Airbnb

[soistes]

I remember hearing about this balcony collapse at the time, and seeing the wreckage in Montpelier Road. Didn't realise that Airbnb were quite such a bunch of shysters though
https://www.theguardian.com/technol...after-guests-plunge-two-storeys-from-balcony?

 

[taz]

This so called gig economy is totally s**t ,, only just found out that if you order food from the. ""just eat"" app, they take 10% commission of what you spend,, easy money for them, but puts Financial pressure on the takeaway or restaurants,, check out the menu phone them direct !!!

 

[Swillis]

This so called gig economy is totally s**t ,, only just found out that if you order food from the. ""just eat"" app, they take 10% commission of what you spend,, easy money for them, but puts Financial pressure on the takeaway or restaurants,, check out the menu phone them direct !!!

What did you expect them to do it for free?

 

[Bob'n'weave]

I remember hearing about this balcony collapse at the time, and seeing the wreckage in Montpelier Road. Didn't realise that Airbnb were quite such a bunch of shysters though
https://www.theguardian.com/technol...after-guests-plunge-two-storeys-from-balcony?

Its like suing Expedia.com because your plane crashes. Airbnb are not liable in any way because......................they are not liable in any way. Ridiculous article. They are 'thinking of taking legal action' Jesus H Christ on a bike, how else are they going to get compensation! Best bit is their lawyer is 'seeking to find the owners of the property' Way to go Sherlock.

 

[Notters]

This so called gig economy is totally s**t ,, only just found out that if you order food from the. ""just eat"" app, they take 10% commission of what you spend,, easy money for them, but puts Financial pressure on the takeaway or restaurants,, check out the menu phone them direct !!!

I thought it was more like 25%

 

[wellquickwoody]

This so called gig economy is totally s**t ,, only just found out that if you order food from the. ""just eat"" app, they take 10% commission of what you spend,, easy money for them, but puts Financial pressure on the takeaway or restaurants,, check out the menu phone them direct !!!

What did you expect, an NPO?

 

[Westdene Seagull]

This so called gig economy is totally s**t ,, only just found out that if you order food from the. ""just eat"" app, they take 10% commission of what you spend,, easy money for them, but puts Financial pressure on the takeaway or restaurants,, check out the menu phone them direct !!!

To be fair, the takeaways choose to sign up. Maybe they think the fee is worth the extra business ?

 

[dazzer6666]

This so called gig economy is totally s**t ,, only just found out that if you order food from the. ""just eat"" app, they take 10% commission of what you spend,, easy money for them, but puts Financial pressure on the takeaway or restaurants,, check out the menu phone them direct !!!

How did you think JustEat made money? Do you think the takeaways didn't know the terms when they chose to sign up?

 

[pastafarian]

This so called gig economy is totally s**t ,, only just found out that if you order food from the. ""just eat"" app, they take 10% commission of what you spend,, easy money for them, but puts Financial pressure on the takeaway or restaurants,, check out the menu phone them direct !!!

with regard to restaurants half of me wants to throttle you for only just realising this is exactly what these apps and websites have been doing all along......did you think they were doing it for lols?
the other half of me would like to congratulate you on your realisation its best to always phone the restaurant direct and save them forking out commission.....i wish more people could enlighten themselves.
same with hotels, forget booking dot com and all the others, phone the hotel direct, tell them you have seen the offer on an agency website and can they match it, 99.9% of the time they will match it or even better it as they wont be paying 15 or 25% on each booking as commission. Dont get me wrong they welcome the online business but with so many bookings moving to online a hotel that used to 100% full anyway with repeat and phone business nowadays finds half its customers booking away from the hotel directly and booking via apps and foreign websites.......thats muchos money they are losing that could be invested back into the business.

 

[Springal]

l Dont get me wrong they welcome the online business but with so many bookings moving to online a hotel that used to 100% full anyway with repeat and phone business nowadays finds half its customers booking away from the hotel directly and booking via apps and foreign websites.......thats muchos money they are losing that could be invested back into the business.

If a hotel is 100% full anyway why did they sign up to the online agency's ? Surely they don't need it? Their choice to give away revenue to be advertised. I know many hotels in the carribean have done the same and stick to the traditional tour operators or direct only.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

Its like suing Expedia.com because your plane crashes. Airbnb are not liable in any way because......................they are not liable in any way. Ridiculous article. They are 'thinking of taking legal action' Jesus H Christ on a bike, how else are they going to get compensation! Best bit is their lawyer is 'seeking to find the owners of the property' Way to go Sherlock.

On the face of it, yeah, airbnb aren't liable. But does that mean they have no risk at all in their business? What if every property they advertised was a death-trap, at what point should airbnb start ensuring minimum standards in properties they advertise.

Sent from my GT-I8262 using Tapatalk

 

[Bean]

This so called gig economy is totally s**t ,, only just found out that if you order food from the. ""just eat"" app, they take 10% commission of what you spend,, easy money for them, but puts Financial pressure on the takeaway or restaurants,, check out the menu phone them direct !!!

I think the restaurants are more than happy to allow Just Eat to take 10% commission. Many people wouldn't order from them otherwise.

 

[Bob'n'weave]

On the face of it, yeah, airbnb aren't liable. But does that mean they have no risk at all in their business? What if every property they advertised was a death-trap, at what point should airbnb start ensuring minimum standards in properties they advertise.

Sent from my GT-I8262 using Tapatalk

I get your point but they simply have no legal obligation to do so. Ebay can't ensure the safety of electrical equipment that is sold and they never will. The 'ensuring' of safety for people inviting guests into their homes lies directly and legally with the owner or person inviting guests. If you rent a place and the balcony collapses you can't sue the rental agency because they are not required to do a full structural survey of the house. I think the article is crap because it just states the bleeding obvious - that Airbnb are not liable and legal actions point to the owner, who is. I don't understand why Airbnb are even mentioned. Newspapers sell paper, not news and mentioning Airbnb is just name dropping to try and make some kind of big expose.

 

[soistes]

Its like suing Expedia.com because your plane crashes. Airbnb are not liable in any way because......................they are not liable in any way. Ridiculous article. They are 'thinking of taking legal action' Jesus H Christ on a bike, how else are they going to get compensation! Best bit is their lawyer is 'seeking to find the owners of the property' Way to go Sherlock.

Well this will be a test of whether they are indeed liable. My view is that the growth of these kinds of web-mediated intermediaries for services raises a whole set of regulatory and legal questions that haven't been sorted out yet (because the relevant law predates the use of this kind of thing). A service has been provided, and someone (whether the property owner, or the agent advertising the service and taking the money, or some combination) must be made liable if it turns out to be dangerous or in any way inadequate. There is plenty of precedent for this kind of thing (for example the way in which credit card providers can be liable - at least for a refund - if goods or services bought with the credit card are defective, not supplied etc).
I don't think it's a ridiculous article at all. It's simply reporting a rather tragic and newsworthy incident, where it appears that the victims have not been well-served by a rapacious business.

 

[Bob'n'weave]

Well this will be a test of whether they are indeed liable. My view is that the growth of these kinds of web-mediated intermediaries for services raises a whole set of regulatory and legal questions that haven't been sorted out yet (because the relevant law predates the use of this kind of thing). A service has been provided, and someone (whether the property owner, or the agent advertising the service and taking the money, or some combination) must be made liable if it turns out to be dangerous or in any way inadequate. There is plenty of precedent for this kind of thing (for example the way in which credit card providers can be liable - at least for a refund - if goods or services bought with the credit card are defective, not supplied etc).
I don't think it's a ridiculous article at all. It's simply reporting a rather tragic and newsworthy incident, where it appears that the victims have not been well-served by a rapacious business.

Again, I get your point, and to some extent agree but my gripe with the article is that the poor people involved may be swayed into buying into a long and drawn out crusade against Airbnb, which entails all the legal/ethical aspects which you rightly point out instead of focusing on who is actually liable and legally responsible. If the article wanted to help the people it would be calling for the owner to be pulled up for immediate and expedient resolution, but that is not such a sensational headline. Making the online giants of 'provision or facilitation of goods/services' accountable is a different story, and although this article highlights that, it does not help the person impaled on the railings.

 

[pastafarian]

If a hotel is 100% full anyway why did they sign up to the online agency's ? Surely they don't need it? Their choice to give away revenue to be advertised. I know many hotels in the carribean have done the same and stick to the traditional tour operators or direct only.

wth respect chap i think you are missing the point
they have signed up to agencies because their customers that usually stay with them and used to repeat book direct are now booking online and are able to easily see local competition

this isnt a conspiracy, occupancy rates in the UK in hotels have remained fairly constant in the last 20 years (financial crash not included) what has changed is people booking online rather than direct. Larger chains can absorb the cost of people booking online and paying a commission out of house, independent hotels struggle with everyone booking through online agencies

 

[JCL666]

If a hotel is 100% full anyway why did they sign up to the online agency's ? Surely they don't need it? Their choice to give away revenue to be advertised. I know many hotels in the carribean have done the same and stick to the traditional tour operators or direct only.

Currently, with the growth in OTA and peer to peer, the traditional tour operator model is in decline and has been for some time. More and more are changing to bed banks, switches and third party referrals in order to hit high volume sales rather than high margin per sale.

In some ways this can be detrimental to small independents, but it can also be a boon as they can leverage tech etc to get access to a previously unavailable set of customers. They will continue to get direct bookings, but the referral sites will typically be used to generate "first contact".

 

[Wrong-Direction]

Value for money though, place we stayed in for Newcastle was great, using them again for a stag doo in Prague next year

Sent from my SM-A310F using Tapatalk

 

[soistes]

Value for money though,

Not sure the one in the article was "value for money" - £217 per night for a flat with a crumbling balcony in a multi-occupancy Regency terrace in Montpelier Road, Brighton?? That's over £6k a month. Even given Brighton property prices/rentals, someone is creaming it here, which makes the failure to accept liability for these poor people's injuries even more reprehensible.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

I'm going AirBnB for the first time this weekend....for Cardiff.