Question: Would You Consider Using A Ski Nanny?

[AltaEgo]

After seeing so many kids skiing blue runs in a death wedge, I'm wondering how many parents would be willing to pay for a skiing babysitter who could keep the little ones on appropriate terrain while the parents are free to take some real runs? I'm thinking of starting a service like this, with the Nannies background checked and cleared. I'm going to try the polling feature, so please parents, weigh in!

 

[Moongidget]

Interesting idea. I think I met a gal who does something similar in Crested Butte. I don't have kids, for good reason, but if i did, I think it would be really valuable for the parents to get adult ski time.

What do you do about liability on the slopes? Even when the nanny is not at fault, accidents happen.

 

[contesstant]

Oh how I would LOVE this!!! Daycare for one day at most areas out here runs $100 and up. A morning lessons is $95 and up. Lesson/daycare combo is $175. She is so not ready to ski with us (and she doesn't want to--stubborn little thing she is!) but she sure has fun with a fun instructor. She would never be able to tell the difference between an instructor and a "nanny" on the hill.

As of now, we have to budget in at LEAST $100 extra per day for child care/lessons. Ouch! I can't imagine how hard that would be if we had more kids. Well, it would basically be impossible.

 

[geargrrl]

isn't usually the parents who have kids out where they shouldn't be?

 

[marzNC]

For me, with only one kid I doubt I would've used a Ski Nanny. Between ski school and friends, I was getting enough time on the snow without her even at ages 4-7 at our local hill. My DD is quite social, so enjoys being with other kids. We sometimes bring along a friend for local weekend skiing. For our annual late season trip to Alta, we meet up with friends. She loves ski school there and I like her to learn as much as possible. Between that and wanting to ski together, a Ski Nanny wouldn't be of interest.

Another factor is that I can ski alone mid-week every so often if local conditions are stellar, plus take a trip out west with friends.

If we lived near (less than 2 hours) a ski mountain and were doing more day trips, that would be different.

 

[Christy]

Considering that you have to pay for gas to the hill and a lift ticket or pass, and you'd need a business license, insurance, and then taxes unless you're going under the table, etc etc, would you make any money charging only $10/hour? That's less than my dogwalker charges!

 

[ScottishGirlie]

Just how many of these parents though actually realise what they're doing? Some of these parents just don't see a death wedge as a problem. Nutters!

 

[MissySki]

Considering that you have to pay for gas to the hill and a lift ticket or pass, and you'd need a business license, insurance, and then taxes unless you're going under the table, etc etc, would you make any money charging only $10/hour? That's less than my dogwalker charges!

I like the idea, but I was also curious what exactly the business plan would be in regard to these overhead costs, especially the lift ticket issue. Unless you find people with a season pass already to do the babysitting, this would seem pretty prohibitive to charging only $10 per hour. It would also cost money to do the background checks I believe to even get started with someone, not sure if you could have them pay that cost when applying though that might be weird not sure.. Then of course, how much of a cut would you be taking from the nanny to make it worth your while as well as theirs? I guess if you could find more than one child to be in charge of at a time, that'd up the take in.

Sorry for all the questions, I am just curious because I took an entrepreneurship class as an elective when I was getting my MBA, and it was really a fun exercise to come up with a business plan for a start up company, but wow are there a ton of details to work out! My professor would always shoot you down, or as he put it "push you to develop your ideas further". It was really annoying at the time, but it also made you come up with a pretty airtight business plan where most of the potential pitfalls had been hashed out in every which way before presenting it at the end of the semester.

I admire anyone who goes out and starts something of their own. If you believe in your idea, keep at it and make it happen!

 

[abc]

Am I the only one who got the impression the "business" OP envision is herself being the one and only nanny?

If there's enough demand to justify hiring extra nannies, the "company" can probably buy a season ticket for each of them. That would only work if the hired nannies are fully engaged.

I think the charge of $10/hr probably came up because it's half way cost of a lesson. Since the nannies aren't instructors, they have to charge less than lessons run by instructors.

Background check cost next to nothing (I see quotes of $20-50 online). And it's not unreasonable to substract that out of the first check. Heck, I had to pay for my own credit check when I apply for a mortgage. Nothing weired at all.

It's the business liability that would worry me. When kids get hurt, parents are going to be upset and may do crazy things. Skiing, unfortunately, has a higher potential for injury. How to get that covered affordably may get tricky.

 

[MissySki]

In the initial post it said " I'm thinking of starting a service like this, with the Nannies background checked and cleared." so I assumed more than herself. However, it'd probably be good to start out on your own doing it because it'd eliminate many of the overhead cost issues and gauge the real potential for demand and income potential.

 

[RuthB]

No I wouldn't use a ski nanny service. When DS was little we used a mix of daycare, ski school (when he was old enough) and skiing with us. Those that I know who have used ski nanny's have taken their regular nanny or a staff member (on annual leave from their regular daycare) when their children were small and they did this because their children were familiar with the nanny that they took. Some children, especially (preschoolers) settle really easily with unfamiliar carers and others don't, ours was of the latter variety, which was another reason I wouldn't consider a ski nanny. Now that he is older we mix up ski school and skiing with us when overseas, and at home we sometimes add in a friend if there happens to be one around.

Daycare provided us with pagers, which they used to contact parents if children did not settle (we got through the long queue and to the top of the excruciatingly slow first chairlift before it went off on one memorable occasion). I think you would consider how you dealt with this, do you require parents to carry a cell phone if they use your service, or will you have pagers? Also what will you do about food? four hours is too long for most kids to go without a break. Or what if the child just didn't want to ski or it was too cold, where would you go and/or what would you do? the benefit of the daycare we used when DS was little was that he got a private lesson (from age three) that lasted up to an hour, but if he wasn't keen then it wasn't pushed.

And I agree with geargrrl, it often isn't the kids that decide the terrain to ski, it is the parents, and sadly it often isn't dictated by what said parent would like to ski (otherwise those same kids would be on double blacks), often I think it is dictated by the parental "comparatition" "my kid is six weeks old and hucks 20 foot cliffs, mentality, so you would also have to think about how you would handle parental expectation about terrain.

 

[geargrrl]

What have done in the past is take favorite teenage babysitter with us and paid her expenses w a little extra. She was a known entity and the kids loved her. My second thought on reading this is that anyone who might hire "ski nanny" probably already has a nanny for their kids.

 

[abc]

What have done in the past is take favorite teenage babysitter with us and paid her expenses w a little extra. She was a known entity and the kids loved her.

Much harder to do if the family is getting on a plane and staying for a whole week.

 

[geargrrl]

However, for day trips, or places you drive to, it works just fine.

 

[marge]

I think it sounds great! : ) I certainly would have used something like that.

 

[Sami]

I wouldn't. I'd be too uncomfortable with the idea of a random person taking my kids skiing. Ski school is a known entity and there is a structure to it that is familiar to the kids and reliable for parents, no matter where you are. We always do half days (and don't ski at places where they don't offer half day ski school) so that we can eat lunch with the kids and then ski with them in the afternoon. Now, I pretty much don't like having babysitters, so take my comments into account in that light. I like being able to go out occasionally and do things at night, but in general, I don't really like other people taking care of my children for me. For something like a ski nanny, there would be so many questions and concerns. And for what you'd have to pay the ski nanny to make it affordable, I don't think you could find employees who would meet the qualifications parents would want. To ski with kids, you have to be something of a teacher, so they'd have to have some kind of instructor training, they'd have to have some kind of first aid, they'd have to be good with kids, have excellent judgment, be able to safely handle whatever situation came up. All kinds of things can happen skiing. At least with ski school, you know the resort's reputation is on the line so they are going to do everything imaginable to keep the kids safe.

 

[abc]

To ski with kids, you have to be something of a teacher, so they'd have to have some kind of instructor training, .

No, if you want instruction, that's when you send you kid to the ski school!

Right now, many parents are putting their kids in ski school more for babysitting than anything else! Given there's not much alternative to choose from, the cost of babysitting by ski instructor is viewed as acceptable in comparison with not getting much adult skiing at all.

It's very clear the proposed business is targeting kids who don't really need more instruction but just someone to ski with, at half the cost.

they'd have to have some kind of first aid, they'd have to be good with kids, have excellent judgment, be able to safely handle whatever situation came up. All kinds of things can happen skiing.

That's true of all nannies, not just skiing nannies.

 

[snoWYmonkey]

While there is certainly a need for more reasonably priced options, I have two concerns for the person thinking of starting this. The first is that in the US anyone making a known profit on land owned by the forest service (most resorts though not all) must have a permit for those specific purposes. I know that our ski area's school also has daycare and they are the sole permittee. Most ski schools would quickly uncover such an operation as it is competition with their business and report it to the entity that owns the land. Not a fair system, unlike europe where the prerequisites are very different to operate a school/daycare on snow (as in over 20K in training and certifications, but obtainable my most good athletes - not necessarily nannies).

Another issue mentioned above is the lawsuits. It is not just a matter of the kids in a nanny's charge getting hurt, but of random people getting hurt as a result of one of the children's actions, which would lead to that child's family as well as the nanny being sued. I forget the exact stats but something like 90% of ski area injury lawsuits involve lessons, but they only represent 10% of total injuries!!!

I do know a number of former instructors that are now full or part time nannies that will ski with the kids they watch. They do not however advertize as ski nannies and their work is not solely on the slopes. Most of the other nannies get hired by the resort and then work through the ski school for a select number of families, being paid during ski resort hours by the school and after hours directly by the families.

I know for a fact that such a business would have to be totally under the table in our area, and as a result would face potential lawsuits, work permit violations, and the like.

 

[ski_more]

I can see the business proposition, but agree with snowymonkey that it would be hard to pull off. For me, my daughter isn't a good enough skier yet, so I will have to fork over the money for ski school for a few more years.

 

[SkiNana]

NO: we enjoyed skiing with our sons too much to have pawned them off on someone else! They spent two hours a day in lessons (as did we) , and then we skied together the rest of the time. But, as MarzNC pointed out, that might have changed had we been much closer to the slopes. Of course, had that been the case, we all would probably have progressed much faster: they probably the fastest of all! As it was, we enjoyed skiing with them, and they were accomplished enough skiers that we were never bored nor they in over their heads.

In addition, we once observed a little boy of about five, in front of the Bachelor's Gulch Ritz Carleton, he in the charge of a nanny. We were enjoying a hot chocolate when he, playing alone in ski boots, stumbled, and I caught him with his (unhelmeted) head inches from metal base of a ski rack. We had a fit and sent her to the father to suggest the purchase (or at least rental) of a helmet for this tyke who was completely outfitted, head to toe in Spyder-wear. I didn't much care what Dad thought of me, at that point, and thought his nanny should have been paying closer attention to her charge as well!

No, no nannies for us, thank you!