As our global host community grows and becomes increasingly diverse, Airbnb’s programmes and policies need to grow and adapt as well – both to ensure the success of people from all over the world, and to show our appreciation for hosts’ hard work and amazing hospitality. That’s why we’re updating the Superhost programme to make it more fair, inclusive, and valuable to hosts everywhere.
Great reviews are essential to earning Superhost status. They also help create a community where trust and transparency is shared between guests and hosts. But, hosts can’t control whether or not their guests choose to leave a review. After examining global data and speaking with Superhosts in a number of countries, we discovered that review rates aren’t consistent worldwide – some travellers always leave reviews, while others rarely do. This discrepancy can put some hosts at a disadvantage when it comes to consideration for Superhost status. In order to make the evaluation process more fair for everyone in our global community, we’ll no longer require that hosts have at least a 50% review rate in order to become Superhosts (or retain their existing status).
As part of our effort to make sure Airbnb programmes are built to meet the needs of all hosts, we’re also updating our cancellation requirement. Previously, we required that Superhosts have zero cancellations, but for hosts with an extremely high volume of bookings across multiple listings, that standard is impractical. To make the programme more fair for high-volume hosts, we’re now allowing one cancellation per 100 trips booked over the past year, which means a cancellation rate of less than 1% across all of your listings. It’s important to note that we still take cancellation as seriously as ever. Over the past five years, the Superhost community has worked hard to earn the trust of their guests and we will continue to reward that trust by recognising the most reliable hosts with Superhost status.
Both the changes to our cancellation and review requirements will take effect on the 1 July quarterly Superhost assessment. We’ll also be updating hosting dashboards at this time to reflect this new criteria.
We’re committed to continually improving the Superhost programme so that it works for the entire host community. That includes using clear, fair qualification criteria and making it valuable for every Superhost. From the overall design of the programme to how it rewards the community, we’re looking at different ways to not only make your hosting experience more positive, but also help you be more successful. So, please stay tuned, there’s a lot of exciting news to come.
@Alon1 It is a long standing bone of contention with hosts that different cultures do ratings differently. And many hosts have experienced it.
I have had guests from many diverse walks of life. And I have experienced people from different cultures throughout my life. Not just as an AirBNB host. I grew up around Washington DC, an extremely culturally diverse area because of the presence of the military, governments and embassies. I still have friends in other countries. And it is a simple fact that certain cultures in certain countries don't automatically give you a participation award and a Gold Star. 3 stars is "Meets Expectations". If the stay was what you expect from a home sharing space, you get 3* and that should mean you've done your job well. Serving Filet Mignon should get you 4* and serving them on Baccarat Crystal gets you 5*.
It is purely an American expectation where everyone thinks they deserve a prize just for showing up. AirBNB expects guests to give a 5* rating when a space is "acceptable". There is no allowance for Acceptable vs Outstanding.
My very first guest gave me GLOWING written reviews. I could have parted the Red Sea with the review they wrote. And I got 3* across the board and nasty-grams from AirBNB about what a failure I was. And no, you can't really overcome that on your first review. Because AirBNB punishes you by pushing your listing to the bottom where it's never seen. And because when no one sees you, you don't get bookings. And when you don't get bookings, you can't climb out of the hole. I tried it. And that's why I simply deleted my old account and created a new one. I literally had nothing to lose by doing so. Guests would rather try a new listing than one with a low score.
Numerous other people have mentioned this and it's one of the biggest flaws in AirBNB: That 5* is Acceptable and anything else is Not Acceptable. It's not a graded scale. It's all or nothing. There are articles written by journalists in major magazines about the AirBNB rating system's flaws and the emphasis on 5* only. Not only about its confusion with the Hotel Rating system but the fact that 4* is FAILURE and leads to Host Burnout trying to maintain a ridiculous standing. AirBNB expects a 4.8* rating or 96%. This means 95% is failure in the AirBNB world. No where else is a 95% a failure. Heck, in Baseball, 33% is outstanding.
I don't care that you have 400 reviews. You are in a completely different market. If I were in town in a major city, I would have hundreds of guests & reviews. But I'm not. I get longer term guests - I've had several who were here for more than a month. But I'm not convenient. I'm off the beaten path so not as desireable. But it's not like I can just pack up and move my farm so....
It means every review is precious. You can absorb a lot more negative reviews in 400 than you can in 80. #Math101
"The simplest example 10 Reviews. If you have 9 x 5 Stars, and 1 x 3 Stars, this will give you the requisite 4.8 Average for SH How long it would take you to accumulate the 10 Reviews is of course dependent on the popularity of your listing."
Except it's not simple, which you should have considered in your condescending response.
It all depends upon when that single 3* review is made as to how detrimental it is to your standing.
If your first 9 reviews are 5* and your 10th is a 3*, you are in fact maintaining a 5* rating throughout. Based on the above, your rating would be as follows after each review:
5.0, 5.0, 5.0, 5.0, 5.0, 5.0, 5.0, 5.0, 5.0, 4.8
It isn't until that 10th review at 3.0* that you drop to 4.8*. BUT, you never leave Super Host territory. You are consistently above the threshold. And you get your Gold Star every time.
If your first review is 3*, even if your next 8 reviews are 5*, you are consistently below the coveted 4.8* rating. Furthermore, you will continue to receive Nasty-Grams from AirBNB after every review until your 6th because you not above their "acceptable" standard of 4.6. That is if you even make it to 6 reviews because when you're below 4.6* you are subject to delisting. So depending upon their algorithms, they might just go ahead and delist you after 4 reviews because you are consistently below their "acceptable" 4.6*.
Based on the above, your rating would be as follows after each review:
3.0, 4.0, 4.33, 4.5, 4.6, 4.67, 4.71, 4.75, 4.77, 4.8
It is not until that 9th 5* review (or 10th overall) that you finally reach that 4.8* goal post. It's a big difference that you should have realized in your analogy. Tsk tsk.
We're all on the same side, Alon. (Or at least, we should be) Dissing our fellow hosts achieves precisely nothing. We need to be pulling together to ever have any hope of bringing about positive change - not tearing each other down over trivialities.
And - genuinely - congratulations on your your superhost award. Delighted you finally got the recognition you deserve as a dedicated, well-performing long-term host.
I don't consider the Rating issue trivial; nor when misinformation is propagated about it on CC. As mentioned I rather consider it 'scaremongering', and I would appreciate if you would rather acknowledge my comprehension and analysis of the Stats which demonstrates Airbnb Rating system is far more accommodating of lower figures than hitherto explained by others.
SH was never a goal of mine, given like you I began hosting before SH was introduced by Airbnb.
Truth to tell, while I always cared about the words in Reviews; I never took much interest in the Stats till last year, when I experienced the 5 Day Pause. Then I had to be concerned and fought for a month to deal with the underlying discrepancy of automated email suspension 4.2 in contrast to 4.4 in Progress/Performance; and in the process found a Case Manager who addressed the issue and deleted 3 Reviews with very low ratings (due to undisclosed 3rd P.B).
Lastly, while I thank you for the congrats, as mentioned to you in PM, it doesn't make a scrap of difference to me whether I have SH or not. I certainly won't lose any sleep worrying about it..... Whether it makes a difference to my Guests is yet to be seen. But on past record, most guests are oblivious of its significance.
Actually, you're absolutely right - there is far too misinformation on the Community Centre - there has been from Day 1, and yes, it should be corrected. But the real question is - why is there so much misinformation here, and who, exactly, is the root cause of it?
All day, every day, the CC feed is bottle-necked with years-old threads, each one stuffed full of outdated, inaccurate and downright false information. When anyone searches a topic in the search bar, very often, the top posts returned are from 2015/16, rather than the most recent threads on the topic being shown first. That's a serious, fundamental design flaw in the CC system - one that has been brought to the mods' attention many times, yet over 3 years later, remains unfixed - and is one of the driving forces in the continued propagation of misinformation all over this forum. Until that situation changes, and relevant, current results are returned to searchers in chronological order, chaos and confusion will always reign supreme in the CC, as it does now.
As regards the topic of whether or not the claims that Airbnb threatened to delist hosts for falling below a 4.6 are accurate, or whether calculations of how many X's it takes to make one Y are correct - as you know, that's not my particular area of interest. Maths never were my strong point, and my thoughts on the whole ratings/review/SH sh*tshow are already well documented. I very rarely even look at my own star ratings nowadays, let alone try to figure out anyone else's, so while I certainly do appreciate you working out all those complicated (to me, anyway!) formulas, I'm afraid they go right over my head as my brain starts to fry once I see too many numbers in one place :)
As I mentioned previously, I enjoyed the Guantanamo thread because it was tongue in cheek, and a bit of fun, but far more importantly, the post raised serious questions and ignited debate on the wider issues of how Airbnb is using the ratings and review system as a blatant form of manipulation and control over the host community - and the lengths hosts are increasingly expected to go to, in order to meet the higher and higher targets that Airbnb is continuously setting for them. That's a discussion that needed - and even moreso now, needs - to be had.
The thread in question - or the host who posted it - most certainly wasn't the source of the "4.6 or delisted" rumour though. At the time of that posting, there had already been weeks of confusion regarding the matter, caused by one thing, and one thing only - Airbnb's own gobbledegook, double-speak announcement on the updated requirements. As with all things Airbnb, their communication on the subject was opaque, ambiguous and very much open to interpretation. And yet again - despite an army of bewildered hosts clamouring for clarification/answers here in Airbnb's own official CC - the company couldn't be arsed responding, or even acknowledging hosts' concerns., and simply left everyone swinging in the breeze. As is their MO on just about everything.
This is just one thread, of many, discussing the matter at the time.. it's clear that the root of the alleged misinformation was Airbnb's ambiguity - not host fabrication or conjecture.
The reality is, untold numbers of our fellow hosts, with 4.7, 4.8, 4.9 and 5.0 ratings, are routinely being delisted now, every day of the week, for far more minor "transgressions" - and in many cases, no d*mn transgressions at all - than slipping to a 4.6. That's what we should be uniting and challenging Airbnb about, not squabbling amongst each other over things that really aren't worth squabbling about.
And finally, scaremongering is only scaremongering, in the absence of truth and experience.
thank you for this!!! i totally agree and if i ever get low scores i will definitely set up a new account. i just lost super host status over one lousy 2* retaliation review and when i search for listings in my area now my condo doesn't even show up! i have to specify several filter to get it on search results
Thanks for flagging the missing posts. We are having some technical difficulties with the CC over the last week or so with intermittent long load times and occasional logging out. I would wager the post was lost in one of these moments or may have been trapped in the Spam filter. I can see your content here, if I am correct in assuming this is the missing post?
Thank you for your message.
No, it was not the comment you have identified.
It was rather my preceding response to Stephanie 365 (currently on page 3 of this thread),
including the bold sentence;
Just BAN ALL ANIMALS due to heath issues/allergies of host. DONE. Having a “pet hair and dander-free” listing has been a PLUS for many guests, and avoids all scam service animals, etc.
Hi, I am so disappointed after years of being a Superhost giving my best by going above and beyond to find this all counts for nothing, as because I have a small and seasonal business (because of the location) I will lose Superhost in October because I will not have hosted 100 times.. 😔
Lovely to meet you. Firstly, thank you for all the many years of effort you have put in to make your guests feel welcome in your home.
I came across your post here and I just want to clarify and hopefully reduce you concern, that there has been no changes made to the number of stays Superhost criteria. This remains the same, with hosts needing to host 10+ stays to meet this requirement for Superhost status.
Here is an overview of this criteria:More details, can also be found on this Superhost overview page.
What has changed is, you no longer have to achieve a certain number of guest reviews, this criteria has been removed, as a lot of the feedback from hosts highlighted that this is actually out of their control and therefore shouldn't be included–so the Superhost Team have been looking into this and made this change.
The second slight change is to the number of cancellations. This remains at 0 as I'm sure you aware, but if you host more than 100 reservations in 1 year, you are eligible for 1 cancellation. So this might be where you got the 100 times from!
I hope this helps to clarify things and also hopefully puts your mind at rest that you don't need to host 100 times to become a Superhost! :)
What do you think about the changes? I'd love to hear your thoughts.
I don't think that you have to have hosted a hundred times, Gaby. I can't remember exactly but I think there are 2 options and one of them is that you have hosted a certain number of times in a hundred days. I don't think it's a particularly large number because we only have a limited season too. Maybe have another look at the SH criteria to see if you can meet one of the minimum requirements. Good luck! :-)
I am one of those "high volume" hosts who has missed out in the past three years because of the zero cancellations policy. It is a big relief to know that when I work flat out all year around that the computer algorithm will allow 1/100 cancellation. Also I get a high percentage of reviews but always thought that it was something beyond my control so am now relieved about a more realistic 50% figure. It seems that Airbnb are listening and factoring in the human component of high volume hosting , recognising all the effort put in for our guests. Many thanks !