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

QrizB

Here is yesterday's update from Octopus (which I don't think has been shared here yet):

t0rt0ise

Well I haven't heard about the variable tariff yet. When I spoke to someone from octopus via twitter he said it doesn't matter. Aaargh, my spreadsheet thinks differently!

SJMALBA

MWT said:

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...

Any change in UR caps would be as a result of EPG, not Octopus altering their own caps, as I detailed in my previous post - it would be applied in the same was as EPG is applied to fixes e.g. 78p/22p for the currently available Tracker would comes down to 61p/17.8p (which, presumably, means no rush of people signing up?), and so on for previous versions; in practice, this means only v2/v3 would come down to the EPG floor.

If v2/v3 didn't have EPG applied, then some might/will? move to SVT, so they will be subsided by government anyway, so why not apply it to their current tariff instead? Again, as mentioned previously, if they URs go below EPG, that is because of the way the tariff works, not because of EPG. After all, we have been 'suffering pain' in July, August & September, where Tracker has been more expensive than current SVT, as a result of the way the tariff works, and accepted this risk on sign-up, so why should the potential gain, if URs go below SVT/EPG, also inherent to the tariff, not continue to apply, when it has nothing to do with the application EPG?

Of course, this is just my (logical to me, but apparently not others!) way that EPG could be applied, and its application 'justified' - whether Octopus and/or government would consider applying it in this, or any other way, still remains to be seen...

MWT

SJMALBA said:

whether Octopus and/or government would consider applying it in this, or any other way, still remains to be seen...

That still remains the main uncertainty, as there is nothing in the published Government plan that covers support for variable tariffs other than the SVT, and Tracker/Agile are classified as variable tariffs.

SJMALBA

QrizB said:

Here is yesterday's update from Octopus (which I don't think has been shared here yet):

Contacted all variable customers? Flexible, perhaps, but not all variable... (and not even all Flexible, it seems!)

'No one will be worse off...' - No worse off than you were before, because Tracker is unchanged, or no worse off than everyone else because you too have had EPG applied (in some way) to your (Tracker) tariff? 🙄

savers_united

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. 

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.

I am just playing devil's advocate, the complication was the fact you mention subsidy only when the rate is above EPG, that would mean different rates on different days, seem quite a bit of work over the next number of months working that out and we just don't know how much support Octopus will be requesting for these Tariffs, the caps were voluntary and if I remember not guaranteed in any t&cs (would need to dig that out), so in theory could have been removed anytime, so Octopus may be asking for the same support as what the Gov't will give for the SVT, in that case taxpayers money is not being saved.
We will need to wait and see but it seems Octopus always set the caps on Tracker above the SVT rate at the time, now you think that tracker may be brought in line with the EPG tariff rate, I was on Tracker even before the caps were introduced due to a low SC and at the time often months of cheap rates.

There are different formulas for TOU tariffs, maybe an average tracker rate will be calculated to decide on any subsidy. 

[Deleted User]

Putting a Cap on Tracker is a recent innovation. I guess when Tracker gas was less than 2p/kWh (2 years ago) a Cap wasn’t needed. The whole purpose of these caps was to protect consumers from what were occasional high energy prices. I doubt that Octopus ever envisaged an influx of customers who were just happy to pay the Cap as if it was a fixed unit price. 

Chrysalis

MWT said:

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...

The same answer as to why they would do it for fixed deals in the same situation.

The governments advice is if a fixed can be brought down to EPG then they prefer that is subsidised (as its cheaper), if it cannot be brought down to EPG level then moving to SVT is the best option, of course Octopus could still choose to discount the higher priced trackers but I dont know who would bother staying on the 78p tracker dropped to 61p instead of moving to 33-34p SVT.

But your basis of agreeing with saver was that you think people would flock to the current Agile tariff, that would only be dropped to around 61p cap.

alanwsg

Do you think it would be a good idea to start a separate thread to discuss all this 'tracker/agile' stuff?

There are pages & pages of arguments about it and they bury any queries about their 'normal' tariffs.

Spoonie_Turtle

alanwsg said:

Do you think it would be a good idea to start a separate thread to discuss all this 'tracker/agile' stuff?

What, like this thread https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6261575/octopus-tracker ?

The main reason it's turned into discussion about those tariffs is because it's simple and obvious what is happening with the standard variable and with fixed tariffs.  Tracker and Agile are sort of hybrids so we have no idea, a lot of us are on them so have an interest in what will happen, and there's not much discussion to be had - and not many queries - about what's already known for the SVT (Flexible) and fixes *shrug*