plan for collapse of Thames Water

[randal]

We're impacted by this; It's currently impacting nearly 80,000 houses. We're lucky that we've always got bottled water and hot tub water to flush toilet as the free water stations are completely overrun and there is no water left in any of the local shops.

Perhaps the most amusing thing is that my step father in law works for Hampshire Fire and Rescue command and they've had quite a few calls with Southern Water. Turns out the part that failed has zero redundancy or spare parts stored. A key part that impacts over 80,000 homes not having redundancy is madness

I'm sure those poor shareholders, CEOs and pension fund holders are desperately sorry for all of the money they extracted from TW over the years.

All of the money that should have been sent to operational channels to maintain the service they are paid to provide.

Seems other folks are getting fed up too:

"Spankers Hill Wood" lol.

 

[Diddums]

A key part that impacts over 80,000 homes not having redundancy is madness

As someone who maintains buildings for a living, this is the most excruciating thing. There should be a second pump to take over the load in the event of a failure, AND another one in the critical spares store. These things have no shelf life either, you just buy them and leave them there until needed, occasionally spin the shaft and dust it to make sure it's ready for use.

But nope, let's rather let that money stay on the balance sheet so we all get better Christmas bonuses

 

[b0rn2sk8]

It boggles the mind how almost all infrastructure services are busted, from upgrading archaic water ways to planning energy distribution networks. Nothing works as expected and it is all brutally expensive when compared to other comparable economies. A complete and utter shower from governments, regulators and providers for decades.

Yet, zero effort to make any changes, hold providers to account or to proffer a strategy to turn things around across all or any sectors. Just repeated cycles of investment promises and improvements that never materialise yet all while milking the customers for all their worth and keeping the tax-payers on the hook for all liabilities.

I wouldn’t say all infrastructure services are busted, telecoms seems to be functioning well.

While ground based services are not the fastest for everyone, unless you live out in the boonies, they are fast enough not to be a problem.

Cellular services are some of the best in the world thanks to our population density and they are very cheap.

Ask your average American how much their fibre to home is and how much their cellular plan costs, you’ll be shocked.

Then ask them about their data cap on their fibre lines, you’ll be even more shocked.

By comparison by 1gb FTTP is costing me £15/month for the next year and my phone plan is costing £10 for more data than I realistically need.

 

[darkgen]

I wouldn’t say all infrastructure services are busted, telecoms seems to be functioning well.

While ground based services are not the fastest for everyone, unless you live out in the boonies, they are fast enough not to be a problem.

Cellular services are some of the best in the world thanks to our population density and they are very cheap.

Ask your average American how much their fibre to home is and how much their cellular plan costs, you’ll be shocked.

Then ask them about their data cap on their fibre lines, you’ll be even more shocked.

By comparison by 1gb FTTP is costing me £15/month for the next year and my phone plan is costing £10 for more data than I realistically need.

Of course, I concede some services are mostly ok, including comms even though those miscreants at Openworld have yet to FTTP my gaff the slackers! Then again, there is pretty good competition in Telecoms in general with an actual choice. Energy is slightly different although the CAP has somewhat perverted how that works now.

Water is an entirely different monopolised matter.

 

[b0rn2sk8]

Telecoms has only recently had competition, for the most part, huge parts of the country is still under BT Openreach monopoly but it seems to have found a balance where it works price wise and there is still enough money left in the system for a realistic level of investment.

Sure not everyone has FTTP yet but it’s coming. I’m lucky, I’ve for 3 FTTP distinct network options and decent 5G at my house and most would consider me to living out in the boonies.

 

[Uther]

Great, there's no water but at least the internet works.

 

[mid_gen]

It boggles the mind how almost all infrastructure services are busted, from upgrading archaic water ways to planning energy distribution networks. Nothing works as expected and it is all brutally expensive when compared to other comparable economies. A complete and utter shower from governments, regulators and providers for decades.

Yet, zero effort to make any changes, hold providers to account or to proffer a strategy to turn things around across all or any sectors. Just repeated cycles of investment promises and improvements that never materialise yet all while milking the customers for all their worth and keeping the tax-payers on the hook for all liabilities.

The neoliberal dream in action.

The *only* thing private companies are efficient at is generating returns for shareholders, that is their entire purpose. When they are put in charge of natural monopolies of essential services, wealth extraction at the expense of service provision is the *only* outcome. Either the people telling you privatisation of utilities was a good idea were morons, or lining their own pockets. Probably both.

The chickens have come home to roost, and they're creating a guano mountain on the living room carpet.

 

[darkgen]

The neoliberal dream in action.

The *only* thing private companies are efficient at is generating returns for shareholders, that is their entire purpose. When they are put in charge of natural monopolies of essential services, wealth extraction at the expense of service provision is the *only* outcome. Either the people telling you privatisation of utilities was a good idea were morons, or lining their own pockets. Probably both.

The chickens have come home to roost, and they're creating a guano mountain on the living room carpet.

This is the aspect that leaves me completely boggled. All can see it but seemingly anyone or group responsible or accountable for any of it is staunchly blind to it with zero honest commentary on it, zero acknowledgement of the true situation and zero honesty about how to change it aside from repeated "commitments" to "improve" via ever increasing bills.

It's maddening.

 

[p1RATE]

I have to disagree with that. As someone who travels a lot 5g for example is terrible in the UK

No, you’re not imagining it – the UK’s 5G connection really is crap | Chris Stokel-Walker

We are lagging behind other G7 countries, but improving mobile networks could add billions to the economy, writes the author Chris Stokel-Walker

www.theguardian.com

 

[Sythe79]

The neoliberal dream in action.

The *only* thing private companies are efficient at is generating returns for shareholders, that is their entire purpose. When they are put in charge of natural monopolies of essential services, wealth extraction at the expense of service provision is the *only* outcome. Either the people telling you privatisation of utilities was a good idea were morons, or lining their own pockets. Probably both.

The chickens have come home to roost, and they're creating a guano mountain on the living room carpet.

Well if you don't like it just use the free market and get your water from someone else, but seeing as every water company not only has never had a customer cancel their outstanding service, they actually have increased their number of customers they are obviously the greatest business people of all time and better than you.

 

[b0rn2sk8]

I have to disagree with that. As someone who travels a lot 5g for example is terrible in the UK

No, you’re not imagining it – the UK’s 5G connection really is crap | Chris Stokel-Walker

We are lagging behind other G7 countries, but improving mobile networks could add billions to the economy, writes the author Chris Stokel-Walker

www.theguardian.com

5Gs main advantage is not speed, its capacity. The lack of 5G isn’t problematic if you already have 4G coverage, particularly in a rural area where there is lower density.

5G got all the headlines for the new mm wave stuff but that’s next to useless outside of very specific circumstances as the signal can be blocked with single sheet of paper.

In the real world, there isn’t anything you can do as an individual on 5G that you can’t already do on 4G.

The article cites things like the lack of 5G disrupting card transactions, that’s a complete nonsense. You can run a card transactions through on 2G or even a dial up modem if needs must, takes a while mind.

The article also cited disconnects as they were driving though a rural area, well yes that’s always going to happen as you jump from one mast to the next. If you want a reliable connection from moving vehicle you need something satellite based like starlink.

Anyway we are way off topic.

 

[413x]

It boggles the mind how almost all infrastructure services are busted, from upgrading archaic water ways to planning energy distribution networks. Nothing works as expected and it is all brutally expensive when compared to other comparable economies. A complete and utter shower from governments, regulators and providers for decades.

Yet, zero effort to make any changes, hold providers to account or to proffer a strategy to turn things around across all or any sectors. Just repeated cycles of investment promises and improvements that never materialise yet all while milking the customers for all their worth and keeping the tax-payers on the hook for all liabilities.

All the can kicking and privatisation sucking money out of everything is biting now.

So many services that should be public but are private are now wanting to hike prices to even get to a par standard.

This is what happens when you don't spend on infrastructure in good times.


To top it off this increase in bills will increase inflation doing the old double whammy hit.


Uk is in such a state.

 

[413x]

I wouldn’t say all infrastructure services are busted, telecoms seems to be functioning well.

While ground based services are not the fastest for everyone, unless you live out in the boonies, they are fast enough not to be a problem.

Cellular services are some of the best in the world thanks to our population density and they are very cheap.

Ask your average American how much their fibre to home is and how much their cellular plan costs, you’ll be shocked.

Then ask them about their data cap on their fibre lines, you’ll be even more shocked.

By comparison by 1gb FTTP is costing me £15/month for the next year and my phone plan is costing £10 for more data than I realistically need.

Telecoms and Internet connections are one of the few critical infrastructure parts that are pretty good.

 

[413x]

Can anyone explain why we can't just let Thames go bust.. Take it on publicly?

We basically pay water companies and we have to bail them out and pay share holders for doing their asset stripping.

Why not just cut the messing around and take a company public and see how it goes?


From what I read Thames want more cash from shareholders/lenders etc and to increase bills by 60pc.
If they don't get 60pc, which they haven't. They claim they will still go bust.

I can't understand how this ends in any other way than them going bust. Just now or 2 years later?

 

[413x]

As a side note.
Dwr cymru who we have here are going to be the most expensive water company in England and Wales still. Despite being not for profit.
Also. Our 42pc rise is front loaded. 20pc of that rise is next year.

I'm fine if we actually get less pollution. But I doubt things will improve.
What a joke.

 

[b0rn2sk8]

Can anyone explain why we can't just let Thames go bust.. Take it on publicly?

We basically pay water companies and we have to bail them out and pay share holders for doing their asset stripping.

Why not just cut the messing around and take a company public and see how it goes?


From what I read Thames want more cash from shareholders/lenders etc and to increase bills by 60pc.
If they don't get 60pc, which they haven't. They claim they will still go bust.

I can't understand how this ends in any other way than them going bust. Just now or 2 years later?

Even if they go bust, bringing the company back into public ownership will not be free. The government would have to pay fair value for their assets which amounts to billions.

They would then have to invest a load of public money or hike bills anyway to bring the company back up to standard.

So yes, the investors will lose their investment but it will still cost us billions and keeping the company from collapsing is probably the lease worst option.

 

[413x]

Even if they go bust, bringing the company back into public ownership will not be free. The government would have to pay fair value for their assets which amounts to billions.

They would then have to invest a load of public money or hike bills anyway to bring the company back up to standard.

So yes, the investors will lose their investment but it will still cost us billions and keeping the company from collapsing is probably the lease worst option.

Is it though? If Thames need that 60pc or fail.. How long do we continue kicking the can?
Things have gotten worse and worse behind the scenes. Ofwat have obviously failed over the years.

But this does seem the UK way. Trying to bail out a sinking ship with a bucket. Rather than forseeing future issues and nipping them in the bud early

I fear for the medium future when national debt, failing critical services need ever more cash but the country has ground to zero growth.
It seems we are nearly there.

 

[darkgen]

Is it though? If Thames need that 60pc or fail.. How long do we continue kicking the can?
Things have gotten worse and worse behind the scenes. Ofwat have obviously failed over the years.

But this does seem the UK way. Trying to bail out a sinking ship with a bucket. Rather than forseeing future issues and nipping them in the bud early

I fear for the medium future when national debt, failing critical services need ever more cash but the country has ground to zero growth.
It seems we are nearly there.

Effectively we're in, have been in, a fatalistic spiral of total failure. As you say, the attitude seems to be to throw away millions of public money and allow the consumer to suffer ever-increasing bills as an interim measure till then. Whether it takes special measures or partial nationalisation, the attitude will continue to be to pour millions in to it as opposed to billions for as long as possible but that thread is going to snap whether it be in 5 / 10 or perhaps even 20 years.

I hear cries that it will cost the tax-payer billions to take it over and nationalise but that spend has and is already happening. At least, on paper, if it was nationalised, it could be run as a non-profit public service entity but Christ knows who would run it effectively and efficiently. Clearly none of the existing water companies / regulators have any clue.

 

[Murphy]

If we're having to pay more so the water companies can invest in future stuff what exactly is the job of shareholders?

I always thought selling shares was meant to raise funds to invest in a company, but now customers are being asked to pay more for future promises.

 

[b0rn2sk8]

If we're having to pay more so the water companies can invest in future stuff what exactly is the job of shareholders?

I always thought selling shares was meant to raise funds to invest in a company, but now customers are being asked to pay more for future promises.

I think you fundamentally the role of the shareholder and how business work in the real world if you are asking that question.