At the AICP Town Hall meeting on March 12, 2026, PERG engaged the AICP on a topic that everyone acknowledged has been almost impossible for the rental industry to talk about but poses an existential threat to rental companies. One-hundred-and-sixty-five people attended the meeting. The AICP audience was made up of owners of commercial production companies, executive producers, and heads for production. For this occasion, the AICP allowed PERG to invite its members and about 35 rental owners and executive staff also joined the Zoom call.
Denise Gilmartin (VP Business Affairs at AICP) introduced the speakers, Mark Wofford, John Cini, and Andrew Colón. Wofford and Cini are well known within PERG, both having served as members of the PERG Council and the ESTA board of directors. They each spent decades at the helm of rental companies, Wofford at PC&E in Atlanta, and Cini at High Output in Boston. Colón, who is the Chief Operating Officer at Smuggler, represented the production company perspective. Wofford pointed out that “Neither John nor I are actively involved with rental operations now, and that is why we are ones here speaking to you today.”
Mark Wofford began with the importance of opening this dialogue. He quoted something written by Matt Miller, President of the AICP. Miller wrote “I’m not one to say the sky is falling, as I tend to be an optimist when it comes to business evolution. However, I do know when there is reason for concern and will call out unfair business maneuvers that could lead to a colossal rearrangement of resources, in turn forcing an intricate and valuable constellation into a vast black hole.” This was the introduction to think piece Miller wrote about the emergence of inhouse production companies at agencies, and the real threat that would pose to production companies in the long run. Wofford said “I feel that if Matt was willing to speak a truth about something that was difficult to speak about, and a trouble that was facing AICP and your companies, then we should do the same. The thing is, if we continue on the path that we are currently on, the way the choices are made, and the way that equipment comes to sets, I am concerned about the long-term survival, viability, and success of traditional rental company.”
In Colón’s opinion, the people who have influence over where a production sources its equipment need to do it responsibly, and consider elements like business affairs, risk management, liability. But unfortunately, decisions are sometimes not made with consideration for the big picture. “We all know that productions move at warp speed, especially on commercials, and the fur is flying.” He said that a lot of independently presented crew-owned agreements make the company responsible for more things than there is insurance coverage. The papers are signed on the last prep day, which is a bottle neck to get the production out the door. He recounted that over the past 15-20 years the prices for some gear has become more accessible and, “a lot of crew people are trying to become an enterprise, [in addition to] their technical function as a member of the crew.” In that light, Colón urged that production companies consider the value of the established, reliably, professional rental companies.
This led to a discussion of rental contracts and the AICP/PERG Sample Terms and Conditions document. Cini remarked that no one has time to think about contracts, but they still have to be done. “The AICP/PERG T&C simplified my life as a rental company operator, and I’m sure on the production side we’ll see lots of people saying the same thing,” he told the group. You don’t want to be carried into accepting somebody else’s T&C when it doesn’t serve you. “We’ve seen a lot of agreements that are out there in the community that, specifically in terms of indemnification, really don’t offer fair terms for the production company. I don’t know why anybody on this call would agree to a document like that.”
An example of unfavorable indemnity wording was copied into the chat. Scott Taylor (Taylor & Taylor Associates), who was one of the people who spearheaded the creation of the AICP/PERG Sample document, challenged “People can ask themselves, “If I was aware of this, would I have ever signed it?” Colón agreed saying that Smuggler has made it their practice to use the AICP/PERG agreement for all vendors unless he has a pre-signed, negotiated contract for that vendor.
Many people in the production community may not know about the existence of the ACIP/PERG Sample document, which was negotiated in 2011. Taylor noted that the AICP West Board recently formed a committee to address T&Cs in Los Angeles. To provide some perspective Taylor explained that when that document was negotiated, there were four people from the equipment rental side and four people from the production side around the table. The final document was reviewed by both the AICP’s and ESTA’s legal councils. “Both sides made compromises, and neither side was 100% happy, but that’s how you arrive at a document that is fair. A lot of the reason that certain wording was in that document was because either the production company’s insurance got triggered if certain events occurred or the rental house policies would pay in the event it was their culpability.”
Denise Gilmartin was also on the team that negotiated the AICP/PERG Sample document. Both sides made concessions so long as each side had insurance to cover the claim. She felt that using the document could help rental companies because it would make it easier for the production company to rent from them. “You won’t get clogged up with paperwork the day before the shoot when you are picking things up.”
Colón, who is based in Los Angeles, noted the alarming number of rental companies going out of business in LA last year (eight by our count). “We can’t take our eye off the ball with that,” he said. “I remember what happened a few years ago when Omega Cinema Props was going to close and everybody was freaking out. We are not many layers away from not being as capable to produce here as we might be.” Then looking at the zoom screen Colón noted, “I see a lot of people nodding their heads.”
This led to a conversation about the real value of rental companies. Cini clarified, “What the traditional rental companies are asking is that production focus on having a level playing field.” He urged the production companies to see the benefits that rental companies provide to the community as a whole and the importance to the production community of their business with those companies. He listed three key considerations that benefit the production companies in ways that alternative sources of gear do not: investment, facilities and check out space, and insurance.
Rental companies structure their gear purchases for the benefit of production, not just ROI. “Typically, we invest in many multiples of things, and what that means for you is that, God forbid there is a problem on set, there’s backup. Backup is not something that you can take for granted—it is a dollar investment that the rental companies must make.” It also means that rental companies invest in more than just the items that have better returns. Their inventory includes hundreds of specialty items that a production may only need once a month, or maybe only once a year. Rental companies invest in those things because that want to be the place that can supply all the needs of production.
A second essential element that rental companies provide is check out space. If you get your gear from someplace else, how does it get checked out? It has become a common occurrence that productions place an order, and the crew brings outside gear to the check out. They want to use the rental company’s facilities and rent just a few accessory items.
Gilmartin also brought up the importance of maintenance and having maintenance records, which are important for insurance if there is a claim. “If you are renting something that does not have records the insurance company is going to say, ‘sorry we are not paying for it.’ So then where are you?”
“It goes without saying, but I think it probably should be said anyway,” Cini continued. “Rental companies provide robust liability insurance. I don’t know if every supplier of gear has liability insurance and I’m not sure if production knows that. Something to think about.” Colón illustrated the point with an incident that occurred on a five-day shoot in Los Angeles. The crew had provided some of the gear including batteries. On the last shot of the last day, “the battery literally exploded—a small explosion, caused a small fire. There was location damage, and we couldn’t finish the day. We couldn’t go back into the set because of concern about toxicity of stuff in the atmosphere.” The incident led to an insurance claim for damage and reshoot costs in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. “When you are filing an insurance claim you can’t [mess] around. You have to answer everything honestly. How can I put this . . . In a parallel universe, a big underwriter would have tried to subrogate to one or two individuals, and they would have been [in serious financial trouble], because they did not have the kind of insurance that we have or that the camera house has. You are one membrane away from someone having a really big problem.”
Ever since then, Smuggler and Division Seven, does not rent batteries from crew. “That is a policy that has been adopted by some places. We’ll put a cap on what we will rent. It is hard to monitor it. I’m not going to act like our record is totally consistent, but the batteries . . .”
There was discussion about large catastrophic fires the have happened recently. There was recently a devastating fire on an HBO set in New York that resulted in total loss of a building and picture vehicles. There was a fatal fire at a battery plant in South Korea that killed 22 people, highlighting the danger of toxicity with battery fires. With regards to the New York incident, Taylor Taylor pointed out that the total value of all property damaged in that loss would probably exceed the liability limits of pretty much every production company and almost every rental company.
There was an active discussion in the comments raising questions about consignment gear and how rental companies bill on behalf of crew. Stephen Wheeler (Rental Coordinator at Daufenbach Camera, and current PERG Council Chair) differentiated the gear that goes through the rental companies processes, insurance, and quality checks and the gear that does not.
While many production companies have created policies not to rent big batteries from individuals, Wofford pointed out how this leads to another problem. “We get calls just wanting batteries from us. That’s a tough position for the rental company, because we need the batteries for our inventory. So many of us, in the rental industry, have been hard wired to provide service. That’s why we’re here. That’s what we do. We are here to make production’s life easier. So, it is hard to say no. It is hard to make those decisions, but you have to. You can’t always go along with the easy decision. That kind thinking has led us on this path of what we are talking about here today.”
Sally Spaderna (Koerner Camera, and PERG Council member) pointed out in the chat that it is a risk variable when rental companies rent batteries not knowing what equipment the batteries will be used on. “If we are supplying bits and pieces to other people’s gear, the rental company has no clear idea how it going to be used.”
It is the company with the deepest pockets who will be sued in such an instance, and that would usually the production company, unless the equipment is from a professional rental house. Wofford noted that the AICP/PERG T&C calls for $3M liability. “I think that’s important for everyone to recognize and act on is that if I’m getting gear from someone and there is liability involved, are they adequately insured? It says in the T&C that if you want to see that I have insurance, I’ll show you my cert. Again, the danger of making a quick and easy decision is not paying attention to the detail and that’s an important detail.”
Taylor asked the question that cuts to the bottom of the issue. He said that production company wants to deliver the spot to the client that meets the client’s specifications on time and the rental company is going into do everything possible to keep them up and running. So, the million-dollar question is, who gave that power to somebody other than the executive team within the production company to make the decisions about how the gear is sourced?
Cini raised another important question, saying that this town hall meeting includes heads of production and owners of the production companies and they can be making smart decisions but, he asked, how do we create culture where that same care and responsibility trickles down to all the people in the field who are making calls things on-the-spot? “What can be done from AICP’s point of view, or what can we do as a community to make sure we have a level playing field so that when decisions are made, they truly are in the best interest of production?”
Colón responded by saying “That’s what we are doing. We are here having a Town Hall and restimulating the conversation and maybe some of the influential people on this call will go back to their employee handbook or change their startup-meeting agenda.”
Another person on the call, who is legal counsel for a production company, expressed that he sees many less experienced producers who have the mindset that it does not really matter to them where their money is spent because it does not affect their budget. They can just take money for the equipment budget column and give it to their crew; in their mind it is a win-win.
But the effect of that way of thinking is profound for the rental company. Rental companies think of their role as to support the production, not just to supply gear. As an example, Wofford explained how dolly rentals work. The rental companies that have dollies pay a fixed lease price to two vendors, JL Fisher and Chapman Leonard. You can’t get those pieces of equipment to lease unless you send someone from your organization to be trained by them. “We pay for that and we pay a monthly fee whether the dolly is working or not. Just being able to rent a dolly is not a sustainable business model. I know companies that have decided to send their dollies back because they don’t have enough demand for them to afford the lease. Envision a world where there are no traditional rental companies and there are no companies that have the insurance and have the staff to maintain those dollies. What are you going to do?”
Gilmartin reflected that the health of rental companies will eventually affect the price of rentals, if consolidation continues in the industry. Mark noted that if we had a poll about how production companies make equipment choices that price would be one of the first answers and Colón corrected him, “No, Mark, the first four answers are price. And the fifth might be some business affairs related thing.” But you have to remember all the things that are factored into price, argued Cini. “If you make decision on price every time, at some point, you’re not going to get all the services that go along with it. That’s just the way it’s going to be. Again, I’m retired. You all do what you want to do. I’m just telling you it is a community – my rental company would not have survived and succeeded without the support of our customers, and our customers likewise rely on the support of my rental company—so we are in community together. Things will be changing. The rental companies cannot continue providing the depth of service, the depth of inventory, the years of experience, answering questions, dropping everything to throw something in a van and drive to the job site because someone made a decision to change something – all of that is factored into the price. And frankly, I think the price that you are paying is probably a fair one, when you think about all those things.”
Wofford expressed what he hoped people from rental and production would take away from this meeting. For the rental companies he urged them to understand that production companies care about this too. “Reach out to production companies and engage them. How can we be, not just a better value to you, but a better service to you? Bring this to their attention. It’s been such a thing that no one wants to talk about for so long that I think there’s a danger of people not realizing what the real risk is. So, engage in conversation.” And for the producers, Wofford urged, “If your relationship with a rental company is important to you, if the fact that rental companies exist is important to you, then by all means, please engage your contact at the rental company in your area and talk to them. Ask them about the challenges they are facing. Cause they are sure not going to say anything unless you ask.”
The meeting ended with Wofford expressing PERG’s desire to engage on specifics in future. Some participants on the rental side, made concrete suggestions that could form a starting point for truly addressing the issue. Should we help define which items truly are “tools of the trade” and which are not? Should the rental quotes and paperwork more clearly show who owns and maintains the equipment and where ultimate liability lies? If putting equipment on the rental contract increases liability, should the items be billed directly by the equipment owners instead?
Taylor related that, in preparation for this meeting, he had conversations with owners of production companies, executive producers, and heads of production, company owners. “I probably talked to fifteen maybe twenty over the last two weeks—if I asked them do they value the traditional rental house and do they want to see them continue to be in existence; the answer was 100% “yes.” Even the people who are supplying equipment from non-traditional sources, they also want the rental house to succeed, because if they don’t, they have to become them, and the reason the do what they do is that the probably don’t want to become them.”
PERG is grateful to the AICP and especially Kristin Wilcha, Denise Gilmartin, Matt Miller, and for inviting us to participate in the Town Hall and to Andrew Colón for diving into this territory with us.
No comments:
Post a Comment