PWMTrav

I think this is supporting my point - demand for short term rentals exists and has existed for a while. Airbnb has taken some of the friction out of the process, but I don't think they should be demonized for it.

I didn't say Airbnb was the only option, but how is an agency like this one any less damaging to the locale (if that's the debate), other than having a less functional website and a less convenient process? The places look nicer, I'll say that, so I'm bookmarking it!

At the bottom of the homepage, there's this, so we know they're not local:

VENICE PRESTIGE
Venetian Apartments Ltd
26 Dover Street
London W1S4LY
UK

obscure2k

It was a very convenient process. I selected a property based on my needs, communicated with the owner of the Company via email and, as promised, when we arrived there was someone to meet us at the water landing of the apartment (which was in a Palazzo), handed us the keys, accompanied us in to the apartment and showed us where everything was and how everything worked and how to communicate with him if we had any more questions. No issues with their being UK based. Communication was easy, payment was easy and the entire transaction was seamless

Perche

That's exactly the point. If the government regulated them the same way, 90% of them would be closed down. The vast majority of the so-called owners would be in jail because they don't collect the required taxes. Actually, many of them do, and give the tourist a receipt, but they pocket the money. This is the reason why they are referred to as being in "nero," which means in the dark, and refers to an underground, illegal activity. If they had to obey the same regulations as a hotel, they'd disappear.

That's all that places from Manhattan to Milan are trying to do: stop this mega-corporation, the largest hotel chain in the world, from posing as an internet company that merely tries to connect tourists with Italians who want to rent out their house while they're away on vacation. Basically, it's a massive hotel chain.

I'm not trying to play with people's conscience, and tell them what to do or not to do. I spend close to half of my time in Italy, and I hear what people say, and most days I read the newspapers from the cities where I've lived (because the news here can be very depressing).

All I'm doing is reporting that people in Italy hate AirBnb, and providing links to news articles about the topic that might be of interest to tourists.

It's amazing how differently people from one country can view the same thing. Once I went to Japan and saw a map of the world. I had no idea what I was looking at. Then I realized that I was used to seeing a map where North and South America are in the center, and the rest of the world is off to the right or left. But that's not actually the case. In Japan, the map shows Japan in the center, and the Americas are some distorted shape way over on the corner of the map, and because of the way the earth is curved and a map is flat, North and South America were east and west of one another, not one on top of the other. .

Similarly, there's a particular view of things like AirBnb and Uber that prevails here, and a completely different point of view by those over there. I'm not making any judgments, I'm just trying to make people aware of prevailing news over there.

Remember that Milan shut down Uber Red, or whatever the color was, in a flash. All of Italy recently banned Uber entirely, and gave them 10 days to shut down. Just days before the deadline, they received a stay, and their appeal is pending.

All I'm saying is that AirBnb is also now in the crosshairs. I'm not arguing right or wrong. It's just that if someone is planning their dream vacation next year, they should know that the regulatory environment is in flux. AirBnb was pretty much banned overnight in NYC and several other metro areas in the usa. I'd hate to have someone planning their RTW trip or honeymoon around AirBnb without them knowing that things might change. I have no opinion here about people's personal choices. This is just information I'm passing along.

pamdo

Hello! We have a long layover in Rome on our way to Mykonos. We arrive at 12:30 pm on Tuesday from Miami but don't leave to Mykonos until 3:50 am Wednesday. We were going to just leave our luggage at the airport left luggage but found out it closes at 11:30 and we don't want to run the risk of not getting there in time before closing and having to deal with not having our luggage. We think that booking a hotel room is our best option so we can freshen up and store our luggage. Would it be better to stay near the airport or in the city? We are going into Rome regardless of where we stay. Also, we don't want to spend more the USD $100 as we are essentially using the hotel for storing out luggage. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated

PS: are there any other luggage storage options?

Perche

There is a 24/7, seven days a week luggage storage place right next to Rome Termini. It's inside of a hotel called Mr. Gerardo's Hotel. The service is called BagBnb (no kidding). I think you have to make sure you reserve in advance. It's only about 5 euros a bag. From there, you can get a taxi to the airport. Watch yourself in that area that late at night.

https://bagbnb.com/how-it-works

Welcome to FlyerTalk and the Italy Forum!

pamdo

Perche, thank you for the info! I had not found this service in my research. I found others that did not work because of the time.

Thanks again!

Perche

AirBnb continues to be in the news almost every day. For example

http://corrieredelveneto.corriere.it...81493509.shtml

A Venezia 6 mila alloggi su Airbnb: "Turismo: un mercato selvaggio"
Six thousand AirBnb units in Venice: Tourism: A Wild Market.
(Selvaggio translates as more than just wild, but wild as in savage and ferocious).

To summarize the article, here are a few statements: This study reflects the diffusion of tourist apartments. AirBnb units went from 3,900 at the end of 2015, to 6,000 by the end of 2016, and this is almost certainly an underestimation, because this is a wild market. It is critical to cut this off, because it is why traditional businesses in Venice that are managed correctly are doing so poorly. It's not a home sharing business, because most of the time the entire apartment is rented, for most of the year, and most of the owners "sharing their apartment" are managing multiple apartments.

It goes on to say: The other place that is besieged like Venice is Verona, especially around Lake Garda. (Most cities, including Venice, collect a tourist tax of a few dollars for each night in a hotel.). The goal is to require AirBnb to start paying tourist hotel taxes too. Cities are losing a large amount of income that could be invested to improve the city. We want to adopt the Florence model. In Florence, AirBnb collects the tax and sends it to the government, it's not the responsibility of the owner. "AirBnb disputes all of this."

rickg523

Airbnb can be seen as a listing site.
I've booked rentals in Airbnb/HomeAway that are longstanding short term rentals. Examples are Residenza M**** in Rome and Ca'N****** in Venice.
These are lovely properties that are providing service for groups of 5 or more at a fraction of the cost of three hotel rooms.
These aren't "nero." They advertise, they have their own websites. They also happen to list on Airbnb or HomeAway, often both. Often also with local rental agencies.
I have no clue what their relation to city government and taxing authority is. I know I'm paying the tax on an itemized bill. This is no different than a hotel. I assume innkeepers of any sort are playing by the rules. I know of and have stayed in fleabag hotels surrounding Termini. Via Palestro still induces an itch response in me. Are they any better than some guy renting out his place while he's away? I'm no more certain that either is playing by the rules.
If they're fulfilling their regulatory responsibilities, the only complaint I see with individual short term rentals is they're undercutting tax revenue by being so relatively low-priced. That argument holds no water unless the demand is all hotels in Rome price at Hassler rates, all hotels in Venice price with Danielli. Anything lower is dragging the market down and counter to civic well being.
/rant on/
If Italian city officials are unwilling or unable to control zoning or enforce their own regulations, blaming the listing service is imo totally bogus passing the buck. Do your damn job and stop bellyaching and pointing fingers at a website if it's hard.
/rant off/

PWMTrav

Why did you asterisk out the property names? If they're good, I want to know what they are in case I want to stay there!

rickg523

Sorry. I thought straight recommendations might be against the rules.
Residenza Mazio/Residenza Navona in Rome.
It's on Via della Scrofa near Stelleta.
Ca'Navagero in Venice. It's on the Riva at the Pieta canal (Castello)
Both have websites linkable through Google Maps.
Stayed at Navagero three years ago and at Mazio last year. Returning to both next month.

Perche

These are all great points, rickg523. I'll try to offer my take. Articles about AirBnb and Uber are taking up a lot of air and press time in Italy right now. I mentioned when I went to Japan for the first time about 20 years ago I was on the subway and I saw a map of the world, and it just seemed completely wrong to me. North and South American weren't on top of one another. They were east and west of one another. By the time I got to where I was going I figured it out; the rest of the world doesn't see things the way we do.

The world is round, so you can see it any way you want to, including upside down. A map of the world from Japan is below. You can see that from their perspective it wouldn't be called North and South America, it would be called East and West America. It's just a different perspective. I'm not trying to tell anyone what to do, but I can say that there is a heck of a lot of news about Uber and AirBnb in Italy recently.

I think it is great that there are apartments available in Venice, and cars to take you places in Rome. One of my best memories of Venice is an apartment that I rented near Campo San Lorenzo. It was the home page on my iPhone for many years. I rented it through an agency. I stayed there for about half a year, and was awakened every day by the sound of Venetian gondoliere signing songs from Naples (yuck). The "owner" if there was one, was always away, and "lived" in the apartment next door. This was about ten years ago, when I think AirBnb didn't really exist. Finally, the owner actually did come home to the apartment next door for one day. At least, he pretended to be the owner. I have no problem with people investing in real estate. All transactions were made through the lady in the beauty parlor downstairs. I doubt that the "owner" ever paid a dime in taxes. I'm pretty sure from what I read that despite what your receipt says, your AirBnb is not sending that tax money to the government, they are putting it in their pocket, and are "nero."

These are also not short term rentals. Italy's investigation indicates that they are not owners going away for two week, who want to share their home by making it available to you. No one lives there, and no one is sharing their space with you. NYC killed that by a recent ruling that withstood every Court challenge. It said something like, "If you don't live in that apartment for 10 months out of the year, you are not 'sharing' your apartment. You are running a hotel, and are outside of the rules and regulations."

Even though the "owners" are giving you a receipt, they are not paying the taxes. The receipt goes into the trash as soon as you walk out the door.

If people stayed at a regulated hotel, or apartment, or bed and breakfast (I'm all for that: I rent legal apartments in Venice all the time) it is estimated that instead of tourists being a huge drain on the city in terms of trash and quality of life, and the depopulation of the city, Venice would have tens of millions of more euros to spend on making itself even more beautiful, rather than picking up the trash of the extraordinary number of people staying in the city who don't pay any taxes to support it.

The people staying in unregulated apartments are draining the city of needed funds. The invoice they give you is just for you. The "owner" is not going to walk down to the City Hall and give your money to the city. The "owner" almost certainly doesn't even live in the city, and has some "neighbor" pitching in for them because they are are out of town on an emergency or on a business trip. It's just another squeeze. Do the math, just for Venice with 6,000 apartments. If there are 6,000 units in Venice, that's 2,190,000 occupancy days. Assuming the AirBnB units are not occupied all of the time, but 90% of the time, that's 1,971,000 days of occupancy escaping taxes. You mentioned 5 people sharing the apartment. That might be extreme, so let's assume that on average an AirBnb is occupied by only 3 people. The total avoided taxes (since despite your receipt they are not going down to city hall and handing over the money), is close to 2 billion dollars.

Then, since you won't be getting your jeans hemmed, your hair cut, or anything else that a resident would do, all of which sustains a city's life, the drain caused by "wild" tourism can kill a city. I don't have any concern about people investing and renting real estate. Such things have alway existed. It makes no sense to refer to Roman times. Websites are new, and old paradigms no longer apply. How AirBnb can nearly double the number of apartments it has available in Venice in just one year is not something that can be explained away by referring to the free market. It's a wild, uncontrolled market.

Advertising that they are just, "sharing their apartment when they are out of town," is false. Conglomerates who have never even been to Venice or anywhere else in Italy are forcing people out of apartments where families have lived for centuries in order to convert them to AirBnb because outsiders don't give a hoot about the neighborhood. Most "owners sharing their apartment" are investors in multiple apartments, like a hotel chain. That's why the owner is always out of town, and you are never sharing the apartment with them. But they don't pay taxes, and they throw the city out of balance.

I don't have any problem with a person renting out their place. I'm probably not going to be in San Francisco for the rest of this year, and rather than selling my house or paying a mortgage on an empty house, I'll probably find a responsible renter. I would make a fortune on it as an AirBnb, but the town where I live decided to protect the neighborhood and after briefly allowing AirBnb, it decided it was too disruptive to have "weekenders" there, and banned it. AirBnb, like Uber, is getting hard knocks in the paper almost every day for practices that are not considered fair, or in the interest of the city. It's as destructive as cruise ships.

Comments like, "why don't they just regulate them like a hotel," do not take Italy's unique history into account. It's a different form of government. As mentioned before, Italy is much younger than the USA having just been founded in 1861. But it didn't include Venice, which at the time was part of Austria. The Austrians got into a war with somebody, and the new Italian government promised their support. When the Austrians won they gave Venice to Italy. The capital was Turin. After a few months it was switched to Florence.

The person who was doing all of this conquering of the many independent countries that existed on the Italian Peninsula in the 1850's was Giuseppe Garibaldi, which is why there is a Piazza Garibaldi everywhere in Italy. When he first tried to conquer all of the countries that occupied the Italian Peninsula in order to establish a country of Italy, he couldn't, and so they all put a price on his head, and so he moved to South America, and then settled in New York City, where he worked making candles on Staten Island.

I happen to be in NYC right now, and I'm going to do my best to pilgrimage to Garibaldi's house on Staten Island, which the Italian American Society keeps as a museum. In a certain sense, Italy was founded by a candle maker from New York City, although I'm greatly simplifying, because there were other great heroes, and in Italy people like Cavour are adored even more.

Garibaldi retired, then decided, "Italy cannot be Italy until we conquer Rome," so he came out of retirement and fought the Pope and defeated the Papal States, meaning most of southern Italy, and made Rome the new capital sometime in the 1880's, I believe. Then, he retired again and gave it all to a King, Vittorio Emanuele, and Italy lived under a King until 1946.

Of course, Mussolini got in there and brushed the King aside, but when it was all said and done, after WW II nobody in Italy wanted to have anything more to do with Popes, dictators, and Kings. Everyone in Italy loves the Pope. If you insult him, you will surely get punched. But no one goes to church.

In 1946 they held a referendum that banned Kings, and threw him out of the country. They formed a system of government that would take a whole day to explain, but it makes it almost impossible for anyone to change laws because they don't want anther Mussolini, King, or Pope, or anyone else to take control. It's not realistic to say," if Venice doesn't like AirBnb they should just regulate them like a hotel," or "if Rome doesn't like Uber, make them subject to the same regulations as taxi drivers." Italy has had a different experience. On average in the USA, its takes about 10 years to change a law. The Founding Fathers made it that way on purpose, because they had enough of Kings. How long did we work on Health Care? Going back to Truman or Roosevelt?

In Italy, multiply that by several factors, based upon the only being founded about 150 years ago, while the USA is almost 250 years old. You can't say, "If Venetians don't like AirBnb, just change the regulations." It's hard to do that in a country with it's own unique history. It's why Japan has East and West American on their map, instead of north and south America, as depicted below. You can't just issue edicts, Italy has been down that road before. When predatory, destructive agents come in, it can take Italy some time to get their act together, because the regulations are not designed for fluidity. They are designed to obstruct lawmakers from tyranizing people again. When places like Uber and AirBnB arise, you cannot just expect them to react like Austin or Portland, or New York and Chicago, and just ban or severely limit them. It's a different country.

Venetians and other places are doing all they can, as fast as possible under existing constitutional law, to reign in "wild" tourism.

"If Italian city officials are unwilling or unable to control zoning or enforce their own regulations, blaming the listing service is imo totally bogus passing the buck. Do your damn job and stop bellyaching and pointing fingers at a website if it's hard."

My opinion is, they cannot. Due to fascism, being under a king, and a dictator, and being a country that is barely 150 years old that is just learning to have a common language (I think it was around 1996 when studies showed that more than 50% of Italians learned how to speak Italian as their native language, and stopped using the regional language of the country that they were in before Italy became a country, and they started to try to select a common language), and 1946 referendum when Italy chose to no longer be ruled by a King, and held elections, and in so many regions the majority of people voted to be under communist rule, it's not like going to your local town mayor and changing a hotel zoning law.

There are only a few areas of Italy that are allowed to pass their own laws; Alto Adige, Sardegnia, Sicily, Valle de Aosta, and Friulia-Venezia-Giulia. Most of them were recently part of Germany, or were not part of Italy, and bargained for the concession to be independent.

Other areas, like Venice and Lombardy have been arguing for their own quasi-independence, to the point where someone in Venice attempted to drive a tank into Piazza San Marco a few years ago, to declare an independent Venice, and Venice is about to have a non-binding vote, that will nevertheless require a Parliament ruling, about their own independence. They want to be able to pass their own laws and to keep their own tax money, including cruise ship port docking fees in Venice, which go to Rome. They can't just snap their fingers and stop AirBnb from depopulating whole neighborhoods, and all of the supporting institutions that rely on locals.

Thinking that Italians can just go down to city hall and change their local regulations to make it a fair fight between mom and pop locals against a gigantic corporation like AirBnb, by far the world's largest hotel chain, makes me feel as I felt when I looked at the map of the world from the Japanese perspective, below. Italy is a different country. The same rules do not apply.

That's why Italians take to the streets. If they could go down to city hall and ask the mayor to change the rules, the taxi drivers wouldn't have shut down Rome, Milan, and Naples during their recent anti-Uber strike. Italy didn't even pass its own Constitution and become a Republic until about 60-70 years ago. You can't expect it to act like the USA, where you just go down to City Hall. It has its own road to hoe, and it's not the US model.

askias

Hello everyone, I'm organizing a trip for two families, for a total of 7 people from Washington DC to Rome and Venice for next August. I'm interested in suggestions for 4 bedroom, 3 bathroom places to stay for probably 5 days in Rome and 3 days in Venice if possible. Thanks!

rickg523

( truncated for thread brevity only)
That was a phenomenal post, Perche. As I've by now come to expect and look forward to when reading your contributions. So much background and organic understanding of Italy. And so willing to take the time to share it with us. Thank you.
As to the content of your post, I agree almost entirely. I just think the properties I mentioned are not the Airbnb model we both find corrosive to neighborhoods when uncontrolled. Both Residenza Mazio in Rome and Ca' Navagero in Venice are businesses offering an alternative to hotels for larger groups. Neither are in any way long term rental units converted to short term rentals, any more than a hotel is a boarding house converted to short term rental.
Both are "luminoso non nero." Advertised as businesses with websites, even with accommodation-marked locations on Google Maps.
Here are the two websites
http://www.residenzamazio.com/overview.html
The Ca' Navagero website even lists its Cod. Fiscale.
http://www.canavageroapartments.com/en/palazzo.html
Just to be clear, when I search for places to stay I start with Google Maps, because to me location is more important than any and every other consideration. I'll stay in a 3-star perfectly located over an out-of-the-way 5-star even if they're priced the same. Relais al Senato on Piazza Navona over The Boscolo on Repubblica.
Once I chose the area, I use every listing resource I can find because experience has shown me that accommodations list all over the place and pricing can vary significantly. Trivago has made a business model out of that fact. When looking for a holiday rental, because of their market presence, you have to consult Airbnb and HomeAway. Both these places listed there. But that doesn't make them in any way what both of us are using the term for. It's like all photocopiers are Xerox machines, all tissues are Kleenex, all adhesive bandages are Bandaids, all wide screen movies are Panavision. All vacation rentals are Airbnb. But some aren't. They just happen to list there. Btw, I've found rentals in Varenna, in Atrani, in Paris, in Copenhagen, in Austin, in Seattle. All listed on Airbnb, but every one of them a legitimate business owned and run by real estate agencies or property management companies. With offices and licenses. And the prices, while significantly less than say 3 double hotel rooms, aren't exactly cut-rate. I actually prefer not to pay to house-sit someone's place while they're out of town

Perche

For short stays, I'm in a hotel. Longer stays, in an apartment. I rent apartments all the time. I'm not under the illusion that I'm baby-sitting someone's apartment while they are on vacation, or out of town on a business trip. I rent from legitimate apartment rental agencies when I need to, or I go through friends who always can find a place for me to stay in Venice or Rome.

Marriott, Intercontinental, and Hilton are the three biggest corporations that hold themselves out as hotels, in that order. AirBnb holds itself out as a third party website that simply links owners leaving their apartments for a week or two while on vacation or on a business trip, with people seeking a place to stay.

Every court has ruled, and there are many of them in cities around the world, that in most cases no one actually lives in those apartments. AirBnb is a hotel chain, and it is bigger than Marriott, Intercontinental, and Hilton. When you stay there, you are not baby-sitting someone's apartment. You are renting a hotel room masquerading as an apartment being rented from an owner who is temporarily out of town.

Since they masquerade as a website and not a hotel chain, they don't play by the rules, and have documented ill effects. That's why cities from Barcelona to Berlin, San Francisco to Manhattan, have passed bills to regulate them.

Italy, being a little slow in its ability to change laws, has only done so to date in Florence. All that Florence did was require that when you click the purchase button, the tax is included, which makes AirBnb responsible for handing over the tax. Everywhere else, the owner is supposed to take the tax from you, and send it in on their own. That doesn't happen. Or, they take the tax, give you a fake receipt, and pocket the money. On the AirBnb website when you book an apartment there is a room fee, a "cleaning fee," and a "service fee." No tax fee. Florence required them to add the tax fee to the website in their area.

In other words, the largest hotel chain in the world doesn't pay any taxes, because it holds itself out as just a website, and claims that the "owner" is responsible for collecting and paying the tax. I have no problem renting apartments in Italy, I just prefer that they be legitimate. It seems like the ones that you stay in are legitimate.

rickg523

This is where I agree Airbnb is not legitimate. The model they typically cite is eBay. But if I want to buy something on eBay, I don't send eBay a "service fee," eBay doesn't act as a currency exchange service and charge a usurious foreign exchange fee.
The other model Airbnb can cite is Best Western. Again, as a customer, I have no financial transactions with Best Western. Airbnb is a listing service, but because they collect money, separate from the actual booking rate, from the purchaser of their service, money they keep, they ought be considered an active, not passive, participant in the transaction and ought be held to the same regulatory and fiscal responsibilities as any other paid provider of accommodations.
In my view, because of Airbnb's financial arrangements, liability for tax collection and remittance, and for maintenance of properties to local regulatory requirements should rest with them, regardless of the type of rental (room or whole place) and regardless of whether the property is otherwise occupied when not being rented through their service.
Specifically for a city like Venice, the density of all short term rentals, whether listed on Airbnb or not, needs to be controlled. But this is a municipal matter. It requires actual regulation that will constrain the resident's - the voter's - freedom to manage their property as they see fit. I could see the hesitation. However, in a city like Venice entire neighborhoods could become transient. And never in the history of capitalism has a business voluntarily restricted its own growth. Well, rarely. I seem to recall Patagonia's founder, Yvon Chouinard, did just that. It was newsworthy because it was such an exception.