June 30, 2008
Bridal Shops Trying On Charges
By Bernice Hurst, Managing Partner, Fine Food Network
Women do undeniably love to try on dresses but stores also, undeniably, have a right not to have their time wasted or their clothes tried on an infinite number of times.
According to The Independent newspaper and the BBC, an increasing number of specialist retailers in England have started charging women to try on wedding dresses. The theory is that they spend so much on their weddings anyway, a little bit more won’t make a difference.
Part of the reason for the fees is that women are increasingly photographing dresses and then having them copied. Cameras have been banned from some high-end boutiques to prevent the growing numbers of women who photograph dresses and then have them knocked off at budget prices.
The story explains that specialist shops often have to contend with “time-wasters who are choosing a gown before they have even bagged a groom” as well as women who photograph dresses and then have them copied.
“Quite a few shops have started to charge now, and I can see why retailers are doing it. Charging for an appointment forces a bride to think about whether or not she is serious about buying a dress from that particular designer,” said Deborah Joseph, editor of Brides magazine.
Fees are also said to cover consultation and advice although some stores offer a refund if a dress is purchased. Frequently described as “appointment fees,” “consultation fees” and “deposits,” the fees range from £25 to £50.
Some of the women interviewed by the BBC considered the practice unacceptable.
Discussion questions: Can high-end retailers justify charging women for the ‘privilege’ of trying on wedding dresses? Can you think of any circumstances where a retailer could rationalize charging a fee for customer service? Do you see “consulting” or “appointment” fees becoming a bigger component of high-end retailing?
[Author’s commentary] Not many women are inclined to make a snap decision on the dress they wear for the most important day of their life. Any woman who has ever done it can describe the stress of planning and wanting everything to be perfect. The last thing they need is additional pressure during what they expect to be a very happy shopping trip. While there may be some women who try on wedding dresses just for the thrill of it, many women wait until they know they are ready to buy. But they do want to buy absolutely the right dress and that may mean trying on quite a few until they are sure. If you’re going to spend a great deal on a dress that is so important, they should be entitled to an excellent service without being charged extra. After all, the shop is there to make a sale.
BrainTrust
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Poll
There is a bridal salon in our city that does charge $5.00 per gown to try on. The customers are not pleased with this. But the reality is that this nominal fee (used towards a final purchase) and would be helpful in cleaning costs that is necessary to keep the merchandise in impeccable condition. Having been in the industry since 1972, I can absolutely understand this mentality and did consider following suit.
One must actually be IN this industry to experience the different type of animal that it is. We are not talking about a customer that goes out shopping and intends to purchase the product that they actually try on. The average bride will try on between 30 – 50 gowns in her shopping experience. These gowns are both expensive up front, White (shows EVERYTHING) ornately detailed, hand beaded on fragile fabrics. The wear and tear of trying on can and for many stores does destroy the ‘sample’ gown that the store most usually pays full price for. After the girl finds ‘The One’ it is not uncommon for her to take that information and attempt to find the gown elsewhere for less. With the advent of the internet, we are seeing increasing numbers of clients making their actual purchase there after free use of salons’ time, service and products (inventory: INVESTMENT). This is one of the top reasons for salons to not allow photos.
Alternatively, if she does choose to purchase the gown at the salon that she found it at she often demands that they buy her a ‘new’ gown. I have had girls to be THE ONLY ONE to try on a gown and not want THAT gown, in spite of it being the right style, size and color. The reality of today is that with the tightened economy and lack of perception of the value (work) that goes into the garment and the free try on services the brides work and are taught to drive the price down as low as possible, and even beyond possible: hence the salons that close and leave brides empty handed. I believe the majority of these salons (from talking to many owners wearing the shoes) are not crooked individuals, but just did not have the business acumen to build a hearty profit margin in so that they could be successful.
As for my business: we built our business on customer service and it is how we have come to stand out in our industry. We have had to find new ways to buy and brand ourselves to increase the profit margins so that they are enough to keep us from the rut of feeling as if we are unpaid try-on houses for the bride.
The salons need, and have every right to protect them from being used by girls who give no thought nor value to the services they are receiving without a fee. Of course, the client also has the right to fair pricing for the merchandise.
But purchasing the product at one price from salon A and another from salon B will not necessarily equate to the same service she may receive that has been built into the price at one salon over the other. It is the salon’s duty to create customer awareness. However it is not uncommon for something to have no value until you don’t receive it. It is not uncommon for a bride to feel that she should receive all her services from the bridal salon free as an entitlement due her title. Unfortunately, all these things have both a value and a cost to provide. Today’s brides are more savvy and more demanding than they once were.
I would love to see more awareness in our industry from every direction. I would love our industry to be revolutionized for the better! I have been working long and hard on a program that will do exactly that. Complaining will not solve a problem, but solutions can be created as a result of those complaints.
I think this is a great idea if the retailer is looking for a way to decrease store traffic. Retailers should look for ways to encourage people to try on clothes, not discourage them. They should try and implement new services, not less service. That being said, there are ways for them to create income for value-added services. For example, what if the retailer offered a service in which consumers can try on dresses, have digital photos taken of them, email the photos to friends, and then get feedback from friends as to what they think of the look?
Bottom line is this. Retailers should not look at new ways to generate revenue from consumers by charging for normal services. They should offer unique services, and then feel free to charge for these unique services.
Now here’s a novel concept…in a down economy, charge for customer service. It seems like a great formula for failure.
You only have to watch one episode of “Bridezillas” to get a sense for what these shops have to deal with on a daily basis. Forget about an appointment fee, sometimes these women need to be hit with a “mean girl” fee.
I think it’s fine to charge for something like this as long as it’s a “deposit” that gets applied to a purchase rather than a fee that truly provides no additional value to the experience.
I often thought that shops like Sharper Image and Brookstone’s should charge a fee for admission–$1 per group or something like that–just to recoup the cost on the store of supporting the “entertainment browser” who is never going to buy anything–so long as you got the dollar back if you bought something.
Charging for something that is a basic expectation is wrong, but charging to separate the serious customers from people who never had any intention of buying in the first place–that doesn’t seem so far-fetched to me….
This situation is analogous to a similar shopping pattern I came across on a planning project last year. In the furniture category, women are always dreaming, then planning, then considering “item” options, and finally setting up various trips on which they actually are in purchase mode. The insight from the research revealed that if a retailer had no relevant interaction in the dreaming, planning or consideration phase, there was NO CHANCE they’d get on the list of stores they visited when they started the purchasing trips. Without one shred of real research, I am going to venture a theory that this research and insight applies to the wedding dress category.
No chance I would consider paying to try on dresses a relevant experience in my (or more likely, either of my daughter’s) phases of dreaming, planning or considering a wedding gown purchase.
Charging consultation and appointment fees to prospective bridal dress customers shows a lack of business sense. Such expenses should be built into the price of the product. Time spent on prospective customers trying any piece of clothing should be considered an investment and not an expense! The moment you consider it an expense the downward spiral starts. Businesses are built on investments and not on expense reduction.
The point of differentiation in high-end retailing is competing on quality, service, convenience and lifestyle aspirations rather than price. High-end customers are prepared to pay more for these things. That means there is far less pressure on gross margins, which creates the space to pay for all that goes into high-end retailing.
If these retailers are getting so pinched that they now need to charge extra for these services, something is very wrong in their pricing and business models, and the message that they are sending to their customers is potentially devastating to their store brand equity.
With traditional marriages declining, this will accelerate the “let’s just live together out of wedlock” process. That doesn’t meet the survival objective of bridal stores.
The “My Virtual Model” on H&M, Sears, Lands’ End and others, along with simple clip & save options from magazines, allow consumers to copy dresses anyway. Indeed, they have been doing it for years. To ban cameras and charge fees puts a bad taste in consumers’ mouths and can’t last. Retailers need to go bargain or go high end, the middle can’t hold.
I can’t believe that this is a universal strategy, but for wedding dresses, evening wear, couture gowns, the right retailer may be able to build into their process a concierge service; something over the top that includes capuccino, champagne, Godiva chocolates, and personnel that make the customer really get to that special occasion in style. Maybe even a gift certificate to a mini-spa appearance. I might be crazy, but this might be the paid for service that makes one dress shop stand out from another. Consider; why do Business and First Class passengers pay many times more for premium seating to get to their destination when the entire plane lands at the same time in the same place? To be pampered and made to feel special.
Please let this be a weird and wacky thing specific to the UK market and the consumer there. Please. Clienteling of any kind is a part of doing business, and an integral aspect of differentiation and competitive advantage. Charge for it?
OK…disposable income is dropping, times are tough, and now we are going to take the most recession-resistant customers and charge them for the privilege of “advising” them on what to buy…from us?
Open letter to US Retailers: don’t do this. It’s short sighted, contrary to serving the consumer, and will not prove worth the small amounts of revenue it generates.
Having said all that: if you have a value-added service to offer, one that does not depend on selling your other products for legitimacy, and you want to create a service business out of it…go for it. The Geek Squad doesn’t care where you bought your computer or home theater system. Cool model. That’s a real business. Not just an “add on” to the core model of selling “stuff.”
Am I the only one amused by this “terrible” development? Apparently the dress stores have been able to quantify their losses from non-serious shoppers and counterfeiters, and then compared it to the cost of annoying so-called “customers.” Will an accountant, physician, or attorney meet with you for free? Do most car dealers charge a minimum amount for diagnostics, refundable if you buy their service? Do most internet retailers charge a restocking fee for returns? (Think about it; it’s the same principle, only online.) Tempest in a chai tea carafe.
Assessing a consulting charge is reasonable, acceptable, and adds to the “snooty” factor. Frankly, it will appeal to those who shop at the tippity tip top of the high end bridal dress designers. These are the folks to whom money doesn’t matter, unless they can impress others by spending a bunch of it. During the 80s recession I built a print campaign for a client that included the Wall Street Journal. Among their advertising case histories, the WSJ presented one of a jukebox restorer/builder who, despite poor economic times, had a backlog of orders for their very expensive boxes. An interview with the owner of the business produced this priceless quote: “People with money will always have money.” For that reason alone, the argument that it’s especially stupid to charge a fee for bridal dress consultation during hard economic times simply doesn’t apply.
If the stores can get away with charging brides for trying on their gown assortments, more power to them. Retailing is a high risk business whose return on investment is often shamefully low. If real estate salespeople could charge folks for giving house tours, they would. Warehouse clubs’ membership fees used to equal their pretax profits. Many auto mechanics charge for estimates.
Wedding gowns are fragile and attract dirt like powerful magnets.
This will be my shortest post ever. This is a total assault on the customer and my advice to anyone faced with this is to move on to another store!
More Discussions
As Boomers ‘Age Out of Peak Purchasing,’ How Can National Brands Retain Interest With Gen Z?
According to a recent First Insight study titled “Is Gen Z Still Choosing Your Brand,” while…Is Supply Chain Volatility Here To Stay?
Can we expect an ongoing volatility to remain in terms of retail supply chain?Has Same-Day Delivery Become an Expectation Across Retail?
Are expectations around retail delivery speed in flux?
There is a bridal salon in our city that does charge $5.00 per gown to try on. The customers are not pleased with this. But the reality is that this nominal fee (used towards a final purchase) and would be helpful in cleaning costs that is necessary to keep the merchandise in impeccable condition. Having been in the industry since 1972, I can absolutely understand this mentality and did consider following suit.
One must actually be IN this industry to experience the different type of animal that it is. We are not talking about a customer that goes out shopping and intends to purchase the product that they actually try on. The average bride will try on between 30 – 50 gowns in her shopping experience. These gowns are both expensive up front, White (shows EVERYTHING) ornately detailed, hand beaded on fragile fabrics. The wear and tear of trying on can and for many stores does destroy the ‘sample’ gown that the store most usually pays full price for. After the girl finds ‘The One’ it is not uncommon for her to take that information and attempt to find the gown elsewhere for less. With the advent of the internet, we are seeing increasing numbers of clients making their actual purchase there after free use of salons’ time, service and products (inventory: INVESTMENT). This is one of the top reasons for salons to not allow photos.
Alternatively, if she does choose to purchase the gown at the salon that she found it at she often demands that they buy her a ‘new’ gown. I have had girls to be THE ONLY ONE to try on a gown and not want THAT gown, in spite of it being the right style, size and color. The reality of today is that with the tightened economy and lack of perception of the value (work) that goes into the garment and the free try on services the brides work and are taught to drive the price down as low as possible, and even beyond possible: hence the salons that close and leave brides empty handed. I believe the majority of these salons (from talking to many owners wearing the shoes) are not crooked individuals, but just did not have the business acumen to build a hearty profit margin in so that they could be successful.
As for my business: we built our business on customer service and it is how we have come to stand out in our industry. We have had to find new ways to buy and brand ourselves to increase the profit margins so that they are enough to keep us from the rut of feeling as if we are unpaid try-on houses for the bride.
The salons need, and have every right to protect them from being used by girls who give no thought nor value to the services they are receiving without a fee. Of course, the client also has the right to fair pricing for the merchandise.
But purchasing the product at one price from salon A and another from salon B will not necessarily equate to the same service she may receive that has been built into the price at one salon over the other. It is the salon’s duty to create customer awareness. However it is not uncommon for something to have no value until you don’t receive it. It is not uncommon for a bride to feel that she should receive all her services from the bridal salon free as an entitlement due her title. Unfortunately, all these things have both a value and a cost to provide. Today’s brides are more savvy and more demanding than they once were.
I would love to see more awareness in our industry from every direction. I would love our industry to be revolutionized for the better! I have been working long and hard on a program that will do exactly that. Complaining will not solve a problem, but solutions can be created as a result of those complaints.
I think this is a great idea if the retailer is looking for a way to decrease store traffic. Retailers should look for ways to encourage people to try on clothes, not discourage them. They should try and implement new services, not less service. That being said, there are ways for them to create income for value-added services. For example, what if the retailer offered a service in which consumers can try on dresses, have digital photos taken of them, email the photos to friends, and then get feedback from friends as to what they think of the look?
Bottom line is this. Retailers should not look at new ways to generate revenue from consumers by charging for normal services. They should offer unique services, and then feel free to charge for these unique services.
Now here’s a novel concept…in a down economy, charge for customer service. It seems like a great formula for failure.
You only have to watch one episode of “Bridezillas” to get a sense for what these shops have to deal with on a daily basis. Forget about an appointment fee, sometimes these women need to be hit with a “mean girl” fee.
I think it’s fine to charge for something like this as long as it’s a “deposit” that gets applied to a purchase rather than a fee that truly provides no additional value to the experience.
I often thought that shops like Sharper Image and Brookstone’s should charge a fee for admission–$1 per group or something like that–just to recoup the cost on the store of supporting the “entertainment browser” who is never going to buy anything–so long as you got the dollar back if you bought something.
Charging for something that is a basic expectation is wrong, but charging to separate the serious customers from people who never had any intention of buying in the first place–that doesn’t seem so far-fetched to me….
This situation is analogous to a similar shopping pattern I came across on a planning project last year. In the furniture category, women are always dreaming, then planning, then considering “item” options, and finally setting up various trips on which they actually are in purchase mode. The insight from the research revealed that if a retailer had no relevant interaction in the dreaming, planning or consideration phase, there was NO CHANCE they’d get on the list of stores they visited when they started the purchasing trips. Without one shred of real research, I am going to venture a theory that this research and insight applies to the wedding dress category.
No chance I would consider paying to try on dresses a relevant experience in my (or more likely, either of my daughter’s) phases of dreaming, planning or considering a wedding gown purchase.
Charging consultation and appointment fees to prospective bridal dress customers shows a lack of business sense. Such expenses should be built into the price of the product. Time spent on prospective customers trying any piece of clothing should be considered an investment and not an expense! The moment you consider it an expense the downward spiral starts. Businesses are built on investments and not on expense reduction.
The point of differentiation in high-end retailing is competing on quality, service, convenience and lifestyle aspirations rather than price. High-end customers are prepared to pay more for these things. That means there is far less pressure on gross margins, which creates the space to pay for all that goes into high-end retailing.
If these retailers are getting so pinched that they now need to charge extra for these services, something is very wrong in their pricing and business models, and the message that they are sending to their customers is potentially devastating to their store brand equity.
With traditional marriages declining, this will accelerate the “let’s just live together out of wedlock” process. That doesn’t meet the survival objective of bridal stores.
The “My Virtual Model” on H&M, Sears, Lands’ End and others, along with simple clip & save options from magazines, allow consumers to copy dresses anyway. Indeed, they have been doing it for years. To ban cameras and charge fees puts a bad taste in consumers’ mouths and can’t last. Retailers need to go bargain or go high end, the middle can’t hold.
I can’t believe that this is a universal strategy, but for wedding dresses, evening wear, couture gowns, the right retailer may be able to build into their process a concierge service; something over the top that includes capuccino, champagne, Godiva chocolates, and personnel that make the customer really get to that special occasion in style. Maybe even a gift certificate to a mini-spa appearance. I might be crazy, but this might be the paid for service that makes one dress shop stand out from another. Consider; why do Business and First Class passengers pay many times more for premium seating to get to their destination when the entire plane lands at the same time in the same place? To be pampered and made to feel special.
Please let this be a weird and wacky thing specific to the UK market and the consumer there. Please. Clienteling of any kind is a part of doing business, and an integral aspect of differentiation and competitive advantage. Charge for it?
OK…disposable income is dropping, times are tough, and now we are going to take the most recession-resistant customers and charge them for the privilege of “advising” them on what to buy…from us?
Open letter to US Retailers: don’t do this. It’s short sighted, contrary to serving the consumer, and will not prove worth the small amounts of revenue it generates.
Having said all that: if you have a value-added service to offer, one that does not depend on selling your other products for legitimacy, and you want to create a service business out of it…go for it. The Geek Squad doesn’t care where you bought your computer or home theater system. Cool model. That’s a real business. Not just an “add on” to the core model of selling “stuff.”
Am I the only one amused by this “terrible” development? Apparently the dress stores have been able to quantify their losses from non-serious shoppers and counterfeiters, and then compared it to the cost of annoying so-called “customers.” Will an accountant, physician, or attorney meet with you for free? Do most car dealers charge a minimum amount for diagnostics, refundable if you buy their service? Do most internet retailers charge a restocking fee for returns? (Think about it; it’s the same principle, only online.) Tempest in a chai tea carafe.
Assessing a consulting charge is reasonable, acceptable, and adds to the “snooty” factor. Frankly, it will appeal to those who shop at the tippity tip top of the high end bridal dress designers. These are the folks to whom money doesn’t matter, unless they can impress others by spending a bunch of it. During the 80s recession I built a print campaign for a client that included the Wall Street Journal. Among their advertising case histories, the WSJ presented one of a jukebox restorer/builder who, despite poor economic times, had a backlog of orders for their very expensive boxes. An interview with the owner of the business produced this priceless quote: “People with money will always have money.” For that reason alone, the argument that it’s especially stupid to charge a fee for bridal dress consultation during hard economic times simply doesn’t apply.
If the stores can get away with charging brides for trying on their gown assortments, more power to them. Retailing is a high risk business whose return on investment is often shamefully low. If real estate salespeople could charge folks for giving house tours, they would. Warehouse clubs’ membership fees used to equal their pretax profits. Many auto mechanics charge for estimates.
Wedding gowns are fragile and attract dirt like powerful magnets.
This will be my shortest post ever. This is a total assault on the customer and my advice to anyone faced with this is to move on to another store!