plan for collapse of Thames Water

Soldato
Joined
14 Jul 2005
Posts
8,380
Location
Birmingham
I'm convinced they've bought in and knowingly overleveraged these companies on the assumption the government would bail them out if the **** hit the fan

In the case of Thames, it was the previous investors 10-15 years ago that did it. They are long gone.

The new investors will take the hit for something they didn't directly cause nor profit from. But it's on them, they should have done due diligence before buying the company.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Mar 2008
Posts
32,751
I think that might be a little too generalising as I'm sure there's a fair minority who know privatisation was always an arms-length scam to fool morons into thinking it wasn't always the government's fault.
 
Soldato
Joined
11 Sep 2013
Posts
12,310
Given that it was down to the regulator to specify and enforce the conditions of sale such that the likes of Macquarrie did not do exactly what they've done, it ultimately always is the fault of the government.
 
Soldato
Joined
16 Jun 2005
Posts
24,041
Location
In the middle
Dear God, I agree with him. I don't ever see the utilities companies being renationalised so the best possible to thing to happen would be for one to be allowed to go bust and let the investors take the hit. I'm convinced they've bought in and knowingly overleveraged these companies on the assumption the government would bail them out if the **** hit the fan.
Me to. I actually feel dirty agreeing with him, but yep, let it go to the wall. An example should be made, although I'll be very surprised if it is allowed to fail, and fully expect us all to just pick up the bill.
 
Soldato
Joined
23 May 2006
Posts
6,882
Me to. I actually feel dirty agreeing with him, but yep, let it go to the wall. An example should be made, although I'll be very surprised if it is allowed to fail, and fully expect us all to just pick up the bill.
well you know what they say about broken clocks......... I dont disagree with him either for the most part.

only difference would be that personally i would prefer that once it went to the wall it was the government who then picked up the pieces and essentially renationalised it.

but letting it fail and then picking up for pennies in the pound sounds a much better plan than bailing them out to me.

The problem is......... Moggy for all his flaws IS a very good speaker and can make even the most bat sh.. ideas sound good. So i do wonder if i am missing something.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
16 Jun 2005
Posts
24,041
Location
In the middle
well you know what they say about broken clocks......... I dont disagree with him either for the most part.

only difference would be that personally i would prefer that once it went to the wall it was the government who then picked up the pieces and essentially renationalised it.

but letting it fail and then picking up for pennies in the pound sounds a much better plan than bailing them out to me.

The problem is......... Moggy for all his flaws IS a very good speaker and can make even the most bat sh.. ideas sound good. So i do wonder if i am missing something.
Maybe he forgot to invest in it and wants to pick it up for 50p himself...I am heartily sick of the state of this country now. I'm like one of those old farts that says things were better in the past, but they really were before the rot set in.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
18 Mar 2008
Posts
32,751
It's a natural monopoly... no amount of obfuscation from rentier parasitical garbage can wish away reality. We'll be paying for it eventually.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
11 Sep 2013
Posts
12,310
Maybe he forgot to invest in it and wants to pick it up for 50p himself...I am heartily sick of the state of this country now. I'm like one of those old farts that says things were better in the past, but they really were before the rot set in.
Except that the rot of underfunding and underinvestment was there long before privatisation... Things most certainly were not better!
 
Soldato
Joined
14 Mar 2005
Posts
16,821
Location
Here and There...
Except that the rot of underfunding and underinvestment was there long before privatisation... Things most certainly were not better!
I don’t remember the state run water boards putting 57bn that could have been invested in the network into the pockets of private investors, maybe I was to young to benefit from that hand out!
 
Caporegime
Joined
22 Oct 2002
Posts
26,989
Location
Boston, Lincolnshire
I shouldn't laugh as I'm dependent on them but watching this whole debacle unfold is literally the entire reason I've not trusted these companies ever. People say I'm far too cynical, well, this is why :D

I pay direct debit for everything in my household. Water is the only thing I do not and pay it at the last moment possible. I have been like that for 15 years. The fact a private company can have a monopoly over you has always irked me.
 
Associate
Joined
31 Dec 2023
Posts
41
Location
Kent
Given it's JRM, i wouldn't be surprised if there ulterior motive behind what he says; similar to what @Uther says, perhaps he and/or his hedge fund buddies want in in some way...

Just one company has US$853 billion, just imagine the return. So a share of £500million is nothing to them.
But for a lot of people paying the water bill takes out a lot of their income.
MultiReply
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom