I think I wasn't clear on the point. They need to communicate their story and the value of the service in every market, as well as start addressing the concerns proactively. There seems to be much more organization from the anit-AirBnB side than the pro-AirBnB side, so they should be investing much more in organization and lobbying as well. Local legislation is always determined by local voters, which is why they need to be seriously investing in a grass roots infrastructure.
AirBnB provides no benefit to local voters and communities, except to the hosts putting the guests up. Possibly hotel tax revenue, which would've been realized regardless through traditional hotel bookings.
I'm not describing 'astroturfing', but rather investing in a grassroots infrastructure. AirBnB wins on legislation when voters want AirBnB. I will agree that while 'astroturfing' best describes AirBnB's current approach to the problem, it is very expensive with limited effectiveness. The NFL is a wonderful counter example here. They employ every tactic possible for getting new stadiums, but nothing is as effective as the outcry from the public over the possibility of losing their football team.
The anti-AirBnB side is absolutely better organized. Why else would AirBnB have to outspend them >10x to stop Prop F?
Or perhaps they're in the wrong? Are you proposing that right and wrong can be determined by measuring political influence? That seems a bit frightening.
This like most problems is yet again a lack of leadership. Lacksadaisical govt when simple regulations voiced by the people could be easily met. Bnb is like an ostrich with it's head in the sand and should follow the law even if one has to be made.
