16 comments

[ 2.4 ms ] story [ 48.5 ms ] thread
I mean Uber and air b&b are already that. This just adds a second middle man
And Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, full of scams and weird videos

They want to ban tiktok, no matter what [1,2,3], it's quite fishy the way they treat TikTok, the western media are legitimizing this anti-asia sentiment, almost like some form of racism

For some reason it's alway targeted at foreign products, all other social medias are from the US, as if a rule was to be respected, weird

The only places where i find political stuff and scams are Reddit/Facebook/Twitter/YouTube, Alex Jones, Tate, all the disinformation originated from these places, all US owned products

The only content i find on TikTok are people dancing, people traveling, people cooking stuff and cute animals

[1] - https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/03/30/faceboo...

[2] - https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/tiktok-ban-midterm-el...

[3] - https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/nov/02/tiktok-te...

You are smoking some good stuff if you think Meta is in "western media's" good books over the past few years. How often have Tik Tok execs been dragged in front of Congress?
Why is it not banned then? why are we talking about banning TikTok over suppositions then?
Is Facebook lying about providing mass amounts of data to a hostile government?
No, they're quite open about information sharing with the US.
> Is Facebook lying about providing mass amounts of data to a hostile government?

that's a supposition, disinformation perhaps

everyone can put javascript trackers on their website, even criminals

if data is this important why do we let companies harvest it and sell it without our consent?

what the chinese government has anything to do with tiktok? a private company that plan to go public with an IPO

hostile government? i think it's the opposite, the US government is hostile to china

why do they let them manufacture all of their goods if they are "that hostile"?

something doesn't compute well

This isn’t really arbitrage by my reckoning. Arbitrage normally means selling the same product.

A long term unfurnished apartment is a very different product than a short term vacation rental. Cleaning, laundry, taxes, key exchange, booking, and compliance is what you are signing up to deal with that a long term landlord doesn’t touch.

There's a similar term (it's not buy long sell short) and arbitrage is close, but the basic idea is you make a longterm commitment and turn around and resell it to short-term committers.

And it can work quite well until it doesn't.

The thing is short term rents really do pay that much more in some areas. There's an apartment in my building on Airbnb that brings in over €8k/mo. It has a minimum stay length of 14 days. It's booked (well, the calendar shows unavailable) until February next year. To rent a similar apartment long term would be around €1500/mo. With the difference you can easily pay taxes and could even hire someone full time to look after it for you.
Yes, it can be a profitable business strategy: that doesn't make it arbitrage.
> Doing this, he can jack up the rent and pocket the difference

> Introducing: rent-to-rent, also known as rental arbitrage, the parasitic investment strategy that is being touted across social media as a way for the growing number of people who can’t afford to buy their own home to invest in property.

> With the landlord’s consent, they then convert these places into short-term lets or houses for multiple occupation (HMO), which means they can rent them out for more than they are paying and scalp the difference.

> For one, you might wonder how responsible it is to encourage people to convert rental properties into short-term holiday lets right in the middle of a housing crisis.

My pet peeve is when authors launder their opinion into an otherwise factual article using emotionally-resonant language like “scalp the difference” and “parasitic investment strategy”. You can just tell the facts, your readers are capable of making up their own minds on it.

Worse is when it’s an opinion I disagree with. Consider the characterization of this as “scalping”. Sony seemed to put some effort into anti-scalping tech when they couldn’t meet PS5 demand. So isn’t it weird that these people are “scalping” with the landlord’s consent? Why wouldn’t the landlord just do what these people are doing and keep the money?

The answer is that these people aren’t scalping at all. They’re renting an apartment for a year, and rerenting it for a few days. By doing that, they take on more risk and have to put in some effort to furnish the apartment, which they’re willing to do for that price and the landlord is not.

So it's literal rent-seeking?
"Yo dawg, I heard you like rentseeking, so we put rentals in your rentals so you can rentseek while you rentseek."

We need land value taxation yesterday.

Interesting hes so successful but sells a get rich quick course.