To need a car or not need a car - that is the question

Hi, I looked through topics on this and there was a similar one made on April 7th by Off_Leash but I’d like to expand on it, so I created this.

I’d like to (re)raise an “issue” and a solution regarding:

  1. Sitters need a Car
  2. Use of car Included

I don’t own a car and so I typically gloss over many listings that say Sitters need a Car (SNAC) unless I’m really interested (and then my next thought is “how can i make this work?” even before getting into the listing). Having said that, I’m not necessarily looking for sits where the car is included because frankly, although it’s a nice option (I do drive), I enjoy being somewhere where most amenities are within walking distance which for me, would be within 30 minutes one way (I’m referring to essentials like food not sights). I mean if it’s a nice walk why wouldn’t I?l

Some homeowners would never think of walking 30 minutes one way for their groceries so they put SNAC. But, the more I’ve started to look at sits saying SNAC, I see that once you get into the description, many homeowners talk about how walkable their area is or how close transit is. Thing is, I have to read down into many SNAC listings (which technically would exclude me) just to check on the walkability/transit.

I realize that homeowners can put something about walkability/transit in their headline but why use up valuable real estate on that, when they could be featuring their home and furr-faces? A suggestion is a middle ground that TH could introduce that’s additional to the only two options for HOs. So how about a 3rd “button”? Example:

  1. Sitters need a Car
  2. Walkable/Transit options
  3. Use of car Included

If it’s important enough to have the the car options shown up front, then surely it’s important enough to show sitters that there are walk/transit options right away too (environmentally conscious) without having to scroll through down into each the posting.

As a bonus, TH may find that it increases the amount of applications some homeowners would receive - ones that sitters without a car may have normally skipped over, simply for that reason. It just seems to work for everyone, while also being a lot less work.

12 Likes

Yep, a lot of people agree with this.

Also, if you go to the magnifying glass, you can search “need car” and see quite a number of posts discussing this very thing.

@Leftcoastofcanada I agree. I saw a listing recently that I thought was great. They said car needed but then went on to explain walking distances to local shops, restaurants and points of interest. They mentioned terrain as well. Nearest public transport and regularity was mentioned. This to me as a non driver helps me decide whether I want to apply for such a sit.

2 Likes

Good morning @Leftcoastofcanada and thank you for posting your very clearly presented suggestion. We will pass this feedback over to the product team. I’d welcome this, or a version of, as an option, especially when we are looking at international sits. Thankyou.

1 Like

Hi I am new and just learning all the ropes. Although most amenities are within walking distance some attractions are not and our transit system does not run 24/7 or go to the attractions. Where I live there is so much to see nature wise that they may prefer to have a car to get around.

1 Like

Yeah, I agree with your thinking. I think so long as you spell that out for sitters, they can decide how important it is for them. We always rent a car because we want access to things like that, but some sitters prefer to use transit, know how to organize themselves to shop etc on limited schedules, and don’t mind missing out on the local attractions.

Would love to have a filter on this so you could avoid having to rent a car.

2 Likes

Came to forum for this reason! User interface from a sitters perspective could use some refinement for sure

1 Like