The Rise of Copy Cat Clinics

In regional towns across Australia, a quiet crisis is unfolding — one that’s threatening the integrity of aesthetic businesses and the trust of the communities they serve.

In recent weeks alone, I’ve spoken with multiple clinic owners who are dealing with a disturbing trend: the replication of their entire business models (treatment menus, product ranges, websites, interiors, and even brand philosophies) by new entrants to the industry. Increasingly, these operators are new to the skin space—some transitioning from other areas of aesthetics—launching what one clinic owner describes as “near carbon copies” of long-established businesses.

More concerning still is the role some laser and device suppliers are playing. Devices that cost upwards of $200,000 are being sold into regional areas without any territorial protection—only to be sold again, sometimes to a competitor across the road, a few months later. This is saturation without strategy. Sales without sustainability. And for the clinics who came first, it’s not just a blow to the bottom line—it’s a betrayal of everything they’ve built.

“I Was Congratulated on a Clinic I Didn’t Even Open”

For Natalie and Laura Sims, founders of Gisborne Skin Clinic, the realisation came via a well-meaning client in a local coffee shop. “They congratulated me on opening a second clinic just down the street,” Laura recalls. “But we hadn’t expanded. Someone had simply copied everything — from our interior style to our website tone. They even tried sourcing the same skincare brands.”

Natalie and Laura Sims - Owners of Gisborne Skin Clinic

Over time, the Sims sisters noticed near-identical interiors, mirrored websites, and a disturbing mimicry of their brand identity and philosophy—carefully cultivated over 13 years of hard work. Even more concerning, they discovered that individuals had visited their clinic multiple times, seemingly observing and documenting their services before launching a similar space nearby.

“This has had a deep emotional impact on us,” they explain. “Every detail of our clinic reflects our personality—it takes years to shape, and it’s devastating to see it replicated without understanding or originality. It’s draining, and frankly, disheartening.”

Their biggest concern? That clients are being misled into thinking they’re receiving the same level of service and expertise when they’re not. “We’ve had clients unknowingly book at a replica, thinking it was us. That’s how blurred the lines have become.”

This wasn’t an isolated incident. In speaking with Cat Armstrong, owner of Lush Skin & Laser Clinic, she explained that imitation wasn’t limited to treatments or devices—it extended to her philosophy, pricing structures, and educational tone.

Armstrong has experienced clinics mimicking her entire treatment menu, mirroring her social content, and even replicating her promotional campaigns—sometimes with identical phrasing. In one particularly serious case, she successfully pursued legal action and obtained an injunction against a clinic passing off her brand.

“This wasn’t about stifling competition,” she says. “It was about standing up for professional identity and the years of work it takes to build something unique.”

In both cases, the fallout has been more than aesthetic. “We’ve had people referred to us by others, only to find they’ve ended up at the imitation clinic by mistake,” said Natalie. “They don’t realise it’s not us.”

The emotional impact is perhaps most devastating of all.

“It’s appallingly exhausting,” said Cat. “Every detail of our clinic reflects who we are. It’s months, years, of energy, intention, and trial.”

The Shortcut of Replication

It’s like investing years of thought, passion, and purpose — only to see it replicated without understanding or respect.

Said Cat. “Every part of our clinic — from the devices we choose to the skincare we trust — is the result of years of research, trial, and intention. It's deeply disappointing to see others mimic that work, approaching the exact same suppliers and brands we’ve carefully curated, and then claiming it's the outcome of their own extensive research.

At a time when building a unique brand should be a creative and exciting process, it’s disheartening to see some take the shortcut of replication. Instead of exploring the vast, innovative landscape of aesthetics to craft something truly their own, they simply mirror the model of a successful clinic in hopes of achieving the same results — without the substance behind it.”

What’s even harder to watch is when the imitation goes beyond treatment menus and into clinic identity — with some positioning themselves as skin experts without the depth or training to back it.

True expertise isn’t about trends — it’s built on science, experience, and a genuine commitment to ongoing learning.

Suppliers Are Enabling the Problem

This isn’t a slight on any particular profession, both Cat and the Sims sisters are quick to clarify. Rather, it’s a call for transparency across disciplines — and a more honest conversation about what qualifies someone to treat complex skin concerns.

“There’s a growing assumption that if you have a machine, you can do the job,” said Cat. “But technology doesn’t deliver outcomes. Training, insight, and lived experience do.”

While imitation from other clinics is harmful, a deeper concern lies with the suppliers who enable it. Clinics have invested hundreds of thousands into premium technology — only to see those same machines placed in a competitor’s space just months later.

Cat Armstrong - Owner of Lush Skin and Laser Clinic

Territorial protection, accompanied by a defined period to allow a return on investment, appears to be rare in many cases," said Cat.

“It’s disheartening. We do our due diligence, educate clients, and work ethically. Then the same laser we’ve invested in is sold to someone down the road with none of that infrastructure. That doesn’t just hurt us — it confuses consumers and undermines the brand of the device itself.”

Fortunately, the Gisborne team credits their brand partners with standing beside them. “We’re grateful our partners have had our back,” said Natalie. “They reached out to tell us when a nearby operator was trying to copy our entire offering. That kind of loyalty matters — especially in regional areas.”

But this level of supplier integrity isn’t consistent across the industry. Without clear guidelines around ethics, saturation, or brand protection, clinics are left vulnerable.

In one particularly serious case, Cat took legal action against a clinic she says was “passing off” as her brand.

“The court found in our favour,” she explains. “It wasn’t about punishing competition — it was about drawing a line. Our work, our brand, our investment deserves protection.”

This legal precedent serves as a clear message: copying isn’t harmless. It can carry consequences.

So how is this happening—and why does it continue?

Both Gisborne Skin Clinic and Lush Skin & Laser Clinic agree: the industry lacks consistent regulation after initial qualification. “It’s too easy to open a business after completing a six-month online course,” Laura and Natalie say. “There’s no mentorship year, no clinical oversight, and no safeguards around IP or ethical marketing.”

“We need to eliminate short online courses and introduce a structured graduate year,” said Laura. “Our brand was built over 13 years. It’s not something that should be replicated in six months.”

Their recommendations:

• Stronger educational standards with in-person components

• A graduate year of clinical mentorship

• Copyright protections for brand assets

• A code of conduct for suppliers and device manufacturers

At the heart of this issue lies something more than competition — it’s about client trust.

Clients cannot be expected to distinguish between a clinic that has spent years refining its offering, and one that mirrors it without the same depth. But the results, and the risks, speak for themselves.

“I’ve poured everything into this brand,” said Cat. “To see it copied (without the knowledge or values behind it) is not only frustrating, it’s disheartening.”

Copycat clinics aren’t just a nuisance. They’re a symptom of deeper cracks in our industry’s foundation — and if left unchecked, they risk compromising both business viability and client care.

The aesthetics industry is filled with innovators, educators, and professionals doing the right thing. Let’s not allow shortcuts to define its future. We owe it to our industry peers (and to the clients who trust us) to raise the standard, protect what’s original, and call time on copy-paste clinics.