Forced to use an unfamiliar beacon

I was recently heli-touring with NCH in Mazama.
As part of their policy, we were not allowed to use our own beacons but had to use one supplied by them.
I was not happy with this as I am used to my beacon and practise with it.
As usual I let them know my unhappiness with being forced to ski with a beacon I had never operated.
They give you a mandatory beacon practise for about 5 mins before you go, but its rudimentary and no mulitple burial practise.
The reason is seemingly that they had an expert from Canada that told them that a lot of Client's beacons are not set at the right frequency or have range problems and that for litigation and insurance purposes they should issue beacons that they had tested.
When I explained that I felt that the policy was diverging from common sense, the guides seem to agree but said it was the policy and no fly unless you use their beacons ( Trackers).
Stewie had a tracker but still wasn't allowed to use his.
The guide had a barryvox like mine but I wasn't allowed to use my barryvox.
Now , no reflection on NCH and the guides , they were SUPERB BUT i still think being forced to ski with an unfamilar beacon made me uncomfortable ( at least until I forgot about it, which was approx 5 secs after getting in the heli)
What do you think?

In full agreement with you, sir.  One can somewhat see where they're coming from with regard to condition of the equipment/battery - no doubt they carefully maintain their gear -  but familiarity with your own means a lot, too.

btw, you just made 100 people jealous..

Well thats where their rigid policy leaves the realm of common sense as when I said they could test my beacon, check it's range, watch me use it in their beacon park, they said it didn't matter even if I could prove my beacon was A-OK, we HAD to use their beacon ( it didn't cost anything).

Yes business in the USA it's all about protecting your ASSsets.
It seems weird in this case, but the attorneys would be lining up for miles to take that case if there was a burial and a bad outcome.
IMO-Their beacons have just as much chance at failure than one that you own.

A rambling point...
A friend of mine recently gave me a generous gift of a beacon (Ortovox M2).
I had it out the other day around the house testing the device compared to my Tracker. Later It was sitting on a table and I was asked if I bought a new beacon. The gift giving friend was right there and I was caught in an awkward moment. I said that I decided to work with the beacon until I can prove to be as efficient with it as my Tracker. So I won't wear it in the field until I am confident enough that it would be efficient. It's all about the minutes and seconds when it comes to a burial and I would like to give it my best effort if it happens.

Well thats where their rigid policy leaves the realm of common sense as when I said they could test my beacon, check it's range, watch me use it in their beacon park, they said it didn't matter even if I could prove my beacon was A-OK, we HAD to use their beacon ( it didn't cost anything).

To Joes' point as well, then it likely is the nature of their insurance policy. I wonder if all heli ops are the same way? I heli skiied 20 yrs ago out of Golden, BC. We didn't even use beacons.

^^^
When I heli-skied with WPG and cat skied with BRC we were allowed to use our own. Obviously they issued loaners if skiers didn't have them.