Soldato
As an accountant I really hate it when you get people going on about cooked books and the such.
Pretty much guarantees that they have absolutely no clue what so ever.
Energy Prices (Strictly NO referrals!)
- Thread starter DXP55
- Start date
As an accountant I really hate it when you get people going on about cooked books and the such.
Pretty much guarantees that they have absolutely no clue what so ever.
Yeah, I was in early 2022 mode when I made my previous post.
The same messages applies, just change 6 with 3
Last edited:
No doubt that’s the case in late 2020 through to 2021. The issue is that those massive spikes hasn’t really been the case. And ofgem raised the cap and standing charges to protection supplier profit margin as well! No just to cap exposure to consumer. If the sole purpose is to protect consumer then why not cap it for cost…clearly that doesn’t work for the industry cos they want to make money
Are you saying it doesn’t exist or doesn’t happen in real world l?
Or you saying you don’t do it or you don’t know how to?
The two clearly are different. One’s ignorance is not the truth.
Soldato
I am saying that its a fall back position for people with weak arguments and lack of facts.
"Cooking the books" involves misrepresenting the position of a company. Now whilst I am no fan of nor particularly standing up for the ability of external audits, the vast majority will the vast majority of the time detect any material omission or misrepresentation.
Plus the penalty for not just the accountant, but wider in the company will mean just about all will shy away from this.
Plus to perpetuate the "position" across multiple years will increasingly make the numbers involved more and more material and harder and harder to cover up.
The scale of the company will influence that heavily. Some corner shop "cooking the books" will probably get away with it. A company with billions of turnover, assets and liabilities etc will struggle. Real world.
Could I "cook the books" of course. Could I cook the books with absolutely no risk to myself, nope.
Its fraud. I would immediately be booted out of my association hence losing my income.
Simple TLDR; cooking the books is not worth the risk in the current corporate world.
Suppliers were supplying at a loss or break even many times in this period, the price cap only allows for a very small % of profit for suppliers anyway, its not what you think. Profit comes from the other side mainly. (generation).
Also, of course they want to make money. Unless or until the entire thing is run by government then you have to allow for a small profit from supply side.
Last edited:
That’s where the cap and the dysfunctional energy market considered together become a complete crap show.
Cap protects supply profit at the same time generation makes minter off sky high market rates.
People calling for energy market reform, ofgem side steps and says it’s a political decision whilst minsters and government say ofgem is the regulator and it should implement changes and the merry go around keeps going.
The big 6 all have generation business so the cap basically just feed them more profit at the expense of consumer.
Last edited:
Soldato
It's convenient that the gouging generation side of the business are able to use smoke and mirrors to present to the uneducated public that thier profits are modest via having them focus on thei supply side of their business...
This is the way we are set up, people blaming the energy companies are blaming the wrong people, if people want energy supplied at cost or below cost as many are asking for then that has to come from government.
Soldato
I'm not sure anyone is expecting energy to be supplied at cost or below cost. Stopping the producers from profiteering before passing this cost onto the end users via their supplier side of the business would be a direction to look at....
Edit - For clarity: Energy Producers make large profits which then means the suppliers, often a different arm of the same company, have to buy at inflated prices and then pass this inflated price onto the consumer to avoid making a loss. The production side needs taken to task.
Its just convenient for the overall business to hide behind their supply side and post the supply side profit margins to try and show they aren't profiteering... Its disingenuous
Last edited:
Soldato
They got a cheap rate for 2 years while a lot of other people's had already risen.
It was good advice at the time, and probably saved a lot of people cash vs. being on the SVR
Soldato
The problem is the production side is a global business.
Unless your talking of having them state owned, or state run, or some kind of state oversight then its basically a daft conversation.
Plus of course you are assuming our domestic production is enough to cover UK demand.
Edit, and.
The government apply super taxation to this. Eg wind farms pay excess tax based on a formula for price. As such as the price goes up they pay more and more to the government.
Why are the government not saying this needs to be passed on via lower pricing for domestically produced energy...
Last edited:
Been discussed before but the energy companies dont set the price at which they sell at its all done on the open worldwide markets so the term profiteering is misleading at best. If you want to change this it needs to be state run/owned.
Soldato
Yeah fair enough, the wrong term was used. They are making huge profits off the back of doing nothing different. - I have no problem with companies increasing profits through efficiencies, removing bloat or changes to systems etc however, when the huge increases in profits are fuelled due to things like global pandemics and wars, its a little crass at best
Last edited:
Point is ML is not financial adviser and should not give out short term advice on such things.
The way the head line was written screams boiler room sale tactics which would naturally entice people into making financial decisions (biggest ones) without full and due considerations.
It’s just wrong.
Providing comparison is one thing. Recommending taking out best buy mortgage products at the time is another.
Could you imagine the people who can’t afford mortgages normally or as such and go on this product then 2yr later facing 6%-10% rate for the mortgage cos they can’t get it anywhere else that they can afford.
Worst of it all is recommending a 2yr fixed product against a landscape of rising rate. It’s almost as bad as the opioid people.
Last edited:
Soldato
Top tip of the day...
If you still manually enter readings to your provider, don't mistype the number, especially the first or in my case the second!
Only realised when I came to enter new reading a few weeks later, saw I'd hit x3xxx instead of x2xxx. First time I've managed that mistake.
If you still manually enter readings to your provider, don't mistype the number, especially the first or in my case the second!
Only realised when I came to enter new reading a few weeks later, saw I'd hit x3xxx instead of x2xxx. First time I've managed that mistake.
That’s called forecasting your reading thenTop tip of the day...
If you still manually enter readings to your provider, don't mistype the number, especially the first or in my case the second!
Only realised when I came to enter new reading a few weeks later, saw I'd hit x3xxx instead of x2xxx. First time I've managed that mistake.
Last edited:
Ahh it seems people are starting to make sense of what I started saying a year ago.
This is why I said needs to be some kind of state ownership, as its the only realistic way to exclude the open market from the process.
We dont necessarily need to state own 100% of what we need, but there needs to be a step made I think, as right now we are too vulnerable to the import market.
Soldato