Hacker News Reader

Comment by thriftwy | Hacker News Reader

Russia does not have landlords (as a medium business). Virtually all apartments available for rent belong to moms and pops who happen to have a surplus so they're renting out. They usually have just one property which they rent out.

Add to that retirees who lend out their 2nd apartment to live off it.

The prices aren't exactly low but the market is pretty durable as the result. Lots of offerings at any moment at competing prices. The regulation is also almost inexistent.

View on HN

> Russia does not have landlords. Virtually all apartments available for rent belong to moms and pops who happen to have a surplus so they're renting out.

Also known as "being a landlord"? Maybe I'm missing something!?

OP's phrasing is pretty odd. Maybe they're using "landlord" to specifically mean someone that makes a career out of real estate.

A lot of the blame for the rent crisis in the US is put on big corporate landlords.

I have no idea to what extent it is actually the case that they are to blame, but mom-and-pop businesses are never as popular to attack.

I don't know too much about the industry either, but I do recall recently that large corporate landlords have been revealed to be engaging in nationwide rent fixing: https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/monopoly-round-up-fbi-rai...

What definition of landlord excludes people renting out surplus apartments?

As I imagine it, the person who rents out a single apartment for subsistence cannot pull all kinds of tricks that a large landlord with multiple properties will. They don't make the market, merely participate in one.

Moreover, a large landlord will often siphon the income into paying off more apartments for rent, taking them from market. Whereas for these single apartment landlords may consider selling their propertied instead of renting out so they don't hoard the stock as much. Their income from renting out is insufficient to buy more reliably.

So - two types of landlord. That's the key point here - your original wording confused everyone.

None.

That’s the problem though because there is a meaningful distinction to be made between landlords renting out surplus space in their primary dwelling, and landlords who own dozens or more of properties which they rent out. Based on context I assume they were using the word landlord to exclusively refer to the latter, even though both groups would generally be called “landlords”.

How is "person with a surplus who is renting out their 2nd/3rd apartment" anything other than a landlord?

They probably use the term "landlord" to refer to professional full-time landlords, sort of like how you wouldn't call a person a "carpenter" just because they made a table or a chair in their spare time (though personally, I wouldn't object to that person choosing to call themselves a carpenter.)

The person with one spare home that's renting it out is likely doing it as supplementary income, or might not even be turning a profit on it. They're basically just preventing the home from sitting empty, to try and get value out of it.

Naturally the renter would call them both landlords, but from personal experience the renting experience is also very different when you're renting somebody's second home vs when you're renting from a big corporation.

Plus there's a whole spectrum from surplus letting to mega corporate agents. There are individual landlords who own 3-6 lets, respond promptly to call-outs, keep the buildings in good condition, are cautious to raise rents, and don't try to screw you over on the deposit. They're difficult to find (partly because tenants stick with them) but they're out there and doing a good thing for society. The question is not necessarily "how to we get rid of landlords" but possibly "how do we incentivise this type of landlord vs big corporations".

There is also a whole slate of individual landlords with small holdings that let out rundown slums. Being small scale isn't the panacea your comment implies.

Didn't mean to imply that although I see where you're coming from. I was instead trying to counter the idea that anything bigger than a surplus room letter is bad.

I always heard that Saint Petersburg is one of the most expensives cities in Europe compared to income. Is that not the case? (anymore)

That may be the case because of low baseline wages. Some people end up pooling a single apt between multiple tenants to cope. But the expenses are also low, meaning many people are able to own an apartment eventually, especially with the help of a safety net of their relatives. Make somewhat above the median and you can contemplate buying. Not sure if that still works with the lending rates and price fluctuations of late, though.

I've updated wording about "landlords".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com