Whilst we struggle with bills, BG profits up.

MillicentBystander

Crikey, I really can't believe I'm having to spell it out but oh well. You simply cannot compare the profits of a company which provides a product that the public don't need to sustain life itself with one that provides just such a product (especially one that was basically gifted millions of customers to start them off). A company that provides a product essential to life and one which the punter can't simply decide to use another supplier without hoop jumping and a long-ish wait really should come under closer scrutiny, surely? This isn't exactly rocket science (but maybe it is and I'm a previously undiscovered genius judging by this thread, who knows?).

insanegloss

MillicentBystander wrote: »

Crikey, I really can't believe I'm having to spell it out but oh well. You simply cannot compare the profits of a company which provides a product that the public don't need to sustain life itself with one that provides just such a product (especially one that was basically gifted millions of customers to start them off).

Does that mean we hold Pharmaceutical, water and perhaps supermarkets in the same regard? After all, they provide products that are needed to sustain life. Where does that definition end?

Do we need to keep the energy companies balance sheets under scruitiny, of course, we need to ensure that we are getting value for money as consumers.

However, we need to be realisitic when we are looking at the profit figures as absolute profit is fairly meaningless, as for instance, if the company organically grows their customer base at the same profit margin, this will increase the absolute profit and not the margin.

Cardew

MillicentBystander wrote: »

Crikey, I really can't believe I'm having to spell it out but oh well. You simply cannot compare the profits of a company which provides a product that the public don't need to sustain life itself with one that provides just such a product (especially one that was basically gifted millions of customers to start them off). A company that provides a product essential to life and one which the punter can't simply decide to use another supplier without hoop jumping and a long-ish wait really should come under closer scrutiny, surely? This isn't exactly rocket science (but maybe it is and I'm a previously undiscovered genius judging by this thread, who knows?).

Isn't the thrust of your argument a criticism of the Government, ofgem, and Maggie;) rather than a criticism of BG?

macman

How about adding petrol/diesel, telecoms to the list of essential services?
You want the 'essentials' to be presumably either renationalised or under heavier state regulation, yet you asked me to desist from using Tesco as an example of another company making vast profits at the consumer's expense.
So, to follow your logic, since food is clearly an 'essential of life', shouldn't the big supermarkets also be nationalised or regulated? Tesco have a greater monopoly in their market sector than BG do.
It's up to people to decide for themselves what they consider 'essential'. If that includes subscription TV, then that's their choice, however misguided it may be.

antrobus

MillicentBystander wrote: »

Crikey, I really can't believe I'm having to spell it out ...

That's not really much of a point though is it? As other posters have pointed out the world is full of companies that make profits out of providing the 'essentials of life'. Such an observation would fall into the SFW category.

Nada666

I've had a quick look at Millicent's posting history. I have decided to walk away. There will be no point presenting an argument.

[Deleted User]

macman wrote: »

OK then, how about a comparison to a well known/infamous satellite TV company instead?
Sky and BG have approximately the same number of UK customers, but Sky (last year's figures) made almost twice the profits of BG: £1.19 bn compared to £0.606bn. £100 per customer per year compared to £50. And that's on a much smaller annual spend. Sky's profit margin is more like 18% compared to BG's 5%. And Sky, last time I checked, don't have to bear the capital costs to build new power stations.
I suspect that your response will be that no one needs subscription TV, but they do need gas and electricity. Well, obviously 12 million people out there do not agree, as Sky continues to increase it's subscriber base, despite the recession.
If BG were to be a bit more media-savvy and announce their figures in the height of summer, I doubt that they'd barely get a mention for this.
Why aren't the BBC and the popular press laying into Murdoch for 'rip-off price and profit increases'? Oh, I almost forgot, Murdoch owns most of the popular press...

British Gas dont actually do much for their £50 per customer per year, a big rise on other years. Auto billing systems and hired call centres is all whats needed. They have managed to get the public doing their own readings saving a lot on meter reading costs without passing on any form of a discount. At our last meeting our Union Rep brought up the subject of Brit Gas call centres phoning up aged and disabled customers to get the quarterly reads without even asking if the people are capable of it, he said someones going to end up getting killed ! . Thats British Gas for you, utterly ruthless. Hopefully the C.E.O. will be sat in front of Ann Robinson on BBC Watchdog once again soon.

sheffield_lad

sacsquacco wrote: »

At our last meeting our Union Rep brought up the subject of Brit Gas call centres phoning up aged and disabled customers to get the quarterly reads without even asking if the people are capable of it, he said someones going to end up getting killed ! . .

I am not sure its up to BG to ask the customer if they are fit enough, would it not be the customers choice on if they feel they can give the read? If I was frail I would tell them so.

As for BG doing something for the £50 don't forget about the infrastructure and IT (not forgetting shareholders), needed to run a business not forgetting the staff costs. The whole country seems to be anti energy firms but its only because the Gov and the BBC won't put the argument into context IE not explaining that our prices are competitive in comparison with other EU countries if not cheaper. The other elephant in the room is a booming world all wanting the same energy, 50% of Indians currently don't have mains electric but that's not going to be the case in a few years to come. It's got to go up its that simple yet folk don't bat an eye lid at buying an IPhone on a £40 per month contract.

MillicentBystander

sacsquacco wrote: »

British Gas dont actually do much for their £50 per customer per year, a big rise on other years. Auto billing systems and hired call centres is all whats needed. They have managed to get the public doing their own readings saving a lot on meter reading costs without passing on any form of a discount. At our last meeting our Union Rep brought up the subject of Brit Gas call centres phoning up aged and disabled customers to get the quarterly reads without even asking if the people are capable of it, he said someones going to end up getting killed ! . Thats British Gas for you, utterly ruthless. Hopefully the C.E.O. will be sat in front of Ann Robinson on BBC Watchdog once again soon.

Like I said before, it's a very easy business with no incentives to cut costs/increase efficiency at all in order to increase profits. They simply look at their costs and make sure they make £50 per household over that amount in profit. If that means increasing their prices, they simply do it with no worry of regulation and their millions of inherited customers just pay the money. Easy peasy. They need proper regulation, proper regulation which no Govt of any hue have ever seemed bothered about providing. I guess talking of easy businesses, how about the Govt just creaming off their 5% from every household whilst making sure they make the right noises about how seriously they take the industry and where it's going (they don't really) . It's basically a horrid industry regulated by a succession of horrid Govts.

Last word from me on this now, I'm not going to convince those who take an opposite view and they certainly aren't going to convince me of their view/s by comparing it to wholly irrelevant industries.

[Deleted User]

howee wrote: »

I am not sure its up to BG to ask the customer if they are fit enough, would it not be the customers choice on if they feel they can give the read? If I was frail I would tell them so.

As for BG doing something for the £50 don't forget about the infrastructure and IT (not forgetting shareholders), needed to run a business not forgetting the staff costs. The whole country seems to be anti energy firms but its only because the Gov and the BBC won't put the argument into context IE not explaining that our prices are competitive in comparison with other EU countries if not cheaper. The other elephant in the room is a booming world all wanting the same energy, 50% of Indians currently don't have mains electric but that's not going to be the case in a few years to come. It's got to go up its that simple yet folk don't bat an eye lid at buying an IPhone on a £40 per month contract.

My Mum was very elderly at 89 when she was asked to get the reading by British Gas high up, she needed a wobbly stool and a torch in one hand to try and see the reading. she was suffering a degree of confusion also and would willingly have a go at it. she actually died last September after a fall in the street at ground level. Of course its up to the call centres to ask if someones capable, that gos without saying, but my mum was suffering confusion also and could nt be relied on to give an accurate answer. British Gas are a cowboy outfit, none of the other big six have stooped so low. I work for British Gas, I know and see many old folk who are getting pestered by their latest money making scheme. I hope my little rant seeps through to Phil Bentley as Ann Robinson is getting the chair warmed up for you once again, I am confident about that