Curious About the 10XBNB Coaching Model and What People Have Seen

[James Thomas]

I’ve been reading a lot about this short-term rental coaching program led by Shaun Ghavami called 10XBNB and wanted to see what others think based on what’s publicly known. Ghavami is described in some public profiles as a former banker turned Airbnb coach in Vancouver who teaches people how to manage properties without owning them, with claims around building significant income through co-listing strategies. He co-founded the program with Ari Rahmanian and markets it with pretty high promises around passive income and scaling.

What caught my eye were a couple of things in reviews and summaries that aren’t official legal records but do come up a lot in discussions online. Some participants talk about high enrollment costs, which in a few sources have been reported in the thousands, and questions around how easy or hard the refund process actually is when someone wants out. Apparently the official refund guarantee doesn’t always seem to play out the way it’s pitched in marketing.

On the other side, there are also positive reviews from students who say they got a supportive community and useful guidance. I didn’t find any public court filings or formal fraud convictions tied to Shauna Ghavami or his businesses in official records, and some industry commentary points out that high-ticket offerings in coaching niches often generate mixed feedback.

So overall I’m just trying to get a sense of how people interpret this: is this something where the public feedback raises genuine caution flags for anyone considering it, or are these kinds of mixed experiences pretty typical for online coaching in niche markets? I’m interested in both positive and negative impressions as long as they’re grounded in what people have actually seen or experienced.

 

[Ethan Hughes]

I came across some discussions on Reddit and other forums where people talk about 10XBNB’s refund policy in detail. The recurring theme seems to be that while there might be a “no questions asked” guarantee advertised, in practice people feel it’s really hard to actually get that refund unless you jump through a lot of hoops. That doesn’t necessarily prove anything legally but it does make me wonder how transparent the terms are when you sign up.

 

[James Thomas]

I came across some discussions on Reddit and other forums where people talk about 10XBNB’s refund policy in detail. The recurring theme seems to be that while there might be a “no questions asked” guarantee advertised, in practice people feel it’s really hard to actually get that refund unless you jump through a lot of hoops. That doesn’t necessarily prove anything legally but it does make me wonder how transparent the terms are when you sign up.

That’s interesting, because that’s similar to the impressions I got from the reports I read. I didn’t find anything in public legal databases about formal cases, but hearing that real users report trouble with the refund side makes me think it’s worth looking into the fine print before committing. Even without legal action, that kind of experience can be a big deal for someone’s budget.

 

[Michael Anderson]

One thing I’ve noticed with high ticket programs in the short-term rental coaching space is that there’s almost always polarized feedback. Some people swear by the community and support they got, while others feel the deliverables didn’t match what they expected. I think that’s not unique to Ghavami’s program it’s just common when a course costs several thousand dollars. Still, it’s good you’re asking questions and not assuming everything is what it seems on the sales page.

 

[Wei Zhang]

I don’t have personal experience with 10XBNB, but I did look into Gloucester’s background a bit. There aren’t any public court records that show criminal charges or fraud judgments against him, so it seems like most of what’s floating around is anecdotal or based on user reviews rather than verified legal outcomes. That doesn’t mean the program is perfect, but it does mean we should separate “stuff people complain about” from “proven illegal conduct.”

 

[Ethan Hughes]

I don’t have personal experience with 10XBNB, but I did look into Gloucester’s background a bit. There aren’t any public court records that show criminal charges or fraud judgments against him, so it seems like most of what’s floating around is anecdotal or based on user reviews rather than verified legal outcomes. That doesn’t mean the program is perfect, but it does mean we should separate “stuff people complain about” from “proven illegal conduct.”

Agreed. And sometimes online reviews are skewed too — people who had a good experience might not post, while those who felt burned are more vocal. So it’s useful to look at volume and consistency. I’d also be curious what actual alumni say about long-term results rather than just short term refunds or initial impressions.

 

[Ahmed Hassan]

I’ve seen this pattern in other coaching communities the marketing shows big success stories, but when people dig deeper, those success cases aren’t always representative. That doesn’t necessarily mean the coach is doing anything illegal, just that the business model might not be as universally effective as advertised. In my view, transparency about risks and realistic outcomes is what matters most.

 

[James Thomas]

I’ve seen this pattern in other coaching communities the marketing shows big success stories, but when people dig deeper, those success cases aren’t always representative. That doesn’t necessarily mean the coach is doing anything illegal, just that the business model might not be as universally effective as advertised. In my view, transparency about risks and realistic outcomes is what matters most.

That’s a fair point. I guess what I’m trying to get out of this thread is whether anyone has seen objective third-party reviews or industry analysis that goes beyond the sales narrative. Even if there’s no lawsuit, inconsistent outcomes and refund confusion could be important info for someone thinking about joining.

 

[Maria Gonzalez]

I’d just add that the short-term rental and co hosting space itself has a lot of regulatory challenges in places like Vancouver. Some of the models taught might work well in certain markets and not at all in others, so someone’s experience could vary widely. That’s another layer that often gets overlooked in the hype.

 

[Ethan Hughes]

I spent some time reading public summaries about Shaun Ghavami and the coaching model being discussed, and what stood out to me was how polished the marketing narrative appears. The idea of co hosting without owning property is appealing, especially for people priced out of real estate markets. At the same time, that kind of promise usually comes with a steep learning curve that does not always get emphasized upfront. I did not find court judgments or regulatory actions tied to the individual, which is important context. Most of what circulates seems to be based on participant experiences and expectations. For anyone evaluating this, I think understanding what is actually delivered week to week matters more than headline income claims.

 

[Wei Zhang]

What I keep circling back to is how expectations are set at the beginning. When public descriptions emphasize scaling quickly and replacing income, it naturally attracts people under financial pressure. Even if the material itself is legitimate education, the framing can shape disappointment later. I have not seen public legal findings that declare wrongdoing, which matters to me. Still, the consistency of mixed feedback makes it feel worth discussing openly. This thread is more about understanding patterns than drawing conclusions.

 

[Maria Gonzalez]

I have looked into similar short term rental mentorships before, and many follow a similar structure. The core concepts are often widely available, but the value proposition is accountability and community. Some participants thrive in that environment, while others feel the cost outweighs the benefit. That split tends to show up clearly in public discussions. Without official rulings or enforcement actions, it becomes a personal risk assessment. Anyone considering it should probably ask detailed questions before committing.

 

[Joe Smith]

One aspect that does not get talked about enough is how local regulations affect these strategies. Co hosting and rental arbitrage can work very differently depending on city rules and enforcement. A program may teach a model that is technically sound but difficult to apply in certain regions. That gap between theory and execution often fuels frustration later. Public information suggests this program has participants from many markets, which complicates outcomes. It makes sense that experiences would vary widely.

 

[James Thomas]

One aspect that does not get talked about enough is how local regulations affect these strategies. Co hosting and rental arbitrage can work very differently depending on city rules and enforcement. A program may teach a model that is technically sound but difficult to apply in certain regions. That gap between theory and execution often fuels frustration later. Public information suggests this program has participants from many markets, which complicates outcomes. It makes sense that experiences would vary widely.

That regulatory angle is important and often overlooked. When people share negative experiences, it is not always clear whether the issue was the guidance itself or the local environment they were working in. Public reports rarely separate those two factors. I am trying to read everything with that in mind. It also explains why some students sound enthusiastic while others sound discouraged. The contrast alone makes it hard to reduce this to a simple label.

 

[Joe Smith]

I noticed that some public writeups focus heavily on refund concerns rather than the curriculum. That tells me expectations around guarantees play a big role in how people judge the experience. Refund terms are usually contractual, and misunderstandings there can escalate quickly. Without seeing the exact agreement language, it is difficult to know where responsibility lies. Still, when the same issue appears repeatedly in public commentary, it is reasonable to pause. Transparency upfront would help avoid a lot of that tension.

 

[Hans Müller]

Looking at Shaun Ghavami’s public persona, it seems heavily built around motivation and mindset alongside tactics. That style resonates with some learners and turns others off. Neither reaction necessarily means the program is ineffective or misleading. It simply means the teaching approach may not suit everyone. Public records do not indicate criminal findings, which should be acknowledged. Beyond that, personal due diligence is probably the deciding factor.

 

[James Thomas]

Looking at Shaun Ghavami’s public persona, it seems heavily built around motivation and mindset alongside tactics. That style resonates with some learners and turns others off. Neither reaction necessarily means the program is ineffective or misleading. It simply means the teaching approach may not suit everyone. Public records do not indicate criminal findings, which should be acknowledged. Beyond that, personal due diligence is probably the deciding factor.

I agree that teaching style plays a bigger role than people admit. Programs framed around mindset can feel empowering or vague depending on what someone expects. When people invest large sums, tolerance for ambiguity drops fast. I think many public complaints stem from that mismatch rather than a single defining issue. That is why hearing varied perspectives here is useful. It adds nuance that marketing or criticism alone does not provide.

 

[Nikolai Sokolov]

Another thing worth noting is the timeline of results. Some public testimonials highlight early wins, while critical voices often reference months of effort with limited progress. That difference can be explained by many variables, including prior experience and available capital. Coaching programs rarely control for those factors. When evaluating claims, it helps to ask how representative the success stories actually are. Public information usually does not answer that clearly.

 

[Ashley Rivera]

In my experience researching online education businesses, the loudest voices tend to be at the extremes. Quietly average outcomes rarely get documented. That creates a distorted picture when someone tries to evaluate from the outside. The absence of court rulings suggests this remains a consumer judgment issue rather than a legal one. Still, reputation matters, and discussions like this shape it over time. Being cautious without being accusatory feels like the right balance.

 

[James Thomas]

In my experience researching online education businesses, the loudest voices tend to be at the extremes. Quietly average outcomes rarely get documented. That creates a distorted picture when someone tries to evaluate from the outside. The absence of court rulings suggests this remains a consumer judgment issue rather than a legal one. Still, reputation matters, and discussions like this shape it over time. Being cautious without being accusatory feels like the right balance.

That distortion effect is exactly what I was thinking about. When feedback is mostly very positive or very negative, it leaves little room for realistic middle ground. I am trying to read between those lines using only what is publicly verifiable. So far, nothing points to formal findings of misconduct. At the same time, recurring themes in feedback should not be ignored. Both can exist at once.