Party House, House Party, and Party School

[Mike1034]

After Orinda incidence with 5 people shot to death, Airbnb announced to ban 'Party House'.  I googled internet to find what a party house is. Most of them came out related to Airbnb's announcement for banning 'Party House'.

I could only find House Party definition in Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_party. It is defined as

A house party is typically a type of party where medium to large groups of people gather at the residence of the party's host. In modern usage, a house party is typically associated with teenage or young adult crowds, loud music, dancing, and the consumption of alcohol, marijuana or other recreational drugs.

The term 'Party House' reminded me 'Party School'. Party School appears in Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_school

A house is a house which is a residential property. There is no party house unless a party is held in the house by party goers. Airbnb bans Party House, which is essentially to delist a house from its listing platform. It actually does not do any good to eliminate the root cause. The root cause is party goers. If party goers are not banned, they will pick other listings to have parties.

There are party schools. I have not heard that any schools being closed because of the parties held by party goers in those schools. Hopefully Airbnb management understand what they need to be done to stop un-registered parties held in those listings which do not allow parties by hosts instead of delisting those houses which are victims of those party goers.

One side note is about the absence of Airbnb in the hearing held by Orinda city council. Do Airbnb really care about the death and shooting incidence in a host's house? From the absence, I don't see they really care. What they care is to get publicity in various media and internet about their pledge of banning 'Party House'. Ironically, another gunfire was reported yesterday in an Airbnb listing in San Diego less than two weeks after Airbnb announced to ban 'Party House'. https://www.10news.com/news/local-news/gunfire-reported-during-party-at-la-jolla-mansion.

I'd like to hear hosts' opinion what Airbnb really need to do to ban parties held by party goers in Airbnb listings which have no party specified in the house rule.

[Rebecca181]

@Susan17 I always have this weird feeling that young heads-of-company Gazillionaires like Chesky and Zuckerman deliberately wear sneakers and cool, hip non-corporate attire to create a kind of soft, fuzzy, 'Mr Rogers' vibe:  "I'm one of the GOOD, SAFE, TRUSTWORTHY guys here" (even though they are ultimately responsible for the horrendous messes that are a direct result of the predatory, 'feral capitalist'-driven corporate policies they create). 

If so, it ain't working.

[Sarah977]

@Rebecca181 Something else I've noticed about this Silicone Valley gig economy that also seems designed to come across as "good, safe, trustworthy" is the use of first names only. I've never met, or in any way communicated with Brian Chesky, therefore I don't refer to him as Brian, but Mr. Chesky or his full name. I totally understand use of first names only on public forums- it's an informal setting and it's a safety concern to have your full name out there, but this use of first names seems calculated- supposed to make you feel like these billionaires and elites are your buddies, someone approachable who you'd sit down and have a beer with.

This just occurred to me the other night, as I'm reading a novel about a major cyber event that shuts down pretty much everything worldwide. The author looks young, and his portfolio is as a developer of computer programs, etc. You know where they have a little blurb about the author on the back of the book? I've only ever seen the author's full name on these i.e. "John Irving is the author of ........."  On the author blurb on this book I'm reading, it says "Matthew is...."

[Rebecca181]

@Sarah977 Do you remember the days when you joined Facebook, you'd receive an (automated) message: "Hi, I'm Mark!" - and he'd be your first Facebook friend?

"Hi, I'm Mark!" (Soft, fuzzy, trustworthy...)

[Anonymous]

@Mike1034  I don't think there's any advantage to anyone - not the hosts, nor Airbnb - for the property where 5 people were killed to have a current and active listing. I agree that it would be wrong for Airbnb to tarnish a listing as a "party house" just because unscrupulous guests have had an unauthorized party there. I'd much prefer that they aggressively ban guests who have been reported for rule and legal violations and eliminate the "suitable for parties/events" category if they want to be taken seriously, and not just keep up appearances until the  news cycle moves on to the inevitable next mass shooting.

I also think Airbnb needs to do a better job of communicating what hosts can realistically expect from them. Every day a dozen posts comes up on these boards from hosts who feel that Airbnb doesn't "support" them enough, and much of the time they've been misled by the marketing into underestimating the risk and responsibility involved, and overestimating the protection that's available to them. These details shouldn't be buried in the fine print.

[Mike1034]

@Anonymous  I agree with you that the host should not list the property after the shooting incidence in the house in Orinda.

But from the statement given by Airbnb, it left the public with the impression that they ban the so-called "party house" because the host was responsible for or involved in the party and shooting incidence. I would rather to see that Airbnb ban parties in all their listings instead. Any violated guests and hosts would be removed from Airbnb platform.

[Anonymous]

@Mike1034   We shouldn't forget, outside of the bubble of regular Airbnb users, there are a huge number of people who are worried about the impact Airbnb is having on their communities, and who have experienced firsthand what it's like when one of their neighbors' homes gets used as a "party house." From their perspective, the neighbor who chooses to list their property here is not a "victim," but rather a responsible party who created the circumstances that allowed things to get out of control. And it's true - nobody forced them to rent their home out to unsupervised strangers from the internet who they know nothing about. The owner of a property does still ultimately bear responsibility for it, and their neighbors can make the argument that they shouldn't have put it up on Airbnb in the first place if they couldn't maintain control of what goes on in it.

The idea of a "party ban" seems inadequate for that controversy, since there's no fixed definition of what a party is. And if someone rents a property under false pretenses with dodgy intentions, I don't think Airbnb's Terms of Service are going to stand in their way. We all know, once the guest has physical access to the home, there's nothing that a listing service can do to protect it.

[Mike1034]

@Anonymous  What a host can do is very limited after a party actually started in such a circumstance. I watched video from Orinda hearing. From the neighbor complaining to the occurrence of shooting was about one and half an hour. Police was called about 9:30pm and later again. But they did not respond immediately till after 10:30 pm. Shooting occurred around just before 11pm. The violence could happen anytime during the party.

Therefore, any preventive measures before a party can be held are more important and practical. Anything related to seriously vetting Airbnb users are crucial among those preventive measures. Current Airbnb system and policies really need to be considered for dramatic changes in order to avoid more tragedies and neighborhood disturbance related to parties.

[Hamish7]

I have 3 properties in different countries. Australia, Thailand and Argentina and the only place I've had trouble with guests "partying" is in Buenos Aires (Argentina)  where guests book for 2 and 5 or 6 turn up (I charge extra/person/night over 2 guests) and the response from Airbnb has been underwhelming to say the least. I installed a security camera in the entrance which I can monitor via the cloud from my home in Melbourne and I've seen 7-8 guests of guests turn up at midnight and not leave until the midday. It was obviously quite a party. I just don't hold back on bad reviews anymore and frankly NEVER want to see guests like that renting from any host EVER. It is just dishonest on the part of guests and Airbnb support in this situation is hopeless. 

[Rebecca181]

It's kind of sad yet amazing to see how well this idea to focus on 'Party Houses' worked for Brian Chesky and Airbnb. Search on google using these words: 'airbnb orinda shootings november 2019'. Page after page after page you'll see 'Party House(s)' in the titles of the online article.  Seems most everyone is buying what Chesky and his team are selling, hook, line, and sinker. Wow. Great way to detract from the real issues that led to these murders: Airbnb's own policies that encourage hosts to accept any and all guests, or be dropped in the search rankings.

[Sean433]

@Mike1034 

I have made some very solid and common sense suggestions directly to airbnb executives. I really hope they start taking this more seriously to avoid dangerous situations. I have one listing that is titled Toronto Mansion. 6 bedrooms, 5500 square feet. It is prime target for local guests who want a "party house". I am always the most careful with this listing. We have 2 cameras outside and have had 3 known cases of parties being thrown their and if there are more, it will lead to trouble because airbnb may consider this a "party house" even though we are very clear that no parties are allowed. And even though airbnb does not take my valid suggestions to avoid such incidents.

The suggestions I made were that not only should a host see the full name of the guest after the booking but also during the request to book phase. Whenever I have a local booking, i always search their number on google but I cannot search their name so hopefully I can find enough info about them by their number. For instance, I have a guest checking in today this listing (Toronto Mansion) and he is local. He told me he is booking it for his family but after I googled his number, I saw that he was a promoter for night clubs and events. But it is too late now because I was only able to see his number after I accepted. So now I am very worried he will host a party even though I asked him to confirm he is not throwing any parties. So what I did was tell him that our maintenance manager will come by at night to shovel and salt the property just to let him know that there will be eyes on the property. As well, I will have to drive by at midnight to verify there isn't 20 cars and check the cameras every 30 minutes tonight to verify because I am about 50/50 that he will throw a party. It has all the markings of it. This could have easily been prevented had we had more info.

If they allowed hosts to screen guests prior to bookings, it would avoid so much drama and would actually save airbnb money from having fewer resolution requests and fewer demands on their customer service department when guests break house rules. It would also improve their credibility. 

The other suggestion I made is that all guests MUST submit a government issued ID when they sign up for an account and that the name they put on their profile must match their ID. This will prevent the bad apples from joining which is what you want and promotes guests to be accountable. As someone who uses airbnb's when I travel, I have no issues with this because I know that I come with good intentions and will not cause issues. Those are the type of guests airbnb should want to have.

These suggestions do not breach privacy laws because if a guest wants to book someones private home, the host has the right to more information before accepting. In the case of Long term rentals, it is standard practice to obtain 2 forms of the tenants government issued ID on file as well as check their credit history. We are not asking for any of this. Just their names so we know what were getting into. It really isn't too much to ask.

I think executives should really start taking these suggestions seriously. I really hope I do not have an issue tonight but if I do, I will reach out to airbnb again around midnight to ask them to tell the guest to leave. and then I will tell them, why aren't you take my suggestions seriously, I am on the front lines and

[Sarah977]

@Sean433  If I were you, I would change the name of the listing from Toronto Mansion to something which isn't an open invitation to partiers. That seems like a no-brainer.

[Sean433]

@Sarah977 

Either way, the large listings are always targeted regardless of title. Guests search by the number of bedrooms in the search filter critera. It wasn't always titled Mansion. In fact, when I had bad incidents last year, it wasn't titled that.

Also, I am not going to lower the marketing value of my title just because 1% of guests are bad. It does bring in a lot of great guests. The title of my listing isn't the issue, it is the reluctance to create barriers to the bad apples.

[Mike1034]

@Sean433  I am amazed that you always come up with some ways to mange your listings at minimum risk and optimized for the balance between good reviews and financial profitability.

The suggestions you proposed could unload extra vetting work from Airbnb to hosts. However, I would rather Airbnb can change their policies to do complete vetting as suggested by @Susan1028 in the thread below. If Airbnb is reluctant to disclose a guest full name, age, location when a booking request is sent to the host, they should take the responsibility of vetting the guests properly. If they can disclose those information to the host, that is even better to provide one more vetting from hosts.

But I guess that Airbnb would rather to take control of the vetting than to let hosts vet because more declining of booking requests could be the result when hosts can vet. That is actually my logic thinking when Airbnb used the name of against discrimination to remove all information of a guest during booking except for a first name. Airbnb's purpose of this change is mainly to force hosts blindly accept booking requests.

[Sean433]

@Mike1034 

With regards to your first point, thank you. What I do is I look at other hosts who are in Toronto and scan through their reviews and I notice that guests who are likely to be problematic and therefore leave a retaliatory review are the ones who reside in our city but more specifically, there seems to be guests who are extremely problematic from certain towns within our city, e.g Brampton, ajax, etc.  and so I usually just decline them and prefer the out of town guests. 

But the vast majority of hosts who manage multiple listings don't seem to grasp this somehow. It is hard to find a superhost in Toronto who manages several listings. 

[Susan1028]

You've got it @Mike1034

They have advisors on staff that used to work for the government, so they are well counseled in how to achieve all of their goals and avoid liability..