Ebico to close in January? - SLC 31D

2010

lstar337 wrote: »

Not the point.

You said none of the big 6.

None of the big 6 have offered a NSC tariff on gas.

lstar337

2010 wrote: »

None of the big 6 have offered a NSC tariff on gas.

Could have saved a lot of time by being specific in the first place.

Out of curiosity, why is it you believe you shouldn't pay your fair share towards maintaining the gas network?

2010

lstar337 wrote: »

Could have saved a lot of time by being specific in the first place.

Out of curiosity, why is it you believe you shouldn't pay your fair share towards maintaining the gas network?

We already pay through the nose because of lack of competition by the big 6.

joncombe

lstar337 wrote: »

Out of curiosity, why is it you believe you shouldn't pay your fair share towards maintaining the gas network?

Every business has fixed costs. The vast majority recover it through the profits they make on the goods or services that they sell (and usually if they don't they go bust). Energy companies are not selling their gas and electricity to consumers at cost price. If they were I think a standing charge would be fair enough, but they are not. So they are making a profit on this but also apparantly want standing charges as well to cover "fixed" costs. I say put fixed in quotes because pretty much every supplier charges a different standing charge to recover the supposedly fixed costs, and often the same suppliers charge different standing charges on different tariffs. Standing charges are NOT being used to recover fixed costs, even if that is what they are meant to be for.

If we must have standing charges they should be set by the regulator so that every supplier will charge the same rate. At present you still have to compare unit rate and standing charge to work out the true cost of a tariff based on your projected usage. So it is no simpler to compare tariffs but in many cases standing charges have been yet another price increase. The current system is a mess and not working.

Regarding your comment about "not paying your share", how do you define that? At present most suppliers charge the same standing charge to entire regions. Yet the cost of supplying electric (and gas, if they get it) to remote isolated properties or those in hamelts or small villages is typically much higher than those living in cities and large towns, all of which are likely to exist in each geographic region. Same as if I live near a power station or far away from one. So under the previous no standing charge tariff some people will not "pay their fair share". Under a system of fixed standing charges for entire regions (that it seems will soon be the only option), some people will "not pay their fair share". It might be a different set of people, but it is still the case. Same with pretty much everything else. The cost of posting the same letter is identical whether I send it to my next door neighbour or to a remote Scottish island. In neither case am I likely paying my "fair share" of the cost.

Bluebirdman_of_Alcathays

joncombe wrote: »

Every business has fixed costs. The vast majority recover it through the profits they make on the goods or services that they sell (and usually if they don't they go bust). Energy companies are not selling their gas and electricity to consumers at cost price. If they were I think a standing charge would be fair enough, but they are not. So they are making a profit on this but also apparantly want standing charges as well to cover "fixed" costs. I say put fixed in quotes because pretty much every supplier charges a different standing charge to recover the supposedly fixed costs, and often the same suppliers charge different standing charges on different tariffs. Standing charges are NOT being used to recover fixed costs, even if that is what they are meant to be for.

I think you misunderstand how profits are actually accounted for. Profits are what's left at the end of the accounting year. Fixed costs are not deducted from profits, the only amendment made to profit once it's been calculated is tax to be paid and interest (Operating Profit --> Net Profit). You cover this in the first few weeks of an Accountancy course.

To try and say only non profit making entities can recover fixed costs is ludicrous.

If we must have standing charges they should be set by the regulator so that every supplier will charge the same rate. At present you still have to compare unit rate and standing charge to work out the true cost of a tariff based on your projected usage. So it is no simpler to compare tariffs but in many cases standing charges have been yet another price increase. The current system is a mess and not working.

Totally agree - Fixed costs in this industry won't vary enormously between supplier, a decent audit firm appointed by the regulator could easily calculate this.

Regarding your comment about "not paying your share", how do you define that? At present most suppliers charge the same standing charge to entire regions. Yet the cost of supplying electric (and gas, if they get it) to remote isolated properties or those in hamelts or small villages is typically much higher than those living in cities and large towns, all of which are likely to exist in each geographic region. Same as if I live near a power station or far away from one. So under the previous no standing charge tariff some people will not "pay their fair share". Under a system of fixed standing charges for entire regions (that it seems will soon be the only option), some people will "not pay their fair share". It might be a different set of people, but it is still the case. Same with pretty much everything else. The cost of posting the same letter is identical whether I send it to my next door neighbour or to a remote Scottish island. In neither case am I likely paying my "fair share" of the cost.

2 ways to go on this - either have numerous charges based on location, or have 1 nationwide standardised cost. The complications involved in the former (Railway Time etc.) would indicate the latter would be the way to go.

I think the current system of having x standing charge and y unit rate is OK (not perfect of course)- companies are free to charge 0p after all, and if nobody does there's a gap in the market.

Equally there wasn't a lot wrong with the old system - people that use a normal amount of energy are paying largely the same. The only people up in arms are the second home owners, for whom my heart bleeds.

Nada666

Bluebirdman_of_Alcathays wrote: »

The only people up in arms are the second home owners, for whom my heart bleeds.

And a <deleted> to you, too. Those with second homes, or out-houses with a separate supply, are not materially affected. It is people with insulated small flats who also own jumpers who are affected. You may think it is a joke to have consecutive 70, 70 and 50% increases in what is paid each fix but it is not pleasant.

I am looking at indulging a five-fold increase in my consumption this winter. After my fixes currently available tariff prices mean, insanely, increasing my gas usage five-fold will increase my total spend by less than sixty percent!

Richie-from-the-Boro

Cardew wrote: »

Likewise I will be sad to see the demise of Ebico.


I have never understood how the Ebico model worked. They became the supplier of choice for those owning holiday homes etc.


I have an annex with a separate gas and electricity supply and minimal consumption, so use Ebico.


When other companies charged high rates for Pre-pay meters, Ebico with their flat rate for all methods of payment were a help to some low users.


However it has always been the case that Ebico were expensive for anyone except those with very low consumption - and very low consumption is not the same as those in fuel poverty.


I have a sneaking suspicion that some of those in fuel poverty and using Ebico are subsidising holiday home owners etc.

Essentially their business model [delivered and priced by SSE] was a social one, not-for-profit, no shareholders the PAYG users subsidised by those of us who pay DD. They were then as you say hijacked in a big way by those groups that the social energy service was not intended for.

If I'd had my way years ago on this forum I argued for single £UKP tariff of kWh [gas & leccy] delivered to the postcode, that's it. All providers would have has to start by saying its £x.xx per kWh all inclusive. Tree huggers and quarterly payers and other exceptions add on £x for the extra service they choose, but the starting point should have been DD /e-account / meter reads and one price for all energy at £x.xx per kWh. Everyone including your good self disagreed at the time. I still to this day think its a good idea and one of only a very few ways to get enough of the % of 'stickies' to swap to be able to stick one up the big 6.

Take care Cardew.

joncombe

Bluebirdman_of_Alcathays wrote: »

I think you misunderstand how profits are actually accounted for. Profits are what's left at the end of the accounting year. Fixed costs are not deducted from profits, the only amendment made to profit once it's been calculated is tax to be paid and interest (Operating Profit --> Net Profit). You cover this in the first few weeks of an Accountancy course.

To try and say only non profit making entities can recover fixed costs is ludicrous.

No I understand how profits are calculated. However the point about standing charges is they are supposedly about recovering "fixed" costs, the implication being there is no other way to recover these costs. However since energy providers are typically making a profit on each unit sold, costs can be recovered this way.

Equally there wasn't a lot wrong with the old system - people that use a normal amount of energy are paying largely the same. The only people up in arms are the second home owners, for whom my heart bleeds.

It is certainly NOT just second home owners. I do not have a second home and have calculated my gas usage over the last 11 months (all the bills I have access to) and it works out at 190 units over 11 months. I calculate this as 2098 KWH. This is 191 KWH per month.

I use Ebico. They charge 5.41p per KWH and no standing charge. So this works out at £113.50.

By way of comparison the cheapest tariff I can now get with Scottish Power (who I used before Ebico, when they still offered no standing charge) is "Online Fixed Price Energy September 2015" which has a 33.58p a day standing charge and a unit rate of 3.497p. So this would be a usage charge of £73.36 and a standing charge of £110.82. This gives a total of £184.84. As you can see if Ebico closes I would immediatly face a 62% price increase. That's a pretty large increase to have to pay.

robin58

Bu**er it!

Went over to Ebico because they had no standing charge.

Out of my last gas bill I was paying two thirds of it on standing charge.

I do not approve of a blanket charge of so much a day for a standing charge.

If you use a low consumption of gas its a rip off.

I am personally getting feed up with Ofgem sticking their nose into things to make it fair, only to make it even worse for the lower consumption users.

On another matter saw I article in a newspaper where a consumer was being charged 24p on top of the standing charge, to supply the gas.

I thought that was what the standing charge was for.

Bark01

The actual publication is asking for a 12 month extension with the threat of closure if they don't get it. Its not confirming closure.

Also where did you find that publication I can't find it by going through Ofgems site and its not mentioned on Ebico site either? (not suggesting anything fishy, just curious)