Temporarily re-nationalising energy companies
Discussion
How does it work when the govt renationalise a failing rail franchise?
I suppose they could simply buy a controlling share like Feance has with EDF. I'm not sure if that would drive the price up through speculation or drop it from other investors fleeing. BPs share price is still lower than Pre-Covid.
I suppose they could simply buy a controlling share like Feance has with EDF. I'm not sure if that would drive the price up through speculation or drop it from other investors fleeing. BPs share price is still lower than Pre-Covid.
BP? Are you sure?
Aside from the highly shaky legal ground you may end up on, unless the Govt pays market book value you make the UK univestable to foreign money...
Its not a practical solution. The fix is to look at tax and how its levied on fuel / energy. Perhaps even price caps (ala France) and kick the lawsuits can down the road.
Aside from the highly shaky legal ground you may end up on, unless the Govt pays market book value you make the UK univestable to foreign money...
Its not a practical solution. The fix is to look at tax and how its levied on fuel / energy. Perhaps even price caps (ala France) and kick the lawsuits can down the road.
All staples that people need to live should be limited to a set percentage profit, all the big providers of water, electricity, gas etc making huge profits while people are struggling to pay for bascis is just wrong.
Imagine the scenario come the winter where you cannot afford to heat your house, what will they tell you put on an extra jumper and a coat, that's like saying to someone starving to death I have plenty food for you but since you can't pay you'll have to die.
Imagine the scenario come the winter where you cannot afford to heat your house, what will they tell you put on an extra jumper and a coat, that's like saying to someone starving to death I have plenty food for you but since you can't pay you'll have to die.
stongle said:
BP? Are you sure?
Aside from the highly shaky legal ground you may end up on, unless the Govt pays market book value you make the UK univestable to foreign money...
Its not a practical solution. The fix is to look at tax and how its levied on fuel / energy. Perhaps even price caps (ala France) and kick the lawsuits can down the road.
Aside from the highly shaky legal ground you may end up on, unless the Govt pays market book value you make the UK univestable to foreign money...
Its not a practical solution. The fix is to look at tax and how its levied on fuel / energy. Perhaps even price caps (ala France) and kick the lawsuits can down the road.
Unless they printed more shares.
This all seems a bit unfocused in terms of what they are proposing to renationalise.
All of the cost rises are at the primary level, in either the production of gas or the production of electricity. So are they proposing the government nationalise BP, Shell and all the electricity producers?. That sounds like it would be very expensive at a time when the government already has a soaring debt interest bill. Also does government have the expertise to run a deep sea drilling platform or a power station?
If we are not talking about the primary level but are rather talking about the distributors and retailers then what is the point?. These are often operating on small margins and in fact a bunch of the retailers went under because they were losing money. Nationalisation would enable them to operate at a loss and so bring down bills, but so would paying them a subsidy and without having to nationalise them.
It is a basic populist call that does little to address any of the real issues.
All of the cost rises are at the primary level, in either the production of gas or the production of electricity. So are they proposing the government nationalise BP, Shell and all the electricity producers?. That sounds like it would be very expensive at a time when the government already has a soaring debt interest bill. Also does government have the expertise to run a deep sea drilling platform or a power station?
If we are not talking about the primary level but are rather talking about the distributors and retailers then what is the point?. These are often operating on small margins and in fact a bunch of the retailers went under because they were losing money. Nationalisation would enable them to operate at a loss and so bring down bills, but so would paying them a subsidy and without having to nationalise them.
It is a basic populist call that does little to address any of the real issues.
Edited by JagLover on Saturday 13th August 10:10
JagLover said:
This all seems a bit unfocused in terms of what they are proposing to renationalise.
All of the cost rises are at the primary level, in either the production of gas or the production of electricity. So are they proposing the government nationalise BP, Shell and all the electricity producers?. That sounds like it would be very expensive at a time when the government already has a soaring debt interest bill. Also does government have the expertise to run a deep sea drilling platform or a power station?
If we are not talking about the primary level but are rather talking about the distributors and retailers then what is the point?. These are often operating on small margins and in fact a bunch of the retailers went under because they were losing money. Nationalisation would enable them to operate at a loss and so bring down bills, but so would paying them a subsidy and without having to nationalise them.
It is a basic populist call that does little to address any of the real issues.
You could argue that having a myriad of small energy retailers all selling the same product at similar prices all chasing a finite market is hugely inefficient, and maybe it would be better to have just one?All of the cost rises are at the primary level, in either the production of gas or the production of electricity. So are they proposing the government nationalise BP, Shell and all the electricity producers?. That sounds like it would be very expensive at a time when the government already has a soaring debt interest bill. Also does government have the expertise to run a deep sea drilling platform or a power station?
If we are not talking about the primary level but are rather talking about the distributors and retailers then what is the point?. These are often operating on small margins and in fact a bunch of the retailers went under because they were losing money. Nationalisation would enable them to operate at a loss and so bring down bills, but so would paying them a subsidy and without having to nationalise them.
It is a basic populist call that does little to address any of the real issues.
Edited by JagLover on Saturday 13th August 10:10
deadslow said:
not temporarily; that just societises their losses. We did it with the banks. Better to stop the big energy companies pretending the retail/wholesale cannot cross subsidise. Set a cap where we were in January. If they insist on going bust, take the whole sector into state ownership.
Ok, so take OVO, they don’t have generation assets (I think) and buy it all on market, what do you suggest happens to them?And Exxon, they don’t have a retail arm and are not involved in electricity production.
BP don’t have a power station in the uk , but seem to be investing in renewable generation.
The lack of joined up thinking is remarkable.
king arthur said:
JagLover said:
This all seems a bit unfocused in terms of what they are proposing to renationalise.
All of the cost rises are at the primary level, in either the production of gas or the production of electricity. So are they proposing the government nationalise BP, Shell and all the electricity producers?. That sounds like it would be very expensive at a time when the government already has a soaring debt interest bill. Also does government have the expertise to run a deep sea drilling platform or a power station?
If we are not talking about the primary level but are rather talking about the distributors and retailers then what is the point?. These are often operating on small margins and in fact a bunch of the retailers went under because they were losing money. Nationalisation would enable them to operate at a loss and so bring down bills, but so would paying them a subsidy and without having to nationalise them.
It is a basic populist call that does little to address any of the real issues.
You could argue that having a myriad of small energy retailers all selling the same product at similar prices all chasing a finite market is hugely inefficient, and maybe it would be better to have just one?All of the cost rises are at the primary level, in either the production of gas or the production of electricity. So are they proposing the government nationalise BP, Shell and all the electricity producers?. That sounds like it would be very expensive at a time when the government already has a soaring debt interest bill. Also does government have the expertise to run a deep sea drilling platform or a power station?
If we are not talking about the primary level but are rather talking about the distributors and retailers then what is the point?. These are often operating on small margins and in fact a bunch of the retailers went under because they were losing money. Nationalisation would enable them to operate at a loss and so bring down bills, but so would paying them a subsidy and without having to nationalise them.
It is a basic populist call that does little to address any of the real issues.
Edited by JagLover on Saturday 13th August 10:10
And while they're at it, renationalise the water companies too. Private monopolies.
Also, why am I paying a levy on my gas bill to bail out the failed so called energy suppliers....Privatise profits - Socialise losses.
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: No I just needed to think of an energy company.
I have no idea how nationalisation works in practise.
If you're a shareholder on Friday are you no longer one on Monday?
Literally no idea.
Yes, that's exactly it.I have no idea how nationalisation works in practise.
If you're a shareholder on Friday are you no longer one on Monday?
Literally no idea.
According to John Mcdonnell. Money should be borrowed to buy off the shareholders, by implication at less than the market price. The profits currently used to pay dividends to shareholder will then be used to pay interest to creditors, and to increase investment, and to pay more to
It's all based on the idea that profit is the difference between the price and what things ought to cost, rather than a return on investment.
https://capx.co/exposed-again-the-true-cost-of-lab...
glazbagun said:
How does it work when the govt renationalise a failing rail franchise?
I suppose they could simply buy a controlling share like Feance has with EDF. I'm not sure if that would drive the price up through speculation or drop it from other investors fleeing. BPs share price is still lower than Pre-Covid.
France government holding already had >80% of EDF shares. They have simply bought over the remaining shares they didn't hold (at iirc a slight premium to last market prices) just recently.I suppose they could simply buy a controlling share like Feance has with EDF. I'm not sure if that would drive the price up through speculation or drop it from other investors fleeing. BPs share price is still lower than Pre-Covid.
Dr Jekyll said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: No I just needed to think of an energy company.
I have no idea how nationalisation works in practise.
If you're a shareholder on Friday are you no longer one on Monday?
Literally no idea.
Yes, that's exactly it.I have no idea how nationalisation works in practise.
If you're a shareholder on Friday are you no longer one on Monday?
Literally no idea.
According to John Mcdonnell. Money should be borrowed to buy off the shareholders, by implication at less than the market price. The profits currently used to pay dividends to shareholder will then be used to pay interest to creditors, and to increase investment, and to pay more to
It's all based on the idea that profit is the difference between the price and what things ought to cost, rather than a return on investment.
https://capx.co/exposed-again-the-true-cost-of-lab...
Profits per customer are actually quite small to quite how nationalising them will solve the problem isn't clear.
The problem is talking heads on TV just get fixated on "billions" profit without any concept of how and where that profit is made, and how much it would mean divided by the number of consumers.
Another problem is these are global companies, with worldwide shareholders. BP hasn't been "British" in a long long time.
Edited by 98elise on Saturday 13th August 16:55
Klippie said:
All staples that people need to live should be limited to a set percentage profit, all the big providers of water, electricity, gas etc making huge profits while people are struggling to pay for bascis is just wrong.
Imagine the scenario come the winter where you cannot afford to heat your house, what will they tell you put on an extra jumper and a coat, that's like saying to someone starving to death I have plenty food for you but since you can't pay you'll have to die.
What % would you think is acceptable? By profits I assume you mean money paid out to shareholders as opposed to profits that pay wages, investment, and taxes?Imagine the scenario come the winter where you cannot afford to heat your house, what will they tell you put on an extra jumper and a coat, that's like saying to someone starving to death I have plenty food for you but since you can't pay you'll have to die.
Dr Jekyll said:
Yes, that's exactly it.
According to John Mcdonnell. Money should be borrowed to buy off the shareholders, by implication at less than the market price.
Millions of UK individuals have / own these shares in pe sion funds. You can't buy at less than the market price, its going to make the UK a dodgy place to invest...According to John Mcdonnell. Money should be borrowed to buy off the shareholders, by implication at less than the market price.
Dilution of existing shareholders is also dodgy.
If they paid a premium (plus the uptick in price as everyone gets on the price bandwagon), it's possibly fair - but it's not really practical. Or deliverable in a tineframe that will help. You may as well say you are going to mine the moon (or something).
Some of his ideas, might be workable; but they need to be rethought to remove government interference. If the UK had a sovereign wealth vehicle - seperate from direct control; this might be much fairer. Something like Norges, might make a lot of sense. It should also act as a vehicle for massive infrastructure investment here.
Short term they (govt) really ought to be looking at either reducing duty or price cap (but like France and EDF that's a future lawsuit / compo waiting to happen).
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff