We pay Airbnb 3% of bookings, while guests pay somewhere around 12% (give or take). So, in my mind it has become obvious that Air has four times as many reasons to steer their policies towards guests. Never mind that sticky little detail about their platform not existing without hosts, but it appears they aren’t currently having issues on the supply side. This has all become a very serious, very competitive business, and I only see more changes in store that benefit guests to secure bookings.
2 Likes
Yes, I hate new policies that secure more bookings for me.
You really eat their party line right up don’t you?
This has always been the case and is not the reason for their new guest centric policies. They don’t even try to hide it anymore. I also think they watch the competition and might feel they are losing business to the others. I think regulation is getting to them and they are plateauing. I also think they need to become way more profitable for an IPO, which is why it hasn’t happened yet.
2 Likes
I don’t see the problem, worst case scenario you’ll still have 12 days to find a replacement guest.
I’m a fly in destination, so that line of thinking doesn’t work for Hawaii.
Not withstanding the fact that the people canceling at 12 days out just booked at 14 days out.
Again. I am a fly-in destination. Most people book airfare at least two weeks in advance. Most book their rooms at the same time.
48 hours to change your mind might not affect most of you but it will affect me.
But go ahead and defend your 48 hours, you seem to love it so much!
What is irritating me is that one of the very first options guests can choose now when searching is “Free Cancellation - Show homes that allow you to cancel for free within 48 hours of booking”. If they select that, only listings with Moderate and Flexible cancellation policies show up. So even though the strict policy now gives guests 48 hours to change their minds, because it’s only within 14 days of the check-in date, my listing doesn’t show up. I’m worried that guests looking for summer dates, for instance, will check that option and not even view my listing.
I am thinking that on April 5 the search dynamics will change when all strict listings will be burdened with this.
I have always refunded those who book a long way out and then cancel quickly so no real difference.
I am thinking of using Booking, have been told by friends who use it that they have a lot more cancellations but often can get new bookings to replace them due to the higher flow of traffic.
This has already been explained to you @Brandt but you don’t seem to be listening 
Airbnb have tested the 48 hour free cancellation policy for hosts on strict cancellation, and found according to them, that it encourages more people to book. But as guests can cancel for 48 hours after booking, the initial host they book with may not benefit if they change their minds and book elsewhere or don’t book at all…
As I have already mentioned, in an earlier post, in my case it led to a demonstrable loss as guest A blocked dates another guest B was interested in, for a much longer booking.
By the time guest A bothered to cancel (45 hours later), guest B with the longer booking had found somewhere else.
So in answer to your question. Airbnb always benefits when more guests book. However individual hosts will only benefit if they receive more bookings than before (much too early to evidence this yet, but I certainly got no more than the same period last year).
On the contrary hosts can lose out if guests on 48 hour cancellation block dates and then cancel, meaning another guest who could of made a definite booking isn’t able to.
2 Likes
Personally this won’t affect me. It’s very rare that I get bookings more than 14 days out anyway. So if I did, and they cancelled, it’s just as likely I’d get another booking anyway.
BUT I do understand that my situation is different to many others, where a couple of days might actually be the difference between booking and no booking.
I just can’t see why this can’t be an opt-in thing. Or why does it have to be 48 hours anyway? That’s an awfully long time to make up your mind and get your ducks in a row. 12 would be sufficient for most functioning adults I would think
3 Likes
Nope I’ve booked today for 7 people for 1 week away and received skulking contact details ect.
I’m aware it’s not within the 14 days period they talk about, but we had made an enquiry with another host. They came back to us, after we’d made our booking and I had let them know to open up the date as we had already booked. And told me I could cancel my booking as I had 48 hours to do it and could go with them for less.
Several things here, 1 they misunderstand the 14 policy part and two it could/ does encourage cut throat competition between hosts.
Not very community minded in my eyes.
Anybody else this has happened to ?
1 Like
So I have spent way too much time thinking about this new wrinkle to the Strict Cancelation policy. The 48 hours to cancel must be enticing to potential guests. I think the flaw here isn’t the 48 regret period, but the timeline. 14 days is pretty short. Now, for a fly-in location, if your place is still available 16-days out, a booking is actually a good thing. Isn’t that the issue? Those last 48 hours before people won’t book a flight are critical to hosts.
Would folks that have a strict policy feel better if the timeline was 30-days? 45-days? 90-days? What is the magic number?
I realize that there is anger that AirBNB has taken away a measure of control, but if you were building this new feature, how would you tailor the parameters?
What I know is, with my moderate cancelation policy, when I have a cancelation within those measly 5-day window, as one of the more expensive options in the area, in order to rebook, I have to lower my price. I always loose. I figure that is part of the game, but that doesn’t mean I like it.
The aspect of the policy that is an unknown will be how many reservations hosts on the strict policy will now secure because of the cancellation flexibility. Some hosts are concerned about a 48 hour tie up in their calendar where they could lose out on another booking. My opinion is it will be a net positive.
I think TAs is 60, which is no big deal. 14 is cutting it so close.
If they add this to the book and look policy some hosts are facing, it’s pretty much all over.
It feels like a slow boil to me. Frog in a pot theory.
1 Like
I TOTALLY disagree. There is NO positive, net or otherwise, to allowing guests to tie up your place for 48 hours and then dump you. What if you had several in a row who did this? Then it would just be a clusterF of booking and cancellations. But yeah, no worries, net positive.
1 Like
The average host does not have 100% occupancy! Great if you do, you are not average. I’m totally lost as to why you don’t think a guest could take cancellation factor into consideration when making a reservation.
The closer it gets, the worse. most people book airfare first. So they could tie up my place for Christmas in October and cancel 48 hours later, taking it off the market for a crucial, two day pre holiday booking period.
1 Like