As a longstanding premium sitter member, it’s quite surprising that THS hasn’t introduced more features to enhance the appeal of the premium membership for homeowners and housesitters alike.
From my observation, THS has evolved significantly from the time of its first five applications. It no longer necessitates the careful review of specifications or the crafting of personalized introductions. Rather, the focus has now shifted to speed, which is quite disappointing.
Here’s a feature I suggest be offered exclusively to Premium members: Allow them the opportunity to submit applications even after the initial five have been received.
This will make it more attractive to stay premium and for other to become premium.
I think that is a terrible idea.
Having been a member since its inception, I would hate to see I am being penalised because I dont want to pay double the membership fee.
This could start the rocky road of introducing other changes for the worse.
I am a long standing member with basic membership.
I have already had choice taken away from me due to the ‘topic which cannot be mentioned’ and this idea would limit my options even further.
Surely the whole ethos is the best care for the pets and not how much money you are willing to pay and how quickly you can get an application in.
Homeowners and sitters need more choice and not less.
Ow yes, I wanted to add that standard members will hate this idea, I understand.
With this feature homeowners will get more choice indeed and the care of the animals is the most important. I can hardly think that the animals are now best served since it’s a race to get in first.
I am unsure if you joined THS before the limited application rule was brought in. Some newer members have never known anything else.
Prior to that Homeowners could receive multiple applications from sitters and had the option to pause their listing while they reviewed. Since the change (which many members still are unaware of) they need to pause and reopen until they find their ideal sitter. Personally I cannot see how that is an improvement but I am speaking from a sitter’s perspective.
So that would mean that HOs get to see a disproportionate number of applications from sitters who can afford to pay for a premium membership. Not necessarily good experienced sitters . I don’t see how that would benefit HOs .
Colin, consider this scenario: If I phone my telecommunications provider and find myself waiting in line while another customer who’s willing to pay more gets assistance faster, where’s the problem in that?
Why do you find “premium memberships” all over.
As long as I eventually receive the help I need, I’m fine with it. I don’t mind.
Aren’t we regularly investing in services, seeking superior benefits compared to those offered to a “standard account”?
I get your frustration, but certainly, we’re not aiming to stir up a commotion.