Shareholders profits more important than saving an OAP's life.

[I1L2T3]

The average profit per customer is £125 so there's very little scope to lower that by capping prices, it could be lowered more by using energy more efficiently.

 

---------- Post added 26-09-2013 at 07:10 ----------

 

 

Yes they under estimated demand, but wasn't it consumers that bought most of the shares, so ultimately the consumer won.

 

There is plenty of scope. It's only recently that profits have surged to £125 per household. I would tend to agree that an arbitrary freeze at a fixed point for 20 months is unworkable. The cap would need to be flexible and variable.

[Doom]

If Red Ed's that bothered about pensioners ability to pay their heating bills, why doesn't he promise them a greater heating allowance from the Labour 'money tree'?

 

Regards

 

Doom

[chalga]

Some of the share holders will be pensioners and future pensioners, and they might be relying on profits from their shares to fund their retirement and pay for their future energy needs. Without these profits they might fall short and freeze because of lack of money.

 

I haven't heard of any pensioners claiming this,I have heard Neil Woodford intimating that energy companies should withdraw investment to turn out the lights in the UK............wouldn't that affect pensioners?

[angos]

There is plenty of scope. It's only recently that profits have surged to £125 per household. I would tend to agree that an arbitrary freeze at a fixed point for 20 months is unworkable. The cap would need to be flexible and variable.

 

If average bills are £1300 per year with a profit for the company of £125 a year, then best case scenario is cutting profits to £25 per year and saving the customer £2 a week, that reduces their weekly energy bill from £25 a week to £23 a week, I can't see many people jumping for joy.

 

---------- Post added 26-09-2013 at 10:14 ----------

 

I haven't heard of any pensioners claiming this,I have heard Neil Woodford intimating that energy companies should withdraw investment to turn out the lights in the UK............wouldn't that affect pensioners?

 

He's the UK Head of Equities for Invesco Perpetual which is an investment company, not a charity. His job is to maximize profits for investors, not provide cheap energy to the elderly.

[Mr Bloom]

i see " Ed the- red Milliband" has been making rash promises to cap the energy companies?? is that a vote winner or what? i wonder if the government pensions invest in energy companies??? how many more schemes can he come up with to try and get the labour vote back....oh yes votes for 16 yr olds:roll:

 

And what about Cameron's rash promise to ensure everyone was on the cheapest tariff for them? That was soon back-tracked on within hours!!! Ed's promise has already outlasted that one!!

 

And by the way, congratulations to Ed Milliband, you know they're starting to run scared when they start coming up with names like Ed the-red (sic) Milliband.

[AdamSmith]

If Red Ed's that bothered about pensioners ability to pay their heating bills, why doesn't he promise them a greater heating allowance from the Labour 'money tree'?

 

Regards

 

Doom

 

Or even set up a insependant government run power company!! Let's see how competitive they can be ?

[I1L2T3]

If average bills are £1300 per year with a profit for the company of £125 a year, then best case scenario is cutting profits to £25 per year and saving the customer £2 a week, that reduces their weekly energy bill from £25 a week to £23 a week, I can't see many people jumping for joy.

 

---------- Post added 26-09-2013 at 10:14 ----------

 

 

He's the UK Head of Equities for Invesco Perpetual which is an investment company, not a charity. His job is to maximize profits for investors, not provide cheap energy to the elderly.

 

That is not a good argument for allowing profit margins to continue surging.

 

You're right about the motives of Invesco but it only highlights the issues with retail energy being treated as a commodity rather than the needs of consumers being the key priority.

 

If we have yet another very cold winter this will really be brought into focus.

[truman]

So which part of people dieing through fuel poverty,and shareholders selling shares because they are afraid of their profits being hit don't you agree with?

 

What difference does it make to the cost of energy if shareholders sell up? How much less would you pay for your gas and leccy if everyone held onto their shares?

[chalga]

If average bills are £1300 per year with a profit for the company of £125 a year, then best case scenario is cutting profits to £25 per year and saving the customer £2 a week, that reduces their weekly energy bill from £25 a week to £23 a week, I can't see many people jumping for joy.

 

[

 

He's the UK Head of Equities for Invesco Perpetual which is an investment company, not a charity. His job is to maximize profits for investors, not provide cheap energy to the elderly.

 

Of course,so like the thread title says,profits are more important than freezing OAP's..........especially for him,and even though he is already making profits,the thought of maybe making less,or just continuing to make what he does now is not an option.

[I1L2T3]

What difference does it make to the cost of energy if shareholders sell up? How much less would you pay for your gas and leccy if everyone held onto their shares?

 

In such a doomsday scenario the industry would need to be nationalised.