If only Miliband was in power...
11 October 2013, 10:49 AM
#31
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Cardiff. Wales
Posts: 11,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Au contraire Jeffrey 
Having worked for British Gas during and after privatisation I saw many changes, both good and bad but it did become a lot more efficient under privatisation. There was also a lot of money spent on renewing the UK pipeline system of which a lot is over 100 years old whereas before it was a case of just maintaining the system which was generally falling apart.
And of course all those sharesave schemes came in handy in later years. If fact with divs reinvested profits are around 4800%. Happy days!
Having worked for British Gas during and after privatisation I saw many changes, both good and bad but it did become a lot more efficient under privatisation. There was also a lot of money spent on renewing the UK pipeline system of which a lot is over 100 years old whereas before it was a case of just maintaining the system which was generally falling apart.
And of course all those sharesave schemes came in handy in later years. If fact with divs reinvested profits are around 4800%. Happy days!
Last edited by Chip; 11 October 2013 at 10:56 AM.
11 October 2013, 12:00 PM
#32
Scooby Regular
We're supposed to thank a corporation for spending money on infrastructure that enables it to do business now are we? Should we thank Tesco for spending money on shops that enables it to profit? This just highlights the pseudo-market that is power generation and retail.
11 October 2013, 12:03 PM
#33
it is for the rich who buy the shares.
It is annoying when they announce massive profits one minute, then feel the need to increase the prices the next. So in effect, the price hike is there just to ensure the shareholders maintain their profits too.
Wouldn't it be nice to have a company who would put profits aside during this economic time and re-invest all the money back into keeping the prices low. I'm sure we could form a system of government for this!!!!
It is annoying when they announce massive profits one minute, then feel the need to increase the prices the next. So in effect, the price hike is there just to ensure the shareholders maintain their profits too.
Wouldn't it be nice to have a company who would put profits aside during this economic time and re-invest all the money back into keeping the prices low. I'm sure we could form a system of government for this!!!!
11 October 2013, 12:04 PM
#34
Au contraire Jeffrey
Having worked for British Gas during and after privatisation I saw many changes, both good and bad but it did become a lot more efficient under privatisation. There was also a lot of money spent on renewing the UK pipeline system of which a lot is over 100 years old whereas before it was a case of just maintaining the system which was generally falling apart.
And of course all those sharesave schemes came in handy in later years. If fact with divs reinvested profits are around 4800%. Happy days!
Having worked for British Gas during and after privatisation I saw many changes, both good and bad but it did become a lot more efficient under privatisation. There was also a lot of money spent on renewing the UK pipeline system of which a lot is over 100 years old whereas before it was a case of just maintaining the system which was generally falling apart.
And of course all those sharesave schemes came in handy in later years. If fact with divs reinvested profits are around 4800%. Happy days!
That's it?
11 October 2013, 12:17 PM
#35
Scooby Regular
it is for the rich who buy the shares.
It is annoying when they announce massive profits one minute, then feel the need to increase the prices the next. So in effect, the price hike is there just to ensure the shareholders maintain their profits too.
Wouldn't it be nice to have a company who would put profits aside during this economic time and re-invest all the money back into keeping the prices low. I'm sure we could form a system of government for this!!!!
It is annoying when they announce massive profits one minute, then feel the need to increase the prices the next. So in effect, the price hike is there just to ensure the shareholders maintain their profits too.
Wouldn't it be nice to have a company who would put profits aside during this economic time and re-invest all the money back into keeping the prices low. I'm sure we could form a system of government for this!!!!
Remember, "their" ability to operate and invest comes from shareholders in the context of what we're referring to here. The way you word it, is that a company is an individual..... it's made up of many thousands of shareholders (in this context). No one in their right frame of mind is going to invest in to a company, to push their profit back in to the company, so the customer can have a reduction. That makes no sense in business at all, for a service model that doesn't need to..... even if it would be nice to us.
Remember these are only suppliers (by on large)..... 5% profit is totally acceptable imo. You need to find out where the costs that make up the 100% come from first.
11 October 2013, 01:51 PM
#36
it is for the rich who buy the shares.
It is annoying when they announce massive profits one minute, then feel the need to increase the prices the next. So in effect, the price hike is there just to ensure the shareholders maintain their profits too.
Wouldn't it be nice to have a company who would put profits aside during this economic time and re-invest all the money back into keeping the prices low. I'm sure we could form a system of government for this!!!!
It is annoying when they announce massive profits one minute, then feel the need to increase the prices the next. So in effect, the price hike is there just to ensure the shareholders maintain their profits too.
Wouldn't it be nice to have a company who would put profits aside during this economic time and re-invest all the money back into keeping the prices low. I'm sure we could form a system of government for this!!!!
11 October 2013, 02:18 PM
#37
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Cardiff. Wales
Posts: 11,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You know, this bit:
I saw many changes, both good and bad but it did become a lot more efficient under privatisation. There was also a lot of money spent on renewing the UK pipeline system of which a lot is over 100 years old whereas before it was a case of just maintaining the system which was generally falling apart.
Last edited by Chip; 11 October 2013 at 02:21 PM.
11 October 2013, 03:02 PM
#38
Scooby Regular
They are seen as massive profits as you look at the £ value in isolation, without any reference to the overall turnover and cash required to "turn" that profit. Look back at the 5% factor and do the maths.... we're talking huge numbers here.
Remember, "their" ability to operate and invest comes from shareholders in the context of what we're referring to here. The way you word it, is that a company is an individual..... it's made up of many thousands of shareholders (in this context). No one in their right frame of mind is going to invest in to a company, to push their profit back in to the company, so the customer can have a reduction. That makes no sense in business at all, for a service model that doesn't need to..... even if it would be nice to us.
Remember these are only suppliers (by on large)..... 5% profit is totally acceptable imo. You need to find out where the costs that make up the 100% come from first.
Remember, "their" ability to operate and invest comes from shareholders in the context of what we're referring to here. The way you word it, is that a company is an individual..... it's made up of many thousands of shareholders (in this context). No one in their right frame of mind is going to invest in to a company, to push their profit back in to the company, so the customer can have a reduction. That makes no sense in business at all, for a service model that doesn't need to..... even if it would be nice to us.
Remember these are only suppliers (by on large)..... 5% profit is totally acceptable imo. You need to find out where the costs that make up the 100% come from first.
Exactly, but these facts seem to be ignored by most. Also I'm pretty sure the banks would not lend to these businesses if they could not turn a profit of 5%
11 October 2013, 03:23 PM
#39
The UK's left-leaning media have instilled a belief across the country that all business is bad and that profit is a dirty word. As Shaun puts it so well, people will critique the headline that an organization makes £xx millions in profit without comprehension of the turnover the organization has. I totally agree that business should be regulated as it has the potential to exploit but at the same time it should not be tarred the way the it is - facts and statements should be made in context.
11 October 2013, 05:58 PM
#40
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No it isn't in essence. Both business need capital expenditure to be able to trade. The only thing is that most power companies operate in a pseudo-market where they are nothing more than traders in electricity for example. The actual infrastructure is run by a third party. There is an incentive for any given trader to try and 'free ride' the system and so logically investment could dry up.
11 October 2013, 08:56 PM
#41
Scooby Regular
Tony,
What's capital expenditure got to do with maintaining public service infrastructure / model adopted and your comparison to Tesco - I'm lost on that one.
What's capital expenditure got to do with maintaining public service infrastructure / model adopted and your comparison to Tesco - I'm lost on that one.
11 October 2013, 09:43 PM
#42
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 323bhp.............. Scarborough
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the way to help stop big price rises is to switch providers once your current one becomes uncompetitive.
it's pretty straight forward to switch, although it should be quicker, but not many people switch. does this mean the people don't think that it's as bigger issue as miliband thinks / hopes it is?
to the people saying about it should never have been privatised, being publicly owned doesn't mean you would definitely have cheaper prices, would you be happier to pay more if no one makes a profit...
it's pretty straight forward to switch, although it should be quicker, but not many people switch. does this mean the people don't think that it's as bigger issue as miliband thinks / hopes it is?
to the people saying about it should never have been privatised, being publicly owned doesn't mean you would definitely have cheaper prices, would you be happier to pay more if no one makes a profit...
Last edited by stevie boy; 11 October 2013 at 09:45 PM.
11 October 2013, 09:54 PM
#43
Errr Jeff, try reading ALL of the post please.
You know, this bit:
I saw many changes, both good and bad but it did become a lot more efficient under privatisation. There was also a lot of money spent on renewing the UK pipeline system of which a lot is over 100 years old whereas before it was a case of just maintaining the system which was generally falling apart.
You know, this bit:
I saw many changes, both good and bad but it did become a lot more efficient under privatisation. There was also a lot of money spent on renewing the UK pipeline system of which a lot is over 100 years old whereas before it was a case of just maintaining the system which was generally falling apart.
11 October 2013, 10:12 PM
#44
Scooby Regular
as regular as the seasons, price is come down just before summer and up before winter. Needs setting up like water, set bill, none of this charge what you want profitiering
12 October 2013, 07:54 AM
#46
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
12 October 2013, 10:55 AM
#48
12 October 2013, 04:35 PM
#49
Scooby Regular
Tony,
You're stating an obvious and moot point though surely?
Re-reading your original comment, I can't make out if you were trying to compare how the Public Service infrastructure replacement is funded and how that directly compares to Tesco.
Public Service infrastructure is totally different, with specific regulation governing it's management. This is not about the utilities maintaining the infrastructure so they can make profit...... it's about maintaining a public service - period.
If I'm misinterpreting your original statement I apologise.
You're stating an obvious and moot point though surely?
Re-reading your original comment, I can't make out if you were trying to compare how the Public Service infrastructure replacement is funded and how that directly compares to Tesco.
Public Service infrastructure is totally different, with specific regulation governing it's management. This is not about the utilities maintaining the infrastructure so they can make profit...... it's about maintaining a public service - period.
If I'm misinterpreting your original statement I apologise.
17 October 2013, 02:41 PM
#50
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
British Gas have followed SSE's lead today and announced price rises of between 8.7 and 10.2% from 23/11/13.
For some reason certain people on here will argue the fact that the energy companies are not taking our pants down and doing us without lube yet that is obviously the case!
I keep reading how wholesale costs are the driving factor ... well since 2009 wholesale costs have risen 3.2% while costs to the consumer have risen 24% on average!!!! In that time household income has risen only 2.9%!
Source here:
Energy bills: Where does my money go?
The next thing that goes unmentioned is that many if not all of the major energy companies consumers have to deal with are themselves part of a wholesale energy generating company so they are claiming the high costs of a product they manufacture is the reason they have to charge us more yet when you look at their profits from the wholesale dvisions they are huge!
It's pretty much a scam and one the politicians will be able to do little about even if they really wanted to!
For some reason certain people on here will argue the fact that the energy companies are not taking our pants down and doing us without lube yet that is obviously the case!
I keep reading how wholesale costs are the driving factor ... well since 2009 wholesale costs have risen 3.2% while costs to the consumer have risen 24% on average!!!! In that time household income has risen only 2.9%!
Source here:
Energy bills: Where does my money go?
The next thing that goes unmentioned is that many if not all of the major energy companies consumers have to deal with are themselves part of a wholesale energy generating company so they are claiming the high costs of a product they manufacture is the reason they have to charge us more yet when you look at their profits from the wholesale dvisions they are huge!
It's pretty much a scam and one the politicians will be able to do little about even if they really wanted to!
Last edited by f1_fan; 17 October 2013 at 05:40 PM.
17 October 2013, 08:06 PM
#51
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Miliband is milking it. He was banging on about freezing energy prices on radio 4 news even more than ever today! After slagging Cameron off as usual he said his party will be on consumers' side. He emphasised the word 'side' quite optimistically.
I don't know what to think of it, meself.
I don't know what to think of it, meself.
17 October 2013, 08:09 PM
#53
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
17 October 2013, 08:20 PM
#54
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Miliband is milking it. He was banging on about freezing energy prices on radio 4 news even more than ever today! After slagging Cameron off as usual he said his party will be on consumers' side. He emphasised the word 'side' quite optimistically.
I don't know what to think of it, meself.
I don't know what to think of it, meself.
17 October 2013, 08:29 PM
#56
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
17 October 2013, 08:32 PM
#57
Scooby Regular
I went on a fixed deal with BG last week, odd thing was, it was also cheaper than the deal I was already on with them; so much for them automagically putting you on the cheapest option.
17 October 2013, 08:34 PM
#58
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
17 October 2013, 10:34 PM
#59
Who does milliband think he is? He cannot fix global gas prices and the 20 month price freeze is nothing but a gimmick. Gas suppliers will simply put prices up beforehand and then we are stuck with the new price for 20 months.. Surely it'd be better to improve the infrastructure for the future to ensure prices are more sustainable...
Milliband was partly responsible when labour were in government to help introduce the green levy. Also petrol prices are also higher thanks to labour and their fuel duty escalator. I can't believe that people have forgotten just how bad labour were in government. Record tax receipts and terrific growth and all they did was spend more and more money. The whole reason we're in the sh*t now is we have to try and pay back all the money they overspent. If you max out your credit card, you have to pay it back sometime...
Rant over lol
Milliband was partly responsible when labour were in government to help introduce the green levy. Also petrol prices are also higher thanks to labour and their fuel duty escalator. I can't believe that people have forgotten just how bad labour were in government. Record tax receipts and terrific growth and all they did was spend more and more money. The whole reason we're in the sh*t now is we have to try and pay back all the money they overspent. If you max out your credit card, you have to pay it back sometime...
Rant over lol