I’ll check it out, thanks!
@Angela_L @Vanessa_A what is the end goal of this thread? What value is it adding to the forum at this point?
I only found out about the trial because I saw it being discussed in a FB group and confirmed it with a member of THS who I’m connected with. So…thinking I might have missed an official announcement, I asked around 10 people I know are involved with the site if they knew about it- either home owners I’ve sat for and am now friends with (including my current sit) or new sitters I referred and helped with their profile and application templates. None of them knew about the change. None of them like it, nor can see how it might improve their experience. In fact they can see the obvious drawbacks. Several are quite angry at the change and the fact they weren’t made aware of it.
4 Likes
I think this thread will help alert members to the new policy, because many (most?) of them don’t know about it. I have personally spoken with three members who had no idea it existed.
2 Likes
@Candide, I’m so glad you mentioned the disappearing posts, I was beginning to think I was losing my mind. I saw 1001 comments the other day and then it dropped to around 960. I then convinced myself that maybe I had dreamt it (because this ridiculous situation is haunting my dreams). I found it hard to believe that THS would be so duplicitous as to delete so many comments.
2 Likes
What can I say that hasn’t already been said by literally hundreds of members? I can only add that we, as long-time successful TH members will not be renewing our membership. We have also - with great embarrassment - informed those to whom we had recently recommended TH that they consider this new policy before joining.
3 Likes
But it shouldn’t be a done deal. This forum is showing how unpopular this change is. With these responses showing the dissatisfaction and possible loss of many members, maybe a change back or compromise should be considered. If you can make the change in the first place, there is no reason it can’t be reversed or changed.
4 Likes
But THS has NOT conveyed this information in any format except the forum. We became aware of this new policy only by accident and after we had wondered why, after many successful years of membership, we weren’t finding any sits that matched our criteria.
4 Likes
I couldn’t have said it better. While we haven’t been at THS quite as long (only several dozen 5* sits), we also feel that we have been thrown under the bus for the sake of THS acquiring new members.
3 Likes
As a homeowner, when I get an application (both before and after this change) that only has a placeholder message, I tend to decline them on the spot. Of course, I understand that this new policy is almost forcing sitters to do this, but I want a sitter that’s going to make an effort to apply.
Since the majority of THS members STILL do not know about this change, I can only guess that many homeowners are getting these placeholder quick message applications and dumping them, regardless of how experienced the sitter is.
Yet another bad outcome
Admin Notice; P:ost Moderated
7 Likes
I got an email from TH for a sit I wanted. I opened it 45 minutes after received and I could not even apply because it was already shut down. This is unfair to sitters, why should I not be able to be considered? I know this is a recent policy and I think it is counterproductive. You are limiting sitters and home owners from opportunity.
12 Likes
That is your choice.
Would rather have a hurried message from a sitter that has done no research or someone who has sent a polite message asking you to wait for an hour and then receive a well thought out informative message from a sitter who really wants to come and look after your animals and isn’t wasting your time?
This system is not ideal but it’s the only way i have found to get round it and it has worked. We all know this is here to stay so we have to find a way round it.
2 Likes
Thanks for the explanation…I was wondering this as well. The same seems to be true for Los Angeles sits. I can’t understand the reasoning for this cut-off at all. If I was a HO, I would want to be able to pick the best sitter who applies…5 is not much to choose from. If the HO wants to only consider the first 5, I would think that they can just do that on their own.
You know the easiest way around obstacles?
DON’T PUT THE OBSTACLES THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!
(Not yelling at you - just the insanity of THS thinking the 5 app pause is a good idea!)
10 Likes
@Ben-ProductManager
I have been a homeowner member for 5 years and was NEVER given any notification of this change. I learned about this new policy because I posted a sit and only received 5 applications (all unqualified)…after clicking around I saw that my sit was paused. Then found this forum and learned about this policy. Is that any way for THS to treat their clients??? Without our postings you would not have a business!
Because I live in a very desirable community in Southern California I always received many applications and so I stated in my posting that I will not consider anyone with less than 10 reviews or young children (because I have a pool). I would receive about 15 applications within a day or two and many of them did not meet our requirements but thought they would throw their hat in the ring with an application. That was fine when you did not remove postings after 5 applicants. This new policy has sitters in a rush to communicate without reading the posting at all, thus preventing qualified sitters from being able to apply and in the end also frustrating themselves when they find out they didn’t meet the criteria - which they would have realized had they not been in such a rush to be one of the first 5 to apply.
For the 2 week sit over the holidays, which I currently have posted, I am finding I have to clear my inbox daily because people are applying who do not qualify, and people are also filling my inbox to tell me they cannot sit during the dates of my posting but want to introduce themselves and ask if I would reach out to them in the future first. Again - filling up my now limited inbox.
A few days ago I did receive an application from a qualified applicant and set up a zoom only to have her tell me that cannot actually sit during those dates and didn’t have the time to determine that first because new policy compelled her to apply to hold the spot before she could determine whether or not she could actually do it.
This policy has proven to be a huge waste of time for both homeowners and sitters.
The rationale THS has given which was to push Homeowners to interview and settle on a sitter is total nonsense! As a homeowner I am naturally motivated to vet and lock in a great sitter as early as possible because the best ones are always booked far in advance!!
It is because I respect sitters who have taken the time to write detailed emails to introduce themselves to me, that I previously never declined sitters without responding to their email to politely let them know why I did not wish to pursue their application. Now I do not have the time to send a thoughtful reply as I just need to clear the inbox asap to open the spot for qualified and truly available sitters to apply. Your policy of limiting applications has created an environment where you can no longer have time to write thoughtful and polite emails and responses. THS used to be a friendly site where people took the time to get to know one another and thoughtfully determine whether or not they are a good for for one another, meet and interact with others. This new policy has made the experience a rushed transaction where no one has the time to treat others with consideration and kindness. Keep in mind that you need to establish a certain amount of trust and a good rapport before inviting them into your family’s home - creating a rushed environment robs excellent sitters of the time they need to write a thoughtful application and thus put their best foot forward. It is a bad start for both parties to establish the confidence one would need to have in order to invite a stranger into their home or to travel a distance to reside in someone else’s home.
As soon as I finish this email I will be be searching for another petsitting site to use in the future. I am sure others will leave THS as well.
Whoever dreamed up this new policy clearly has no business sense, because in the end THS will be out of business - because housesitters and pet owners ARE your content! Without attractive housesits and great housesitters, you have nothing.
I imagine the execs at THS recognized the chicken (great housesit) or egg (great housesitter) conundrum inherent in this business model, yet I can assure you that smart money would bet on the chicen (housesit) since they have other pet care options while travelers on a budget likely wont find many free vacation housing opportunities. In other words you are betting on the wrong horse.
29 Likes
Very, VERY well said!
5 Likes
I am having the same problem. Can you share whatever other housesitting sites you have found? I know many of us are now looking. So far I found this competing website:
3 Likes
Ben. this recent decision to place arbitrary limits on the number of applicants for sits is a highly detrimental step for a very large proportion of your users, This needs to be reversed promptly to avoid lasting damage to your user base, This sort of thing should be a paramaterized setting for individual house owners to set themselves not forced on them by administrators, Many house owners welcome a large response in order to filter the best sitter for their needs. By all means offer it as a parameter to individuals. This would not be a difficult technical change to implement. I am speaking as an IT professional with forty plus years experience! Regards greg.
11 Likes
Ben, could you please let us know if THS is going to drop this poorly communicated and executed trial in response to the mountain of complaints you are receiving??
I am sure many of us would like to stop wasting our time on this site and move to another more productive platform.
3 Likes
Hi @CAadventurer thank you for your question, this is a very long thread and you may have missed the last update posted on September 20th, here is the relevant part which addresses your question …
Thank you