Housesitting is my most expensive hobby I have. And I love it.
10 Likes
I have used it mainly to have a 3 week stay in the LA area to visit and help my daughter in college. It may only cost me $150 US in the LA area, so I am saving thousands, even with the THS fees. Over 2 visits, at least $6K. Since I sit mostly dogs, it requires work. But I am staying in a place with a doggie door. And it is very hot, so early morning and late evening walks only. Otherwise they go out the doggie door. And I can leave for many hours. That is nice.
Funny but true.
It reminds me of one of my favourite jokes that I think we all could remember when trying to monetize this exchange.
A friend runs into another in the street and sees he looks agitated but happy, so he asks what happens. The friend says he started to run to catch the bus but the bus left before he could reach the stop, he then kept running and was very happy because that had saved him the bus fare. The friend said: “you are an idiot, you should have run after a taxi and would have saved a fortune!”
13 Likes
very funny @Newpetlover
There was a separate thread about a host struggling to get sitters. At the time, their listing included a requirement that their pets couldn’t be left for more than two hours on their rural sit, which would make it hard even for a sitter to go buy food (based on the circumstances described for even the host being able to access groceries, a 45-min drive, one way).
If you take the approach of trying to monetize a sit like that (or sits that include things like mowing), a sitter could start theoretically doing math by estimating mowing services, housebound pet sitting and home security, plus costs for travel to a rural place.
All of that would add up to a crapload. It would be ridiculous of course, and I highlight that for why hosts shouldn’t try to put a cost on their homes — in such cases for example, someone could actually make the case that a sit is one that requires a paid sitter.
9 Likes
Some home owners may think that sitters are getting a great deal by having a free place to stay whilst looking after the HO’s property and caring for the homeowner’s pets in the comfort of their own home for free, and that we’re saving a lot of money on accommodation.
This couldn’t be further from the truth.
Pretty much everything to do with a sit is based on the HO’s terms - the dates of the sit and the responsibilities of sitters.
Staying in the HOs home is actually a logistical requirement of most sitter’s responsibilities imposed by the HO - to suggest that a free place to stay is a benefit distinct from the sit itself is bizarre when in fact the the two are intertwined.
I’ve never paid for lodgings when I do not set the dates of my stay myself, I’ve never paid for lodgings where I’m not free to come and go as I please and my schedule is determined by the requirements of the lodging owner, I’ve never paid for lodging where I’m responsible for doing chores such as collecting mail or mowing lawns or doing maintenance, I’ve never paid for lodgings where I feel I’m staying in a strangers home and I feel I have to be extra careful and responsible with the property/possessions, I’ve never paid for lodgings where I’m expected to leave my accommodation as clean as I found it and I’ve never paid for lodgings where the owner has the right to cancel my stay at the last minute or during my staying without providing compensation to me.
HOs should bear all of these ‘restrictions’ in mind when conjuring up dollar amounts on just how much this so called ‘free place to stay’ is ‘saving’ their sitters!
And I know plenty of HOs who happily and regularly pay for the services of a live-in pet sitter.
4 Likes
I really don’t see why it matters what the other party is getting out of the deal.
As long as you are happy with your end of the bargin why even consider if the other person is getting, in your opinion, a better deal ?
Surely the aim is that both parties are happy and both parties get to write the words :
“I’d definitely recommend this sitter/this housesit”
In their review.
7 Likes
It matters if one wants sitters and/ or sits. If one doesn’t take into account what is attractive to the other party you get fewer applications/ sits. Unless you are in a high demand area and get 5 applications in 1-2 minutes after posting your dates. 
Personally, I think it is more value in putting it in the same context as you would have had it been between friends. Be hospitable, reasonable and ask enough but not to much.
3 Likes
Perhaps my communication wasn’t clear, or maybe you should read all of it again 
1 Like
Hey Loreemezz, i dont think you understood my question. I hear a lot that the sister’s first responsibility is to take care of the pets. And i totally agree! That is my main focus on a sit. But my question is what is a homeowner or pet parents first responsibility.
I totally agree that it is a trade. But i would never stay in a $400 Airbnb and most likely not in a $150 Airbnb either. So the value of what something would go for on Airbnb is not a concern for me. I’m not saving $150 or $400.
But anyway, my question is what a homeowners first responsibility is.
1 Like
@Loreemezz It’s marketed as an equitable exchange, not simply a trade. It’s an important distinction.
I’ve read it again and stand by my post. 
2 Likes
I think you are both right, @Garfield and @Newt, but you may be talking about different aspects of this thread.
I agree with @Garfield that it is important to understand the other party’s needs in order to improve your chances of being chosen. But I also think, as @Newt has said, that it doesn’t really matter if there is some “imbalance” as long as both parties are happy.
Sometimes it looks as though this is a fight, HOs against sitters and vice versa. But what I think is really important here is to find a good match. There’s usually a right sit and a right sitter for almost everyone. Sometimes people are willing to compromise, then that’s at least good enough.
If a HO doesn’t get applications, then they have to improve the conditions of the sitting, negotiate the dates or consider alternatives to THS for the care of their pets. The same applies to sitters, if they don’t get chosen, they will have to improve their profiles, applications, skills and experience and consider alternative accommodation.
4 Likes
It may be marketed as an equitable exchange, but what is equitable? In my case it was to be in a particular area, for specific dates so I could be in the area of my daughter’s college to facilitate moving her in and out of living arrangements and have a place she could live in between. If I had to stay in a hotel, in that area, during those, it would have costed X. So I am saving X. I needed sits in that location for those dates. I could have waited to find the most desirable sits, but I was anxious and took back to back sits that worked. The second sit will be easy, better location. The first sits is so so. But I know that I am saving at least $3K in hotel bills. I am not there to site see, so I don’t care. For me this is an equitable exchange. I decided to go nomad after Oct and have sits booked along my route through mid Jan. I have saved searches. Got declined on one desirable one. But now my parameters have changed, I can take my time and see what comes up. So my idea of equitable has changed.
Sitters have different reasons for sitting and that’s perfectly fine, as long as the pets get the care they need, as agreed on transparently and honestly at the outset. No unpleasant surprises from either side, because someone was trying to hide something to get a sit or a sitter.
Personally, I have varying needs or preferences for various sits / locations and I judge sits differently all the time. So for example I might do a local sit for a change of neighborhood, or I might take an overseas sit because I’ll enjoy local life and / or acclimate to the time zone and do nonsit travel as well. Or with my next sit, I’ll be having lunch or dinner with friends in an area where I used to live, and I won’t be doing any sightseeing. In one case, I applied for a sit because I wanted to spend time catching up with friends and seeing coworkers whom I normally don’t, because we work remotely.
Whatever my reasons, I include them when I apply, to be transparent. And I want honesty from my potential hosts as well.
It’s important on a platform built on trust for both sitters and hosts to actually be transparent and honest. Otherwise, trust is a sham and matching can go very wrong.
2 Likes
We recently saw a sit where the HO said the dogs could not be left alone AT ALL. Apparently the grocery store allowed them in, and they gave a list of pet friendly pubs and restaurants. It was ridiculous.
2 Likes
Yes THS allow this - but these listings don’t get many applications ( if any )
2 Likes
I am definitely a hobby sitter. I am in my early 70s with a home of my own, but I love doing cat sits to see new places or to re-visit places/cats I like and basically to get a cat fix. It costs me money to cat sit: petrol, eating out more which is obviously not a necessity but I do it along with sightseeing, buying flowers for the HO at the end of a sit. I have paid membership to about half a dozen organisations which means I can visit stately homes, gardens, historic sites, etc. for free but inevitably buy a guidebook and have a cup of tea and sandwich/cake while I’m there.
This is all my hobby, and it certainly doesn’t make me an inferior HS as my 80+ 5* reviews show. My reasons for staying in somebody’s house are just as legitimate as a traveller’s, maybe more so because I really am there for the cat fix. As @pietkuip has mentioned, some of us are in it for the pure enjoyment and that is just as valid as somebody who is travelling and looking to save money.
9 Likes
I remember reading an article about a couple who had gone bancrupt and decided to take off and backpack around the world. When they told people their story the were met with a lot of negatively and people not wanting to engage further with them so the changed their story They started telling people they had decided to take early retirement that they had sold everything in order to travel and suddenly they found people to be really positive with them and wanting to get to know the more.
Exactly same people just a different story.
Same on here really people judging others by their story, wrong reason, in their opinion for wanting to do it, their photos, no pets, too many travel photos etc etc. Sad really.
6 Likes
The challenge is figuring out whether strangers are trustworthy or not, etc. Practically, people will always look for some way to gauge that.
Agnostically, a history of bankruptcy correlates with higher rates of insurance claims, for instance — actuaries run numbers for that sort of thing all the time to figure out who’s mathematically a worse risk.
Of course, in the U.S., many bankruptcies are tied with medical bills when someone has a catastrophic illness and/or has poor or no health care coverage. The U.S. has little safety net for things such as health care. And people without good professional jobs or with pre-existing medical conditions can more easily run into trouble, because Americans usually get health insurance through employers and many insurers won’t cover pre-existing conditions.
1 Like