PSA: I started charging a flat $5 for kids under 10 and it backfired immediately

I figured a simple, cheap rate for little kids would make things easier for parents. The first week, a mom brought in her three boys, all under 8, for trims. It took me 45 minutes just to get the youngest to sit still, and I barely broke even on my time. I learned that a low price doesn't mean a simple job, it just means you're working for less on the hardest cuts. How do you guys handle pricing for really young clients without scaring off the parents?

3 comments

3 Comments

wade_perez1mo ago

Yeah, that flat rate just tells parents you're the cheap option for the tough jobs. Maybe try a minimum fee that covers your time, then a lower add-on price for extra siblings.

the_margaret1mo ago

Totally agree, that's what I ended up doing. A base rate for one kid with a smaller charge for each extra child worked way better for me.

cameroncarr1mo ago

Gotta jump in here and say that @the_margaret is onto something with that base rate model, but I think you mixed up a tiny detail. The flat rate approach doesn't necessarily tell parents you're the cheap option for tough jobs. It more often tells them you're not paying attention to how much work actually goes into watching multiple kids. I've seen too many sitters burn out taking three kids for the same price as one, and that's just not fair to anyone. A base rate plus a smaller add-on per extra kid covers your time without scaring off families with two or three children. It's a smarter way to price yourself without looking like you're either overcharging or undervaluing your work.