Airbnb set to destroy housing market in The Lord Of The Rings‘ and The Hobbits‘ Shire, too
Airbnb is offering three groups the opportunity to stay at the New Zealand Hobbiton set
Film Features Airbnb
Having messed up the housing market in cities across the world, Airbnb is now aiming to make it impossible for all but the wealthiest hobbits to own their own place in the Shire, too. The first sign of the company’s expansion plans comes through a new listing that allows interested—and hopefully short—travelers to book a stay in one of the New Zealand hobbit hole sets used in filming The Lord Of The Rings and The Hobbit.
The Airbnb listing, hosted by site owner Russel Alexander, promises the first opportunity to date “to stay at the original Hobbiton Movie Set” featured in the two trilogies. Waikato, New Zealand’s Shire features “44 permanently constructed Hobbit Holes” and one of them, The Millhouse, will be set up to accommodate visitors next spring.
The Millhouse includes two bedrooms, an indoor fireplace, backyard, and “homey decor curated by the trilogies’ Creative Director Brian Massey.” It also comes with a TV and wi-fi, just like Frodo used to catch up on his stories and argue with other hobbits on hobbit Twitter late into the night.
Those who manage to book a two-night stay in the Shire will be given a private tour of the set and “an evening banquet in The Green Dragon Inn with a feast featuring beef and ale stew, whole roast chickens, freshly baked breads, and plenty of ale.” (Second Breakfast and Elevenses are also promoted in the listing.)
Competition for the three bookings is sure to be tight, as will demand for future Airbnb listings for other Middle-earth locations. For the time being, at least, we hope rental and sales prices stay affordable in the fetid orc-pits of Mordor.
Check out photos of the Shire set through Airbnb. Bookings open on December 14th with the two-night stays scheduled for March 2nd to 4th, 9th to 11th, and the 16th to 18th.
[via Nerdist]
Send Great Job, Internet tips to [email protected]
50 Comments
Gregg Turkington must be excited.
I know this is tongue-in-cheek, but Airbnb is not the main driver of housing unaffordability, it’s all that we do to block increases to the housing and hotel supply. If we had housing abundance, Airbnb wouldn’t be a problem.
Except yes it fucking is because we did have housing abundance.Then venture capital companies like airbnb (that don’t even turn a profit) came along and through loss-making incentives encouraged landlords to turn said abundant housing stock into short-term leases that has priced out those trying to just rent somewhere, let alone buy.
No, we did not have housing abundance. Can we both at least agree we need to build more homes?
No, because you are just speaking shite.In New Zealand there are approximately 100,000 more dwellings than households. There is an abundance of housing (https://www.stats.govt.nz/information-releases/dwelling-and-household-estimates-march-2021-quarter/).
Dude, it’s NOT shite, though. You can’t just strip the practical considerations from the argument.
100,000 units that the rabble cannot afford to live in, and/or are maintained as investment vehicles for people who (in other countries, not NZ) don’t fucking live there = effectively zero units.
As already said, the issue is therefore government inaction on housing to make sure the more than enough housing that already exists actually obtainable and affordable to the public.
Seems a weird hair to split, but okay.
To add, I get what you’re saying. What I’m getting at is that it isn’t an “either/or,” it’s both.
But it is an either/or. I live in a country where they’ve been building “100,000s” of houses a year, including “affordable homes”, despite already having a housing stock that has more than half a million of empty houses (https://metro.co.uk/2020/12/30/500000-homes-sitting-empty-in-uk-while-100000-families-are-homeless-13812966/) and still housing is becoming more unaffordable.Why? Because housing is treated as a financial asset and therefore it is in the interest of the “market” for the price to only go up.
Here’s my point: I am not going to level the blame only and exclusively at government for these issues. Absolutely will not do it.Why? Literally EVERY. FUCKING. TIME the prospect of a development comes up, in which there is to be a segment of units deemed “affordable,” there is ALWAYS some fuckery to prevent that number from being realized.I say again: if you have 100,000 people looking for housing, and 100,000 units are theoretically “available” at prices that none of the people can afford, you effectively, practically have zero units. Government recalibration can fix that, sure. It does not change the fact that as is, those units may as well not exist.
Government recalibration can fix that, sure. It does not change the fact that as is, those units may as well not exist.That’s literally my entire point though.There is enough housing out there to house everyone if the government actually did its fucking job and regulated it, and stopped predatory venture capitalist and private equity treating it as a commodity or business opportunity.Until it does that the facts show “build more housing” isn’t actually going to solve the problem of unaffordable housing because the housing already being built to be affordable is already unaffordable.
Why? Because housing is treated as a financial asset and therefore it is in the interest of the “market” for the price to only go up. We completely agree on this.I’m saying that telling someone that there’s no housing shortage because there ARE units, they’re just not affordable to almost anyone is…you see how that’s kind of an odd argument to go hard in the paint on, yeah?
AGAIN the fact the existing system has more than enough housing, an actual surplus, and yet is still unaffordable shows why botname up top claiming “just build more houses, it’s not airbnb’s fault” is just complete shite because it’s companies like airbnb who have pushed up the typical price so much to render it unaffordable.
OKAY. I see we’re not going to get any further on this score. We generally agree, but we’re each stuck on something we’re not going to budge on.For the record, I’m living in a city not unlike yours. There’s far more to it than either of us reasonably has the time to jaw about at length.Bottomline? There’ll be 100,000 units ready to go tomorrow. Same again the next day. For practical considerations, they may as well be up for sale in Narnia or Never Never Land.
Yeah, because for some completely unknown reason to me you’re just endlessly fucking repeating back to me my own fucking argument as though it’s not my argument. My entire argument is housing is currently unaffordable despite a surplus of housing stock so building more houses isn’t going to solve the unaffordability, and the issue is the government not taking action to stop companies artificially pushing up prices and yet you keep endlessly going “I see lots of empty property where I live but no-one can afford it” which is proving my bloody point.
Yeah, because for some completely unknown reason to me you’re just endlessly fucking repeating back to me my own fucking argument as though it’s not my argument. Your argument was that the OP’s assertion was “complete shite.” I’m saying it isn’t. I’m trying to walk through the nuances, and you’re getting increasingly irritated.You want me to say to you that there is enough housing. I will not, because barring an actual, DEDICATED PLAN TO RENDER THE GLUT AFFORDABLE, there functionally is not enough housing. If people cannot afford the food for sale, they cannot eat the food. The food is barely an extant concept at that point, as regards most of the food-consumer market.You have a point that building more will not necessarily help. YOU ARE CORRECT, OKAY? We good on that? Cool!Where you’re at NOW is not where you were at at the beginning of the conversation. and yet you keep endlessly going “I see lots of empty property where I live but no-one can afford it” which is proving my bloody point. BECAUSE YOU LED OFF SAYING THIS:No, because you are just speaking shite.In New Zealand there are approximately 100,000 more dwellings than households. There is an abundance of housing (https://www.stats.govt.nz/information-releases/dwelling-and-household-estimates-march-2021-quarter/).You want to tee off on OP for his point? Fine. The only reason I jumped in was because you were calling the dude out on the basis of a point that was not, in fact, as clear a point as you’re asserting. You want to get frustrated? Fine. I’ve seen you have quibbles of this very sort with other commenters, when something rubbed/rubs you the wrong way.You’re not going to budge on the fact that there is “an abundance of housing.” I am not going to budge on the fact that, as of now, those units are worth fuck all in terms of solving the problem.We both agree on the solution to that.
BECAUSE YOU LED OFF SAYING THISBut I didn’t “lead off” did I, they did. but Airbnb is not the main driver of housing unaffordability, it’s all that we do to block increases to the housing and hotel supply.That’s the false argument I’m responding to and calling shite, that it’s not companies such as airbnb driving up housing affordability but governments/NIMBYs “blocking increases” (i.e. suggesting there’s a housing stock shortage). You want me to say to you that there is enough housing. I will not, because barring an actual, DEDICATED PLAN TO RENDER THE GLUT AFFORDABLE, there functionally is not enough housing.But again, that “lack of a plan” is what I’m saying is the reason it’s an unaffordability problem, not a scarcity problem.The real problem is the price housing has been artificially inflated to which can be readily resolved by government intervention. The OP wants to suggests there simply isn’t enough housing stock and that if more housing was built prices would fall which hasn’t been the case for decades despite house-building exceeding houses needed.
The real problem is the price housing has been artificially inflated to which can be readily resolved by government intervention. The OP wants to suggests there simply isn’t enough housing stock and that if more housing was built prices would fall which hasn’t been the case for decades despite house-building exceeding houses needed.
I wanted to give him a bit more credit than “you’re talking shite.” As of now, he seems to be in his own intractable lane on that score.As for me, I went harder on this than usual because I fucking HATE hair-splitting as regards these sorts of matters, particularly since the housing market is something I track as part of my job. At best, it’s (at least initially) glib. At worst, it’s a way to obfuscate a point in order to save face. I apologize if I misread you, and the ensuing conversation made your point clearer to me.I just fucking HATE (as in H.A.T.E.) when people say things like “There’s abundant ::BLANK::, it’s just hard to get!” The GOP rabble pulls that shit with jobs, housing, resources, food, etc., and 9/10 times it’s just diarrhea on a keyboard. I reacted accordingly, my bad.
That’s fine. I responded strongly because I completely agree with the problems you’ve listed, my response is that it’s why government intervention is desperately needed. Whether it be airbnb in the rental market or private equity in the ownership one both actively inflate the prices to try and make a buck.I’m certainly not suggesting “it’s there, just need to pull up on your bootstraps dear boy”.
I’m American, so not that familiar with NZ, but the literature point to NZ having a shortage that is getting better because they’re building more homes now.
No, the actual government stats show housing supply has outstripped numbers of households for decades by approximately 100,000 units going back years.But continue to spout shite.
Again, I’m not familiar with NZ like I am the US, but doing the reading tells me NZ government itself believes there to be a shortage and are addressing it with building a ton more homes: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-09/new-zealand-may-eliminate-housing-shortage-within-years-westpac#:~:text=New%20Zealand%20needs%20to%20build,in%20a%20research%20note%20Tuesday.
Look, I’m not opposed to regulating AirBnb out of existence, I don’t really care. Do it. But do you have a moral stance against building more housing?
The source, WestPac, is an Australian banking giant that does mortgages. They’re not the NZ government.You’re still talking absolute shite. Look, I’m not opposed to regulating AirBnb out of existence, I don’t really care. Do it. But do you have a moral stance against building more housing?“I don’t care,” says the person who immediately came into a puff article to defend their honour.
Not what I did, you’re talking shite. Strawman me as an Airbnb shill if it helps you sleep, but all I want is more homes to be built, instead of focusing on whining about “luxury” housing and other shit.
Funny how someone who claims to care about the “affordability” of housing considers it “whining” to point out there’s actually more than enough houses lying empty as it is, they’re just made unaffordable by the companies you are shilling for.
https://www.tewaihanga.govt.nz/news/how-new-zealand-built-its-housing-crisis/Talk to the NewZealand Infrastructure Commission and tell them they’re wrong. New Zealand has not built enough homes. They have a housing shortage. Airbnb, complaining about “luxury” housing, is all minor, nibbling at the edges shit. The real solution is to build enough housing to meet demand.I’m not shilling for anything except more homes. You’re making up shit about me, apparently because you don’t want more homes built? I don’t know. But I’m done here. I’m out. You won’t be getting any more responses from me and I won’t be reading yours.
instead of focusing on whining about “luxury” housing and other shit. Then you’re ignoring a big part of the problem. Which you’re free to do, if you wish. ::shrug::
“Luxury” is a meaningless term with no definition.Anyone call build an apartment and sell it using the term “luxury”. If you mean new, then yes, new stuff is more expensive than old stuff. It has modern amenities, stuff will last longer, it’s clean, etc.If you mean expensive, stuff sells at the price the market will bear, which is a function of supply and demand. It’s expensive because there is market demand for it that isn’t being met, driving up the cost.
If you mean expensive, stuff sells at the price the market will bear I do, and I’m aware. This isn’t news.As for “what the market will bear,” wait for the next crash, then get back to me as to how that shakes out. I can guarantee that the units with the cathedral ceilings and granite countertops won’t be liquidated, they’ll be held by the people who own them and don’t have to sell shit. It’s expensive because there is market demand for it that isn’t being met, driving up the cost. And if we “build more,” then the ghouls will buy THAT shit as well. As they have been doing for decades, with increasing regularity.So if the same fuckos are just going to keep gobbling up the supply, of what value is “build more?” Do you think “the market” is going to unfuck this? If so…nah. Nah, it really super won’t.
“Luxury” is meaningful purely in the sense that it describes the market expectations for developers. If a highrise full of 2BR “luxury” condos was built on the assumption they could get $700k+ per unit, that’s what they expect.If some fair hand of the market was truly in play here, their expectations wouldn’t matter. “Nobody’s buying at $700k? Lower the price.” But that isn’t what happens. Developers control so much capital, they can eat the minor losses as those units lie fallow and wait for a better outcome. That’s still preferable to accepting a loss….and meanwhile, the market just gets more hostile to individual buyers.The situation isn’t purely supply and demand, because the heavies in real estate (banks, developers, other corporate entities) can throw around their massive amounts of money and artificially control the market. They can sit on assets and create scarcity, outbid individual buyers and turn all housing stock into rentals they own. It’s a game the average person cannot win, and greater housing abundance won’t actually fix the systemic problem.
Eh, I quibble with “housing abundance.” In New England, particularly in any metro area or distressed mill town, there was and is an abundance of “luxury” housing. Think 2br/1ba condos starting in the $450K – $550K range. That helped approximately no one but people in a position to buy at the right time, as well as institutional investors, who gambled on and exacerbated the housing crunch (helped in no small part by the aforementioned “luxury” properties being flatly unaffordable for the majority of the “middle class”).Fuck, right outside my office are three high rises, being built simultaneously. One is for lab space. The other two are straight-up “luxury” buildings adding to an already glutted market. And they’re counting on PE to snatch up what the plebs don’t/can’t.It’s all very fucked, would be the point.
But that’s still an abundance of housing, the actual physical thing people need. The problem is it’s become a “market” (a commodity) and the government doing fuck all to step in.Instead all you ever here is “we need to build more affordable homes” except those homes are still fucking unaffordable by the time they’re built and property developers are never going to voluntarily build enough that it undercuts the inflated prices they make selling in an era of artificial scarcity.
But that’s still an abundance of housing, the actual physical thing people need. I mean, sure, but that doesn’t mean anything in relation to the fundamental problem. It’s like going to an economically depressed country selling produce at 500% markup and telling the downtrodden “Hey, there’s FOOD, so what’s yer problem?” The problem is it’s become a “market” (a commodity) and the government doing fuck all to step in. And they won’t, because the real estate market is already reeling from the pandemic and the abandonment of commercial rentals. Instead all you ever here is “we need to build more affordable homes” except those homes are still fucking unaffordable by the time they’re built and property developers are never going to voluntarily build enough that it undercuts the inflated prices they make selling in an era of artificial scarcity. We DO need to build more affordable homes, though. It needs to happen. Otherwise, at least in America, there should be a declaration that home ownership is no longer part of the “American dream.”
Except “building affordable homes” is a myth, because they’re not affordable.What actually needs to happen is the government taking action to make the more than enough homes already built affordable.
So the standard “look, the market isn’t going to hold itself accountable, so the government has to do it.”I’m levelling some blame at PE itself, for glutting the market with unaffordable shit. Which they are deliberately doing. Which, again, in lieu of gov’t interference, is not going to stop.Fuck, is it that controversial to level *SOME* blame at them? Or is this the level to which we split this hair and no further?
I’m not arguing private equity doesn’t share the blame though, they’re also part of the reason “build more houses” doesn’t work, because they just buy it up as an “asset class” and render it immediately unaffordable.
They’re that expensive because of a shortage. It wouldn’t be financially viable to build them and sell that at that price if there weren’t people willing compete and pay. “Luxury” is a meaningless term, it essentially just means new and expensive – can’t control the new part, but expensive can be addressed with abundance.
They’re that expensive because of a shortage. Because of a *practical* shortage, not an *actual* shortage. The units exist, as said elsewhere, but there’s a fucking reason I’m harping on that distinction. but expensive can be addressed with abundance It won’t, though. Only way that’d work would be if there were a slew of developers motivated to build and sell units at a deliberate loss. Which…yeah, that ain’t happening. All it’d take would be a larger developer doing an astroturf campaign against “section 8″ (whether such housing would or wouldn’t be actual section 8 housing) to put the NIMBYs on alert, and it’d be blocked. As Mortal Dictata said elsewhere, it’s something that the gov’t needs to rein in.
The thing is, there are also tons of examples of massive luxury developments that sit half-empty because the developers can’t fill them, and they refuse to lower the price. They can write off these losses on their taxes and thus have no incentive to make things more affordable.It’s not just a question of abundance, because wealthy entities who own a disproportionate amount of real estate are more interested in theoretical profits than sating real need. Rental properties help them do this, holding out for market changes in their favor also does, but building and selling affordable housing to a bunch of poors does not.
That isn’t what the numbers say if you read up on the people who study this. We at a base level don’t have enough homes and we need to build more.
Let the record show the absence of sources, cited or otherwise, regarding these numbers in the above comment.
Welcome to Internet arguments.
I mean, I’ve seen first hand on two continents and a dozen cities in six countries that Airbnb drives up rents, forces out my friends who can’t find a place a live, and ramps up gentrification, but hey, what do I know?
They can write off these losses on their taxes and thus have no incentive to make things more affordable. CORRECT. Rental properties help them do this, holding out for market changes in their favor also does, but building and selling affordable housing to a bunch of poors does not. CORRECT.And those people? The ones who are bankrolling the highrises? They’re not fucking around with Airbnb, except for maybe a lark. There’s more money to be made elsewhere.
Media outlets are reporting that Stephen Colbert has already booked all the available dates.
Thrillho!
Milpool…
They’ve added a clause that says parties of thirteen dwarves plotting to recover their long-since stolen ancestral gold are strictly prohibited.
At what point is this not an Airbnb and just a resort?