I'm usually a really easy going woman. Calm and collected: the type that doesn't even swear if someone cuts them off in traffic. Or, if I let someone in and they don't give me a wave or a nod, I don't even notice. But this... this news that I read the other day makes me fume. Really fume. The NY Daily News reported that a â€œ30,000 haircut at British salon helps super-rich survive recession with no hair out of place.â€
$30,000 for a haircut?! That's obscene! The hairstylist responsible for these services is London's Stuart Phillips. He explanation about what his celebrity clients get (for about the same amount I couldn't even afford to spend on a new car) is rather insulting: â€œI have to provide everything from security teams and bodyguards, exotic and expensive oils to wash through clients' hair, interpreters, personal chefs, and special scents put through the ventilation system, and even dog walkers to entertain their pets.â€
More insulting still is his justification. He seems to have a bit of a â€œwhy notâ€ attitude, remarking that â€œIf someone has a billion dollars in the bank, to fly their girlfriends or wives over, it is nothing. For them [$30,000] is a drop in the ocean.â€ So it seems that his rational is as follows: if people have the money, charge them whatever they can afford. Sounds great, doesn't it; I mean, we don't want surplus money hanging around do we? Heaven forbid, it could be given to charities!
Who do you think is to blame here? Hairstylists for charging that amount of money for a haircut, or celebrity customers because they're willing to pay? Are these customers fools for thinking that a security guard at the door of a hair salon and a bit of expensive oil and aromatherapy is worth 30k? Maybe Serena Williams could shed more light on the question as The NY Daily News reports her as one Phillips' previous clients.
Tell us what you think? Is 30k too much for a haircut? Who's to blame? Salons or the wealthy?