So will Octopus keep to their word and start communicating with customers today?

JohnPo

So the answer is 'nobody really knows' as regards the various variants of Tracker, Agile and probably also GO until they tell us.

Worth pointing out, these tariffs have been integral to all the 'ECO' initiatives that Octopus have got involved with as a competitive differentiator.

So my thoughts are that are unlikely to come up with a set of rates that incentivise folks to all switch back to the 'SVT' rates come October 1st.

So wait and see is probably the correct answer.

fryedslyce

JohnPo said:

So wait and see is probably the correct answer.

I think you mean, wait, wait, wait and wait some more, and maybe hear something before 2023.

MWT

JohnPo said:

So wait and see is probably the correct answer.

... of course it is, but where would the fun be in that... ?

Spoonie_Turtle

No tariff info yet but they've just adjusted my DD to take into account the £67.

Chrysalis

savers_united said:

Spoonie_Turtle said:

savers_united said:

SJMALBA said:

As far as I can see, the obvious way to apply EPG to Tracker is to reduce the unit rate caps:

v1 would have no change because its UR caps are below EPG.

v2/v3 UR caps would be reduced to EPG, which means that you wouldn't pay more than EPG, but if you pay less, then that is because it is an inherent feature of the tariff, and not because of the application of EPG.

With later Tracker versions, the maximum EPG reduction to their UR caps would still leave customers (potentially) paying more than EPG, in which case, these customers can choose whether to stay on Tracker, or switch to SVT.

In other words, similar to the application of EPG to Fixed tariffs?

(Yes, Tracker is a variable tariff, but so is SVT, and while EPG is primarily for SVT, they have chosen to apply it to Fixed tariffs too, so why not another variable tariff, such as Tracker?)

Is there not a case for Gov't saying, why don't your tracker customers just move to the EPG SVT, it's variable, there are no exit fee's why would they want to stay.... Errrr because there may be days where they could pay less than the SVT.... So they / you want the penny and the bun, EPG protection and to pay less than everyone else if wholesale prices fall... On your bike. 

Hypothetically speaking, if the government did subsidise down to or near the EPG:  If the retail Tracker price drops to or below the EPG, that's less for the government to subsidise (no subsidy needed for units used those days) AND Octopus get a little bit of profit from those units, because profit is calculated into the unit rates.  On days when the retail price of Tracker drops below the Ofgem cap (but not the EPG) then that's still less for the government to subsidise.  And Octopus are already subsidising unit rates above their voluntary caps themselves.

Note: I am not implying any opinion about it even being a potential option. Just responding to your reasoning there. 
[I'm well aware it's probably far more likely to be a case of the government not agreeing to anything complicated, which any support for Tracker would be - especially as the people now in government appear not to care in the slightest about trying to move away from fossil fuels, which is what the electricity Tracker/Agile tariffs are ultimately designed to support.]

It is rather messy and not sure for the numbers involved it would be a worthwhile exercise, it would also depend I guess on what Octopus submit in terms of support for these tariffs, they may look to remove their own caps and be asking for full support, the next question is then why would anyone with octopus stay on the SVT and not just move to the tracker tariff if as you say it works out cheaper for the Gov't. 

If I was dealing with this for Gov't I would certainly be asking questions regarding these specialist tariffs and why they need any kind of support when the option of the EPG tariff is available. 

You making a lot of posts on this. But really you are trying to make it sound much more complex than it is.

To apply the EPG to agile its very simple, you adjust the cap (this is absolutely trivial, Octopus currently have multiple tiered agile already). The problem I have with your solution is primarily that it wastes tax payers money, the subsidy will be much larger.

For those on the cheaper tariffs. Although it does make sense for the newest trackers, as it does for the newest fixes. I think most of us are just waiting to see what will happen but you keep making posts trying to push the idea its super complicated and the government wouldnt like it, maybe you are right and the government likes spending more than they need to I dont know.

If I got subsidised its basically 1-2p per unit of electric and less than 1p per unit of gas, and days of cheaper wholesale costs there is no taxpayer subsidy at all, how is that a bad thing for you? Or I could move to SVT and I am getting the full subsidy. As I said I dont care on a personal level, I am not moving subsidy or not, but I do care about saving taxpayers money. Try not to look at it from a winners and losers perspective.

--


Its even simpler than I said actually, the only trackers available now are way way above the original October SVT, so they wouldnt be subsidised even close to the SVT so there would be no mass migration to these tariffs, remember 35p agile and v3 tracker got pulled months ago. 55p agile also pulled.  I am surprised MWT agreed with you on this point.

The current 78p agile is not attractive even if it were to get the subsidy.  It would barely get down to just above 60p unit range.

niktheguru

What people haven't mentioned is that Octopus have no real duty to make the cap the epg. They may redcue the cap to just above the epg and say this is what it is. You may have to pay more than the epg but some days you may well pay much less. That is the risk on tracker. That was always the deal for those of us that were early adopters when there wasn't even a cap.

Octopus introduced caps to incentivise the tariff and make sure customers didn't get shafted with ridiculously high prices on any one day, it wasn't designed so the top limit was svt and customers would only benefit from savings.

It makes no sense for them to make it at epg.  Then it will easily be the best tariff and everyone to swarm with it. Perhaps they'll close it to new customers. It's less hassle for them to just say it is what it is and just allow everyone who is worse off to go to svt. At the end of the day who knows, but maybe they're currently working out at what level the cap should be so it's fair for both parties.

Chrysalis

niktheguru said:

What people haven't mentioned is that Octopus have no real duty to make the cap the epg. They may redcue the cap to just above the epg and say this is what it is. You may have to pay more than the epg but some days you may well pay much less. That is the risk on tracker. That was always the deal for those of us that were early adopters when there wasn't even a cap.

Octopus introduced caps to incentivise the tariff and make sure customers didn't get shafted with ridiculously high prices on any one day, it wasn't designed so the top limit was svt and customers would only benefit from savings.

It makes no sense for them to make it at epg.  Then it will easily be the best tariff and everyone to swarm with it. Perhaps they'll close it to new customers. It's less hassle for them to just say it is what it is and just allow everyone who is worse off to go to svt. At the end of the day who knows, but maybe they're currently working out at what level the cap should be so it's fair for both parties.

I mean I did post right above you that cant happen, as the current tracker tariffs with subsidy would be nowhere near EPG.

The good tracker tariffs are no longer available to switch to.

Octopus might prefer people to leave the trackers though, I agree with you on that one, as it isnt clear how they manage to keep people on such low caps on tariffs that are based on daily prices.

MWT

Chrysalis said:

niktheguru said:

What people haven't mentioned is that Octopus have no real duty to make the cap the epg. They may redcue the cap to just above the epg and say this is what it is. You may have to pay more than the epg but some days you may well pay much less. That is the risk on tracker. That was always the deal for those of us that were early adopters when there wasn't even a cap.

Octopus introduced caps to incentivise the tariff and make sure customers didn't get shafted with ridiculously high prices on any one day, it wasn't designed so the top limit was svt and customers would only benefit from savings.

It makes no sense for them to make it at epg.  Then it will easily be the best tariff and everyone to swarm with it. Perhaps they'll close it to new customers. It's less hassle for them to just say it is what it is and just allow everyone who is worse off to go to svt. At the end of the day who knows, but maybe they're currently working out at what level the cap should be so it's fair for both parties.

I mean I did post right above you that cant happen, as the current tracker tariffs with subsidy would be nowhere near EPG.

The good tracker tariffs are no longer available to switch to.

Octopus might prefer people to leave the trackers though, I agree with you on that one, as it isnt clear how they manage to keep people on such low caps on tariffs that are based on daily prices.

Why would they change the cap for those already below the current version of the tariffs, but leave the current version alone?

That really doesn't make sense either...

BeerSavesMoney

Spoonie_Turtle said:

No tariff info yet but they've just adjusted my DD to take into account the £67.

I’ve just checked my account and noticed the same!

bristolleedsfan

Chrysalis said:

savers_united said:

Spoonie_Turtle said:

savers_united said:

SJMALBA said:

As far as I can see, the obvious way to apply EPG to Tracker is to reduce the unit rate caps:

v1 would have no change because its UR caps are below EPG.

v2/v3 UR caps would be reduced to EPG, which means that you wouldn't pay more than EPG, but if you pay less, then that is because it is an inherent feature of the tariff, and not because of the application of EPG.

With later Tracker versions, the maximum EPG reduction to their UR caps would still leave customers (potentially) paying more than EPG, in which case, these customers can choose whether to stay on Tracker, or switch to SVT.

In other words, similar to the application of EPG to Fixed tariffs?

(Yes, Tracker is a variable tariff, but so is SVT, and while EPG is primarily for SVT, they have chosen to apply it to Fixed tariffs too, so why not another variable tariff, such as Tracker?)

Is there not a case for Gov't saying, why don't your tracker customers just move to the EPG SVT, it's variable, there are no exit fee's why would they want to stay.... Errrr because there may be days where they could pay less than the SVT.... So they / you want the penny and the bun, EPG protection and to pay less than everyone else if wholesale prices fall... On your bike. 

Hypothetically speaking, if the government did subsidise down to or near the EPG:  If the retail Tracker price drops to or below the EPG, that's less for the government to subsidise (no subsidy needed for units used those days) AND Octopus get a little bit of profit from those units, because profit is calculated into the unit rates.  On days when the retail price of Tracker drops below the Ofgem cap (but not the EPG) then that's still less for the government to subsidise.  And Octopus are already subsidising unit rates above their voluntary caps themselves.

Note: I am not implying any opinion about it even being a potential option. Just responding to your reasoning there. 
[I'm well aware it's probably far more likely to be a case of the government not agreeing to anything complicated, which any support for Tracker would be - especially as the people now in government appear not to care in the slightest about trying to move away from fossil fuels, which is what the electricity Tracker/Agile tariffs are ultimately designed to support.]

It is rather messy and not sure for the numbers involved it would be a worthwhile exercise, it would also depend I guess on what Octopus submit in terms of support for these tariffs, they may look to remove their own caps and be asking for full support, the next question is then why would anyone with octopus stay on the SVT and not just move to the tracker tariff if as you say it works out cheaper for the Gov't. 

If I was dealing with this for Gov't I would certainly be asking questions regarding these specialist tariffs and why they need any kind of support when the option of the EPG tariff is available. 

To apply the EPG to agile its very simple, you adjust the cap (this is absolutely trivial, Octopus currently have multiple tiered agile already). 

You and others seem to be assuming Octopus can change product caps on existing versions of agile and tracker without a lot of work behind the scenes........

It might ( might not) be something that they have been working on, there was some suggestion here during April as well as elsewhere since that Octopus cannot easily/quickly change Cap on existing versions.

At least up until middle august tracker and agile renewals have not been renewing in the way opinions expressed on this forum assume that they would....... I will give a bit of a clue about that, in the lead up to tracker coming to end of 12 month term, email has always been sent out giving option to renew, change to another tariff, do nothing option has always been to extend term for further 12 months with no exit fees.