Add-ons Made Easy

Article Published in Stylist Magazine, July 2012

It’s fairly common for nail salons to offer add-on services, like paraffin treatments, French polish and nail art. The options and pricing vary, of course, because there’s a great deal of flexibility and few guidelines. For example, a salon offering nail art might charge by the nail, the time required, the difficulty of the design, or the amount of colors/glitter/rhinestones/etc. used. While add-ons have the potential to significantly increase revenue, their success depends on desirability, cost- and time-effectiveness and client perceptions of value.

Before exploring these variables, I want to acknowledge that for the purpose of this discussion, I will focus on nail-related add-on services only. Many salons have expanded their menus to include more unconventional services, but I caution salon owners against straying beyond their primary business, performing regulated beauty services. Just because clients want something doesn’t mean that you’re qualified/licensed to provide it, or that their/your best interests would be served if you did.

When considering the introduction of a new service, ask yourself, “Will this service enhance my reputation as a successful nail professional?” For example, consider “detox” foot soaks. Be sensible. If detoxifying were even possible through feet (it’s not; ask a reputable doctor) and capable of curing ailments/diseases (really?), you’d be practicing medicine which is definitely NOT within your scope of practice. Conversely, if it’s a scam (it is; just ask a chemist if you’re still not convinced), then you’d be practicing quackery which is unethical and unprofessional. Why risk your reputation when your credibility would be permanently damaged? Please, don’t. Now back to our discussion . . .

Much like retail, add-ons have a somewhat negative connotation as an “up-sell,” an extra or more expensive service that you must persuade clients to purchase. As a nail professional and salon owner, I want to provide services clients need and want, without any convincing on my part. What’s the secret? Add-ons sell themselves when clients desire them. It all depends on how your salon defines an add-on.

When developing services, I recommend giving your clients options, but not too many, otherwise scheduling and explaining the differences among services become too complicated. This can be easily avoided by creating two distinct levels of service: a very simple one that meets basic nail care needs and another that packages more luxury into an expanded service. Pedicures provide a ready example:

Basic

• Nail shaping
• Cuticle work

Expanded

• Nail shaping
• Cuticle work
• Callus work
• Exfoliation
• Paraffin
• Massage

At Precision Nails, the basic service (Foot Express) costs $20 and takes 15 minutes, and the expanded service (Foot Detail) costs $50 and takes 45 minutes. If all the extras provided in the expanded service were available individually, it would be a pricing and scheduling hassle. Whereas, when those extras come packaged together, most clients willingly choose the expanded (and more expensive) service.

Note that neither of these services includes polish. Why? We don’t assume that only women need/want their nails done; men deserve and appreciate professional nail care also. Besides, not all women want polish and some men do. I deliberately name and describe services in a gender-neutral way, because the quality of the service and the products used don’t change according to the client’s gender. Pricing should be based on the service provided, not on who’s receiving it. Our clients, whether male or female, can add a polish application or buffing to either the basic or expanded service for an additional charge; that’s the client’s choice. (Our salon doesn’t offer nail art; that’s my choice).

The cost- and time-effectiveness of an add-on service should be calculated like any other service. My standard is to price a service at no less than a $1/minute, and to limit product costs to no more than 10% of the service cost. For example, we charge $15 for a polish application or buffing, and schedule an additional 15 minutes, though it may take less time. (To learn more about my competitive pricing strategy, please reference the article published in the March 2011 Stylist).

Despite their potential, add-ons cannot generate any revenue if clients aren’t charged for them. That sounds obvious, but I cannot count the number of nail professionals who complain that their clients expect “freebies,” like nail art/repairs/massage/etc. Despite their perceptions, clients must be held financially accountable for the services they choose to receive. To firmly establish your value, produce a comprehensive brochure with enticing service descriptions that detail what’s included, the time allowed and the price. Your salon policies (appointments, cancellations, payment options, etc.) also need to be explained in writing. When asked about your service prices, whether in person, by email or phone call, be prepared to ask some questions to determine which services, if any, best meet the client’s needs. And make sure to charge accordingly.

By Jaime Schrabeck, Ph.D.

Miss (or Mister) Independent?

Article Published in Stylist Magazine, June 2012

Several years ago, after teaching a class at Premiere Orlando, I was approached by an apprehensive student who asked, “How do I convince my husband that I can make money doing nails?” Though unexpected, it was a relevant question. Even before becoming licensed, this student was feeling uncertain about her career choice. Perhaps she was concerned about finding the ideal salon, investing in expensive products, developing her technical skills, building a loyal clientele or other challenges that we face as beauty professionals. Instinctively, I responded, “You need to convince yourself first.” Rather than offer false assurances, I wanted to be honest. While my experience validates the possibility of success, it’s not a common experience and not what students should expect, no matter how confident they are. If believing in oneself were the foundation of success, any manicurist could succeed, regardless of talent, effort and/or luck. That’s simply not the case.

Here’s something else students are not likely to be told, but I tell them anyway. Within the beauty profession, there’s a strong possibility of failure, and the overwhelming desire to be “independent” may be to blame. Visit any beauty school and the majority of students will share their dreams of opening their own salons. I can relate to the excitement of entering a new profession, and appreciate the students’ enthusiasm. Understandably, it’s very appealing to envision ourselves as capable of making our own decisions, controlling our work environment, making clients looks and feel better, doing what we love and supporting ourselves. But how realistic is that, really? Regardless of employment status, how many manicurists earn  a living wage doing nails? If not many, don’t blame greedy salon owners. Having taken an opportunity to be independent either as booth renters or salon owners, why do so many manicurists still struggle?

Let’s go back to beauty school, in which students learn how to perform the beauty services required by a licensing examination. Being prepared for a test is different from being prepared for the realities of salon work, much less salon ownership. Instructors can inspire students all they want, but if they happened to be unsuccessful working in a salon environment, how can they prepare their students? (I doubt most instructors, while still students, dreamed of working at a beauty school for $15 an hour.) Not to minimize the sacrifices students make, but the investment of attending beauty school at a fixed cost for a specific number of hours does not compare to the investment of launching a salon, and the continuous demands of its operation. Completing beauty school is a prerequisite for attempting the licensing exam; does any state require a beauty school education to own a salon?

I ask that question facetiously because I’m frequently contacted by individuals who plan to open salons, despite having no professional education or experience in our industry other than receiving services. (I love dining out, but that doesn’t qualify me to own a restaurant.) These potential salon owners believe that their success in their current profession will easily translate to success in the nail profession. They’re just as naive as students. Opening a salon is easy; operating one that’s legal and profitable is much harder to achieve.

Returning to the plight of struggling manicurists, what’s the problem? Spend time around them, whether online or in person, and they’ll offer multiple explanations:

• the economy is bad and all salons are suffering
• I can’t compete with discount salons
• my clients will leave if I raise my prices
• my services take a long time, but it’s because I’m a perfectionist
• my clients expect free repairs and nail art
• the cost of quality products is too expensive
• the other manicurists in the salon don’t clean
• the salon owner doesn’t refer clients to me, and so on.

Apparently, not even glitter can cover their frustration. It would seem that there’s always some excuse, but very little personal responsibility.

Why do these manicurists reject the option of being employed by a successful and responsible salon owner? What makes them believe they could do better on their own? While optimism might sustain them initially, and sometimes indefinitely, it can also mislead. How else to explain the number of manicurists who persist in our profession despite not being financially successful? Maybe they don’t need to make money; they might have another job, financial support from a spouse or a trust fund. That’s not me; I’ve always valued my success more than my independence because I need to support myself. Each of us must consider what’s in our best interests, and for some, that might mean leaving the nail profession altogether. If that seems harsh, I’d say that encouraging those incapable of success, for whatever reasons, to stick it out would be far more so. If I’m wrong, they can prove it.

By Jaime Schrabeck, Ph.D.

Nails in the News

Article Published in Stylist Magazine, May 2012

Browsing the home page of msnbc.com recently, I was surprised to find an article link containing the words "extreme manicure" at the top of the page. Before proceeding to the article, I hesitated a moment. Whenever reading or watching any news related to nails, I'm prepared to be disappointed and frustrated. It's not that I expect the news to be positive; that would be remarkable and promising, and likely not news at all.

There's a difference between journalism (investigating and reporting on current events, trends, etc.) and content marketing (providing information to alter consumer behavior and build brand loyalty). I expect journalistic integrity from my news, and hold the media accountable for what they present. What's the purpose and relevance of the news report? Who's the source? Is the information (facts, quotes, etc.) accurate and objective? Has the context been adequately established? What are the qualifications of any contributors? How was the research conducted? What conclusions can be drawn? What impact does the information have? And on a more personal note, why should I care?

Some defend content marketing by claiming that consumers are sophisticated enough to distinguish between journalism and marketing: "today's audiences are accustomed to filtering information from a great many sources and taking those sources into account" (When Worlds Collide by Peter Haapaniemi at www.customcontentcouncil.com). Really? If I were a consumer without any specialized knowledge about nail care (anatomy/physiology, infection control, product chemistry, etc.), I'd probably believe the following:

• nails need to breathe;
• clients should bring their own tools to the salon;
• professional nail services, pedicures in particular, can be deadly;
• nail polish adversely affects reproductive health and causes breast cancer;
• UV lamps used to cure gel nails cause skin cancer;
• products that smell are more toxic than ones that don't.

Repeated often enough in the media, this information, whether true or not, makes consumers afraid of nail salons and nail products, both professional and retail.

If having your nails done is dangerous, then doing nails must be very dangerous. Yet, manicurists don't even make the list of "The 15 Most Dangerous Jobs in America:"

1. Fishers and related fishing workers*
2. Logging workers
3. Aircraft pilots and flight engineers*
4. Farmers and ranchers*
5. Coal miners
6. Roofers
7. Refuse and recyclable material collectors*
8. Truck drivers*
9. Police officers*
10. Electrical power-line installers and repairers
11. Construction laborers
12. Taxi drivers and chauffeurs**
13. Grounds maintenance workers*
14. Athletes, coaches, umpires and related workers*
15. Operating engineers and construction equipment operators*

*Transportation incidents are the main cause of death.
** Assaults accounted for slightly more deaths than transportation incidents.
(Based on data compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in 2010 and reported by Gus Lubin and Kevin Lincoln for www.businessinsider.com).
My work as a nail professional does not require driving, which might explain why it doesn't rank among these other professions.

That being said, it's interesting that when I Googled "nail polish death," I could document an actual death related to nail polish. But it had nothing to do with "toxic" chemicals as some might expect In a tragic incident widely known as the "Nail Polish Crash," motorcyclist Anita Zaffke was killed by motorist Lora Hunt who was polishing her nails while behind the wheel. Hunt was subsequently convicted of reckless homicide and sentenced to 18 months. Meanwhile, Zaffke's son Greg honors his mother's memory with the Crash Coalition (www.crashcoalition.org), a non-profit organization advocating against DWD (driving while distracted). DWD is deliberate and avoidable, yet one of the the leading causes of fatalities and injuries according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (www.distraction.gov.).

I digress, so back to the article I found on msnbc.com, A whole new gloss: Consumers buy into 'extreme manicure' trend by Martha C. White. The author and I have different perspectives on what constitutes "extreme" or even "new;" she briefly mentions the "crack" polish look and "press-on decals" as if they were revolutionary. Within approximately 400 words, the word "bright" appears 3 times to emphasize the trend towards bolder and less traditional colors. White also cites some research from the NPD Group about increased polish sales at department stores (up 63%) and the popularity of blue polish, which accounts for 20% of the top 130 colors sold. (There's no data included on polish sales at salons or mass market retailers, like Target or Walmart.)

White concludes that "budget-minded," "DIY" shoppers are driving this "low-cost trend." That's laughable because I would never refer to consumers who buy department store polish as "budget-conscious" or likely to DIY; Chanel's Le Vernis Nail Color, at $26 a bottle, is hardly "low-cost" when compared to professional polish available for about $8 a bottle. So while the overall tone of the article is positive (no mention is made of the "toxicity" of nail polish ingredients), White ends her article by quoting a retail strategist: '"The customer that used to to get weekly manicures is probably doing her own nails," Levy said. That nail salon's loss is a beauty retailer's gain.' Here's some news: we're gaining clients who prefer to have their nails done professionally, and we also retail polish, some of it blue.

By Jaime Schrabeck, Ph.D.