One dilemma many building owners and managers grapple with is whether it is more cost effective to rent mats or to purchase them outright.
According to McGraw Hill Construction's Continuing Education Center, which addresses the needs of architects and contractors, there are several factors to consider, starting with where the mats will be used.
Based on its course Entrance Mats Keep It Clean, if architects and contractors are working with clients such as service stations, where considerable amounts of oil and lubricants end up on the floor, or restaurants, where large amounts of food and grease also find their way to the floor, renting mats may be the better option. The reason for this, according to the course, is that these mats may need special cleaning, which purchasers may not be able to provide.
However, the course literature does suggest that there can be problems with rental mats, such as:
- Large mats may not be available from rental companies.
- Rental mats may be of dubious age and efficiency.
- Rental mats may have experienced substandard treatment and maintenance.
The course literature also suggests that purchasing mats is ultimately more cost effective. This conclusion was justified using the following scenario:
- A national chain with 222 stores is currently renting a total of 98,568 square feet of entrance mats for a total annual expenditure of $512,554, or an annualized cost of $5.20 a square foot.
- If the company purchased custom mats, [specifically designed to address] the needs of the facility, [it] would need only 77,256 square feet.
- By purchasing the mats rather than renting them, the total annualized cost would now be $3.69 a square foot.
- By purchasing the mats, there would then be an expected savings of $880,459 over the expected life of the mats.
"This example is designed to help architects and contractors advise their clients on the most cost-effective way to handle the 'rent vs. buy' dilemma," says Adam Strizzi, marketing director for Crown Mats and Matting. "These savings can vary but invariably the end customer finds that owning is the more cost-effective way to go."