I have to wonder what proportion of Airbnb's transactions ever cause any kind of disturbance to anyone. If it's the rule rather than the exception that "vacationers" turn out to be party animals who tear up the place, it's surprising that tenants in prosocial environments would even continue to take that risk.
That's why I have to wonder what the real situation is. I see a few complaints about disturbances with nothing being done by the landlord (which is what I'd expect at my old slum apartment), but nobody complaining about being evicted for using Airbnb (which is what I'd expect if a tenant were to turn a nice apartment building into a party hotel, as some complainers insinuate).
In any case, this seems like a problem that already has a resolution: Evict people for subletting if the contract prohibits it, regardless of whether the customers were found on a web site or in the back alley.
Maybe it's not willful, and that's why I'm asking? Would you care to help alleviate my ignorance?
FWIW, I've actually heard a lot of viewpoints against AirBnB; I just think they're all poorly reasoned.
People don't want to be regularly woken by strangers in their building.
What have they done wrong? Made it easier for people to share living space? God forbid people make tools that make travel easier and more accessible.