Strategic Sourcing of Audio
Visual Services
By Joel A Feingold
c. Joel A Feingold, 2012
Introduction
Those of us who plan
meetings and special events in remote markets often hire local AV companies and
crew. On the venue side, many facilities have made an agreement to designate
one AV company as the exclusive provider of services. Such an arrangement may
stifle competition and potentially reduce service quality. On the client side,
some programs require the highest degree of technical excellence and others the
most specialized gear. Other programs are more mundane and require sustained
attention even if the production is not sophisticated. On the labor side some
facilities are union halls and others provide no guidance at all, thus making
the planner’s own research even more crucial. There are several decision points
and some thoughtful planning can result in improved quality and reduced, or at
least controlled costs.
Contracting process
inclusions
Venue contracts often do
not address important AV production items. A planner should try to negotiate the
venue contract so that known additional charges are part of the complementary
items and services provided. Power and internet connectivity charges can add
up. At some properties “show” power (3 phase, 240 volt service) might amount to
several thousand dollars. A hard line Ethernet connection might be a few
hundred per day per connection. Some venues charge for risers or may have
limited numbers of the size tables needed that might lead to cross rentals.
Others may have man lifts that bill by the day. By addressing these sorts of
items in prior to signing the deal certain costs can be contained.
Exclusive vs. outside AV vendor
Addressing the various
complexities of the “Exclusive” provider situation during contracting can be an
important step. Many properties have made arrangements with large AV companies
essentially to create an in house concession. Convenience and consistent
quality are thereby obtained.
Unfortunately however,
these arrangements are often coupled with exclusivity – or the representation
of exclusivity – and charges and other types of barriers are put in place to discourage
competition. It goes without saying that the pricing power associated with such
an arrangement allows the parties to make a higher margin, paid for by
planners’ clients.
In addition, the vendor’s quality
level may not always suffice. Quality is most likely to be reasonable for many
programs because it is in the property’s interest to have good quality too. And
since certain gear is warehoused on property most last minute requests can be
accommodated. But for some programs quality may be lacking, depending upon what
is required. This is especially true with increasing requirements of
customization and technical excellence. In general, the exclusivity arrangements
may lead to on site complacency, upper management one-size-fits-all directives,
or other symptoms that create problems for planners and clients.
Sources of gear
The need for an exclusive
AV provider to maintain a stock of commonly used equipment and store it in the property’s
highly limited space is combined with typical corporate ROI considerations, leading
the companies to own inadequate amounts and types of more specialized gear. This
pressure on the AV companies’ margin is in part caused by the properties that
have driven “too hard” a bargain, the margin being too thin to accommodate
crucial inventory. Since the AV companies also choose to prohibit cross rentals
as policy, it is not uncommon for gear to be out of spec or less than ideal. A
planner needs to begin to consider alternative sources of gear, and that leads
into needs for specific knowledge, adding a producer or technical director to
the program staff, or contracting with an outside vendor, not the exclusive AV
provider.
There are many sources of
AV gear. These range from “full service production companies” to specialized
high end sound, lighting or video production companies, and most interestingly,
the top line live rock and roll production companies are also excellent
suppliers in the right situations. Learning who’s who in the equipment rental
and show production space is not accomplished quickly and as mentioned above,
an experienced show manager might be added to the meeting team.
One immensely difficult
problem when working in a remote location is finding a vendor you can trust. As
a planner may be a one off client, we might find the deliverables to be rather
different than we expected and contracted. If one is fortunate enough to have a
good national network from which to obtain referrals, one can mitigate this
risk. Sometimes, more often than clients might want, the best course of action
is to bring in a company from afar, even if the expense is higher.
AV companies carry many
different brands and models of sound, lights and video support. It is not
unusual for audio speaker systems to be adequate for voice and marginal for
music. Some companies always bring extra equipment. Others are sticklers for
quality. In such a case it is a good bet that the show will sound better and
look better, because the gear that looks the same has better guts in it. For
example, there are many “heads” that go inside the same microphone shell. They
look the same but they are not, and most people can hear the difference. This
is meaningful as if the audio is not natural then audience brainpower is wasted
processing the sound when it should devoted to absorbing content. So briefly
summarizing, there is a rationale for hiring different, and sometimes multiple
vendors, to optimize quality and price.
Use of highly senior staff
Above I alluded to the
need for certain staff with specific knowledge, and since AV is at its core a
specialty, a planner always needs competent technicians to operate audio, lights,
video switching, graphics, work with the headlining band, manage the stage, and
so on. On larger shows a qualified production manager or technical director can
be beneficial. On still more complex programs a producer, to whom multiple
technical directors report, may be a necessity. Often producers or technical
directors double as production managers. Individual backgrounds and expertise
determines just what responsibilities such a staffer should hold. To help
explain this I will use myself as an example. I call myself a producer and in
my work I frequently double as a production manager, but I would never call
myself a technical director, as I am not technical, I am a manager. There are
other people who have immense technical knowledge but lack the organizational
and communications skills to be a manager or the necessary polish to interface
with clients and their guests.
Local vs. traveling staff
As one might surmise,
producers, production managers and technical directors often travel for their
clients. However, it is also not uncommon for these suppliers to reside in
different locations from their clients. In our highly interconnected world
their offices travel with them. Specialized audio engineers and lighting
designers also fit into this scenario as do certain video and graphics
operators. There are however, a large number of competent technicians and if
the bar is not too high, one can have pretty consistent success with local
staff in almost any major city. (A head’s up: other countries may limit what
duties traveling staff may perform.) Where there is an exclusive AV provider it
is that company’s responsibility to source the staff. One hopes for excellence
and usually gets acceptable quality. (As mentioned above, the higher the bar,
the riskier this situation.) Depending upon the show a planner, in consultation
with the show producer, or relying on the producer’s good business judgment,
would determine what lead staff to travel.
Union vs. non-union crew
Finally, restrictions
about sources of on site labor can be a source of concern. In some venues one
may be allowed to bring in a gear vendor of choice but the crew decision is
taken away from planners and clients, as the venue is a union shop. Generally
the union will be either Teamsters or IATSE and sometimes both, for different
work. It seems everyone has their own opinion about whether this is good, bad
or neither. I suggest that neither is the correct answer. The choice of a union
or non-union venue may have cost ramifications, but that is a consideration
that has to be factored in prior to contracting the venue, not during the
production of the show. And in a non-union venue, many clients would choose to
pay a “prevailing wage” as a policy decision, eliminating a cost differential.
As with many aspects of
business, keeping an open mind is critical. If you had a road show and were
stopping in Twin Falls, Idaho, and you’d never worked there, to whom would you
turn to hire crew? At a minimum you know you need crew who have handled lights
and sound, truss and staging, cables and safeties, so you think perhaps folks
who have worked in the local theater, and that leads to IATSE – the
International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees. There will be a chapter
in Idaho and it will have members who will happily drive to Twin Falls, if they
don’t live there, and they will be delighted to have the work. Now you have
experienced stagehands at a very reasonable rate, and they have their own
workman’s comp too. What is most important in all the labor scenarios, beyond
all else, is having crew that work forwards, and not have a crew member that
drags the rest backwards by making mistakes or bringing a bad attitude to the
job site.
Sourcing and staffing AV
is an important decision in the production of a meeting and its associated
special events. The decision of which venues to select is the first point where
AV needs to be factored in. In larger or multiday meetings it is not uncommon
for the main stage production budget to exceed $100,000, so the ability to
capture 10% in savings or reduce risk of a glitch impacting the presentations
is important. Keeping an eye on this ball will help planners create and operate
more successful meetings and special events.
