The Lemon Fool

Nimrod103 wrote:I read that Green customers (including me) are to be moved to Shell, about which I know nothing. Any views or opinions? I was thinking that it would be best to stay on the capped variable tariff until early next year.

if you mean Green network energy then not Shell but EDF
https://greennetworkenergy.co.uk/

sorry you might mean

https://green.energy/

or

https://www.greenenergyuk.com/

They ALL just too keen to use GREEN in their name

pje16 wrote:

Nimrod103 wrote:I read that Green customers (including me) are to be moved to Shell, about which I know nothing. Any views or opinions? I was thinking that it would be best to stay on the capped variable tariff until early next year.

if you mean Green network energy then not Shell but EDF
https://greennetworkenergy.co.uk/

sorry you might mean

https://green.energy/

or

https://www.greenenergyuk.com/

They ALL just too keen to use GREEN in their name

No not Green Network, just Green. I have just now received an e mail from Shell welcoming me as a new customer transferred automatically from Green. Of course they all just use the same mix of energy as all the companies without Green in their name.

This news may reassure energy users who have been moved to Octopus.

They appear to have been given a major financial boost by a $600m investment from the investment fund set up by Al Gore. This will increase their market value to around £4.6bn.

As a current Octopus customer (who went there voluntarily) it has reassured me that they appear to be well-funded and, hopefully, well run.

It was interesting to read that Octopus's green energy software platform, Kraken, is used to manage 17m energy accounts globally, including Octopus customers, as well as those of rival suppliers such as Npower, E.ON and Good Energy.

regards

Howard

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... by-al-gore

Howard wrote:This news may reassure energy users who have been moved to Octopus.

They appear to have been given a major financial boost by a $600m investment from the investment fund set up by Al Gore. This will increase their market value to around £4.6bn.

As a current Octopus customer (who went there voluntarily) it has reassured me that they appear to be well-funded and, hopefully, well run.

It was interesting to read that Octopus's green energy software platform, Kraken, is used to manage 17m energy accounts globally, including Octopus customers, as well as those of rival suppliers such as Npower, E.ON and Good Energy.

regards

Howard

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... by-al-gore

A fellow Octopusarian! Happy to hear the positive news.

John

forrado wrote:The cheapest isn't always the best. From the pages of the Mail on Sunday.

The man who made a fortune setting up SEVEN collapsed energy suppliers

Little wonder he looks so smug. From that DM article:

"Each customer costs the rescuing firm between £600 and £700 to take on, with those costs usually passed on via household bills. Bigger firms such as British Gas and EDF have been put under pressure by the Government and Ofgem to take on customers from failed firms."

Yes... I understand it's called "Free Enterprise" or "Capitalism" (as currently practised) by many, and some believe it to be really "efficient".

I think of it more as: "Privatise the upside, socialise the downside".

So perhaps we should call it: "Half [expletive deleted] Capitalism"?

XFool wrote:

forrado wrote:The cheapest isn't always the best. From the pages of the Mail on Sunday.

The man who made a fortune setting up SEVEN collapsed energy suppliers

Little wonder he looks so smug. From that DM article:

"Each customer costs the rescuing firm between £600 and £700 to take on, with those costs usually passed on via household bills. Bigger firms such as British Gas and EDF have been put under pressure by the Government and Ofgem to take on customers from failed firms."

Yes... I understand it's called "Free Enterprise" or "Capitalism" (as currently practised) by many, and some believe it to be really "efficient".

I think of it more as: "Privatise the upside, socialise the downside".

So perhaps we should call it: "Half [expletive deleted] Capitalism"?

Private sector firms being pressured into taking on customers from failed firms is the complete opposite of "Free Enterprise" or "Capitalism"!

That sounds more like "privatise the downside" to me. Can you explain your thinking?

dealtn wrote:

XFool wrote:

forrado wrote:The cheapest isn't always the best. From the pages of the Mail on Sunday.

The man who made a fortune setting up SEVEN collapsed energy suppliers

Little wonder he looks so smug. From that DM article:

"Each customer costs the rescuing firm between £600 and £700 to take on, with those costs usually passed on via household bills. Bigger firms such as British Gas and EDF have been put under pressure by the Government and Ofgem to take on customers from failed firms."

Yes... I understand it's called "Free Enterprise" or "Capitalism" (as currently practised) by many, and some believe it to be really "efficient".

I think of it more as: "Privatise the upside, socialise the downside".

So perhaps we should call it: "Half [expletive deleted] Capitalism"?

Private sector firms being pressured into taking on customers from failed firms is the complete opposite of "Free Enterprise" or "Capitalism"!

That sounds more like "privatise the downside" to me. Can you explain your thinking?

Haven't you just explained it yourself?

XFool wrote:

dealtn wrote:

XFool wrote:Little wonder he looks so smug. From that DM article:

"Each customer costs the rescuing firm between £600 and £700 to take on, with those costs usually passed on via household bills. Bigger firms such as British Gas and EDF have been put under pressure by the Government and Ofgem to take on customers from failed firms."

Yes... I understand it's called "Free Enterprise" or "Capitalism" (as currently practised) by many, and some believe it to be really "efficient".

I think of it more as: "Privatise the upside, socialise the downside".

So perhaps we should call it: "Half [expletive deleted] Capitalism"?

Private sector firms being pressured into taking on customers from failed firms is the complete opposite of "Free Enterprise" or "Capitalism"!

That sounds more like "privatise the downside" to me. Can you explain your thinking?

Haven't you just explained it yourself?

Not that I can see. You claim it is privatising the upside, not the downside. How is pressuring private sector firms to take on unprofitable customers "Free Enterprise"?

Genuinely perplexed by your claim so can you explain please?

dealtn wrote:

XFool wrote:

dealtn wrote:Private sector firms being pressured into taking on customers from failed firms is the complete opposite of "Free Enterprise" or "Capitalism"!

That sounds more like "privatise the downside" to me. Can you explain your thinking?

Haven't you just explained it yourself?

Not that I can see. You claim it is privatising the upside, not the downside. How is pressuring private sector firms to take on unprofitable customers "Free Enterprise"?

Genuinely perplexed by your claim so can you explain please?

"How is pressuring private sector firms to take on unprofitable customers "Free Enterprise"?" - It isn't, you say this yourself. (Mind you, being practical, they have to be dealt with in some way)

Who is paying for this? All of the customers of the existing firms who are running a genuine business.
Who benefits from this? The CEO who set up/sold all this 'Energy Companies' doing nothing beyond buy energy supplies on short term, unhedged contracts to sell to customers at long term fixed rates. A simple enough recipy for going tits up. But the owners will be well away...

Igloo, Symbio & Enstroga cease to trade.

XFool wrote:

dealtn wrote:

XFool wrote:Haven't you just explained it yourself?

Not that I can see. You claim it is privatising the upside, not the downside. How is pressuring private sector firms to take on unprofitable customers "Free Enterprise"?

Genuinely perplexed by your claim so can you explain please?

"How is pressuring private sector firms to take on unprofitable customers "Free Enterprise"?" - It isn't, you say this yourself.

Yet you said

XFool wrote:
Yes... I understand it's called "Free Enterprise"

Hence my confusion and asking you to clarify.

swill453 wrote:And Igloo looking to "restructure", apparently.

Scott.

And now their "restructure" = "ceasing to trade"
Oh well, I guess I need a new supplier

--kiloran

kiloran wrote:

swill453 wrote:And Igloo looking to "restructure", apparently.

And now their "restructure" = "ceasing to trade"
Oh well, I guess I need a new supplier

Yes, got an email saying, among other things, "You need not worry; your supply is secure and funds that you have paid into you accounts will be protected if you are in credit."

Can't currently log in to see my account, but did save everything last week.

Scott.

dealtn wrote:

XFool wrote:

dealtn wrote:Not that I can see. You claim it is privatising the upside, not the downside. How is pressuring private sector firms to take on unprofitable customers "Free Enterprise"?

Genuinely perplexed by your claim so can you explain please?

"How is pressuring private sector firms to take on unprofitable customers "Free Enterprise"?" - It isn't, you say this yourself.

Yet you said

XFool wrote:Yes... I understand it's called "Free Enterprise"

Hence my confusion and asking you to clarify.

This is not a pipe – Magritte’s most famous painting

https://publicdelivery.org/magritte-not-a-pipe/

i.e. It is what many will call "Free Enterprise" or "Capitalism", but that doesn't mean it really is.

(Or perhaps it IS? Now there's a thought...)

XFool wrote:

dealtn wrote:

XFool wrote:"How is pressuring private sector firms to take on unprofitable customers "Free Enterprise"?" - It isn't, you say this yourself.

Yet you said

XFool wrote:Yes... I understand it's called "Free Enterprise"

Hence my confusion and asking you to clarify.

This is not a pipe – Magritte’s most famous painting

https://publicdelivery.org/magritte-not-a-pipe/

i.e. It is what many will call "Free Enterprise" or "Capitalism", but that doesn't mean it really is.

(Or perhaps it IS? Now there's a thought...)

Now I literally have no idea what you are talking about, or its relevance to either to either this Board or Gas and Electricity.

As such I will bow out, but can't help feeling your message is a difficult one to grasp.

Mine is one of those that have gone today (Symbio).
Oh well, it was good while it lasted (a couple of years).

Just have to wait now to find out which company I'm being asigned to before logging on to gocompare again.

The lights and TV are still working - so no mad rush.

Laughton wrote:Mine is one of those that have gone today (Symbio).
Oh well, it was good while it lasted (a couple of years).

Just have to wait now to find out which company I'm being asigned to before logging on to gocompare again.

The lights and TV are still working - so no mad rush.

Didn't realise another had gone.

Wonder what the medium term is like for prices.

Sunnypad wrote:Wonder what the medium term is like for prices.

For the next six months I can't see anyone being able to compete with the cap, since the current wholesale energy price isn't even reflected in it (it was set in August).

So the small companies must just be crossing their fingers they're still in business in 6 months time when the cap will very likely go up again. If the wholesale price comes down after winter then they might have some scope to discount against the cap.

Scott.

swill453 wrote:

Sunnypad wrote:Wonder what the medium term is like for prices.

For the next six months I can't see anyone being able to compete with the cap, since the current wholesale energy price isn't even reflected in it (it was set in August).

So the small companies must just be crossing their fingers they're still in business in 6 months time when the cap will very likely go up again. If the wholesale price comes down after winter then they might have some scope to discount against the cap.

Scott.

I was worried we'd see a big price rise long term, but then I always worry about stuff like this.

I'm currently on a 1 year fixed tariff with EOn which runs out on 18th November 2021. When I looked a few weeks back, they were suggesting a much dearer new fixed tariff to replace it (over double the cost). They have since withdrawn that one and are currently offering an even dearer one! I am therefore rapidly coming to the conclusion that I should stick with the current one until it expires and then see what variable tariff I end up with, on the assumption that it will at least be subject to the new price cap, and then see what transpires with energy tariffs generally at (if not beyond) that time.