ChairHold
Tactical

How to handle a client who is chronically late as a solo beauty pro

· 23 min read · back to blog

She was twelve minutes late to her last appointment. Fifteen minutes late to the one before. Eight minutes late to the one before that. Each time, you absorb it — you shorten the blow-dry, you skip the scalp massage, you rush the finish — and you say nothing, because it feels awkward to address and she's otherwise a good client. You rebook her and the pattern continues. By her fifth appointment of the year, you are scheduling an hour and ten minutes for a sixty-minute service, and you've started putting her last on Fridays because you can't afford to have her blow up the rest of your day.

You have a chronic late client. And you've already started managing around her instead of managing the pattern itself.

This post is specifically about the pattern case — a client who is reliably late, appointment after appointment, not as a one-time anomaly but as a structural feature of how she operates. It is distinct from the one-time late arrival (which a per-appointment late policy handles in isolation), distinct from the no-show (which has its own protocol), and distinct from the difficult client post (which covers a broader category of personality-driven friction). The chronic late client is often otherwise pleasant, usually loyal, frequently your best tipper. The lateness itself is the only issue. And because the lateness is otherwise surrounded by a good client relationship, it is precisely the kind of problem that goes unaddressed until it becomes structural — until you've quietly reorganized your entire schedule around one person's inability to arrive on time.

This post covers: how to define "chronically late" before you act on the label; why the solo beauty context makes chronic lateness more damaging than it would be in a salaried service job; the three wrong ways most pros handle it; the four-step structural response (buffer slot, pattern conversation, rebooking adjustment, ultimatum); the scripts for the pattern conversation and the ultimatum; vertical-specific late patterns for colorists, lash artists, nail technicians, PMU artists, and mobile groomers; how deposit-first booking changes the chronic late calculation; and the three-year compound math. This is not the same as the one-time late-client post, which covers the incident-by-incident policy response to arriving late on a particular day.

Defining "chronically late" before you apply the label

One late arrival is data. Two late arrivals — from the same client, in close succession — is a signal. Three late arrivals is a pattern. The label "chronically late" should be applied only when the pattern is clear and documented, not after a single bad appointment or a run of them that may have a shared explanation (a client who was late three times in two months because she was dealing with a family crisis is different from a client who has been arriving ten minutes late to every appointment for a year).

A working definition: a client is chronically late when she has arrived late to three or more appointments within a six-month rolling window, or to any two consecutive appointments within a four-appointment span. The six-month window prevents a cluster of life-crisis lateness from being misclassified as a structural pattern. The two-consecutive threshold catches a short-booking client who books quarterly and has now been late to two appointments in a row — that's half her annual visits and a clear pattern even without the volume.

The threshold also matters for documentation. If you haven't been keeping a record, start now. The client record — in whatever system you use, even a notes field in your calendar app — should include arrival time for each appointment. "On time," "7 min late," "14 min late," "on time," "11 min late." When you have five entries and three of them are late, you have the documentation that the pattern conversation requires. Without documentation, the pattern conversation is an impression. With it, it's a factual observation.

Why solo beauty pros absorb more than they should

In a six-chair salon, one client running ten minutes late is absorbed by the shop's aggregate buffer. Another stylist takes a walk-in. The person at the front desk handles the delay. The systemic slack in a multi-provider operation distributes the impact until it is undetectable. The solo pro has none of that distribution. Every client relationship, every slot, every transition is hers alone. Ten minutes late on a back-to-back day is ten minutes borrowed from the next client, or ten minutes added to the end of a day that was already full, or ten minutes of service quality removed from the appointment that was shortened to compensate.

The math is stark. A solo pro running six appointments a day on a fifty-minute booking cadence has 300 minutes of productive chair time. A client who arrives ten minutes late to every appointment costs 60 minutes of that productive time per month — assuming one appointment per month. If the appointment runs long to compensate, she's costing the next client's quality. If it runs short, she's receiving a partial service for a full-service price. Neither outcome is stable.

The deeper issue is opportunity cost. Every minute a solo pro spends doing a rushed finish on a late client is a minute she is not doing a proper service. Over a month, that compounds into perceptible quality drift — services feel more hurried, results are slightly less consistent, the pro is slightly more stressed. This is not a minor inconvenience. Chronic late clients, left unaddressed, gradually degrade the quality of every appointment that surrounds them on the calendar.

The three wrong ways most pros handle it

Before the structural response, it helps to name the failure modes, because most solo pros cycle through one of them before finding anything that actually works.

Wrong response one: absorb it indefinitely. You shorten the service, rush the finish, say nothing, and rebook. The client has no idea the late arrivals are a problem because no one has told her. The pattern continues. Your schedule quietly reorganizes itself around her behavior. You eventually start dreading her appointments without being able to articulate exactly why. This is the most common failure mode. It feels like patience. It is actually an accumulation of unaddressed structural damage.

Wrong response two: confront it too aggressively at the wrong moment. The client arrives twelve minutes late, you are already behind, and you say something sharp in the chair — "I need you to know this keeps happening and I can't keep doing this." The client feels ambushed. She didn't know there was a pattern because no one ever named it to her. She feels criticized in a vulnerable moment (she's literally sitting in your chair). She leaves, she doesn't rebook, she leaves a review that says you were rude and unprofessional. The pattern conversation, held in the chair at the wrong moment, is almost always counterproductive.

Wrong response three: hint at it passively. You put the late policy in the reminder text and hope she reads it. You mention that you "try to start on time" in a group message to all clients. You add a note to the booking confirmation. None of these are directed at the specific client with the specific pattern. She doesn't absorb them as applying to her because they aren't framed as applying to her. Passive policy reminders do not change individual behavior patterns. They are appropriate for setting expectations with new clients. They do not address an established pattern with an existing client.

The four-step structural response

A chronic pattern requires a structural response — one that addresses the mechanics of the problem, not just the feelings around it. There are four steps, and they escalate in that order.

Step one: the buffer slot

Before having any conversation, make one scheduling adjustment: add a ten-to-fifteen-minute buffer after the client's appointment slot. Book the client's slot as ending ten minutes before the next appointment begins. This buffer serves two purposes. First, it absorbs the lateness without cascading the impact onto the next client. Second, it gives you the data clarity you need for the next step — because now you can see whether the client is late to a padded slot, which tells you whether the issue is chronic or whether it was being magnified by tight scheduling.

The buffer slot is a one-appointment experiment, not a permanent solution. If the client arrives on time to a padded slot, the issue may have been scheduling pressure on her end that resolved itself. If she arrives late to the padded slot — twelve minutes late to a slot that already had ten minutes of buffer — you now have confirmation that the pattern is genuine and the conversation is warranted.

Do not tell the client about the buffer. The buffer is a diagnostic and operational tool for you, not a negotiation. Telling the client "I've added extra time in case you're late again" is a passive aggression move that makes the conversation harder.

Step two: the pattern conversation

The pattern conversation happens outside the appointment. Not in the chair. Not when she arrives late on a particular day. Not as a retroactive note after she's already left. It happens between appointments, via text or a brief phone call, after you have documented at least three late arrivals and before you rebook her next slot.

The conversation has three parts: observation, impact, ask.

Observation: You name what you've seen factually, without editorializing. "I've noticed that your last few appointments have started a bit behind schedule — your most recent three ran about ten to fifteen minutes late." You are not characterizing her as a bad client. You are not accusing her of anything. You are stating what the record shows.

Impact: You explain what the lateness costs, briefly and without drama. "When we start late, I either have to shorten your service or run into my next client's slot — neither of which is good for either of you." This is not a lecture. It is a factual explanation of why this matters to her outcome, not just to yours. A client who understands that her late arrival results in a shorter blowout or a rushed finish has a self-interested reason to arrive on time.

Ask: You make one named request. "Going forward, I need you to arrive right at your appointment time or a few minutes before so we can get the full service done. If something is ever going to make you late, a quick text as early as possible helps me plan." The ask is specific and actionable. You are not asking her to be a different person. You are asking for a behavior change at a specific level.

The full script, sent as a text message between appointments:

"Hey [Name] — I want to catch you before your next appointment. I've noticed that your last few visits have started a bit behind schedule — running about ten to fifteen minutes late. I know things come up, and I appreciate that you always text when you're running behind. The issue on my end is that starting late means I have to either shorten your service or push into the next client's time, which isn't fair to either of you. Going forward I need appointments to start on time. If something's going to make you late, even a quick heads-up helps me plan. Is that something you can work with?"

Two things to notice about this script: it gives her credit for communicating when she is late (this keeps the tone collaborative), and it ends with a question that invites her to engage rather than just receiving a lecture. Most clients who receive this message will respond apologetically and arrive on time to the next appointment. Some will have a reason for the pattern that resolves the moment you name it — she was dealing with a carpool schedule that has since changed, she didn't realize how tight your back-to-backs were. The conversation itself often fixes the problem.

What to do if she doesn't respond: give it one appointment. If she arrives late to the next appointment without acknowledging the message, follow up when she arrives: "Did you see my message?" If she says she did and apologizes, proceed. If she dismisses it or seems unaware of the problem, the conversation needs to happen in person at rebooking — not in the chair, but at checkout.

Step three: the rebooking adjustment

If the pattern conversation doesn't resolve the issue within two appointments, make a booking adjustment: schedule the chronic late client as the last available slot of the day, or as the last slot before a natural gap in your schedule. This is not a punishment. It is a risk mitigation move. When she is last in the day, her late arrival affects only her own service time — it doesn't cascade onto another client's slot. You can run her appointment to the full length if she arrives early, or shorten it if she arrives late, without any downstream consequence.

Tell the client, briefly: "I've moved you to the end of the afternoon — that slot tends to be less rushed for longer services." You don't need to explain that this is a consequence of her late arrivals. The explanation of the policy consequence should have happened in the pattern conversation. The rebooking adjustment is operational, not punitive.

The rebooking adjustment also serves as a signal to the client about where she stands. Clients who previously had first-morning slots or premium mid-day slots notice when they're moved to the end of the day. If the late client is paying attention, she may ask. You can then reference the pattern conversation.

Step four: the ultimatum

If two appointments after the pattern conversation the client is still arriving late and the rebooking adjustment has been made, a single ultimatum is warranted. The ultimatum names one consequence stated plainly, without hedging or apology.

The ultimatum script: "I need to let you know that we've had this conversation before and the late arrivals have continued. I want to keep seeing you, but I can't keep starting appointments late — it affects the quality of your service and it's not fair to my other clients. If your next appointment starts more than five minutes late without a heads-up, I'll need to shorten or reschedule it, and I'll need to reconsider whether I can continue to hold slots for you. I hope that doesn't happen."

The key elements: it references the prior conversation (not a first mention), it names a specific threshold (five minutes), it names two specific consequences (shorten or reschedule), and it names a third consequence (not continuing to hold slots). It ends with a statement that you prefer not to reach that point — this keeps the tone from feeling like a termination notice when the intent is still to keep the client if the behavior changes.

The ultimatum is said once. If she arrives late to the appointment after the ultimatum, you follow through on the stated consequence — shorten the appointment, or reschedule it. If she arrives late to the appointment after that, you decline to rebook. At that point, the client has been told twice (pattern conversation plus ultimatum), given structural accommodation (rebooking adjustment), and still hasn't changed. The decision to stop holding slots for her is not cruel — it is the stated outcome she was informed about.

When to skip steps

The four steps are sequential but not always exhaustive. Two situations warrant skipping steps.

The severe lateness case. If the client's late arrivals are not ten to fifteen minutes but thirty to forty-five minutes — arriving after the appointment is no longer serviceable — skip the buffer slot experiment and go directly to the pattern conversation. A client who arrives 35 minutes late to a 60-minute appointment cannot receive a meaningful service. The economics of this are so clear that there is no value in the buffer-slot diagnostic.

The client who has been warned before by a previous provider. If a new client arrives late to her first appointment and mentions, unprompted, that her previous stylist "had a problem with it," that is a red flag. New clients who arrive late and reference prior conflicts about lateness are telling you that this is an established pattern that has already been flagged. You can apply your late-arrival policy at the first appointment rather than waiting for three data points.

What to do at checkout after a late appointment

During the interval between the pattern conversation and the rebooking adjustment — when you are in the window of "one more chance before the ultimatum" — there is a brief, useful thing to say at checkout after the client has been late to an appointment. Not a lecture. Not a reminder of the pattern conversation. One sentence: "I had to cut a few minutes off the finish today because we started a bit late — next appointment, if we can get started on time, we'll have the full slot." This is factual, forward-looking, and non-punitive. It also reinforces that the shortened service was a consequence of the late start, not a service failure on your part. Some clients don't connect those dots on their own until you name them.

Do not repeat the pattern conversation at checkout. The pattern conversation happened between appointments for a reason — the chair and checkout are not good moments for relationship-level discussions. If she brings up the prior message or asks about the pattern, you can reference it briefly ("yes, that's what I meant — today was another example"), but keep the at-appointment exchange short and forward-looking.

The deposit and how it changes the chronic late calculation

Clients who have paid a deposit to hold their slot are measurably more punctual than clients who haven't. This is not speculation — it is the consistent finding of every operator survey that has asked about no-show and late-arrival rates in deposit-required versus deposit-optional booking flows. The mechanism is straightforward: a client who paid $40 to hold her appointment has a tangible financial reason to show up and show up on time. A client who booked from a DM with no deposit has only a social obligation, which is less binding.

This does not mean deposit-first booking eliminates chronic lateness. It means it reduces the base rate. In a deposit-free booking environment, a solo pro with 200 annual appointments might see 12 to 15 chronic late clients over the course of a year. In a deposit-required environment, that number typically falls to 4 to 7 — the clients for whom the financial commitment has no meaningful behavioral effect, either because the deposit amount is too small relative to their income, or because the pattern is deeply structural.

For the chronic late clients who remain even in a deposit-required environment, the deposit still helps in one specific way: it lowers the cost of following through on the ultimatum. Declining to rebook a deposit-required client means she loses her deposit if she cancels, and she won't receive a new booking link until she's paid a new deposit. The friction this creates is a real behavioral signal — some chronic late clients who would ignore a pattern conversation become punctual the moment they understand that continued lateness could cost them their deposit. The deposit isn't just a payment tool; it is a behavioral filter.

Per-vertical patterns for chronic lateness

Colorists

The chronic late client is the most damaging case in color services because color appointments are time-locked in both directions. A 90- minute balayage session that starts 15 minutes late either finishes 15 minutes late (cascading onto the next client) or finishes without the toning step (producing a result that doesn't match what the client expects). There is no safe place to absorb 15 minutes in a color appointment. The buffer slot for a chronic late colorist client should be 20 minutes, not 10, because color services can't be run partially — you either have the full time or you don't.

The rebooking adjustment for colorists who have chronic lateness: move them to the first appointment of the day. This sounds counterintuitive (first appointment means no prior cascade), but it also means the client has no upstream appointment that "ran long" as an excuse — there was nothing before her. The first appointment of the day is the one place where a late arrival is purely a client-side issue, which makes the pattern conversation simpler.

Colorists should also check whether the chronic lateness is related to the consultation step. Some clients arrive late because they know the first 10 minutes of a color appointment is consultation, and they don't value it. If you can move consultation to a phone call the day before, you eliminate this sub-case and the late arrival becomes purely a behavioral issue.

Lash artists

Lash appointments are among the tightest in the beauty industry because the service cannot be meaningfully shortened: a lash set at 90 minutes takes 90 minutes regardless of when it starts. A client who arrives 20 minutes late to a lash appointment either receives a partial set (which looks wrong and reflects badly on the artist's work), or the artist runs 20 minutes into the next slot, or the appointment is rescheduled. None of these are acceptable on a recurring basis. The chronic late client in a lash practice is one of the highest-cost cases per incident.

The pattern conversation for lash artists can include a specific consequence that is technically accurate and operationally honest: "If I don't have your full time, I can't complete the set — so if you arrive more than ten minutes late, I'll need to reschedule your appointment and the deposit will be applied to the rescheduled slot." This frames the consequence as a service quality issue, not a punishment — because in lash work, it genuinely is. A partial lash set is not a deliverable product.

Lash artists who have a chronic late client with a strong spend history should consider moving that client's slot to one hour before the end of the workday — giving a 60-minute buffer before the artist's next commitment, so a 20-minute late arrival results in a slightly shorter set rather than a full reschedule.

Nail technicians

Nail appointments have more flexibility in duration than lash or color, which means nail techs are more likely to absorb late arrivals without a natural forcing function. A 45-minute gel appointment that starts 10 minutes late can often be completed in 35 minutes with minor quality trade-offs (thinner top coat, skipped cuticle work). This flexibility is both a practical advantage and a structural trap: the chronic late client learns that she can be 10 minutes late without consequence because the appointment still happens.

Nail techs who have absorbed chronic lateness for long periods often discover that the real cost is not per-appointment — it's in the pattern it sets with the client. A client who arrives 10 minutes late for 18 months of monthly appointments has effectively claimed a 10-minute extension on every appointment without paying for it. If you add that up — 18 appointments × 10 minutes — you've given her three hours of free service time over a year and a half. The per-appointment impact is invisible. The cumulative impact is real.

For nail techs, the pattern conversation should include a specific outcome statement: "If we start late, I'll complete what I can in the remaining time — the service will be shortened to fit the available slot." This shifts the consequence from the tech's schedule to the client's result, which is where the client's self-interest lives.

PMU artists

PMU appointments (microblading, lip blush, powder brows) are the case where chronic lateness intersects most directly with consent and aftercare documentation. A PMU appointment that starts 15 minutes late is a 15-minute loss against a two-to-three-hour procedure — which means either the numbing step is shortened (affecting client comfort during the procedure) or the procedure itself is rushed. Neither is acceptable. More importantly, a rushed PMU procedure increases the risk of uneven healed results, which creates the downstream problem of client dissatisfaction, touch-up requests, and possible refund conversations.

The pattern conversation for PMU artists can be framed around the procedure outcome: "The numbing and preparation time at the start of the appointment is built into the service cost and affects your healing and result. If we lose that time to a late start, we have two options — we shorten the prep time (which I don't recommend) or we reschedule (which I do recommend if we're more than ten minutes behind). I want to make sure you get the full result." This framing puts the client's self- interest front and center: the late arrival is bad for her outcome, not just for the artist's schedule.

PMU artists should have a specific late-arrival threshold written into their consent form: "Appointments beginning more than [X] minutes late may be rescheduled to ensure full procedure time." This makes the pattern conversation refer back to a document the client signed, rather than introducing a new policy in the context of a conflict.

Mobile groomers

The mobile grooming context introduces a variable that indoor beauty services don't have: geographic lateness versus appointment lateness. For indoor beauty pros, a late client means the client arrives after the appointment start time. For mobile groomers, a late client can mean one of two things: the client (or a household member) isn't home when the groomer arrives, or the client lets the groomer in but the dog isn't ready (still eating, still in the yard, the child is in a nap and the client doesn't want to disturb the house).

The chronically late mobile grooming client is often the "dog isn't ready" case — the groomer arrives, and five to ten minutes are spent locating the dog, getting it leashed, managing a household situation before the actual groom can start. In a route-based business, those five to ten minutes per stop compound across a multi-stop day into a significant route disruption.

The pattern conversation for mobile groomers: "When I arrive, I need [dog's name] ready to go at the door — leashed, not in the middle of eating, not in the yard. I have a route to keep, and a five-minute delay at your house creates a ten-minute delay at the next stop. If you need me to ring ahead before I turn onto your street, I can do that — let me know."

The "ring ahead" offer is a practical gesture that often solves the problem: the client is notified two minutes before arrival and has time to get the dog to the door. This is an accommodation, not a concession — you are offering a structural fix that serves both parties. If the client accepts the offer and the problem persists despite the ring-ahead, the pattern is behavioral, not logistical, and the escalation steps apply.

The clients you don't address — and what that costs

There is a specific category of chronic late clients who don't get addressed: the ones who spend the most money. A client who is your highest-volume spender — full balayage plus cut plus gloss, every six weeks, great tipper — is a client you feel you cannot afford to push. She is also the client most likely to have her lateness absorbed indefinitely, because the relational calculus feels unfavorable. She brings in $900 a year in revenue. The pattern conversation feels like a $900 risk.

Here is what is actually happening in that calculation: you are assuming that the pattern conversation has a meaningful probability of ending the relationship. In practice, high-value clients who have a relationship with their pro respond to a respectful, well-framed pattern conversation the same way any other client does — and often better, because they have more invested in the relationship and a greater incentive to preserve it. A client who spends $900 a year with you doesn't leave because you asked her to arrive on time. She leaves if you ask badly — ambushing her in the chair, shaming her, making her feel like a problem. A well-framed pattern conversation between appointments, delivered with care and specificity, almost never ends a high-value client relationship.

The failure to address the pattern with high-value clients has a different cost that is less visible: the resentment accumulation. You absorb it twelve appointments in a row, you say nothing, and at some point the resentment becomes the main thing you feel when her name appears on the calendar. You give her subtly worse service — not intentionally, but as a function of approaching her appointment with dread rather than anticipation. She eventually feels the quality drift. She leaves for reasons that neither of you can fully articulate.

The pattern conversation protects the high-value client relationship. It doesn't threaten it.

Six mistakes solo pros make with chronic late clients

Mistake one: waiting for the pattern to fix itself. It doesn't. Lateness that has gone unaddressed for three or more appointments is established behavior. The client has learned, from experience, that late arrivals don't have consequences. That lesson requires active unlearning.

Mistake two: addressing it in the chair. The chair is a vulnerable place. Clients sitting in your chair are in a service-delivery relationship with you, not a peer-to-peer conversation. Raising a pattern conflict in the chair puts the client in a position where she feels cornered and you feel powerful — neither of which produces the collaborative outcome you're looking for.

Mistake three: confusing the one-time late arrival with the pattern. If a longtime client arrives late for the first time in two years, the per-appointment late policy handles it. The pattern conversation is not warranted. Apply the same threshold you use to classify the pattern before treating it as one.

Mistake four: applying the ultimatum before the pattern conversation. The ultimatum has credibility only after the pattern has been named and the client has been given a genuine opportunity to change. An ultimatum without a prior conversation feels ambush-like. The client didn't know there was an established pattern problem. You're jumping to consequence without giving her a chance to fix the behavior.

Mistake five: not following through on the ultimatum. If you name a consequence and then don't apply it, you've trained the client that your ultimatums aren't real. This is worse than not having had the ultimatum conversation at all — you've now created a new dynamic in which she knows your stated limits are negotiable. Follow through once, cleanly, and the pattern either ends or the relationship ends. Either outcome is better than an ultimatum without consequence.

Mistake six: mixing up the late-arrival policy with the pattern conversation. The late-arrival policy in your booking confirmation applies to all clients for all appointments. The pattern conversation is a direct, specific conversation with a named client about her named pattern. These are different tools for different situations. Using your general late policy reminder as a substitute for the pattern conversation doesn't work because the client doesn't read it as applying to her specifically.

Three operational checklists

Pattern identification checklist (run after third late arrival)

Pattern conversation checklist (before sending the message)

Ultimatum checklist (before delivering)

Three-year compound: two nail techs, one late client

Two nail techs. Same market. Same service mix. Each has one chronic late client — same arrival pattern, ten to twelve minutes late to a 45-minute appointment, monthly booking cadence, $65 per appointment. Neither tech has addressed it yet at the start of year one.

Nail Tech A absorbs it. Twelve appointments per year, each starting ten minutes late. She shortens the service slightly to compensate. The client never notices because she isn't told anything. The pattern continues unchanged through year one, year two, year three. Over three years, Tech A has given away 36 appointment-minutes per year in lost service time — 108 minutes of productive chair time over three years — and has experienced growing dread around the appointment, which ultimately shows in the service quality. In year three, the client notices the quality drift and leaves for another tech. Tech A never understood why.

Nail Tech B has the pattern conversation after the third late arrival. The client apologizes and arrives on time to the next three appointments. One appointment after that, she's 8 minutes late again. Tech B sends the rebooking adjustment — moves the client to the last slot of Thursday afternoon — and sends the ultimatum message. The client arrives on time to the next appointment. And the one after. The pattern breaks. Over three years, Tech B has had one pattern conversation, one rebooking adjustment, and one ultimatum. She has retained the client. The client now arrives reliably on time. The late-arrival tax is gone. Tech B's Thursday afternoon ends on schedule. The next client's experience is not impacted.

The three-year gap between Tech A and Tech B is not measured primarily in dollars — it's measured in calendar integrity. But the dollar component is real: Tech A gave away 108 minutes of service time and lost a $65/month client to quality drift. Tech B spent 20 minutes on two texts and one rebooking adjustment, and kept the client. At $65/month, the retained client is worth $780/year. If Tech A loses her at the start of year three, the gap over the full three years is $780 in retained bookings plus the intangible cost of the dread and the quality drift that affected every surrounding appointment.

The three-year compound on the chronic late client isn't about the money lost to late arrivals. It's about whether the pattern was named or absorbed. Named patterns end. Absorbed patterns compound.