Everyone I meet raves about these things where you basically rent out people's assets they aren't using. First there is AirBnB, and recently I've read about this thing called RelayRide, where you get free parking at an airport in exchange for them renting out your car, which when I first heard of it (like AirBnB) I thought was an amazing idea.
But I have to say I just don't get it. Am I alone? AirBnB you can rent an apartment for 2-4 times the price the owner pays, often in a residential section of town compared to the centre of action, often no daily maid, no room service, no pool, and also you are dealing entirely with unofficial channels where you have less protection, can't go to the front desk and get a map of town, and its far more of a hassle to setup. Compared to just going to a website and booking a hotel in 5 mins. I agree it's good to have a full place with kitchen, but at the same time, hotels for the same price are typically more luxurious, nicer sheets, better location, more amenities, etc.
Then with these car rental programs, I'm looking and from SFO, there is nothing under $20 a day, and this is like a '96 Nissan. Or you can get a '07 BMW 3 series for $150 a day. You'll pay for the car in three months.
With apartment complexes, if you can make 10% a year on the asset value you're doing ok. Here it's 400%. These things remind me of those rent to own places where poor people rent TVs and couches. Horrible deals which pray on people who don't know math.
Or you can go through official rental agencies, and for $25 a day get a fairly new car, dealing with a company who's entire business is looking after and cleaning them, and a ton less hassles. I've rented cars within the last few years for $8 a day, and can't see how they justify this. I mean I guess if people pay it fine, but I just don't see the draw, unless the rates were on par or less than a lease.
I think they're both great ideas, making use of otherwise idle assets, but as far as I can tell in most cases they charge comparable or more then what hotels/car rental places do, for generally an inferior product.
But I have to say I just don't get it. Am I alone? AirBnB you can rent an apartment for 2-4 times the price the owner pays, often in a residential section of town compared to the centre of action, often no daily maid, no room service, no pool, and also you are dealing entirely with unofficial channels where you have less protection, can't go to the front desk and get a map of town, and its far more of a hassle to setup. Compared to just going to a website and booking a hotel in 5 mins. I agree it's good to have a full place with kitchen, but at the same time, hotels for the same price are typically more luxurious, nicer sheets, better location, more amenities, etc.
Then with these car rental programs, I'm looking and from SFO, there is nothing under $20 a day, and this is like a '96 Nissan. Or you can get a '07 BMW 3 series for $150 a day. You'll pay for the car in three months.
With apartment complexes, if you can make 10% a year on the asset value you're doing ok. Here it's 400%. These things remind me of those rent to own places where poor people rent TVs and couches. Horrible deals which pray on people who don't know math.
Or you can go through official rental agencies, and for $25 a day get a fairly new car, dealing with a company who's entire business is looking after and cleaning them, and a ton less hassles. I've rented cars within the last few years for $8 a day, and can't see how they justify this. I mean I guess if people pay it fine, but I just don't see the draw, unless the rates were on par or less than a lease.
I think they're both great ideas, making use of otherwise idle assets, but as far as I can tell in most cases they charge comparable or more then what hotels/car rental places do, for generally an inferior product.