Our Commitment to Trust & Safety
blog.airbnb.com
blog.airbnb.com
Brian, as part of all of this crisis stuff, I think it's time to have a new profile picture taken. One where you don't look so, how should I say... 20.
From rough calculation, I'm only a couple years older, but one thing that's stood out for me visually in all of this is that ... well, let's just say that it's one of those times where looking like the young silicon valley hotshot works against you.
Having a PR shot to pull out of the drawer that looks older, more serious and decidedly less hip would do well when people are worried.
(As for the actual content of the story: well done.)
Edit: Rational or otherwise, people read a lot from a face. Heck, it's obvious that Airbnb gets that since it's part of their trust system. Since trust is a big part of what makes Airbnb tick, I think it'd be worth the time to craft a profile shot that inspires such. This may even be an inflection point in Airbnb's history where it's transitioning from the couchsurfing-but-with-money branding to I'm-trusting-these-guys-to-keep-my-home-safe.
Edit 2: So as a bit of redux, I'm genuinely surprised that this was the most upvoted comment, since it's a minor issue relative to the good that's going down (and specifically, insurance is something that I was personally rooting for since that's what'd kept me from listing a room there prior to this whole shebang.). As for the photo, I think it's actually kind of an interestingly shot, but I don't think it's the one you want plastered all over the interwebs in a crisis scenario.
I'm fairly certain this is going to get me down-voted through the floor, but please at least view the picture in question prior to down-voting me for saying this.
http://www.google.com/search?q=jill+greenberg+photo&um=1...
I wouldn't be surprised too since she's also a RISD alumn.
EDIT: I've edited my comment to make it more constructive. Brian, I think you are doing a great job with AirBNB and handling this situation. Please take these comments as constructive criticism regarding the photo (in this particular situation).
We all have photos taken of us that convey personalities that aren't really our own. I don't think you're a douche, but the photo gives that impression a bit.
John
http://techcrunch.com/2011/07/31/another-airbnb-victim-tells...
For PR reasons you need to smile, even as JimmyL critiques the sincerity of your orthodontics. Smile on the outside and ask them in a chipper tone how you can be of service, but in the end, seriously, f* em. There's an insane amount of implementation work to do to get this 24/7 support and insurance program operational. F* em all and just plow. Pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. And your real customers and fans will thank you for it.
If it were me, I would just take a quick snapshot right now and replace that photo temporarily, until you can get some better professional shots.
Studies have shown that the first impression you get of a piece colors your perception even after you read the whole thing. Pictures have a stronger immediate emotional reaction than words do, and while the bolded "we will be implementing a $50,000 Airbnb Guarantee" definitely gives an immediate "wow, nice" feeling, it'd be even better if it wasn't dampened by the initial "uh, who's the Bond villain?"
If his head was raised slightly and lit more strongly, I don't think you'd feel the same way.
It was my impression too that the photo could be made more appropriate.
perception is everything and all those pics give the reader a different image for sure. more cocky, im the man kind of image.
its just that the pics dont seem right for the situation.
on a side note...i think hes a good looking dude (no homo of course lol)
It doesn't matter if you're gay. You don't need to reassure us of that.
The post itself was great. Since Airbnb is mostly waging a battle of perception in all of this, then the image presented by the CEO's profile picture is actually a relevant issue in this discussion.
Good call.
As was one of the many outspoken people in one of the earlier threads, I hope I speak for a lot of my fellow hn'ers when I say that we call 'em as we see 'em, for better or worse. Not necessarily in judgement, but as part of a community living through monumental changes of all kinds. Believe it or not, Brian, many of us really are on your side.
Like many other "new age" business models, I'm afraid I still don't really understand this one and it's prospects for the future. But it's safe to say you've just taken one giant step on that bumpy road to sustainability.
Two of the most important things I expect from any business is to always tell the truth and to always do the right thing. It matters less how long you take to get there than the fact that you actually do.
Looking forward to seeing how this plays out. Often being down, then up again makes you stronger than if you never went through the tough times in the first place.
There's a pretty good (if a bit dramatic) analysis of other things that they might want to do at http://blog.agrawals.org/2011/08/01/airbnb-ransack-response-....
"Earlier this week, I wrote a blog post trying to explain the situation, but it didn’t reflect my true feelings."
I'm not sure how I feel about this line (I assume it's referring to his TC post). On one hand, it's nice that he's now 'fessing up with a this-is-how-I-feel post. On the other, it's a pretty clear admission that he's had no problems in the past sending out PR spin as a blog post under his own name - so what should make the reader think this (or any future posts) are actually him, and not more spin? It seems like it's muddling the authenticity of the message a bit.
"In working with the San Francisco Police Department, we are happy to say a suspect is now in custody."
Haven't they been saying this for a while, and each time they do, it turns out that when someone tries to verify it with SFPD, the suspect isn't in custody (because they've been extradited to another community)?
As for the potential for fraud, that doesn't concern me that much. If they're doing a blanket insurance policy like this, then they're contracting it out to a legit insurance company - who will presumably have adjusters and claims people who will investigate every claim, the same as other forms of consumer insurance (like you get on your rental car).
I'm also interested in the legalities of this insurance - particularly in places where short-term rentals to strangers are illegal/contrary to bylaw/in violation of the occupant's lease. You'd think that insurance companies would have a problem selling a policy to cover the side-effects of a prohibited activity; that all Airbnb hosts would have to sign a line that certifies under penalty of perjury that they're legally allowed to host a place on Airbnb, which most can't.
If I was a landlord who had a tenant who put their place on Airbnb, and which then got trashed, I'd make the tenant fix it up (which they'd pay for, presumably, from the insurance), and probably try and sue the tenant for violating the terms of their lease. Could I then sue the insurance company as well, for helping my tenant break the conditions of their lease?
The decision to break the conditions of the lease was solely your tenant's decision. Any sane insurance company will either verify the tenant's ability to rent out their place, or will void the contract if they discover later that the tenant did not have the legal right to rent out their place. Most likely, if the insurance is an online-type thing, the tenant will be certifying when they buy the policy that they have the legal ability to rent out their place.
Given that, would all the damage to EJ's stuff even be covered by the policy?
If you thought what happened so far was ugly I'd hate to see what would happen if that were the case. Can we move past this?
Sure it is all words but they are on the company blog this time, not in a forum and to me they come across as written by a man that has seen the Elephant in person.
Specifically: "We will extend this program to EJ and any other hosts who may have reported such property damage while renting on Airbnb in the past."
It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points
out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds
could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who
is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and
sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes
up short again and again, because there is no effort
without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great
enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a
worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the
triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he
fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his
place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who
knew neither victory nor defeat.
-- Teddy Roosevelt
Great to know also that you're interested in the legalities of the insurance. I guess they should have included citations to case law in a blog post.
> it turns out that when someone tries to verify it with
SFPD, the suspect isn't in custody (because they've been
extradited to another community)?
Some people are never satisfied. You appear to be one of them.
As for the veracity of their line about someone being in custody with the SFPD, I stand corrected - my mistake. The last stuff that came to the top of my head was based off EJ's post on 28 July. A few searches reveal that the day after that post went up, the SFPD announced they had arrested someone.
What matters is that EJ (and others) will be compensated and AirBNB will live to fight another day in a much stronger and more real-world grounded fashion. Maybe their margins won't be quite as high but that's what usually happens when you underestimate the cost of doing business.
Winners all around, future hosts and guests of AirBNB included.
Note that this does not take care of any emotional issues but it will certainly help with the practical part of it, and I don't think a party like AirBNB could help with those anyway beyond doing their very best to minimize the hurt from such an event.
That's what we're not sure about. EJ, a renter herself, likely didn't have the right to rent out her unit. The blog post says "We will extend this program to EJ...", not "We'll take care of EJ." She still has to qualify through whatever insurance company airbnb is working with. It's going to be an even worse PR disaster when the insurance company says "No."
Also, I don't see how an insurance company would ever agree to pay out on past cases so my guess is that they'll be paying for all of those out of pocket.
Going forward from Aug. 15th it looks like they'll have a deal in place and in the meantime things are 'murky'. The blog post leaves enough room for AirBNB to assume complete responsibility and/or work together with an insurer, but from the point of an AirBNB host that will likely make very little difference.
I know you're gonna say fraud, but why do you think they've doubled the size of their customer support team in the last month? These guys aren't dumb, they knew this was coming. This is the thing they can do with all of their money that will keep them on top.
In fact... my money says the real reason for trying to get EJ to amend the original blog post was they were hoping to keep the story from breaking in mainstream press before they got this system launched.
In this case, they're liable to get a few claims per year (or month, or whatever). If they wanted insurance, they'd have to pay all of that PLUS some, spread out into a monthly payment. Doesn't make any sense.
If they had an open-ended policy that covered emotional damages or somesuch, maybe they would need insurance.
The man tried admitting his faults, and you're still trying to read in-between the lines, questioning his motives.
Yeah, that phrase jumped out at me too. Both because it implies not telling the truth as well as still passing the buck (were they someone else's words?). And it's too bad because otherwise the post is good.
And I'd have to agree with commentary regarding the photo. It just doesn't strike the right tone of empathy and humbleness. I'm sure it's hard to be humble when you've created a rocket ship but it's a great attribute in these situations.
Good luck Airbnb.
Ethics, the way I understand the term, isn't a set of rules enforced by law. It's true that some laws are informed by our shared moral values, but in general law and ethics are independent. There is no legal punishment for acting like an asshole, but in human society you more often than not pay a price for it. There is no such onus on corporations and in fact the "business ethics" we govern our corporations by can easily be put at odds with what you and I would consider ethical behavior (see Ford Pinto [1]). As you point out, companies are responsible to their shareholders, but their stakeholders are a different (perhaps partially overlapping) set of people to which the corporation doesn't have to answer. It is in that sense that I said companies aren't intrinsically moral.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Pinto#Allegations_and_laws...
EDIT: Here's to consistency! Title has been (presumably mod-) edited.
Yes, let's stick with the original title. Using original article titles is preferred according to HN guidelines.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2823020
(Report of an exception to this principle)
http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
(The actual text of the guidelines)
After edit: The submission title has been changed to match the original article title in this thread. I wonder if that will happen in the thread from last week I linked to in the link shown just above this P.S.
eBay and Paypal's #1 way of avoiding fraud is by validating physical addresses. AirBnB has this built in. Something tells me their insurance policy doesn't apply to shacks in Nigeria.
eBay is probably on the top 5 of worst customer support experiences of any dot com.
Credible, given their histories, I'd say!
As others have mentioned no exact details have been listed anywhere.
For the vandalism they will most certainly require that obviously a police report be filed. Notice that "damage" is not covered though. Only vandalism.
Theft is trickier. The actual policy might say that they will pay if your homeowners/renters policy doesn't pay. Or there may be deductibles. And once again they will require a police report to document the theft.
Typically the problem with any insurance in this situation is proving that something is actually stolen as opposed to just missing.
I think that without seeing the actual coverage you can't really draw any conclusions.
By the way if you rent your apartment you should always have renters insurance anyway. It isn't that expensive and it would cover damage (less a deductible) even if you had a party and a friend damaged something - in other words a simple accident. Or if the tub overflowed by accident and damaged the carpeting.
I hope this is the penultimate word in this saga (EJ's would be the last word; and I'm hoping, after this, her blog would be positive and upbeat).
The lesson to be learnt is: if you're in a consumer-facing business, and a black swan event happens, don't worry about valuations, etc. but worry about the customer who's affected. Fix the root cause, and the outcome will fix itself.
For myself, my expectations are not positive. While definitely an improvement over past communications I'm not buying the "mom" and "grandfather" routine. Specifically:
Earlier this week, I wrote a blog post trying to explain the situation, but it didn’t reflect my true feelings. Then what was the driving influence for the post?
In the last few days we have had a crash course in crisis management. The original incident occurred over a month ago. Apparently that wasn't a crisis. If not, then what was it?
For Brian Chesky's sake I hope the SFPD actually have a suspect in custody this time.
On 06/28/11 the SFPD through investigative leads conducted a search of a premise in Belmont, CA. Two people were detained, but released pending further investigation. The search yielded some of the items that were taken in the theft.
Later on that night through investigative leads, SFPD officers made an arrest of Faith Clifton, female, white, 19 years of age of San Francisco. Faith was booked into San Francisco County Jail that night on possession of stolen property, methamphetamine, fraud charges and outstanding warrant out of Milpitas, CA.
SFPD has been in contact with the victim and have been in contact with the website company, who has provided as much information as possible in this matter.
And from http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2834426 I hear that EJ's story was also retitled to be less enticing.
Sounds like some nice double-standard going on here, considering this one maintains its title. I'm sure it will be blamed on "the gremlins in the automated system"... funny how they seem to favour YC startups in the middle of a big funding round.
I'm just a supporter of a crap-free HN. Thus, I flag stories that don't add anything new to the discussion. I know there are at least ten others like me...
I thought they said it was the first time it happened?
Anyway, better late than never.
I think they did a great job on this response, except that it took too long. Individual incidents should have been handled as exceptions and handled well, and then this policy developed and announced once they noticed a trend of such exceptions in their CRM (or in weekly support team meetings with the founders)
the fact that this is the first major incident to make headlines after 2 million nights being booked means that they have probably been doing a great job handling exceptions. mistakes happen. especially in fast growing companies.
Regardless, it looks like they're doing what they should be doing, and I hope it works out both for them and their customers.
Not to mention the insurance policy, which is international?
This is not trivial stuff. It would take most companies several months to even get close to this.
However, even if they could not be implemented immediately, coming out early, before the story really blew up, talking about it openly and frankly, and announcing these changes would have done wonders. Instead, they've been beaten up in the press for the last week or two for their relative silence.
But that said, yes, good on them.
>>It would take most companies several months to even get close to this.
I think that if a company's ability to remain in business was dependent on getting this sort of infrastructure change in place, most would be able to pull it off. Pulling it off well is another question entirely, and I'm going to be interested to see what kind of service they provide in the next couple of months.
Seriously? I usually just roll my eyes when I hear this sort of feel good, warm-fuzzy cheerleading. But seriously, wake up! The reason they're in this mess is because they lacked preparation for the reality that people have an incredible capacity for bad. This is a false premise on which to rent out your most private, personal space.
Just out of curiosity, why didn't you?
Everyone is piling on them for screwing up the initial reaction to EJ, by not going far enough in offering to help her. But AirBnB didn't do much to help Troy (from the TechCrunch post) 2 months ago, and that story didn't blow up in to a PR disaster. They simply gave him a few free nights and he was happy.
So, it is impossible to tell if any given customer support issue is a potential "PR-nightmare". If AirBnB had over-reacted and offered Troy thousands of dollars (as was being suggested for EJ), they would have lost out - because Troy was happy with just a few free nights in AirBnB credit. How were they supposed to know that EJ (1) wouldn't be happy with what Troy received (2) Would make a scathing blog post and (3) That blog post would go viral. They couldn't have.
So, if you are a wagering person, it seems like the best course of action is to do exactly what AirBnB did: offering minimal support and grow until something really bad happens. Then come out swinging with a big apology and a big offer of support and restitution.
Since it seems like the media and public are willing to forgive AirBnB (judging by the reaction to today's announcement), this course seems like it may have been optimal compared to over-helping people like Troy.
Put another way: PR distasters are recoverable if you say you are sorry and ask forgiveness. Being too careful upfront and limiting your growth curve is not forgivable.
I follow your reasoning, but this approach is optimized for Airbnb alone. The trick is to find an approach that maximizes both Airbnb's business goals and the happiness of the customers.
Ideally, a CEO would try to align all of the goals of the parties relating to the business so that the dynamic is synergistic, not win-lose.
Even from a "business standpoint" I do not feel they would have lost out. Because they would have avoided the EJ fiasco, and still garnered the media and public appreciation from the apology, support, and restitution to Troy.
The company may not have been able to know the story of EJ, specifically, would take this path. But it was predictable that at some point a vandalism or safety issue would eventually get picked up in the media.
It's interesting that 1-15 August is now the only uncovered period. They should also let everyone cancel all reservations during that window without penalty, if they'd like.
Nonetheless, I think Airbnb is finally starting to have a clue on how to properly handle this crisis.
But what intrigued me the most in this whole thing was Michael Arrington's position on TechCrunch. He set this thing on fire, giving it a very aggressive kind of coverage. I wonder: will he now invest on Airbnb, as they're now supposedly going through another funding round? And if so, how much less will he have to pay for the same equity compared to 1 month ago? I'd like a little disclosure on that...
What are the T&C's I can't find them?
For example, what about non-personal property? If I live in a rental apartment, put it on Airbnb, it gets trashed, and my landlord says I have to fix it up...will the policy cover that? It's damage, but it's not damage to the personal property of the person connected to Airbnb.
Brilliant move!
On the other hand, your concern probably presages an eventual headline of the future: "AirBnb guests burn down host's home; AirBnb guarantee only covers less than 10% of loss."
Just because someplace costs $200k doesn't mean it costs $200k to rebuild from the ground up (a lot is in property, structure, etc...). Realistically, you'd really have to try hard to do $50k+ damage to a typical airbnb property without the cops being called as it is happening.
In Dallas (where I live), a structure usually costs much more to tear down and rebuild new than it is currently worth. For example, you might get a mortgage on a $250,000 10yo house here yet your insurance will be for $375,000 for that reason.
Hopefully if you rent and use Airbnb, you have a renter's insurance policy with high liability limits.
I think tipping over a candle should do that nicely. Not much effort needed.
You wonder how much of the concern about the specifics of this announcement really reflect the typical HNer's lack of comfort with the Airbnb model, period. Remember, lots of people on HN would never be comfortable renting their place out period. And that's fine; those people aren't Airbnb customers right now. Plenty of people obviously do find the transaction palatable.
Similarly, terrible incidents like this happen without the fancy Rails app to facilitate them. Ask around for subletting horror stories. How often do we as a community freak out over the concept of subletting? A giant slice of all renters have to consider doing that any time they need to get out of a lease.
Also, I'm not sure what the terms are of my homeowners insurance but I would make sure that something would be covered in a situation like this before I rented my place.
I don't use AirBnB - not because I don't trust them but because I don't trust random strangers to use my home. But that's just me.
Please consider adding 2 requirements: 1) Any renter should provide an actual photo 2) Valid Credit card that will have a hold of x dollars till the rental completes These might cut down on the Tweaker type incidents.
For example, what about cases where they can positively identify the renter who was responsible?
That's bound to be the vast majority of incidents.
Are they going to pay out in those cases?
Or leave it to the owner to pursue in court themselves?
This is a good solid step, but it's only one piece of a comprehensive policy.
It tales big people to acknowledge a screw up, apologize for it, and work hard to make it right.
Good on ya mate.
I hope EJ's third blog post is more positive.
=]
You are a great CEO and deserve to direct a Billion Dollar company, no doubt.
I just can't wait for my trip to the USA to use AirBNB accommodation (as an HN reader I have decided long ago that in the next trip to US I will not stay in hotels but book with AirBNB)
There's a hefty chance that AirBnB wouldn't had responded like this if Arrington hadn't been on their back. It's only once TC started to report them rigorously, they started to _understand_ how lame their previous communication been.
Now all Arrington has to bin CatherinaFake-like posts and we have our old TC back on track.
other than that sounds like you are doing the right thing.
I guess we have all learned lessons from this.