3 ms·
If he owns it, he will want to recover his overhead and make profit beyond that to compensate for his risk and extra effort. That profit typically isn't shared
by wrycoder 4y ago
If he owns it, he will want to recover his overhead and make profit beyond that to compensate for his risk and extra effort. That profit typically isn't shared with the other stylists. On the other hand, the owner will likely diligently pursue his own interest in making the shop as profitable as possible by attracting the most customers to the best service, which may greatly benefit the stylists (and make them willing to pay more for use of the chair).
If it's a co-op, all expenses and profits will be split among the members. (I'm assuming that the co-op members are limited to the stylists in this case.) The business is not likely to be pursued as diligently as it would be if it was a sole proprietorship, as an individual member will not be proportionately compensated for making an outsized effort. If the co-op is large enough to require a full-time employed manager and other staff, then it's just a privately held corporation, and will perform as such.
- mantas 4y agoI was thinking about a hairdresser having a salon with a single chair for himself. Full-on co-op wouldn't work if 1 hair dresser is super popular and 2 others are not so popular. It's a very personal business and a big part of it is one's own contacts. Now if only salon is co-op and hairdressers have to decide together how much they charge per chair to split among themselves... That may get interesting. If hairdresser pays a %, then worse performers may get a chunk of better-off profits. If hairdresser pays for chair days, then worse performers may be subsidising the better ones.