Millions of taxpayers cash to keep Bulb going

DiseasedBunny

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10229901/Government-steps-millions-taxpayer-cash-prop-Bulb-Energy.html

DiseasedBunny

This is where its wrong - if its broke, let it fold

Rich2808

DiseasedBunny said:

This is where its wrong - if its broke, let it fold

And leave 1.7 million households without electricity and gas in mid winter?

Too big to fail - the government has to step in as presumably no one else wants to take on 1.7 million new customers.

emmajones1976

Rich2808 said:

DiseasedBunny said:

This is where its wrong - if its broke, let it fold

And leave 1.7 million households without electricity and gas in mid winter?

Well thats never going to happen, is it? Even if nobody wants to take their customers on, they wont just get "cut off", there would have to be a nationalisation of some sort.

Rich2808

emmajones1976 said:

Rich2808 said:

DiseasedBunny said:

This is where its wrong - if its broke, let it fold

And leave 1.7 million households without electricity and gas in mid winter?

Well thats never going to happen, is it? Even if nobody wants to take their customers on, they wont just get "cut off", there would have to be a nationalisation of some sort.

Hence the government bailout - as they don't want to have to run an energy company with 1.7 million customers.

QrizB

DiseasedBunny said:

This is where its wrong - if its broke, let it fold

In practice, with Bulb it's going to cost us (the consumers) a similar amount whichever way they do it.

• SoLR - we pay the costs via the SoLR process.
• Special administrator - we pay the costs (which will be the same) through that process.

Unless, as Rich suggests, you'd rather cut off 1.7 million customers through no fault of their own?

emmajones1976

Nobody is being "cut off", for the love of god.

Rich2808

emmajones1976 said:

Nobody is being "cut off", for the love of god.

They aren't - because the Government is providing a bailout to keep Bulb operating to stop people being 'cut off'.

If the Government hadn't stepped in - and Bulb simply stopped trading and no alternative supplier for their customers was found - they might well have been 'cut off' as their supplier would have ceased to operate.

I believe Bulb has 700,000 more customers than all the other suppliers which have already gone bust combined!. So they are in a totally different league to the other firms which have gone under.

emmajones1976

There is no "might" about it. NOBODY would get cut off (other than in the usual scenarios).

Are you honestly suggesting that if a buyer for Bulb isnt found, and then OFGEM are unable to find a supplier for 1.7m people, they will go round cutting off their gas and electric?  Dont be silly.

molerat

emmajones1976 said:

Nobody is being "cut off", for the love of god.

Nobody here really has suggested they will be, it was in reply to the, in truth rather silly, suggestion of letting them fold as opposed to spending loads of money.  Loads of money will be spent whatever happens, the only question is which "pot" it comes out of although I suspect it will be the same one as the general SoLR payments.

Rich2808

emmajones1976 said:

There is no "might" about it. NOBODY would get cut off (other than in the usual scenarios).

Are you honestly suggesting that if a buyer for Bulb isnt found, and then OFGEM are unable to find a supplier for 1.7m people, they will go round cutting off their gas and electric?  Dont be silly.

No - because the Government won't let that happen hence why it is providing the bailout! Some earlier said just let Bulb go bust - well if the Government didn't act that is potentially the outcome.

You sort of seem to be not getting it at all! Do you think the Government is providing this support just for the fun of it?

And this Government support will continue until a solution is found - and OFGEM finds someone else to take on Bulb's customers (e.g. one of the bigger operators).