The Lemon Fool

richfool wrote: its largest creditor the Sequoia Economic Infrastructure Income Fund.

If this were to occur, the Investment Adviser notes that the parent company of Bulb, Simple Energy Limited ("Simple"), would enter into normal administration. SEQI would like to note that its Investment Adviser remains actively engaged with all the relevant Bulb stakeholders. As previously noted, SEQI's loan to Bulb is £55.0 million (approximately 2.9% of NAV as at 31 October 2021) and is guaranteed by Simple.

UncleEbenezer wrote:I have yet to do that with eon.next.

They've sent a few emails with links, but they're the kind of tracking links that send me running for the hills. Guess I'll have to hold my nose and click sometime

Variable or Fixed?
Variable Direct Debit
You pay for the energy you use, which means payments will vary across the year. Generally it’s lower in summer and higher across winter months.

Fixed Direct Debit
You pay a fixed cost which we’ve calculated based on your historic consumption we average out across 12 months so you pay the same each month.

pje16 wrote:Because gas is being sold at below cost

scotview wrote:

pje16 wrote:Because gas is being sold at below cost

Should a company with a business model that sells a product at less than the "at cost" value deserve to be bailed out to the tune of £1.6 Billion.

scotview wrote:

pje16 wrote:Because gas is being sold at below cost

Should a company with a business model that sells a product at less than the "at cost" value deserve to be bailed out to the tune of £1.6 Billion.

scotview wrote:

pje16 wrote:Because gas is being sold at below cost

Should a company with a business model that sells a product at less than the "at cost" value deserve to be bailed out to the tune of £1.6 Billion.

pje16 wrote:

scotview wrote:

pje16 wrote:Because gas is being sold at below cost

Should a company with a business model that sells a product at less than the "at cost" value deserve to be bailed out to the tune of £1.6 Billion.

If you sold to your customers at a fixed rate you CANNOT put the price up

We will all feel the effect once those deals expire

A highlight of the Party Conference season was Labour leader Ed Miliband’s promise to freeze energy prices for 20 months. Now in a radio interview his shadow minister for energy Caroline Flint has told us more. There will be a freeze, regardless of what wholesale prices do and that’s OK because the energy companies contract for their supplies 2 years ahead anyway.

Oh, erm, right. Yes, there is a market for energy futures, and energy companies use it (though just contracting everything with a fixed time window would not merely defeat the purpose, it would leave no flexibility to respond to demand issues such as a cold spell). So too do pure speculators who contribute nothing of value but who, free of constraints like the need to supply energy to real customers, have the flexibility to exploit whatever market trends might constrain and force the hands of real users.

Who is going to take advantage? It’s the nimble and flexible. Private individuals may get in on the act, but the big players who will really call the shots are the hedge funds. Mr Miliband and Ms Flint have announced a huge gift to hedge funds!

There’s nothing hypothetical about that. The banking crash of 2008/9 threw up similar opportunities for the nimble, and even as a complete rookie investor I was able to take advantage and trade bank shares at a profit. Commodities are not so accessible to the little man, but professional investors are doubtless looking forward to it.

Nor is it just hedge funds. There’s another class of passive speculator called ETFs (Exchange Traded Funds) that are, I believe, quite a lot bigger. They are the very opposite to nimble: they must just follow the markets. Whatever hedge funds do will automatically be magnified by ETFs. They’ll make money on momentum and lose it when nimble hedge funds switch their positions, but their overall effect is to amplify the market movements that take advantage of our utilities’ positions being forced.

Meanwhile the losers will be the companies themselves, their less-nimble shareholders (from less-sophisticated individuals to sophisticated-but-constrained pension funds), and of course future energy supplies (though, to be fair, that last applies to politicians on all sides). Above all, our suppliers are coerced into buying energy at artificially-inflated wholesale prices, so who will eventually pay for that?

I wonder what our utility companies are even now doing to prepare for the possibility of their market being rigged against them? They’re always up against the hedgies up to a point, and now in addition they have one hand (two hands if Labour look like winning the next election) tied behind their back. Nor can they afford to compete on pay for top hedgies to trade futures markets, though that at least is not necessarily a drawback. Whatever they do, they’re now going to have to pay, in effect, an insurance premium against adverse market conditions out of their control. And pass that cost on to consumers.

staffordian wrote:As an ex-Utility Point customer waiting for EDF to take over my supply, it looks like they are getting somewhere with the data migration.

I received an email from EDF this morning inviting me to set up an account with them.

Having done so, my contact details and bank account information is there, but no details of tariff, meter readings, account credit etc.

Still, it's a step in the right direction.

Dod101 wrote:You do realise, all you cheap energy customers, that apparently all customers are to pay an extra £120 a year or something like that to bail you out. I must say that I object to that but never mind, you are saving as long as it lasts.

Dod

servodude wrote:

Dod101 wrote:You do realise, all you cheap energy customers, that apparently all customers are to pay an extra £120 a year or something like that to bail you out. I must say that I object to that but never mind, you are saving as long as it lasts.

Dod

Someone thought it was a good idea to privatise essential national services and introduce a risky and unsustainable race to the bottom
- surely that's the bit folk should object to?

Dod101 wrote:

servodude wrote:

Dod101 wrote:You do realise, all you cheap energy customers, that apparently all customers are to pay an extra £120 a year or something like that to bail you out. I must say that I object to that but never mind, you are saving as long as it lasts.

Dod

Someone thought it was a good idea to privatise essential national services and introduce a risky and unsustainable race to the bottom
- surely that's the bit folk should object to?

No. I think that folk who bought into the unsustainable nonsense should be those that pay for the cost of getting out of it. I stayed with my energy supplier. Why should I now be charged an excess? Nothing to do with me Guv!

Dod

bruncher wrote:

staffordian wrote:As an ex-Utility Point customer waiting for EDF to take over my supply, it looks like they are getting somewhere with the data migration.

I received an email from EDF this morning inviting me to set up an account with them.

Having done so, my contact details and bank account information is there, but no details of tariff, meter readings, account credit etc.

Still, it's a step in the right direction.

I am in the same position. There seems to be lack of clarity regarding the switchover date:

One email told me: "We start supplying your energy on 18th Sept". "If you have meter readings for the transfer date, being 18 September, please submit these otherwise please can you send the next available meter reading and the date it was taken."

Much later separate emails: "We will be supplying your gas from 30th Nov" Identical one for electricity. Also asked for readings - to be used as a cut-off date for when Utility point stopped supplying.

Confusing. Has EDF managed to get the Govt to pay for my supply (the difference between my Utility Point Tariff and the cap) during Sept/Oct/Nov?

servodude wrote:

Dod101 wrote:

servodude wrote:Someone thought it was a good idea to privatise essential national services and introduce a risky and unsustainable race to the bottom
- surely that's the bit folk should object to?

No. I think that folk who bought into the unsustainable nonsense should be those that pay for the cost of getting out of it. I stayed with my energy supplier. Why should I now be charged an excess? Nothing to do with me Guv!

I put it to you that the biggest contributors in that emboldened category were at one point voted in to office and started the whole sorry mess

88V8 wrote:

servodude wrote:

Dod101 wrote:No. I think that folk who bought into the unsustainable nonsense should be those that pay for the cost of getting out of it. I stayed with my energy supplier. Why should I now be charged an excess? Nothing to do with me Guv!

I put it to you that the biggest contributors in that emboldened category were at one point voted in to office and started the whole sorry mess

I voted for them.
And I approved the privatisation.
But I did not approve of the price cap. First, they privatise, then they interfere, then everyone has to pay for the consequences.

It was not necessary to interfere in electricity pricing. There is competition. Customers can choose. It's not like the railways, water, where there is no choice.
If they were going to interfere, it should have been like the banks requiring a degree of resilience in the suppliers, plus a baseline of hedging.

Now the govt is bleating at the power cos for being slow in clearing the debris of Arwen. The power cos should be allowed to make their profits, and build up their capital so they can make the networks resilient and do all the stuff currently deemed necessary for saving the planet.

V8