@Inna0 and @Melisande0
Inna
I agree that some complications may arise, considering your points.
However, the host that are running long stay are not being rated only on 2 factors. He is being rated on 5 factors. The only difference is that, the redundant factors does need a monthly evaluation. In fact, those redundant factor would be still being evaluetad, but in a kind of "invisible" mode. If the guest does not like the "cleanness, value for money, location and accuracy" on the following months, the guest certainly interrupets its stay. It does make sense that a guest continue in a place where he does not feel comfortable.
Inna and Melisande
Considering some complications raised by Inna I think there is another alternative (suggestion).
Instead of considering the abolute number 10 bookings, Airbnb could change it for number of days booked or occupancy rate that was very well reviewed by the guests.
For example:
Host 1 (Last 365 days): Has 10 booking, being 3 days stay for each booking and overall rating 4.9 . This host has reached the current SuperHost requirements regarding this factors.
Occupancy rate: 8% in the last 365 days
Host 2 (Last 365 days): Has 2 bookings, being 80 days stay for each booking and overall rating 4.9. this host has not reached the current SuperHost requirements regarding this factors.
Anyway, please note that, the occupancy rate of the Host 2 is 43%.
Note that:
Host 1 has had 10 reviews, and Host 2 has had 2 reviews.
The Host 1 has had 30 days rated 4.9 (overall rating) and Host 2 has had 160 days rated 4.9 (overall rating).
Do you think that, the Host 2 that offered a great accommodation for 160 days and have only 2 reviews does not deserve the Superhost badge?
In fact, the Host 2 has 160 days rated 4.9 and the Host 1 has had only 30 days rated 4.9 !
The logic say the Host 2 also deserves the Superhost badge.