News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:How Zillow's homebuying scheme lost $881M by jjav on Friday March 18, 2022 @04:53PM (#30727387)
> Landlords have chosen to enter an inherently adversarial relationship with the goal of profiting from the other party.

There isn't any reason for it to be adversarial, it's certainly not inherently so. Only if one or both sides want to make it adversarial.

It is supposed to be a win-win scenario. Some people prefer to rent instead of buying, so they need a supply of rentals and the owner needs someone to live there so it doesn't sit empty costing them money.

Fortunately I've never had one of the adversarial landlords. I paid them on time and took good care of the property and in exchange they have been super flexible and let me do whatever I want. That's a win-win.

Re:How Zillow's homebuying scheme lost $881M by sobkas on Saturday March 19, 2022 @06:52AM (#30732771)
> > Landlords have chosen to enter an inherently adversarial relationship with the goal of profiting from the other party.

> There isn't any reason for it to be adversarial, it's certainly not inherently so. Only if one or both sides want to make it adversarial.

Landlords compete with their potential tenants for houses to buy. When landlord driven price increase, it prices out people from buying a home/flat, but they still need a roof over their heads. So they rent. This gives landlords cash needed to buy more houses/flats. This also keep rents up as landlords pay more for buildings. So tenants are less likely to accumulate cash for loans/something else. From small owners to big corporations it is a vicious cycle.

Re:How Zillow's homebuying scheme lost $881M by bawolff on Saturday March 19, 2022 @07:56AM (#30733068)
So you're saying that in a capitalistic society, people with capital do better? Colour me shocked.

The landlord also takes on risk and responsibility here. Like any business, if they do a shitty job they go broke. If they do a good job, they make bank and expand their business.

Re:How Zillow's homebuying scheme lost $881M by sobkas on Saturday March 19, 2022 @11:36AM (#30734617)
They will go broke if they do bad job at extracting money from their renters, not bad job at providing value to them. Also: https://www.wsj.com/articles/landlords-were-never-meant-to-g... , privatization of profits and socializing losses.
Re:How Zillow's homebuying scheme lost $881M by bawolff on Saturday March 19, 2022 @03:34PM (#30736888)
Yes, same as any business. If you provide it for free you go bankrupt, if you charge too much you also go bankrupt.
Re:How Zillow's homebuying scheme lost $881M by giraffe_lady on Saturday March 19, 2022 @10:02AM (#30733767)
No because you can't really decline to have a home if none of the options are good for you. If there are only shitty landlords then you'll be forced to choose a shitty landlord.
Re:How Zillow's homebuying scheme lost $881M by bawolff on Saturday March 19, 2022 @12:09PM (#30734931)
I can't decline to eat. Food still costs money.
Re:How Zillow's homebuying scheme lost $881M by giraffe_lady on Saturday March 19, 2022 @03:17PM (#30736776)
Yes almost there keep going.
Re:How Zillow's homebuying scheme lost $881M by bawolff on Saturday March 19, 2022 @03:32PM (#30736876)
Instead of being condescending, can you just make whatever point it is you are trying to make?