It would be great to see Airbnb change the account structure for property managers to allow each listing to have standalone reviews, and therefore considered independently for Superhost status. Maintaining Superhost status for 60+ properties has proven very difficult - there is just too much scope for variance in review scores between different properties. However, this means that our very highly rated properties with 4.9+ no longer have Superhost status. This is not only unfair of the owners of these properties, but it is against Airbnbs interest as Superhost listings perform better. And these listings have all the elements of a Superhost listing, they are just being dragged down by completely separate properties we manage that are not scoring well.
This could be achieved with a special account status for professional management businesses operating on Airbnb.
Yes I am aware of this potential workaround. However, it isn't a good solution for several reasons. It requires a new account to be made every time - a time consuming process not only to create each account but also to connect it to our property management software. Each new account has to be registered with a unique phone number, which creates further difficulties and complications due to verification codes being sent to the owners phone to create the account, make certain changes that trigger a security flag etc. Accounting at the end of the month is massively complicated too. We would have to login to every account individually to export their payment data, rather than simply exporting it from one account.
When managing 50-100 properties and regularly adding new ones, the co-host setup just isn't viable or efficient!
@William74 Superhost status is awarded to hosts who exhibit certain hosting skills - otherwise it would be called “Superlisting” status. A 5-star listing, like a 5-star hotel or restaurant, is so much more than the real estate.
It certainly sounds difficult to maintain those numbers across 50 listings, but like Superhosts everywhere, all you can do is keep trying to improve. You mention separate properties you manage that are not scoring well. Sounds like those are the ones needing some attention.
Also, I am curious, since you can see 50 properties at a glance: is it true that Superhost status equates with better performance? We have had some discussions here about search results, and have found that in any top 10 are always at least a couple of listings that fall below 4.8.
The review rating is the hardest part of Superhost status, the other criteria are arbitary and easily achievable. This is also the main indicator of whether you are a good host or not, with categories to cover all parts of the hosting experience. The review rating is decided entirely at the listing level, so why shouldn't Superhost status too?
Not sure I can answer that as I don't have Superhost status, but just check my top 10 and I have 5 listings under 4.8, ranging from 4.0 to 4.75.
@William74 So you see - in your top 10 are 5 listings under 4.8. Why worry about Superhost status?
So are you arguing for better reviews, or for Superhost status? The categories rated in reviews aren't used in Superhost evaluations. For instance, "location," which may be the most listing-centric of the categories, doesn't count in Superhost evaluations. Overall rating counts - but that is not a number drawn from the 5 review categories. It's completely independent. A guest can give you an overall rating of 1 and still give 5s in all the categories. The review rating comes after a guest has been hosted at a listing. The host, whether on-site or unseen, has either taken steps or not to ensure a guest has a good experience. Neither the review ratings nor the Superhost evaluation can be looked at as "entirely at the listing level."
Yes that may be true, but they still feed into the overall rating a guest gives. Although it does happen, it's unlikely for a guest to give 5 stars for all categories and a 3 star overall for example.
The host, whether on-site or unseen, has either taken steps or not to ensure a guest has a good experience.
In my case this is not true. We do not own the properties so have very little control over a lot of the interior. Some properties are just not high end properties either - not every place out there is a 5 star accommodation. Should we turn down this business just to maintain a superhost status for some properties? Point is it's just not an enterprise solution.
@William74 I'm sorry, but your complaints remain baseless.
You can market properties appropriately to manage guest expectations and deliver the best possible experience the accommodation can provide.
You can turn down any property you want, for whatever reason you want. One reason would be whether it's congruent with your brand or not. If it's volume you're after, that's your priority, no judgement on that. But having made a decision in favor of volume, you might not always be able to achieve the highest ratings. In other words, you can't have everything. Once you've made the decision about the kind of business you want, live with it. Using jargon like "enterprise solution" isn't going to make you right.
@William74 On the flip side, if a host has 60 properties and a large majority of them do really well (5-star reviews) then the mediocre places will be carried by Superhost status. However you look at it, you need a lot of reviews overall and a lot of 5 stars for a lower score to have little impact on the average.
You've just unknowingly highlighted a further problem with the current system, listings that do not meet the requirements of a 4.8 average can be awarded the status just because they are on an account with lots of listings that do bring up the average.
Yes, true because Superhost follows the host and is not tied to any specific listing.
My 2 cents is......it seems like the original Airbnb intent was not about becoming a platform for *professional* hosts with 50+ listings or for property management companies hosting multiple homes all with different owners - which is probably why Superhost status is set up the way it is now. If I were a guest, I would assume that hosts are either the homeowner of the listing or the person with a long-term lease (and has permission from the owner to host guests).
Airbnb are a publicly traded company worth $85bn. People need to let go of idea that the site is populated with people 'just letting out a room for a bit of extra cash'. It's not been that way for years, it's all just marketing fluff. Airbnb are a massive company now with 100,000s of listings managed by companies, so they should be developing enterprise solutions to enable that to be done in a way that better serves both those hosts and the users.
As I said above, the current system has downsides because it means non-Superhost properties can achieve superhost status just by being bundled in with properties that do. How is that good for the guests?
You are right @William74. But when has Airbnb ever done anything that better serves its hosts and guests and not just the bottom line? And why do you assume that Superhost means anything at all? It's all just marketing fluff.
I'd argue that bettering the user experience ultimately improves the bottom line. And it definitely does mean something - I've had lots of guests tell me they use the superhost filter to book superhost properties only.