A Few Really Bad Decisions Made By The Cosmetology Industry

I think that of all the bad decisions made consciously, or unconsciously, by the cosmetology industry - Vidal Sassoon convincing women to stop setting their hair on a weekly basis at the salon has to rank among the worst. And I say this, not because I am in love with rollers, but because I believe this trend (among others), has cost both the salon owner, and the individual stylist, a tremendous amount of money over the years - and continues to do so on a daily basis.
You may not agree with my ideas on this, but read on and I am certain you will find yourself in agreement with several points.

I was raised in this industry. And during the 1960's my parents owned a salon. They only had to fill the books of their salon for one week. Thereafter, the weeks just repeated themselves. Its Tuesday at 11 am, it must be Mrs. Johnson. Women came in every week and they rebooked the following weeks appointment before they left. They fought over appointment slots as though they were gold. Today, we are trying to "convince" them to prebook. One week it was a shampoo & set. The next week it was a color & set. Then, the following week, a haircut & set. Once every three months, it was a permanent wave & set. And during all of this, there were usually weekly manicures along with the occasional pedicure. Our family lived very well as the result of my parents efforts. And over the years, I knew numerous salon owners - all of whom I could say - lived very well.

Now that we have pooh poohed the weekly roller set and talked our clients out of permanents, we have to rely on monthly haircuts, and perhaps colors. Or maybe even, every six week haircuts. This means you have to fill your appointment book for an average of five weeks before it starts to repeat.

Obviously, this means you need five times as many clients as before. And a simple look at the U.S. population census will show you that there are NOT five times as many people living in the country today as there were in the 1960's. In short, stylists have fewer clients today than they did in the 1960's, and this translates to: stylists make less money today than they did during the 1960's or 1970's. And of course, this leaves out the manicurists who largely rely on your clients to become their clients. Generally, clients decide to get their nails done while getting their hair done, and not the other way around. So, if your clients are not in the salon anymore, neither are the manicurist's clients. Soon thereafter, the manicurist is no longer working in the salon. And the next thing you know; clients don't want to come there because they are looking for a full-service salon. It is a snow ball effect, where the problem just continues to get bigger.

This situation is bad for the stylist and bad for the manicurist, but it is really bad for the owner. As an owner, you have fixed expenses such as: rent, electricity, phones, advertising, insurance, supplies, maintenance, etc. And because these bills do not go down, or away, you are left with less and less money at the end of the month.

It seems there are three salons at every intersection, and the only ones making money are the landlords.

There, I have said it. You may not agree with the appraisal, but I was there then and I am here now. And take it from me, there was more money "Then".

In my next blog I will discuss the mistake I believe salon owners have made in attempting to make up the lost revenue, cover their bills, and make a profit.

Because lets face it, while we love the industry - a paycheck is always nice.