Why is it so difficult to compare energy prices?

whitegoods_engineer

I cannot understand why we cannot have a simple system for comparing energy prices.

Different suppliers have so many different schemes and tarrifs which just confuse the chance to compare prices.

When I go to the petrol station, I can simply look at the price per litre and get a comparison. It's not difficult.

When it comes to energy, the energy firms have complicated tarriffs which state how much the charge is for the first so many units, then how much thereafter which then makes it impossible to simply compare with another supplier.

Surely they should be stopped from doing this and then it would be a simple matter of checking a single unit price against another.

When I go to a petrol station, we don't have one price for the first x litres then a different price as thetank fills up, so why do the energy companies seem to be able to get away with hiding their prices behind complicated trickery, disguising their prices, and making comparison difficult?

Premier_2

It's known as confusion marketing.

However, help is at hand, and it's very simple to compare tariffs by using one of the numerous comparison sites available

macman

There is a very simple system. It's called a comparison site.

KimYeovil

Two tier tariffs are not complicated at all. They are a reasonable compromise that most consumers believe represent a fair enough balance between conflicting demands of different users. Single tier tariffs are unfair. Why should fit, able-bodied, well-insulated households be subsidised by the house-bound?

What is wrong is the one supplier having multiple variable tariffs. They should have the one standard tariff that every consumer pays. If bills are not paid on time then late payment charges should be levied.

MillicentBystander

KimYeovil wrote: »

Two tier tariffs are not complicated at all. They are a reasonable compromise that most consumers believe represent a fair enough balance between conflicting demands of different users. Single tier tariffs are unfair. Why should fit, able-bodied, well-insulated households be subsidised by the house-bound?

What is wrong is the one supplier having multiple variable tariffs. They should have the one standard tariff that every consumer pays. If bills are not paid on time then late payment charges should be levied.

Got a link to where you got this 'fact' from?

KimYeovil

MillicentBystander wrote: »

Got a link to where you got this 'fact' from?

Where did I suggest it is a fact? Do you have any material contention with the 'opinion'?

Qualification, then: They are a reasonable compromise that most consumers would believe, if they bother their backsides to pause and think for ten seconds, represent a fair enough balance between conflicting demands of different users.

zagfles

whitegoods_engineer wrote: »

I cannot understand why we cannot have a simple system for comparing energy prices.

Different suppliers have so many different schemes and tarrifs which just confuse the chance to compare prices.

When I go to the petrol station, I can simply look at the price per litre and get a comparison. It's not difficult.

When it comes to energy, the energy firms have complicated tarriffs which state how much the charge is for the first so many units, then how much thereafter which then makes it impossible to simply compare with another supplier.

Surely they should be stopped from doing this and then it would be a simple matter of checking a single unit price against another.

When I go to a petrol station, we don't have one price for the first x litres then a different price as thetank fills up, so why do the energy companies seem to be able to get away with hiding their prices behind complicated trickery, disguising their prices, and making comparison difficult?

It's because there are significant fixed costs eg maintaining the meters, supply pipes, billing etc which are the same no matter how much energy you use, so nearly all tariffs either have a standing charge, or charge more for a small first "tier" of units - which is exactly the same as a standing charge unless you're a very low user, it's just a marketing ploy so some companies can claim they have no standing charge and you only pay for what you use.

Motoring is pretty similar when you think about it - petrol might be charged purely on how much you use but other costs like road tax, insurance etc tend to be fixed charge no matter how many miles you do, so together there's an element of "cost per mile" and an element of "fixed annual cost".

It's easy to compare using comparison sites like uswitch and energyhelpline.com, it takes me no more than 3 mins, you just need to know your postcode, current tariff and annual usage (best in kwh rather than amount per month - try to work out what your annual usage is from two readings taken exactly a year apart or as close as possible).

moonrakerz

macman wrote: »

There is a very simple system. It's called a comparison site.

There really should be a "sarcasm" emoticon to use on posts like this !

Fred44

macman wrote: »

There is a very simple system. It's called a comparison site.

Not that simple - no two comparison sites will give you the same figures.

Premier_2

moonrakerz wrote: »

There really should be a "sarcasm" emoticon to use on posts like this !

We used to have one () but the powers that be won't let us play with it anymore

Apparently it was abusive if used in the wrong way ... or should that be 'report-ive', since apparently some people feel the word abuse was wrong too.

Some of us will never forget the good old days on here

Premier_2

Fred44 wrote: »

Not that simple - no two comparison sites will give you the same figures.

Examples please. :cool:
(Don't forget the advice here is to always insert your annual consumption figures in kWh to get an accurate output)