Thames Water Limited

[Dod101]

Just read an article on the FT about Thames Water. They comment that it was bought by Macquarie who loaded it up with debt as part of the purchase process, they then took £3b out in dividends over their short ownership period and then offloaded it to the present owners.

So a really good financial play on their part
But a pretty poor return for the customers, who lets be fair - often have no real viable alternative for their water and sewage (or for the airport they need to use or the telco infrastructure to their area)

If you treat utilities as simply assets to profit from it is hardly surprising that this is what happens

Yes and that is of course what I was alluding to in an earlier post. The regulator or even the government should have prevented that sort of thing from happening in the first place.

Dod

[scotview]

The regulator or even the government should have prevented that sort of thing from happening in the first place.

Dod

Are "regulators" simply incompetent or are they complicit in Rail, Energy and Water financial and delivery issues ?

[servodude]

The regulator or even the government should have prevented that sort of thing from happening in the first place.

Dod

Are "regulators" simply incompetent or are they complicit in Rail, Energy and Water financial and delivery issues ?

Quis custodiet Ipsos regulators?

I do think the issue is fundamental
- if your goal for a monopoly utility is to maximise profit (divs or return) it can't also be efficiency, competency and customer service

Even taking a swivel eyed marketeer ideology view you can't have a market if there's no competition
- how on earth can it make sense if the KPIs for the firm running the water supply in London pertain more to MY superannuation than jobbies on the beach in Brighton?

[Dod101]

Are "regulators" simply incompetent or are they complicit in Rail, Energy and Water financial and delivery issues ?

Quis custodiet Ipsos regulators?

I do think the issue is fundamental
- if your goal for a monopoly utility is to maximise profit (divs or return) it can't also be efficiency, competency and customer service

Even taking a swivel eyed marketeer ideology view you can't have a market if there's no competition
- how on earth can it make sense if the KPIs for the firm running the water supply in London pertain more to MY superannuation than jobbies on the beach in Brighton?

We are back again to the old question, to take a short or a long term view, which is a choice for a normal commercial company but should not be for a utility especially one in a monopoly position like a water company. Clearly an outside majority investor like Macquarrie need not care, as they have demonstrated, and I would think therefore that that is what a regulator should be for, to care about the long term but I do not know if that is their job. They seem more concentrated on consumer pricing so before we blame them we would need to know their terms of reference.

The model is or was clearly flawed.

Dod

[servodude]

Quis custodiet Ipsos regulators?

I do think the issue is fundamental
- if your goal for a monopoly utility is to maximise profit (divs or return) it can't also be efficiency, competency and customer service

Even taking a swivel eyed marketeer ideology view you can't have a market if there's no competition
- how on earth can it make sense if the KPIs for the firm running the water supply in London pertain more to MY superannuation than jobbies on the beach in Brighton?

We are back again to the old question, to take a short or a long term view, which is a choice for a normal commercial company but should not be for a utility especially one in a monopoly position like a water company. Clearly an outside majority investor like Macquarrie need not care, as they have demonstrated, and I would think therefore that that is what a regulator should be for, to care about the long term but I do not know if that is their job. They seem more concentrated on consumer pricing so before we blame them we would need to know their terms of reference.

The model is or was clearly flawed.

Dod

Precisely. Or more correctly it's flawed for essential services.
It's also a huge national risk to leave the responsibility of this kind of thing in the hands of folk who don't care on the other side of the globe
I've always found it strange how this surrender of control is championed by those that call themselves "the Right" but they get their knickers in a knot about stuff that isn't actually critical to the running of their country

[AsleepInYorkshire]

Secret email from Severn Trent boss to rivals: stick together to fend off nationalisation

‘Please don’t forward this email,’ begs £4m-a-year water chief Liv Garfield
...
Liv Garfield, the boss of FTSE 100 water giant Severn Trent, is trying to bring a taskforce of utility bosses together with the Labour party in a bid to head off the threat of nationalisation.

In an email sent to other utility CEOs which she describes as “sensitive” and “highly confidential”, the £4 million a year Garfield asks them to join an “off-the-record roundtable” with Will Hutton, the Observer journalist best known for books critical of capitalism including The State We’re In.

Her move comes as water companies face the threat of being re-nationalised, decades after they were privatised as one of Margaret Thatcher’s free market reforms.

Prima facie, Garfield appears to prioritise personal and party-political interests before those of the industry she represents. About a month ago polls suggested that raw sewage (no, no, I berate myself, it's s.hit) entering our rivers was the fourth priority for the electorate. Reasonably important then. Her customers would appear to be concerned about illegal dumping of raw sewage at a time when she’s focused on preventing renationalisation.

Whilst Rome burned

AiY(D)

[bruncher]

Secret email from Severn Trent boss to rivals: stick together to fend off nationalisation

‘Please don’t forward this email,’ begs £4m-a-year water chief Liv Garfield
...
Liv Garfield, the boss of FTSE 100 water giant Severn Trent, is trying to bring a taskforce of utility bosses together with the Labour party in a bid to head off the threat of nationalisation.

In an email sent to other utility CEOs which she describes as “sensitive” and “highly confidential”, the £4 million a year Garfield asks them to join an “off-the-record roundtable” with Will Hutton, the Observer journalist best known for books critical of capitalism including The State We’re In.

Her move comes as water companies face the threat of being re-nationalised, decades after they were privatised as one of Margaret Thatcher’s free market reforms.

Prima facie, Garfield appears to prioritise personal and party-political interests before those of the industry she represents. About a month ago polls suggested that raw sewage (no, no, I berate myself, it's s.hit) entering our rivers was the fourth priority for the electorate. Reasonably important then. Her customers would appear to be concerned about illegal dumping of raw sewage at a time when she’s focused on preventing renationalisation.

Whilst Rome burned

AiY(D)

My favourite line in her email is where she proposes:

re-purposing utilities and utility networks into a new breed of declared social purpose companies

what a load of boll .... greenwash / socialwash

[Crazbe7]

Secret email from Severn Trent boss to rivals: stick together to fend off nationalisation

‘Please don’t forward this email,’ begs £4m-a-year water chief Liv Garfield
...
Liv Garfield, the boss of FTSE 100 water giant Severn Trent, is trying to bring a taskforce of utility bosses together with the Labour party in a bid to head off the threat of nationalisation.

In an email sent to other utility CEOs which she describes as “sensitive” and “highly confidential”, the £4 million a year Garfield asks them to join an “off-the-record roundtable” with Will Hutton, the Observer journalist best known for books critical of capitalism including The State We’re In.

Her move comes as water companies face the threat of being re-nationalised, decades after they were privatised as one of Margaret Thatcher’s free market reforms.

Prima facie, Garfield appears to prioritise personal and party-political interests before those of the industry she represents. About a month ago polls suggested that raw sewage (no, no, I berate myself, it's s.hit) entering our rivers was the fourth priority for the electorate. Reasonably important then. Her customers would appear to be concerned about illegal dumping of raw sewage at a time when she’s focused on preventing renationalisation.

Whilst Rome burned

AiY(D)

My favourite line in her email is where she proposes:

re-purposing utilities and utility networks into a new breed of declared social purpose companies

what a load of boll .... greenwash / socialwash

Not like this then!!

Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water is a not-for-profit company which supplies drinking water and wastewater services to most of Wales and parts of western England that border Wales. In total, it serves around 1.4 million households and businesses and around three million people.

Crazbe7

[bruncher]

My favourite line in her email is where she proposes:



what a load of boll .... greenwash / socialwash

Not like this then!!

Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water is a not-for-profit company which supplies drinking water and wastewater services to most of Wales and parts of western England that border Wales. In total, it serves around 1.4 million households and businesses and around three million people.

Crazbe7

Not at all, she's proposing that they remain private but represent themselves as socially responsible community enterprises.

[Crazbe7]

Not like this then!!

Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water is a not-for-profit company which supplies drinking water and wastewater services to most of Wales and parts of western England that border Wales. In total, it serves around 1.4 million households and businesses and around three million people.

Crazbe7

Not at all, she's proposing that they remain private but represent themselves as socially responsible community enterprises.

So what changes?- From the Severn Trent website - Overview

Caring for our community
We think it's important to give back to communities by caring for the environment, supporting the next generation into work, and making our region a great place to live.

So what changes?! - The level of dividend? The Board's salaries?

Crazbe7