Under siege at the Federal and state levels, the indoor tanning industry remains unsure of its approach to fighting proposed under-18 tanning bans.
Is it best to accept teen tanning bans as simply the future direction this industry is likely to take? Or should this industry hire lobbyists and travel to various states to fight this proposed legislation? Currently, this is one of the biggest debates the indoor tanning industry is facing, and with so much to be said about this important issue, salon owners are faced with the daunting task of coming to a decision that they’ll ultimately support. So, without any further ado, here’s what a group of tanning veterans believe about legislation promoting under-18 tan bans.
Pick Your Battles
Salon owner and American Suntanning Association (ASA) President Bart Bonn might be as close as this industry gets to having a supporter of teen tanning bans. Describing his position on the matter as a “flexible one,” Bonn says he supports what fellow ASA member salons in each state decide, whether they wish to fight, work a constructive compromise or accept the ban outright. Bonn believes that accepting the ban benefits salons in that it can diminish the amount of negative press that indoor tanning receives in that state, he says. “This is what we’ve learned from our friends in Europe and certain provinces of Canada,” he added. Because fighting teen tanning bans is very expensive, Bart also says avoiding these battles saves money for the bigger fights at the Federal level. “We should be more concerned about the Surgeon General’s Office and the Center for Disease Control,” he said, “as well as repealing the Tan Tax.”
For salon owners who wish to fight teen tanning bans, Bonn offers a stern warning. “When the question of whether to fight these bills or not comes up,” he said, “the first thing I ask is, ‘Where are the resources going to come from?’ If they want to fight the tanning bans, salon owners are going to have to come up with the funds, and they need to be prepared for a long battle. Even if they win, these issues have a way of coming back in following legislative sessions.” Bonn has led the fight against teen tanning bans in the states where his Palm Beach Tan franchises are located – Florida, Iowa, Missouri and Nebraska – and he and others were successful in stopping or amending the proposed bans. “I have a strong feeling they’ll come back,” he added.
The “Slippery Slope”
One salon owner who disagrees with the idea that accepting teen bans will lessen the amount of negative press is Dan Humiston, owner of The Tanning Bed salon chain in New York. “It puts us on a slippery slope,” Humiston commented. “Agreeing that it’s okay to ban tanning for teens is basically conceding that there’s something wrong with what we do. Eventually people will say, ‘If it’s bad for people at those ages, then it’s probably bad for those who are older.’ As a salon owner, I have people coming up to me and saying they don’t want their kids to tan, and these are parents of young adults who are in the 20s!” During his ten years as president of the Indoor Tanning Association, Humiston maintained this position on teen tanning bans, which he continues to champion as an ITA Board member.
“No Compromises”
Working with lawmakers to adopt tan bans is a compromise, says Rob Quinn, CEO of the Ohio-based chain, Tan Pro USA. This, he believes, is something the industry should never do. Speaking from his legislative experiences as an ITA Board member, Quinn said, “Any compromise we make just becomes the floor from which the next fight will take place. It began when we agreed to an under-14 ban in California and look where that ended!” Quinn also believes that if the industry agrees to under-18 bans, lawmakers would push for an under-21 ban next. “We’ve already seen under-21 bans proposed,” he said, “as well as an outright ban on indoor tanning altogether!”
As a salon owner and current ITA Board member, Quinn wants the tanning industry to spend the money needed to fight teen tanning bans. He added, “Our opponents make a lot of money fighting with us and beating us up so there’s no incentive for them to leave us alone. As long as we’re in business, we’ll be doing battle with them.”
Bad Marketing Strategy
Accepting teen tanning bans is going against the sound marketing strategies of every other industry in America, says Mike Blore, California Sun CEO. As he explained, “I pay very close attention to the marketing campaigns in many other industries, and they seem to have one thing in common – they’re advertising heavily to people in the 15-18 demographic.” Corporations use this tactic, Blore added, to build brand loyalty in young people that will eventually pay off when they’re in their 20s and 30s. He added, “I have a difficult time believing that we as an industry know something that all these other industries aren’t seeing.”
Talk about bad marketing and promotions, Mike Blore says that teen tan bans keep more than just teenager out of tanning salons. “By taking away indoor tanning from people when they’re young,” he explained, “it ensures that tanning won’t be a part of their lives when the majority of them come of age. The unforeseen consequence of the under-18 ban here in California is that it’s severely affected our 19-22 market. These people just aren’t coming in to tan like they used to because they’re growing up without it, so they never know what they’re missing.” As proof, Blore cited the quarter of a million dollars California Sun spent last year to acquire customers in the 22-23 age range, the vast majority of whom had never set foot inside his salons before, not even for a spray-tan.
The Economic Impact
The economic impact of teen tanning bans are something that cannot be denied, according to the fight-teen-tanning-bans crowd. “Since tanners under-18 are a small percentage of their business,” Mike Blore said, “some salon owners say that losing them doesn’t matter. They might not realize that this demographic makes up 10-15 percent of other salon owners’ customer bases. What happens to them when these laws are passed?” For Blore, the question is rhetorical, as he’s seen many California salon owners close their doors – some even declaring bankruptcy – as a result of the effects of both the economy and teen tanning ban. “I take absolutely no pleasure in this,” he added. “I would like our industry to be a thriving one where everyone can be successful.”
Since New York lawmakers adopted an under-17 ban in 2012, the legislation has hurt Rocco Viele’s Suntan City franchise salons, he says. “Now that it’s passed,” said Viele, “it’s had a ripple effect on our businesses. Not only did it stop people under 17 from tanning, it also influenced many 18-22 year olds to stop tanning, too. I know we’ve definitely seen a gradual decrease in customers overall.” From Viele’s observation, it’s a matter of basic psychology – some people tend to think that since the law was passed, tanning must be bad for them. He added that he would’ve preferred a bill that required parental consent for all tanners under 18.
Dan Humiston is another New York salon owner whose bottom line was affected by the teen tanning ban there. Whatever small gains the legislation may or may not have provided in terms of reducing negative publicity, he says, was offset by a bigger reduction in business. And he believes this reduction is hurting his salons’ future growth. “The financial repercussions of this have been huge!” he exclaimed.
Fighting the Good Fight
Butting heads with tanning professionals who favor a teen tanning ban is a reality for some who choose to fight these bills. No one knows this better than Daniel Mann, co-owner of the Tropical Tan salon chain in Seattle, WA. When an under-18 ban was being considered there, Daniel and other members of the Washington State Indoor Tanning Council (WSITC) faced opposition from within their own industry. “My father, Daniel Sr., went to testify against the bill,” Daniel explained, “and when he did, someone from this industry tried encouraging him to support it. My father told the Senate that the WSITC supports reasonable regulation, but we didn’t support this specific bill.” Unfortunately, Daniel believes that once legislators heard that a local salon owner “supported regulations,” they used that to justify passing the ban. Needless to say, Daniel, Jr. was upset with this news.
Conflicting interests within the industry almost derailed a compromise made between salons, dermatologists and the Ohio state legislature. According to Rob Quinn, he and other industry professionals were able to turn a proposed under-18 ban into a bill that required a parent’s written consent every 90 days for tanners younger than 18. He explained, “The dermatologists who supported the original ban were happy with it, we were happy with it and so was the legislature. Despite this, someone from our industry claiming to represent Ohio tanning salon owners tried encouraging lawmakers to adopt an under-18 tan ban and a number of strict controls.” Although Rob was flabbergasted by the “representative’s” claims, he testified that the industry professional in question did not represent him or anyone he knew. “Thankfully, our lawmakers voted to approve the bill we had all agreed upon,” Quinn added.
Dyan Suitt of Endless Summer Tanning in Roxboro, NC recently found out how difficult it can be to organize other salon owners to fight proposed tanning legislation. In her home state of North Carolina, legislators are considering a bill that, if passed, would ban tanning for everyone under-18. As she explained, “It’s easy to get everyone to complain about these types of bills, but it’s not so easy to get them to write a letter to their lawmakers opposing the bills.” This is something Dyan experienced firsthand when she tried to rally NC salon owners to oppose the Federal Tan Tax. “I think it’s because many salons are owned by women with families and other responsibilities,” she said, “so finding time for one more thing in their busy days might be difficult.” Regardless of the challenges, Dyan vows to continue her attempts to organize NC salon owners against the bill.
Which Way do we Go?
So, what should be done about proposed teen tanning bans? It’s an important question and one that should be up to the consensus of this industry. And if the majority of this industry decides that this legislation needs to be fought, then salon owners everywhere need to be willing to fund the fight. Hiring lobbyists and traveling to various state capitals to fight these battles gets expensive, and the battle can only be won if everyone chips in to fight. And here are two more things to consider: currently, 11 states have enacted under-18 tan bans while another three have voted to ban tanning for those under 18, and yet another three have banned it for everyone under 16. What’s more, several other legislatures are considering similar bans for their states. In other words, if you wish to fight, then you’d better move quickly!
We at ist Magazine would like to hear what direction you think this industry should take regarding teen tan bans and why. Call 810.230.1735, ext. 320, or email john@istmagazine.com.
