Superhost Status - Wrong Perception from Guests when Booking - Not Fair

[Liliana293]

Hello, 

I used to be a Superhost but I lost my status because I can't host as often as I used to, but I still have 5 starts!

After I lost my SuperHost status I have find it harder to rent my place.

I think there is a mistake in this SuperHost system, in my case not being a SuperHost doesn't mean that I am not giving the 5 starts service, but guests think that they have to book a SuperHost place because they have best service and homes (not because a have not rent it 10+ times during the last year - they dont care about that).

An example of this is that I saw in the local news in my town Atlanta talking about a bad experience with a home in Airbnb, so their recomendation was to host always a SuperHost, that is the wrong perception that guests have, they just need to look for a home with a good rating! They dont care if the home is rented 5 or 20 times a year.

Do you all understand what I mean? It is unfair that I am label as a NOT SuperHost when I giving still the best service... I think something needs to change.

Thanks for reading and any suggestions are welcome!

Lili

Ex SuperHost from Atlanta, GA - USA

[Ana1136]

@Liliana293 it already changed, now you can be Superhost with less than 10 stays as long as you are booked more than 100 days in the year. It is also unfair with hosts who are booked all year round, it is easier to get 5* when you host a few times, the more guests you get the bigger the chances are that you will get less than 5* and your ratings will drop and you will also loose the status. I personally don't see any difference in the number of bookings since becoming a superhost. 

[Ange2]

@Liliana293     I totally agree with you.  Superhost, partially based on stays hosted and trips reviewed, muddies the understanding for guests who think it is all about the host/guest relationship.  Not!

[Alon1]

@Ange2 

I've never met a guest whose comprehension has been 'muddied' or muddled in this way.

Not surprisingly, as I've never been SH, and per force Guests who stay with me have no such preference.

Ineed, the vast majority of my Guests don't have a clue about SH. It's simply not on their radar.

They rather note that I've been hosting  a considerable time, an experienced host with  a good track record of Reviews, and a place that attracts them, which all creates the confidence to book with me.

Consequently, I am left with the impression that emphasis on SH is largely internal to Airbnb, and most prized by those who strive to obtain it. CC copiously reflects this concentrated bubble.

[Ange2]

@Alon1     True,  many have no idea what Superhost is, my guests go on reviews too.

But those who do know of its existence believe it to be about guest/host relationship, quality of service, comfort of stay and it adds a level of trust for them,  so to add what Airbnb demand in terms of their marketing (reviews) and finances (amount of stays) is disingenuous regarding what Airbnb define as a Superhost:  "Superhosts are experienced, highly rated hosts who are committed to providing great stays for guests."

Plus, many people (and on this forum too)  recommend ONLY booking with Super Hosts, in fact I think you can filter for them.   Quote from @Liliana293   "Local News Atlanta talking about a bad experience with a home in Airbnb, so their recomendation was to host always a SuperHost".

Does SH make a difference?   It hasn't to me. I was once a SH, barred for a year because I cancelled over 30 days in advance of a trip and a day or two after the reservation had been made, and couldn't supply Airbnb with the extenuating circumstances documentation within 24 hours, even though I found the guest alternative listings with same pricing, amenities, offering etc. and they were happy with that.   In effect I did not leave the guest in the lurch. Ironically,  If I had left them in the lurch by waiting a week or more to cancel i.e. when I had the documents in hand (and there were less listings available it being peak season) I would still be a SH,  I have all the other ratings for it.   But still,  having it/not having it  has never made a difference.  But,  I am also in a very popular location, not lacking in tourists,  some hosts are not as well placed and not having SH may well impact their listing negatively especially when the media advise only to stay with SH.

[Alon1]

@Ange2 

Thanks for detailed response.

I agree SH designation is grossly misleading especially the opening assertion 'Superhosts are experienced....' 

   In many cases far from it, as it only takes 10 bookings & 5 Reviews to qualify for SH. 

   [See my posts including detailed article in another thread by Moderator Lizzie:

Superhost Evaluation Timeline - 2019 first quarter ]

re 'many people (and on this forum too)....'

   I would specify this forum is the primary place where the recommendation is prevalent.

-- I haven't come across anything in the UK and London papers equivalent of the Local News Atlanta.

re: 'Does SH make a difference?'

       Not according to you, with the qualification that you are 'in a very popular location...'

The same of course for London. Though the majority of my Guests are no longer regular tourists. The reason is that London was saturated, currently with 80,000 listings, so the vast majority of my guests are now location based for specific reasons: (mainly family & friends, jobs, courses, temporary housing.)