Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

ESB Electric Ireland to increase prices by 14.8%

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Squall19
    Closed Accounts Posts: 565 ✭✭✭Squall19


    Time to get my big magnet out:D

    No 14.8% increase for me then ;)

    How much profit did ESB make last year?


  • Options
    #63
    cocoshovel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,041 ✭✭✭cocoshovel


    Time to cut power usage by 14.8% I guess.


  • Options
    #64
    Latchy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,191 ✭✭✭✭Latchy


    Time to invest in hot water bottles and a cat to keep my feet warm .


  • Options
    #65
    Darkginger
    Registered Users Posts: 695 ✭✭✭Darkginger


    Latchy wrote: »
    Time to invest in hot water bottles and a cat to keep my feet warm .

    Time to invest in a candle company, I think. And a very large hamster...


  • Options
    #66
    terradactyl84
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13 ✭terradactyl84


    Zen65 wrote: »
    No, State-Commercial companies like ESB and BGE do not receive any money from the state. They are privately funded through the money markets (loans). We call them "State" companies because they are established by Statute (laws passed by the Irish State). They pay a dividend to the state, so taxpayers receive a net benefit from them.

    As for having a say as to how a company is run, it is illegal for the Board of any company to run their business in order to make a loss, so nobody could direct a State commercial company to operate at a loss. I'm absolutely sure that all of the State commercial companies could be more efficient, but in real terms they have been a far greater benefit to the people of the state than most private companies and I constantly marvel at threads here that castigate them without recognising the benefit we have all derived from them. The staff are probably over-paid, but I find that less objectionable than companies that earn large profits here and repatriate their profits elsewhere.


    Z

    That's ridiculous. You're saying that it's ok for the State to establish a monopoly by law, install political cronies and yes men to this company, pay these people crazy salaries and pensions, protect their jobs for life and continue to rip off the consumer?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    terradactyl84
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13 ✭terradactyl84


    Zen65 wrote: »
    Absolutely not.

    Nobody should be over-paid for what they do: not ESB staff, not BGE staff, not surgeons, not Premier division footballers and not bankers. The wrongdoing is not altered by being in private or semi-state ownership.

    Overpaid ESB/BGE staff contribute to higher energy prices for everybody (but in truth payroll costs make up a relatively small percentage of the overall costs of electricity production & distribution). While not denying the speciality of the expertise that some of these staff have, it is inappropriate for them to earn such high income at the expense of all energy users.

    But the earnings of staff in such industry pales by comparison to the earnings of (e.g.) Senior Consultants in public hospitals. These consultants are largely funded through our taxes (so we pay for their services throughout our lives whether we need them or not). Their high earnings directly remove wealth from others in the community, making all commodities (including energy) less affordable. Their salaries very directly lead to a two-tier system of care for the public.

    Premier footballers earn huge incomes in what might be considered a fully "private" enterprise. Yet their earnings are sourced from direct charges (the cost of admission to football grounds) and indirect charges (advertising revenue, sponsorship). The companies who place advertisements (which is pretty much every company) in order to bring their products to market have to pay a higher rate for advertisements because so much money is directed to the footballers, hence all products include a higher cost because a very select few people earn such high fees. Television channels also incur these high costs (for broadcast rights, which are driven by player fees among other things) which drives up TV Licence fees and further contributes to advertising fees which further drives up product prices.

    The same is true of Hollywood actors, Rock singers, etc.

    My point originally was that while it is wrong for people in ESB/BGE/Aer Lingus/An Post to be over-paid, we should not single them out for criticism simply because they are under state ownership. All over-paid jobs result in wealth being diverted to a small privileged few in society. We certainly should not make untrue statements such as suggesting that these people are paid through our taxes.

    I'm not advocating a communist approach to the running of society either. I do believe in simply earning an honest day's pay for an honest day's work, and that everybody should earn enough to live in relative comfort, while also taking care of those in our communities who cannot care for themselves. The uniquely Irish response to having our economy destroyed by the reckless activities of private business has been to turn on those working for the state and castigate them for having good jobs. See how quickly our government opted to buy the now-worthless private companies with our monies, and then look at how well-run state-owned companies and assets could be given to the private sector for less than their actual value so that the bankers and private enterprise could once again embark on wild profiteering with these assets!!!!

    (((sigh))) - but of course this is the After Hours forum, so perhaps I should not think so deeply about the issues raised?


    Be at peace,


    Z

    The cruscial point you're missing is that the consumer has no choice when it comes to the monopolies (always) created by government. At least in a free market, the consumer can decide between companies and the most profitable companies are the ones that best serve the desires of the consumers. A completely separate issue is your untrue belief that the recession was caused by private business but that is a topic for another thread.


  • Options
    #68
    ilovesleep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭ilovesleep


    I wonder would it work if people came together collectively as whole and protest by using as little electricity as possible to sting them where it hurts in their pockets. It wouldn't have to be done for long - perhaps a month or two in protest.

    Decide what electricity exactly that you need to use and stick to it. For me it would be washing machine twice a week. Shower twice a week. Phone charging every night. Ipod once a week. Fridge is always on. Kettle 2 or 3 times a day. The rest I can do without. Like use camping gas for cooking, actually I can boil water on the gas for tea, so thats kettle out. Candles for lighting. I don't use the tv anyways because its broken. Would that kind of a protest work? I mean iceland came together and decided not to pay mortgages.


  • Options
    #69
    Kivaro
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,105 ✭✭✭Kivaro


    ilovesleep wrote: »
    I wonder would it work if people came together collectively as whole and protest by using as little electricity as possible to sting them where it hurts in their pockets........ Shower twice a week.

    Yikes.
    I was with you until then.


  • Options
    #70
    ilovesleep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭ilovesleep


    Kivaro wrote: »
    Yikes.
    I was with you until then.
    That would be for me. Obviously everyone would be different. In fact I think I could do one shower a week and use babywipes and dry shampoo in between.


  • Options
    #71
    Fulton Crown
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,493 ✭✭✭Fulton Crown


    Zen65 wrote: »
    Absolutely not.

    Nobody should be over-paid for what they do: not ESB staff, not BGE staff, not surgeons, not Premier division footballers and not bankers. The wrongdoing is not altered by being in private or semi-state ownership.

    Overpaid ESB/BGE staff contribute to higher energy prices for everybody (but in truth payroll costs make up a relatively small percentage of the overall costs of electricity production & distribution). While not denying the speciality of the expertise that some of these staff have, it is inappropriate for them to earn such high income at the expense of all energy users.

    But the earnings of staff in such industry pales by comparison to the earnings of (e.g.) Senior Consultants in public hospitals. These consultants are largely funded through our taxes (so we pay for their services throughout our lives whether we need them or not). Their high earnings directly remove wealth from others in the community, making all commodities (including energy) less affordable. Their salaries very directly lead to a two-tier system of care for the public.

    Premier footballers earn huge incomes in what might be considered a fully "private" enterprise. Yet their earnings are sourced from direct charges (the cost of admission to football grounds) and indirect charges (advertising revenue, sponsorship). The companies who place advertisements (which is pretty much every company) in order to bring their products to market have to pay a higher rate for advertisements because so much money is directed to the footballers, hence all products include a higher cost because a very select few people earn such high fees. Television channels also incur these high costs (for broadcast rights, which are driven by player fees among other things) which drives up TV Licence fees and further contributes to advertising fees which further drives up product prices.

    The same is true of Hollywood actors, Rock singers, etc.

    My point originally was that while it is wrong for people in ESB/BGE/Aer Lingus/An Post to be over-paid, we should not single them out for criticism simply because they are under state ownership. All over-paid jobs result in wealth being diverted to a small privileged few in society. We certainly should not make untrue statements such as suggesting that these people are paid through our taxes.

    I'm not advocating a communist approach to the running of society either. I do believe in simply earning an honest day's pay for an honest day's work, and that everybody should earn enough to live in relative comfort, while also taking care of those in our communities who cannot care for themselves. The uniquely Irish response to having our economy destroyed by the reckless activities of private business has been to turn on those working for the state and castigate them for having good jobs. See how quickly our government opted to buy the now-worthless private companies with our monies, and then look at how well-run state-owned companies and assets could be given to the private sector for less than their actual value so that the bankers and private enterprise could once again embark on wild profiteering with these assets!!!!

    (((sigh))) - but of course this is the After Hours forum, so perhaps I should not think so deeply about the issues raised?


    Be at peace,


    Z

    Yeah fukin yeah..can'understand the number of thanks this wandering post has got.

    Premiership footballers has no relevance whatever to this thread.

    Neither has Rock Singers or Film Stars or any other obscenely paid cabal.

    I have a simple point relevant to this thread ...the greedy bullying Unions in ESB used their muscle to gough obsceenly high rewards for their members simply because their hands were on the levers of power.

    This only happened because our elected reps had not the BALLS to downface them and allowed them to pillage our wallets with impunity.

    Well fcuck them ! I say ..it will bw a long year before I contribute anything to their bloated earnings (voluntarily)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Zen65
    Registered Users Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭Zen65


    terradactyl84 wrote: »
    That's ridiculous. You're saying that it's ok for the State to establish a monopoly by law, install political cronies and yes men to this company, pay these people crazy salaries and pensions, protect their jobs for life and continue to rip off the consumer?

    No, I didn't say that. I said that semi-state companies don't receive any money from the nation's taxpayers.

    As for creating a monopoly, every country in the world establishes a monopoly to transmit & distribute electricity. Sometimes the monopoly is owned privately, sometimes publicly. Sometimes the state may sub-divide their networks into separately owned regions, but these regions don't compete so they are all effectively monopolies. A monopoly is preferable in order to preserve our natural environment and avoid multiplicity of power lines, and to maintain transparent accountability for the safe management of the networks.

    In Ireland there is no monopoly on generation of electricity. Private electricity generation accounts for more than 50% of electricity on the island.


    Z


  • Options
    #73
    Zen65
    Registered Users Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭Zen65


    terradactyl84 wrote: »
    The cruscial point you're missing is that the consumer has no choice when it comes to the monopolies (always) created by government. At least in a free market, the consumer can decide between companies and the most profitable companies are the ones that best serve the desires of the consumers.

    But we do have a choice where we buy our electricity. Over 60% of the monies we pay in our electricity bills go to the generation company, so with our fully open market there is no reason not to shop around for the cheapest price. I'm not sure who sells the cheapest electricity right now but in this country it's very simple to switch supplier. Yet most people who switched away from one semi-state supplier chose the other semi-state supplier in preference to the private supplier. Surely that says something?

    Z


  • Options
    #74
    Zen65
    Registered Users Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭Zen65


    ilovesleep wrote: »
    I wonder would it work if people came together collectively as whole and protest by using as little electricity as possible to sting them where it hurts in their pockets. It wouldn't have to be done for long - perhaps a month or two in protest.

    This is a brilliant idea.... people should use as little electricity as possible, and more importantly use as little fossil-fuel energy as possible. Whatever about hurting the electricity suppliers, it would reduce the degree to which our lifestyles hurt the earth.


    Z


  • Options
    #75
    Paparazzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,398 ✭✭✭Paparazzo


    ilovesleep wrote: »
    I wonder would it work if people came together collectively as whole and protest by using as little electricity as possible to sting them where it hurts in their pockets. It wouldn't have to be done for long - perhaps a month or two in protest.

    Decide what electricity exactly that you need to use and stick to it. For me it would be washing machine twice a week. Shower twice a week. Phone charging every night. Ipod once a week. Fridge is always on. Kettle 2 or 3 times a day. The rest I can do without. Like use camping gas for cooking, actually I can boil water on the gas for tea, so thats kettle out. Candles for lighting. I don't use the tv anyways because its broken. Would that kind of a protest work? I mean iceland came together and decided not to pay mortgages.
    Here's a few more ideas:
    https://www.esb.ie/esbcustomersupply/residential/energy_efficiency/index.jsp


  • Options
    #76
    Going Forward
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,224 ✭✭✭Going Forward


    latenia wrote: »
    It's nothing more than an organised extortion racket.



    http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/average-pay-and-pension-of-esb-workers-near-euro100000-2065160.html

    Gotta keep the lights on, remember the 70s?
    Treat the power workers with kid gloves to keep them onside.

    If that wasnt bad enough a Regulator presides over an artificially created cartel with artificially inflated retail prices to induce competition to what is essentially a tiny inconsequential market which will will never have more than a handful of suppliers. Nothing more than another pyramid scam.

    The ESB or whatever it would like to be called should be supplying electricity at a cost plus price to the state as it stagnates in recession.

    And anyone long enough in the tooth to recall the promises of virtually free electricity if we could only harness our wind resources?:) A classic.


  • Options
    #77
    Zen65
    Registered Users Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭Zen65


    Going Forward wrote: »
    And anyone long enough in the tooth to recall the promises of virtually free electricity if we could only harness our wind resources?:) A classic.

    In theory the wind-farms now operating are financed on the basis of a 15-year lifetime. Therefore after year 15 the owner of a wind-farm has fully repaid his investment (plus earned a handsome profit) and should be able to continue to export at much reduced cost. So if we wait another 15 years ..........


    ((remove tongue from cheek))


    Z


Advertisement