Evaluating the Superhost Cancellation criteria

[Lizzie]

Hello everyone,

Further to the feedback many of you gave on the Superhost criteria topic here in the Community Center and in research session, the Superhost team is currently evaluating the Superhost Cancellation criteria.

They’re considering evolving the Cancellation criteria from 0 cancellations in the past year, to:

• Option 1: 0 cancellations in the past 100 trips (or in the past year if you haven't hosted 100 trips). This means even after a rare cancellation, you don’t have to wait an entire year to qualify again. As soon as you host 100 trips without cancelling again, you will be eligible for Superhost.

• Option 2: 1 cancellation allowed every 100 trips. For every 100 trips you host in the past year, you would be allowed 1 cancellation and still be eligible for Superhost.

Cancellations under extenuating circumstances will continue to not count toward this criteria as they are out of your control.

They would like to hear directly from you on these potential changes:

• What do you think about these changes?
• Which option do you prefer and why?
• Are these changes easy to understand?
• Do these changes seem more fair to you as a host?
• Do they motivate you to continue to work to become or remain a Superhost?

I will share the feedback you submit on THIS topic specifically with the Superhost team. These are not the only things the team is currently looking into, but they wanted to run these ideas by you first.

Thank you so much and I look forward to hearing from you.

Lizzie

Legal disclaimer: By selecting "Post", you agree to share your ideas publicly and without any expectation of confidentiality or compensation of any kind. While Airbnb welcomes your contributions, Airbnb may be working independently on similar policies, products, or features, and may choose to review and/or implement your ideas in its sole discretion. You also agree that the https://www.airbnb.com/terms and https://www.airbnb.com/terms/privacy_policy apply to your use of this and all Community Center pages."

[Alabama-Beach-Vacation-R0]

We prefer option 2 (1 cancellation allowed for every 100 bookings).

[Scott622]

Firstly, I'd like to thank Airbnb for listening to the feedback and concerns of larger agency hosts like us.

We always strive to provide the most professional service we can and are not in the business of cancelling anyone's holiday.

The issue is that with large volumes of properties, cancellations will at times be necessary for varying reasons, some of which can be completely out of our control. Anyway, Airbnb are aware of our opinions and feedback on those situations and reasons they can occur so we won't delve back in there!

I just wanted to say that I find the second option, where we are permitted one cancellation per 100 reservations, to be far fairer than the current requirements for Superhost status. At our current level of listings, this would be a challenging, but realistic figure for us to target whilst still maintaining the high standards Airbnb insist on from hosts who advertise on their platform.

I can understand that some smaller property management individuals/companies may find that too high a figure however and so, would be open to further movement in the interests of fairness as we ask no preference over any other host - larger, or smaller than ourselves. 

We expect only fairness on the part of Airbnb. With the level of service and expertise we offer and deliver, Superhost status would be guaranteed with a low volume of properties (or 1!) - we should not be penalised or criticised simply for being more successful.

Likewise I would remind Airbnb that we are all running a business and that they should put more value and deliver fairness across the board so as not to "punish" those who bring more business their way - it's the way of the world (unfortunately). 

[Bookiply0]

Hello together,
we also discussed in the management team and for big partners (>2k properties) with a strong growth is Number 1 the better version. But also version 1 is not really good because in low seasons it is hard to get 100 trips that means in this time you will loose the status for a long time time and excactly in the time when you normally receives the most booking for the high season. 

The problem with Number 2 is that the last years bookings (and then the allowed cancel.) which are the base for the calculation are compared to the actual year booking to less.

But to be honest, the best solution would be a percentage cancellation limit for the booking volume in period X. For example on a monthly base.

Cheers,

Johannes

[SpainSunRentals0]

Let's add another angle to the cancellation criteria: bad and poor reviews.

For anyone doing a great service overall in providing quality stays to guests, there is always going to be a change in circumstances by no fault of their own. Guests are entitled to have subjective opinions and expectations based on what they see in the photos and read in comments. Therefore let it be cancellations or bad reviews, they will affect a great track record.

My points are about:

1) Weighing the way superhost status is achieved and maintained. It is not possible to compare someone with 2 properties to someone with >100 or more. So far that is easy to understand, then why use fixed values that do not take into consideration the size of the business.

2) Number of nights booked (and season): with the current measurement, it does not matter if you cancel a 1-2 night booking in March or a 3 week holiday in August. Both are considered a booking, but the impact economically for the client and host are very different and the emotional impact of losing a key holiday in high season almost impossible to recover last minute vs. a short stay that any hotel can cover are not taken into consideration.

3) Final point, historic data. For property managers that keep updating their portfolio, we always get good and less good properties. however when we get a bad one, that spoils the whole set. In that case, we stop working with bad properties because we can't keep our level of quality...but the damaged has been done, a cancellation or a very bad review now will stain our profile and superhost calculations even after the property is no longer advertised even months later (there is no way to say that a comment belongs to a property no longer advertised due to poor quality).

In summary, after suffering every kind of scenario in our many years experience in the rental business with a portfolio near 100 properties now what I propose to airbnb is to:

1) Create superhost status for different categories based on the size of their business (maybe number of properties published or number of nights booked.)

2) Change the way status is calculated by moving from a fixed number into a more kind measurement like "number of nights booked" That way a negative comment or cancellation in a 2 night booking will not weigh the same as a positive comment in a 2 weeks booking because keeping someone happy for 2 weeks takes 7 times more effort than for 2 nights.

One size does not fit all and if a system is not fair, people will stop believing in it.

[Robert4446]

As a guest, I feel it's worth mentioning that superhost is not necessarily a selling feature. In fact, the way it's being done, I am wary of any superhost that has a *guest* cancelation in their history. With a regular host, if they need to cancel, they will just cancel. But superhosts seem to be so worried about keeping their status, that some will ask me (the guest) to cancel for them. Less than super, if you ask me.

I'm not here to discuss whether or not superhost criteria is too difficult to keep. If it's supposed to be something that a guest can rely on, then perhaps it should be this difficult, or even moreso. Imho, a superhost should also be under tighter scrutiny by airbnb, whenever there's a cancellation, regardless of who cancelled it; the comments around that cancellation should be automatically reviewed and/or (anonymously) flaggable for review. Any superhost who tries to skirt the criteria should lose their status, maybe permanently.

Then I might start caring if a host is a superhost when I'm looking for a place to stay.

[Sarah977]

@Robert4446 Interesting guest perspective. I agree that it's not kosher for a host to ask a guest to cancel due to some issue on the host's end. It's only acceptable if a guest hasn't bothered to read through the listing info thoroughly and books, then indicates that they intend to do something against the parameters of the listing, like bring more guests than the limit, bring pets to a no pets listing, etc.

If I were a guest, I wouldn't be put off by seeing one past cancellation on a Superhost's reviews, since that could just be a matter of the host having an emergency situation, like the plumbing springing a leak, or the host having a serious accident or getting ill. Although most of those scenarios could be dealt with under the extenuating circumstances policy, with hosts providing Airbnb with documentation as to why they had to cancel, so it doesn't show up as a cancellation on the profile, some hosts, even those who aren't totally new to the platform, may be unaware that that option exists.

So one cancellation wouldn't raise red flags for me, especially if it said the cancellation was made months before the check-in date, rather than last minute, but more than one certainly would. And I might message the host before committing to a booking, to inquire about that cancellation, saying that I was concerned about getting cancelled on.

[Mark3272]

Ive just seen come across this after googling.. The problem was a guest of ours that booked and then contacted us 10mins after booking and wanted a whole load of additional information from us and then decided the booking wasn't for them so I said fine you can cancel as its within 48hours, however I forgot the 14 day rule which meant they were unable to cancel without penalty so I did the cancellation but now lose my Superhost status held for nearly 2 years, this is my first cancellation after 25 bookings this period alone,  just seems really harsh and when asking support they sympathised but say that's policy you should of read it.. oh well shame as I was just trying to protect my Superhost status by giving good customer service bu refunding a potential unhappy AirBNB customer! 

[Sarah977]

@Mark3272  Yes, it's harsh, sorry that happened to you. But try to keep in mind that a guest who has questions or failed to fully read your listing description is the one at fault, so maybe don't try to bend over backwards to accommodate them. If a guest has questions, the time to ask them is before they book, not after.