TOD Update 2

Event: 3 day Conference and Gala Dinner
Venue: Sebel Albert Park
In-House AV company: Staging Connections
Contracted AV Supplier: CMS Australasia
Total Revenue for Job: $30,000
TOTAL TOD/Venue Labour Charges: $5440
 
We competed against Staging Connections (in-house) and another supplier to win this job and were able to provide a more competitive quote, despite them having equipment “in-house”.
 
Somehow, Staging Connections still managed to charge us almost 20% of our total revenue for themselves in labour alone! The Sebel has implemented a Contractor Supervisor policy that means there will always be a “Technician On Duty” when there is an external audio visual company onsite. This is not dependent on the event, nor on the experience the AV provider has with the venue.
 
As an experienced and reputable AV supplier that works in venues all over Australia, we have worked at the Sebel for many years, even back in the days it was called Carlton Crest. We know the venue very well and we also have the appropriate insurances, our own OHS policy and conduct Risk Assessments for all jobs. Up until recently, the venue charged TOD fees for the first 4 hours of an install and during the bump out. This made some sense.
 
The current policy now however, means that on any given event, there will be a 2nd AV Technician that sits next to the contracted AV Technician for the entire duration of the conference. What is their purpose? The policy states that it is to “Supervise” the contractor. They literally sit there at the AV ops position. Is this how you would like to spend $80 per hour of your conference budget?
 
On top of the Contractor Supervisor charges, we were also charged labour charges of 8 hours by Staging Connections for “Setting up” and “Packing Down” the permanently installed equipment that we cross-hired from them. We also believe that we were charged for labour that was performed by the Contractor Supervisor. If this is the case, we were being charge $160 per hour for 1 person’s labour!
 
What value was provided for $5440? What did the end client receive for this sum? To be fair, there was some internal patching required of the in-house supplier and there was also screens and projectors hired from the venue. The button on the remote controls to turn these on was pushed by the in-house AV company. Total labour perhaps could be generously put down as 2 hours.
 
In our opinion, there was not much value provided at all. In fact, we would much rather have seen that money go into providing a visually enhanced event for our client. Unfortunately, the money that is being paid to venues even when they are not providing the audio visual service means that events in these venues are suffering. We want to see these policies abolished.
 
Up until this point, we haven’t shed too much light on the commission arrangements between in-house AV companies and hotels. In our next TOD update, we will look at this and seek your opinion as to whether there is a conflict of interest in play. We will also outline our proposal for an alternative policy that will protect venues and not eat into the budget of Event Organisers.
 
If you would like to share your thoughts, comments or stories, please email us.