1. Hotels are still in the dumps.
2. Single home rentals, a la VRBO and AirBnB, are doing fantastic as people decamp from urban areas and work remotely.
3. Urban rentals are in the shitter.
4. Shared spaces are also in the shitter.
AirBnB has a lot more urban inventory and shared spaces than for example VRBO (which was always more based around vacation destinations), but I have no idea if their split between urban and vacation destinations is an overall boon or hindrance for them.
1: https://shorttermrentalz.com/news/sonder-series-e-round-june...
It's only one datapoint of course but from this very limited perspective it seems very hard for me to believe that their business would be stronger now than pre-covid.
But hotels are probably suffering even more, that's true.
Hotels basically are either closed for renovation or jacked up the prices while closing down everything that they had as an advantage over AB&B.
The restaurant is closed, there is no room cleaning unless you explicitly book it a day in advance, the gym, spa and pools are closed and so are all other in-house attractions and services such as the children play areas, lounges, media rooms etc.
So you have higher prices than pre-pandemic in many places due to them having to recoup their losses and a much much much worst service than usual which already in many places in Europe was a hit and miss outside of the large resorts and world renowned hotels the hotel service and overall quality in Europe is pretty shite.
Hilton, Marriott, etc all still have MASSIVE amounts of physical property that they have to maintain year around no matter if they are full or empty. Airbnb has none of those costs.
This makes them more flexible and are able to quickly respond to changes in the travel market, more so than their traditional competitors
As an anecdote, I had an Airbnb stay in Rome but the landlord went bankrupt due to Covid and had to close the business.
Hilton Certainly does under several of its brands.
This Franchise model does not change my statement really at all, as it is far different model than what airbnb has
I'm now in the process of choosing between 2 houses both in the most exclusive part of the city centre, a thing I could only dream of until few months ago, at the same price I was renting an apartment in Milan in an average neighborhood
Most of the listings are former Airbnb places, you can tell when you visit the houses that packing up so many beds to maximize profit didn't pay, that level of service could only be acceptable by youngsters looking for a cheap place to crash during the two nights spent in Rome with friends, but it actually lowered the real value of the apartments a lot, to the point that many of them are corridors with the same number of rooms and bathrooms, but not a living room or a kitchen, hence impossible to live in unless you enjoy suffering.
Unfortunately for them young tourists and cheap flights will not come back for at least a few years
So now their properties are basically worthless
Agencies that were managing the properties have abandoned the business or are selling their licenses (good luck with that!) and owners have to face the choice of renewing and waiting at least next year to start renting again or lower the prices and avoid more losses, but accept a long term contract which binds them for at least 3+2 years
As I said many of them are not worth it even if the rent went down considerably so it's not even easy to rent in this economy, even owning an apartment in a super exclusive neighborhood rented at half the price, also considering that people who can afford it don't pay for shitty places full of sofa-beds and cheap furniture.
all the listings say the same thing "NO AIRBNB, NO HOLIDAY RENTALS, NO AGENCIES" they only want to deal with medium-long term rentals with trusted people after checking their income.
I'm quite sure even after covid airbnb and all the businesses around it won't come back, at least not in Rome, not in the same way, people are fed up with mass tourism and businesses are starting to enjoy working more with locals who actually live in the neighborhood, like it used to be not so long ago, but were forced to leave by the "tourist-pay-double-for-shit" craze.
It happened and until it worked, it worked, but when it stopped it left ruins
I think people have opened their eyes
Airbnb will still be the preferred way to rent a van on a beautiful beach on a Greek island where a couple can spend few romantic nights, but the idea that it was going to improve the fabric of our old cities is dead IMO
Presuming Airbnb makes it through the crisis, they're set up for many quarters of blistering earnings "growth" as things return to normal.
> Thes patents at issue are used primarily in e-commerce—and some of them date back to the time of dial-up technologies such as Prodigy.
Dial-up era!? Patents shouldn't last that long! This is centuries in technology!
I think the only valid use for software patents (if there are any at all), is to prevent bigger players from moving into your space. But small companies don't have the time, energy, or money to wage fights in the courtroom. They have pressing existential issues.
Companies without products are patent trolls and shouldn't be permitted to have them. If you "invent" yet don't do anything with it, what good are you to society?
Ossified and decaying companies like IBM shouldn't be allowed to trample upstarts.
It's all so backwards.
In 2018 they sued Groupon for $167m and got $83m.
Interesting quotes from an article [0] reporting on it include:
> In 2017 IBM generated about $1.2 billion in revenue from its licensing activities.
> An IBM licensing executive testified that Amazon, Facebook, Google, LinkedIn and Twitter have each paid IBM $20 million to $50 million as part of cross-licensing deals that gave them access to the patent portfolio.
> IBM lawyer John Desmarais told jurors the company had no choice but to sue after Groupon refused to take responsibility for using IBM’s foundational technology.
> “The verdict is a vindication for IBM’s licensing program,” Desmarais said by phone.
It looks like they've been at it for a while, too. They sued Amazon in 2006 [1]. Quotes from that reporting:
> IBM alleges that Amazon.com knowingly exploits its intellectual property by infringing on several patents that cover, among other things, the presentation of applications in an interactive service, the storage of data in an interactive network, the presentation of advertising in an interactive service, and the ordering of items from an electronic catalog.
While doing some digging, I stumbled across this [2] super interesting scoop on how IBM views and remunerates successful patent-applicant-employees, from 2001. Makes sense to give out bonuses for patents, when they weaponize them this way.
Gross. :/
[0]: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ibm-groupon-lawsuit-idUSK...
[1]: https://www.computerworld.com/article/2547652/ibm-sues-amazo...
[2]: https://www.eetimes.com/ees-want-a-bigger-piece-of-patent-ro...
On the other hand, they're still in money saving mode, reducing ad spending and laying people off.
Anyone know what is going on?