An Analysis of The Impact of Short-Term Vacation Rentals on the Hotel Industry

Abstract

Much scholarly attention has been paid to Airbnb’s influence on the hotel industry. However, extant studies have limitations because they consider only Airbnb while overlooking various other short-term vacation rental players that can also affect performance of hotels. To address this research gap, this study aims to provide a broader understanding of the impacts of short-term vacation rentals by analyzing data obtained from various vacation rental platforms. This study shows that while increase in short-term vacation rentals has an overall negative effect on hotel performance, the economic effect is more significant in the low-end market than in the high-end market. Our findings further reveal that the negative effect is reduced when there is a large price difference between short-term vacation rentals and hotels. By comprehensively examining multiple sources of data on hotels and vacation rentals, this study brings alternative perspectives to the attention of researchers for further investigation of vacation rentals.

Keywords

short-term vacation rental hotel price difference market segment Hawaii

Introduction

The short-term vacation rental (STVR) accommodation segment has exploded over the past decades, with websites such as Airbnb, ClearStay, FlipKey, VRBO, HomeAway, and myriad others offering millions of listings of private rental properties to potential travelers. The impacts of STVRs are unique for several reasons. First, according to Airbnb, more than three quarters of STVR properties are outside of main hotel districts (Airbnb, 2019). The dispersion of STVR properties likely means that their impacts are less geographically concentrated than traditional accommodations (Akbar & Tracogna, 2018). Second, traditional accommodations usually operate under a formal structure, with higher marginal costs than STVR properties, which are often owned and operated by sole proprietors. Thus, the operating costs of STVR properties are likely to be lower than traditional accommodations, suggesting that they may be more competitively priced (Guttentag & Smith, 2017). Scholars have also emphasized economic benefits such as price as a primary reason why travelers choose STVRs (Guttentag et al., 2018). Third, STVRs often differ from traditional accommodations in that many offer multibedroom homes with full kitchen facilities (e.g., an entire house). In this way, it is possible that STVRs are complementary, rather than competitive, to traditional accommodations, attracting a different type of tourist to many destinations. While remaining competitively priced against conventional lodging accommodations, STVRs can provide unique opportunities for tourists who wish to further tailor the lodging experience to their specific needs and interests (Xie & Mao, 2019).

Despite the consistent growth of STVRs, their impacts on the hotel industry have not been a popular topic of discussion in academia. Because many STVRs are operated informally, data about their ownership and operation are hard to obtain, leading to a lack of high-quality research about this increasingly important segment. Because more data are available about Airbnb, most of the extant literature in the hospitality and tourism field has discussed the impacts of this particular vacation rental medium, especially if it is substitutive or complementary to the lodging industry. Most studies argue that Airbnb plays an alternative or substitutive role for conventional accommodations because it offers similar products and services in direct competition with hotels (Blal et al., 2018; Dogru et al., 2019; Guttentag & Smith, 2017; Kwok & Xie, 2019; Zervas et al., 2017). Other scholars posit, however, that based on its territorial distribution of listings and competitive prices, Airbnb is supplementary or complementary to the hotel industry (Dogru et al., 2017; Gutierrez et al., 2017; Maté-Sánchez-Val, 2020). Heo et al. (2019) have further emphasized the positive influence of Airbnb in generating additional tourism demand and facilitating innovation and business opportunities for hotels.

However, the existing research focusing on Airbnb raises several important questions: Does Airbnb represent the entire short-term rental segment? Does Airbnb address all the needs of travelers who would otherwise stay at hotels? Although Airbnb may be the most popular, other STVR platforms owned by large travel companies, such as Expedia, Priceline, and TripAdvisor, also provide similar peer-to-peer (P2P) short-term rental services. However, unlike Airbnb, which offers private and shared rooms as well as small studios and apartments, the others tend to provide much larger spaces with more offerings (Geminiani & DeLuca, 2018). In particular, while Airbnb is popular with solo travelers and/or couples traveling to urban destinations for both business and leisure, other STVR platforms tend to cater more for families vacationing in nonurban holiday destinations. For instance, approximately 70% of vacation rental listings on major STVR booking platforms, such as VRBO and HomeAway, are two- or more-bedroom properties with an average capacity of six people—and 87% of their guests travel with a family member (Vacation Rental Management Association, 2020). The implication is that these STVRs are generally geared more toward travelers who are looking for specific attributes, such as household amenities and space, at a more competitive price (Hajibaba & Dolnicar, 2017). The extant literature primarily focusing on Airbnb, therefore, suggests that a more holistic approach to the vacation rental segment is needed to examine the overall effect of STVRs (Blal et al., 2018).

Based on the research gap identified from the literature, this research note aims to provide a broader understanding of the impacts of STVRs by analyzing various types of STVRs in Hawaii in the United States. Due to its higher hotel room rates, Hawaii has long been a popular location for the operation and rental of STVRs, and a variety of alternative accommodations have been popular in the state since the 1980s. In addition, recent rapid growth in the size and scope of online vacation rental operations in Hawaii has provided travelers with varying alternatives to traditional accommodations. By comprehensively examining multiple sources of data on hotels and STVRs, this study brings alternative perspectives to the attention of researchers for further investigation of vacation rentals.

An Exploratory Study

This study examines the impacts of STVRs on hotel performance in Hawaii. The sample of this study consists of hotels and STVRs across the four most popular and heavily visited islands in the state of Hawaii: Hawaii, Oahu, Kauai, and Maui. We collected various monthly data for the period between July 2018 and February 2020. Monthly hotel performance data, such as revenue per available room (RevPAR), average daily rate (ADR), and occupancy rate (Occ), were provided by Smith Travel Research (STR). STVR-related data were obtained from Hawaii Tourism Authority (HTA), the state’s lead agency supporting tourism. HTA provides information on monthly supply, RevPAR, ADR, and Occ of vacation rental units listed on varying online platforms such as Airbnb, Booking.com, HomeAway, and TripAdvisor.

Most previous studies have shown that the increased supply of Airbnb negatively affects the performance of hotels. While they assumed an across-the-board effect for all hotels in the lodging industry, recent research suggests that the disruptive effect of new competition such as Airbnb may vary across market segments (Guttentag, 2015; Xie & Kwok, 2017; Zervas et al., 2017). In particular, analyzing Airbnb’s effect on hotel sales growth in San Francisco, Blal et al. (2018) showed that not all hotels across different segments were affected homogeneously by Airbnb’s entry into the market. However, their findings were limited because other vacation rental players that also can affect hotel performance were not considered. Hence, we argue that STVRs will have differing effects on the financial performances of all hotels across different market segments.

To support our argument, we categorized hotels by market class, an industry categorization developed by STR. A hotel is generally assigned one of six class segments based on its room rate: luxury, upper upscale, upscale, upper midscale, midscale, and economy (STR, 2020). Due to limited data availability in Hawaii, however, STR combined some classes for certain markets to produce a report. Following this approach, the classes were combined to create two primary market categories: the top three classes form the high-end market, and the bottom three classes form the low-end market.

In addition, the price difference between hotels and STVR listings was included to examine if the effect of STVR’s competitive pricing varied across different market segments. Findings of a recent survey indicated that price is the most important motivator for STVR users (Tussyadiah & Pesonen, 2016). Tussyadiah (2016) argued that the emergence of sharing and P2P platforms, such as Airbnb and Uber, have enabled consumers to look for more price-competitive alternatives to traditional services because those services and goods provided via a sharing economy or P2P platforms generally lead customers to expect lower prices. In particular, the effect of Airbnb’s price competitiveness was found to be more prominent especially when hotels are overly high priced (Kaplan & Nadler, 2015).

Furthermore, a recent study by Xie and Kwok (2017) showed a significant moderating effect of a large price difference on the relationship between Airbnb supply and hotel performance, thus providing evidence that Airbnb does not pose direct competition to hotels. They argued that because price generally reflects quality, accommodations that are priced differently do not cater to the same market and thereby are not substitutable (Ye et al., 2014). Although price, as a signal of quality, influences customer decisions, the importance of the price attribute in choice of accommodation may vary among customers in different market segments (Becerra et al., 2013; Chattopadhyay & Mitra, 2020). However, varying effects of price differences across different market segments were not explicitly tested in the literature (Xie & Kwok, 2017). Therefore, we argue that the moderating effect of the price difference can vary between high-end and low-end market segment. Our empirical model is as follows:

R e v P A R_{i t} = β_{0} + β_{1} S T V R_{i t} + β_{2} P D_{i t} + β_{3} {(S T V R * P D)}_{i t} + β_{4} S I Z E_{i t} + ε_{i t}

Monthly RevPAR for the four islands was collected to measure hotel performance for each month in different market segments. STVR represents the total supply of STVR units, measured by the cumulative number of listings. Price difference (PD) was measured as the difference of the monthly average rate between hotels and STVR listings in each month. Size is a control variable, measured as a number of rooms. An interaction term of STVR and PD was also introduced, while relative variables were mean centered to mitigate potential multicollinearity problems (Aiken & West, 1991). Analysis of the variation inflation factors from the regression model verifies the lack of significant multicollinearity issues (Tabachnick & Fidell, 1996). Finally, the logarithmic transformation was applied to all variables to improve the fit of the model.

Results and Discussion

Main Findings

Figure 1 presents the monthly supply of STVR units and monthly hotel RevPAR from July 2018 to February 2020 in the state of Hawaii. In general, growth in the supply of STVRs appears to be negatively related to RevPAR of hotels. Monthly ADR and RevPAR of hotels and STVRs are shown in Figure 2. While a positive relation between ADR and RevPAR exists, the RevPAR of hotels appears to be high when there is a large price difference between STVRs and hotels. Figure 3 compares monthly RevPARs of hotels in the high-end and low-end markets relative to monthly ADR of STVRs. Although the ADR of STVRs appears to be associated with overall RevPAR of hotels, as the average price of STVRs changes, RevPAR of high-end hotels seems to fluctuate more widely compared with that of low-end hotels.

Figure 1

Monthly Supply of STVRs and Hotel RevPAR

Figure 2

Monthly ADR and RevPAR of Hotels and STVRs

Figure 3

Monthly ADR of STVRs and Hotel RevPAR in High-End/Low-End Markets

Regression analyses were performed to further explore the relationship between the supply of STVRs and RevPAR of hotels. Based on the results of the Hausman test (χ² = 0.973; p > .01), the random effects model was adopted while controlling for seasonal patterns and size. The findings in Table 1 show that the supply of STVRs had an overall negative effect on hotel performance. In addition, the economic effect of STVR was more significant in the low-end market, implying that STVRs may be perceived as an alternative option for more price-sensitive travelers. Although STVRs are generally perceived to be a threat to traditional hotels, we argue that they do not have the same impact on all hotels across different market segments especially when there is a large price difference. Indeed, the negative effect of STVR on RevPAR was mitigated in the high-end market as the price difference between hotels and STVRs increased, suggesting that STVRs do not appear to be competing directly with hotels in the high-end market. Therefore, the significantly negative moderating effect of price difference indicate that the competitive price of STVRs does not necessarily hurt hotel performance, further implying that low-priced STVRs cannot be a substitute for high-priced hotels because they clearly serve different markets. For example, because high-end clients are less influenced by price, they may not switch from the high-price hotels to the low-price STVRs even when there is a large price gap between them.

Table 1

Results of the Regression Estimations

Panel A	All Market Segments				N	R ²
Panel A	STVR_i,t	PD_i,t	(STVR * PD)_i,t	SIZE_i,t	N	R ²
(1)	−0.128*	0.184*		0.041**	200	.42
(1)	(−2.33)	(2.26)		(3.56)
(2)	−0.211*	0.144*	0.028	0.049**	200	.43
(2)	(−2.43)	(2.41)	(1.35)	(3.45)
Panel B	High-End Market Segment				N	R ²
Panel B	STVR_i,t	PD_i,t	(STVR * PD)_i,t	SIZE_i,t	N	R ²
(3)	−0.187**	0.498**		0.053***	200	.42
(3)	(−2.91)	(3.62)		(5.88)
(4)	−0.148*	0.587**	0.051*	0.058***	200	.45
(4)	(−2.33)	(3.96)	(2.36)	(5.49)
Panel C	Low-End Market Segment				N	R ²
Panel C	STVR_i,t	PD_i,t	(STVR * PD)_i,t	SIZE_i,t	N	R ²
(5)	−0.218*	0.417*		0.038*	180	.45
(5)	(−2.39)	(2.49)		(2.31)
(6)	−0.161*	0.589*	0.019	0.044*	180	.46
(6)	(−2.26)	(2.84)	(1.78)	(2.39)

Note: STVR = short-term vacation rental. PD = price difference.

Significant at .05, **Significant at .01, ***Significant at .00.

The Impact of COVID-19

The regression analyses excluded data from March 2020 to September 2020 due to dramatic changes in the U.S. economic climate during the COVID-19 pandemic. Tourism and hospitality sectors have been hit harder than others by this outbreak especially because of travel restrictions and border shutdowns imposed by many countries. Table 2 presents monthly RevPAR and Occ of STVRs and hotels between January 2020 and September 2020. RevPAR of hotels plunged by 89% from $262.70 in February to $29.15 in September, while Occupancy fell by 77% from 84.7% in February to 19.6% in September. This is because most flights to Hawaii were cancelled when a mandatory 14-day self-quarantine rule for all arriving visitors went into effect in mid-March.

Table 2

Monthly STVRs and Hotel Performance in Hawaii: January 2020 to September 2020

		January	February	March	April	May	June	July	August	September
Hotel	RevPAR	$264.27	$262.70	$124.68	$11.7	$17.95	$25.28	$36.39	$34.3	$29.15
	% change	−6.4%	−0.6%	−52.5%	−90.6%	−91.1%	−89.3%	−86.0%	−85.9%	−85.0%
	ADR	$314.27	$310.31	$279.90	$131.16	$126.72	$161.51	$174.03	$157.94	$148.8
	% change	−10.8%	−1.3%	−9.8%	−53.1%	−50.4%	−42.2%	−42.7%	−45.5%	−39.5%
	Occ	84.1%	84.7%	44.5%	8.9%	14.2%	15.6%	20.90%	21.70%	19.60%
	% change	4.9%	0.7%	−47.4%	−79.9%	−64.9%	−68.3%	−64.4%	−62.4%	−59.4%
STVRs	RevPAR	$203.81	$206.59	$153.12	$9.54	$17.43	$28.56	$27.76	$26.01	$16.80
	% change	15.6%	1.4%	−25.9%	−93.8%	−92.8%	−88.8%	−89.6%	−89.4%	−92.4%
	ADR	$247.04	$245.66	$239.41	$190.39	$185.47	$206.95	$196.89	$191.28	$190.88
	% change	5.5%	−0.6%	−2.5%	−20.5%	−45.7%	−40.1%	−42.9%	−42.2%	−39.6%
	Occ	82.5%	84.1%	63.9%	5.0%	9.4%	13.8%	14.1%	13.6%	8.8%
	% change	9.5%	1.9%	−23.9%	−92.2%	−61.7%	−59.8%	−63.5	−60.7%	−60.8%

Note: STVR = short-term vacation rental; RevPAR = revenue per available room; ADR = average daily rate; Occ = occupancy rate.

The impact of COVID-19 appears to be even more detrimental to STVRs as they are not considered essential businesses that are allowed to operate during the pandemic. In early April, the state government prohibited operations of all nonessential businesses, including STVRs, during the emergency period (Star Advertiser, 2020). Such regulations have taken a heavy toll on the performance of STVRs. RevPAR plummeted by 92% from $206.59 in February to $16.8 in September while Occ dropped by 90% from 84.1% in February to 8.8% in September. In light of these travel regulations, therefore, understanding tourists’ perspectives in how they perceive STVRs would be critical in predicting their performance during and after COVID-19. For example, tourists have expressed mixed emotions about the issues of safety and hygiene when staying in STVRs during the COVID-19 pandemic (Glusac, 2020). These findings raise important questions about new challenges caused by this unprecedented global health crisis and how they may affect the way STVRs are operated in the future. Therefore, comparative studies can be conducted to analyze the impact of growing health and safety concerns of tourists on their choice of accommodation between hotels and STVRs.

Conclusion

Despite the growing popularity of the STVR segment in the lodging industry, little scholarly attention has been focused on investigating it. In addition, extant studies are limited in that they primarily discuss Airbnb while overlooking various other STVRs that are available in this important segment. Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine whether the existence of STVRs would significantly affect hotel performance. This study contributes to the growing literature on accommodation-sharing platforms. In particular, we extend previous research focusing only on Airbnb by taking into consideration multiple sources of data on the supply and performance of various STVRs while examining their impacts across different segments. Our findings suggest that the extent to which STVRs influence the performance of hotels needs further examination because the economic and financial impacts of STVRs could vary across different rental platforms.

This research note also provides several alternative perspectives to the investigation of the impacts of STVRs on the lodging market. First, future research needs to take a broader view of the vacation rental segment, since research focusing on a single rental platform may not uncover the true impacts of STVRs on the lodging market. While Airbnb is considered a major player in the STVR industry, Airbnb and traditional STVRs may serve different customers. For instance, Airbnb customers are generally perceived to be younger, adventurous, and tech-savvy individuals who are looking for more authentic travel experiences; other STVR users are attracted to more functional attributes, such as home amenities and space (Cheng & Jin, 2019; Mody et al., 2017). A more comprehensive approach is the key to understanding what customers truly want from STVRs.

Second, more attention should be paid to analyzing the impacts of STVRs across different market segments. The STVR segment has evolved to cater to more than a single market. STVRs have recently started offering premium products for high-end customers who are traditionally targeted by hotels. For instance, major STVRs, such as HomeAway, now provide luxury properties beyond the standard offerings for the growing number of high-end travelers. On the other hand, large chain hotels have responded to the disruption caused by STVRs by expanding and recreating their limited- and/or selected-service hotel segment to market to more price-conscious customers. Travelers are now in a position to choose between STVR and hotel, even in the same market segment, based on the specific attributes they perceive to be more important in their choice of accommodation. In particular, our findings have shown that high-end customers would not change their purchase from hotels to STVRs merely because of a large price difference, suggesting that the competitive prices of STVRs do not affect all hotels across different market segments in the same way. While differential effects of STVRs were found, they were based on relatively large groups, comprising only high and low segments. Future research can focus on more in-depth analysis in different geographic locations to compare STVRs and hotels across all market segments. Such a research effort can improve our understanding of customers’ decision-making processes in the choice of accommodations.

Footnotes

ORCID iD

Kwanglim Seo

Jungtae Soh is a PhD candidate of School of Hospitality Management at Pennsylvania State University. His research interests include strategic and economic decision making in the hospitality and tourism industry. Kwanglim Seo, PhD, is an Associate Professor in the School of Travel Industry Management at the University of Hawai‘i at Manoa. His areas of expertise include corporate finance, revenue management, and strategic management. His primary research interests include the effects of financial and strategic management on corporate performance in the hospitality and tourism industry.

References

Aiken

L. S.

West

S. G.

(1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Sage.

Airbnb. (2019). The economic impacts of home sharing in cities around the world. https://www.airbnb.com/economic-impact

Akbar

Y. H.

Tracogna

(2018). The sharing economy and the future of the hotel industry: Transaction cost theory and platform economics. Tourism Management, 71, 91-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2017.12.004

Becerra

Santaló

Silva

(2013). Being better vs. being different: differentiation, competition, and pricing strategies in the Spanish hotel industry. Tourism Management, 34, 71-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.03.014

Blal

Singal

Templin

(2018). Airbnb’s effect on hotel sales growth. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 73, 85-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.02.006

Chattopadhyay

Mitra

S. K.

(2020). What Airbnb host listings influence peer-to-peer tourist accommodation price? Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 44(4), 597-623. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348020910211

Cheng

Jin

(2019). What do Airbnb users care about? An analysis of online review comments. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 76, 58-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.04.004

Dogru

Mody

Suess

(2017). Comparing apples and oranges? Examining the impacts of Airbnb on hotel performance in Boston. Boston Hospitality Review. https://www.bu.edu/bhr/2017/06/07/airbnb-in-boston

Dogru

Mody

Suess

(2019). Adding evidence to the debate: Quantifying Airbnb’s disruptive impact on key hotel markets. Tourism Management, 72, 27-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2018.11.008

10.

Geminiani

DeLuca

(2018). Hawaii vacation rentals: Impact on housing and Hawaii’s economy. http://hiappleseed.org/publications/hawaii-vacation-rentals-impact-housing-hawaiis-economy/

11.

Glusac

(2020, May 14). Hotels vs. Airbnb: Has Covid-19 disrupted the disruptor? The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/14/travel/hotels-versus-airbnb-pandemic.html

12.

Gutierrez

Garcia-Palomares

J. C.

Romanillos

Salas-Olmedo

M. H.

(2017). The eruption of Airbnb in tourist cities. Comparing spatial patterns of hotels and peer-to-peer accommodation in Barcelona. Tourism Management, 62, 278-291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2017.05.003

13.

Guttentag

(2015). Airbnb: Disruptive innovation and the rise of an informal tourism accommodation sector. Current Issues in Tourism, 18(12), 1192-1217. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2013.827159

14.

Guttentag

D. A.

Smith

S. L. J.

(2017). Assessing Airbnb as a disruptive innovation relative to hotels: Substitution and comparative performance expectations. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 64, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2017.02.003

15.

Guttentag

Smith

S. L. J.

Potwarka

Havitz

(2018). Why tourists choose Airbnb: A motivation-based segmentation study. Journal of Travel Research, 57(3), 342-359. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287517696980

16.

Hajibaba

Dolnicar

(2017). Substitutable by peer-to-peer accommodation networks? Annals of Tourism Research, 66, 185-188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2017.05.013

17.

Heo

C. Y.

Blal

Choi

(2019). What is happening in Paris? Airbnb, hotels, and the Parisian market: A case study. Tourism Management, 70, 78-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2018.04.003

18.

Kaplan

R. A.

Nadler

M. L.

(2015). Airbnb: A case study in occupancy regulation and taxation. University of Chicago Law Review Online, 82, 103.

19.

Kwok

Xie

K. L.

(2019). Pricing strategies on Airbnb: Are multi-unit hosts revenue pros? International Journal of Hospitality Management, 82, 252-259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.09.013

20.

Maté-Sánchez-Val

(2020). The complementary and substitutive impact of Airbnb on the bankruptcy of traditional hotels in the city of Barcelona. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 45(4), 610-628. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348020950810

21.

Mody

Suess

Lehto

(2017). The accommodations experience escape: A comparative assessment of hotels and Airbnb. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29(9), 2377-2404. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-09-2016-0501

22.

Star Advertiser. (2020, March 23). Here is the list of essential businesses exempted from Mayor Caldwell’s stay at home, work from home order. https://www.staradvertiser.com/2020/03/23/breaking-news/here-is-the-list-of-essential-businesses-exempted-from-mayor-caldwells-stay-at-home-work-from-home-order/

23.

STR. (2020). Glossary. https://str.com/data-insights/resources/glossary/c

24.

Tabachnick

B. G.

Fidell

L. S.

(1996). Using multivariate statistics. HarperCollins.

25.

Tussyadiah

I. P.

(2016). Factors of satisfaction and intention to use peer-to-peer accommodation. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 55, 70-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.03.005

26.

Tussyadiah

I. P.

Pesonen

(2016). Impacts of peer-to-peer accommodation use on travel patterns. Journal of Travel Research, 55(8), 1022-1040. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287515608505

27.

Vacation Rental Management Association. (2020). Guide to vacation rental taxes. https://www.vrma.org/page/industry-research-data

28.

Xie

K. L.

Kwok

(2017). The effects of Airbnb’s price positioning on hotel performance. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 67, 174-184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2017.08.011

29.

Xie

K. L.

Mao

(2019). Locational strategy of professional hosts: Effect on perceived quality and revenue performance of Airbnb listings. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 43(6), 919-929. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348019836277

30.

Wang

Law

(2014). The influence of hotel price on perceived service quality and value in e-tourism: An empirical investigation based on online traveler reviews. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 38(1), 23-39. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348012442540

31.

Zervas

Proserpio

Byers

J. W.

(2017). The rise of the sharing economy: Estimating the impact of Airbnb on the hotel industry. Journal of Marketing Research, 54(5), 687-705. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.15.0204