Change of Superhost Criteria is Harder vs Easier to Qualify and therefore Airbnb Plus, Work, Family

[Seattle-Oasis0]

I'm not sure if Airbnb realizes this but the Criteria for these categories just became Harder vs Easier to achieve for most hosts.  Let me show you how this works:

A Host with the following scores:

61 5-Star Reviews  11-4 Star Reviews, 2 3-Star Reviews.  They have 82.43% 5 Star Reviews.  However, they have a 4.797 Score.  

Reason being that in order to achieve superhost status the following is true:

A host can also have the following:

1. 18 5-star Reviews, and 1 1-Star, therefore a 94.74% 5-Star Rating. However, they will have a 4.78 Average.
2. 13 5-Star Reviews, and 1 2-Star, therefore have a 92.85% 5-Star Rating.  However, they will have a 4.78 Average.
3. 8 5-Star Reviews, and 1 3-Star, therefore have an 88.88% 5-Star Rating. However, they will have a 4.77 Average.

And so on.  Basically, if you have one bad guest experience, where it is below 4 stars, you pay for it, big time.  

These same review metrics are embedded in the new Airbnb Plus, Work Collection, and Family Collection as well.  According to both the Airbnb Open talk, as well as Brian Chesky's Host talk today both had the message that he hopes there are more versus fewer hosts in the program.  However statistically speaking it looks to me as though there will be less.    By looking at big data, such as one of the largest review platforms ever built, trip advisor, only one Hotel, out of every single hotel in the city of Seattle would qualify for Superhost under this program on a big data perspective.  

So does Airbnb really want to make it harder or easier to get into these programs?  As from where the math shows us it'll be harder.  As if you get a vindictive guest, who gives a 1 star, it'll take 16 5 Star Reviews in a row, without anything less, before you can qualify for any of these programs.  That seems like Airbnb is a little out of touch with guest expectations, and the reviews actually being given and I have nearly 2000 reviews to look at from my perspective. 

If the goal is to make it harder, then fine, make it harder.  But it seems like maybe the goal was to make it easier, but statistically speaking they didn't.    

[Pete28]

You did a better job than I did figuring this out 🙂 although I had noticed the difficulty of moving the needle above 4.8 no matter how many 5* reviews you have after a 3*.

- the lifetime nature of this against the old 3 month avg makes it certainly harder

- the random nature of guest reviews has not changed, 5* or 3* is very subjective and can depend on whether your guest has any grudges 😞

- plus may attract more bad reviews with the increased perfect expectations.

- the plus org will presumably delist you if you fall below 4.8 avg which would seem to lead to a new form of chaos. Do all your bookings the get cancelled since you are no longer plus ?!

Im glad I have not fixated on superhost etc etc, and am not offering at the end where plus would make a lot of difference 

[Terry79]

Ratings can be made fairer by dropping one Low Score and one High Score from the average...Olympic used to do this. Helps eliminate the one highly negative rating if it's an aberration from a great host's rating. If the host is terrible, won't affect them much...

[Pete28]

Not seen much discussion on the change to lifetime average 4.8 required etc - seems like another step backwards.

How long before some poor Airbnb host jumps off a bridge through the stress of unhappy guests, trying to be superhost, and get into the plus !?!

[Seattle-Oasis0]

If this really is lifetime score this is truly punishing those of us hosts that have been hosting the longest.  I've been on the Airbnb platform renting entire spaces since February 2010.  Some of my listings # Are under the first 20,000 listings on the platform.  

During that time, I did suffer some unfair ratings at times from those that said "host wasn't even there" "never got to met them" as I was a leader in the space for using the platform for a whole home, vacation rental experience.  Now those 4 and some 3 star ratings are punishing me.  I find when I launch new properties, they often have better scores, as expectations have shifted in the space and Airbnb has gotten better about distinguishing between the spaces and allowing us as hosts to communicate our involvement, or lack there of in the stay.  

So even though my reviews are overwhelmingly really good.  To compare to the hotel example I mentioned above I'd be the number 3 best-ranked hotel in all of Seattle on Trip Advisor with the same star ratings that I have on Airbnb.  Nearly 2000 reviews. 

So an old host like me, that has been around before the Superhost program even existed would be better off closing my listings.  Opening up new ones, and starting fresh with a clean slate of reviews.  Is that what Airbnb really wants to encourage?  This doesn't seem in line with their goals.

[Pete28]

I believe it is now lifetime based - although the fact that we don't know is symptomatic of the problems. Agree you are better to reset and start again. Someone else had cancelled a few bookings and could never get into plus because you have to have 95% accepts.

As an aside, you will need to do,something to me the hosting requirements in Seattle unless all of those listings are downtown - max 2 or 3 units per host from next year. Given the neediness of many guests I don't think you can run so many and hope to get 5*

[Louise0]

It would be fair and reasonable if Airbnb discarded the malicious outliers, particularly when the host has made a compensation claim against the guest and either the guest paid up or the claim was resolved in favour of the host.   The perverse outcome of this new Super Host metric is that hosts are 'punished' simply because a guest behaved badly and the guest is made aware of the host's displeasure before the guest posts their review of the host.

[Amy38]

A 4.70% 5 star listing will show as 5 star. From Abnb site...new, lower Superhost requirements: Superhost requirements Completed at least 10 trips Maintained a 50% review rate or higher Maintained a 90% response rate or higher 0 cancellations, with exceptions made for those that fall under our Extenuating Circumstances policy Received a 5-star review at least 80% of the time Coming in July 2018: updated rating requirement Current requirement: Receive a 5-star review at least 80% of the time Updated requirement: Maintain a 4.8 overall rating This change is meant to give hosts more flexibility in their review scores and allow for easier tracking. It will go into effect during the July 2018 assessment period.

[Ann10]

I agree and I think you should post this in the host voice. The change is ridiculous and unfair to those of us who have worked hard to become super hosts. Currently, I'm at 4.8, but the whole reason I'm not at 100% 5 star ratings is because of this guest who told me everything was wonderful, wrote that everything was wonderful, but then gave me a 3 for Overall Experience, but refuses to tell me why. Why should some nut like that dictate my stats. Absurd!

[Trishann0]

I have been a super host for years and years and years. I've been a full-on host for almost 8 years, since 2010, on Airbnb. And it saddens me that with the new way Airbnb rates Superhosts, for the first time in years I didn't make the cut. But what I find frustrating about it is you guys were able to narrow it down and show me that my 'location' is what is not ranking high enough, which pulled my overall average below 4.8. Since there is absolutely and literally nothing a host can do about their location, except price accordingly, it saddens me that something as arbitrary and subjective as location has taken away my super-host status. I truly do believe that Airbnb needs to revamp how location determines part of their status. I live north of downtown Seattle and price accordingly and explain it extremely and very well on my profile where I am located, I even include a hand drawn map to show people where I am so they know before they book. I also don't charge the same prices as a host who lives closer to the city centre. I even live on a main thoroughfare with a bus across the street that guess directly downtown, so I'm not in a remote location. So it's extremely frustrating that because of location and location alone I am now not considered a super-host. That is really awful! And truly needs to be reconsidered by Airbnb. I know many other host who feel the exact same way and I feel like there will be a lot of frustration on this point coming soon. I have had people I don't know in and out of my home for 8 years, and being a super-host definitely helps me get through  how stressful it can be sometimes and the guests that can sometimes be quite awful.  So to all the sudden make such an elitist ranking just feels awful. And I truly believe that Airbnb is original Mission  has shifted, but I'm curious as to why?  I realize you want to offer The Best of the Best,  but you do not own any of our real estate, we do. So I believe you need to listen to us even more than you have tried in the past. It is going to get crucial, or Airbnb will shoot itself in the foot in the long run. Please respond. Thank you

[Rebecca181]

@Seattle-Oasis0 I suspect a post like this will get a lot more comments and a lot more thumbs up once Super Hosts start losing their Super Host status because of this new rating method. Because a bell curve is being used, and not a weighted average, many people will lose their Super Host status from just one bad / unfair / uneducated / retaliatory review once this rolls out in July, and obtaining the Super Host status again will be nearly impossible, for reasons you so eloquently describe. And the new 4.7 star standard for ALL hosts; well, at this point I'm scratching my head and am starting to wonder if Airbnb wants to get out of home hosting business all together. Maybe luxury retreats and plans for an airline are more fun. But are they guaranteed to be more lucrative?