Hacker News Reader

Comment by romwell | Hacker News Reader

>I would MUCH rather stay in a nearby hotel (and have my guests stay in a hotel). I would feel less like I was imposing.

You must be well-off with well-off friends.

My friends would feel pretty bad if I were to pay for their hotel, and it is not an insignificant cost to many (especially since I'm living in the Bay Area).

Crashing on a spare couch? No problemo.

(Even if the economics of the spare couch work out in the favor of the hotel room. There is a utility in the spare couch beyond letting guests sleep on it, and that understanding takes away all the feelings of imposing, at least financially.)

However, all of that ignores the fundamental difference. You're not my guest when you're in a hotel. I can't wake you up for breakfast and make you coffee. We can't watch movies on the couch until either feels sleepy. And so on.

You can't rent the experience of sharing your home with someone if you don't have a home to share.

View on HN

> I can't wake you up for breakfast and make you coffee. We can't watch movies on the couch until either feels sleepy. And so on.

Couldn't agree more. In most cases I'd rather crash on a friend's couch than sleep on a comfier hotel bed if it means we can hang out until we pass out and not have to worry about getting me back to my hotel.

> You must be well-off with well-off friends.

I don't think extravagantly so, but I have worked in software for a couple decades and saved a lot.

But I think you're confusing the fundamental question here. Sure, when I was in my twenties I crashed at friends' places, and they at mine, all the time. But the article is specifically about the tradeoff of getting a smaller, cheaper, apartment, vs. getting a larger house in the suburbs with a spare guest room. The idea that it's usually a cheaper option to pay for the occasional hotel than to specifically purchase a larger house with rooms you rarely use. Obviously the "crash on my couch" is a different dynamic entirely.

>I don't think extravagantly so, but I have worked in software for a couple decades and saved a lot.

Well then you are well-off. Most people can't swing 5 nights in a high CoL city without months and months of saving. Offering to pay for someone to stay in a hotel creates an extremely bad dynamic when the receiver couldn't easily afford that on their own.

>he idea that it's usually a cheaper option to pay for the occasional hotel than to specifically purchase a larger house with rooms you rarely use.

Yep, but the important distinction is that a hotel room isn't equivalent because it's a very easily measurable monetary burden on the host.

>>I would MUCH rather stay in a nearby hotel (and have my guests stay in a hotel). I would feel less like I was imposing.

>You must be well-off with well-off friends.

As always, It Depends™. I have friends allergic to our pets, some have significant trouble sleeping on inflatable beds or couches, etc. Some have kids, so one couch / one bed won't cut it.

The only way it's reasonable for them to visit without having pretty major issues after a day or so is when we're all up for setting up a hotel + transportation (or similar)... which ends up meaning it's less often than some other friends.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com