Hi! I just signed up for the app, sent several requests, and was rejected without a reason. I think my lack of experience with the app influenced their decision, even though my profile clearly shows my interest and love for dogs and cats, and I even included my social media links so people could find me and learn a bit about me.
Any advice on how to get accepted for the first time?
@Mmmawmm, welcome to THS and THS Forum. What youâre experiencing seems quite common. Like with many platforms then it can take a little time, effort and patience to get traction. Then gets a whole lot easier.
Suggest that you ensure that your housesitter profile looks great and is complete. Photos with you and animals are great. Text that briefly introduces you, situation, and related experience can make a big difference. Consider looking at profiles of other housesitters. When we started with THS then we addressed zero reviews reality by sourcing (and including on THS profile) a few recommendations from people for whom weâve looked after pets before THS. Many new housesitters get first reviews from listings that are relatively local and short duration - if youâre trying to apply for premium international listings with zero reviews then expectations may be optimistic.
Good luck. Keep applying.
Weâve got a very desirable popular sit on the side of a mountain overlooking the Saronic Gulf on the Peloponnese of Greece. We get so many applicants we can be very selective and typically donât consider sitters with less than a dozen 5 star reviews.
When we reject applicants with few or no reviews we make the following suggestion:
Apply for less desirable sits where the hosts are desperate for sitters, especially those who have vacations pending and have posted last minute sits. Do local sits where you can offer to meet the hosts in person ahead of time.
Do it even though itâs not necessarily a place you want to go. Build a history and then youâll find more of your applications accepted.
Completely agree, we have a desirable location and have been a bit burnt by sitters with few reviews. So we now look for at least five reviews in addition to personal reviews. Definitely building reviews by doing short local sits would help you.
How many have you applied for? Itâs a numbers game. If the 5 âbestâ sitters all apply for the same sit ,4 will miss out. Just gotta build those reviews. Nobody gets Paris as their first sit ![]()
My first three sits were âlow applicationsâ, sits that no-one wanted. They were still great. They were in locations ânot accessible by public transportâ, but I dont have a car or even license: the hosts agreed to pick me up from the station. Meaning that you should apply to low application sits even if they dont really suit you.
After I got the three reviews (within two weeks) only heaven was limit. I was in Paris in no time. And I was lousy first time sitter! Too stubborn to learn and yet did not know anything (the worst combination). So I really really needed the understanding and patient hosts that I got. So I do think hosts are taking a risk when choosing a first timer.
Again, my first hosts were âdesperateâ, but also, the sits were amazing: easy dog, fairyland looking surrounding⌠So dont be warned by the âlow applicationsâ either.
Welcome @Mmmawmm
When I started on THS 4 years ago it took me 23 applications to get my first sit. It was a local sit. Since done 28 sits all over Europe. Iâd strongly suggest you start by applying for local and last minute sits. Get a few of these and build up your reviews so youâll start being considered for more popular location sits. Good luck.
Colonel Sanders tried to sell his chicken recipe to many people. He was turned down 1,009 times before finding a willing partner to sell his recipe, which eventually led to the establishment of Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC).
âlow applicationsâ means a block of five applicants have already been declined. It doesnât mean itâs a sit no one wants. Iâve had over 20 (not suitable) applicants in the last two weeks.
It does not.
You may now be in a place where your listing qualifies for the âlow applicantâ badge because youâve turned away sitter applicants, but the badge has nothing to do with that, it simply indicates that at the moment you have 3 or less applications and in fact your listing has none.
My listing has gone from, new to reviewing then low applications as Iâve declined them, thatâs how itâs been on my listing.
Your listing shows âlow applicationsâ because you have zero applicants. Period.
The fact that you declined blocks of 5 sitter applicants is irrelevant to the tag itself, which is applied based only on the current number of applicants.
Correct I have 0 applications under review, however, to tag the listing as âlow applicationsâ is just untrue.
The tag for low applications also has a time factor. If you are at currently zero or only a few active applications AND its been a few days since you listed then you will indeed be tagged as low applications
In your case the low applications tag is certainly misleading given that youâve turned away entire blocks of sitters.
Sure hope you donât end up with no sitters. Rather odd that you got so many bad applicants with no promising ones in the mix and it happened several times.
Most sits have the low applications label. The ones that are popular quickly go into âreviewing.â
Personally, Iâve set no store in the âlow applicationsâ label, because itâs ubiquitous.
How many days does it take to go from ânewâ to âlowâ? Thatâs what we all really need to know.
Had to look it up on the site so as to be sure âŚ
New: When listings are new or new dates have been added, they will automatically be marked as ânewâ for 24 hours before any other tags such as âlow applicationsâ can be added.
Trusted tip for Pet Parents: Do note that once your listing is no longer marked as ânewâ, if you decline some or all of your applicants, then your listing will automatically be marked as âlow applicationsâ when it meets the criteria above.Wow, 24 hours is not much, takes you snooze you lose to a different level ![]()
Thatâs why âlow applicationsâ is ubiquitous.
