nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

"Give us your MPRN!"

Ubbquittious

We now find ourselves in the rather strange situation where at any one time there are the best part of a dozen companies running around the place vying to get their hands on that silly little number on your electricity bill. In order for them to send you a different colour bill for the same electricity that you have always been getting from the same place.

Who came up with this nonsense? Surely the end result is just the granny who is with the ESB since rural electrification began cross subsidising the stingy person who can be bothered to switch provider every year since they all only do introductory offers. I can see why they would want to allow companies to supply power to the grid but why bother with the consumer side "switching" malarky at all and not charge everyone the same rate?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

TimeToShine

The electricity market has been deregulated to incentivize competition which means more options for tax payers. If supply side electricity was sold to everyone at the same price these companies would have a monopoly over the generation side and generators would be shafted on their wholesale electricity prices.

martingriff

Its called competition. Why not just have just 1 company in every trade and industry and give the same rates

JohnnyFlash

The MPRN is an ESB Networks number. They run the electricity market in the background, so the supplier takes the MPRN and sends a message to ESB networks to change the supplier for the meter registered to that MPRN.

Ubbquittious

TimeToShine wrote: »

The electricity market has been deregulated to incentivize competition which means more options for tax payers. If supply side electricity was sold to everyone at the same price these companies would have a monopoly over the generation side and generators would be shafted on their wholesale electricity prices.

If the generators didn't like the price they wouldnt bother producing, possibly causing the price to rise. That shouldn't cause a problem if there are loads of different companies supplying. The whole consumer side switching provider thing seems like an awful waste of time

SafeSurfer

TimeToShine wrote: »

The electricity market has been deregulated to incentivize competition which means more options for tax payers. If supply side electricity was sold to everyone at the same price these companies would have a monopoly over the generation side and generators would be shafted on their wholesale electricity prices.

It’s not just taxpayers who pay for electricity.

[Deleted User]

Ubbquittious wrote: »

If the generators didn't like the price they wouldnt bother producing, possibly causing the price to rise. That shouldn't cause a problem if there are loads of different companies supplying. The whole consumer side switching provider thing seems like an awful waste of time

True, but the companies make a fortune out of getting you to switch, just look at the little industry that has been created out of nothing just so the consumer has a "choice".

It's like going into a pub and the bar has five levers with different labels and prices, but they all go back to the same barrel.

In reality if the "switching business" wasn't there, the cost to the end users should in theory be cheaper as an entire level of overhead is removed.

policarp

SSE do a deal for a year. Give little bonuses like family membership for the zoo.
Then if you dont renew you are back on the high tariff.

martingriff

Deleted User wrote: »

True, but the companies make a fortune out of getting you to switch, just look at the little industry that has been created out of nothing just so the consumer has a "choice".

It's like going into a pub and the bar has five levers with different labels and prices, but they all go back to the same barrel.

In reality if the "switching business" wasn't there, the cost to the end users should in theory be cheaper as an entire level of overhead is removed.

This "switching business" as you call it is why prices are low. What incentive would a company have of giving you the lowest price if a) it was the only 1 in town or b) you could not switch. This does not just happen with electricity/gas. You have insurance, petrol/diesel, oil. Hell even basic shopping for your groceries has a "switching business". The look what you can save from shopping with us as

[Deleted User]

martingriff wrote: »

This "switching business" as you call it is why prices are low. What incentive would a company have of giving you the lowest price if a) it was the only 1 in town or b) you could not switch. This does not just happen with electricity/gas. You have insurance, petrol/diesel, oil. Hell even basic shopping for your groceries has a "switching business". The look what you can save from shopping with us as

Do you really believe that they compete to keep the prices down, it's only those who constantly switch who get the least highest price.
They still have to pay for the additional costs involved in operating these companies.
That extra layer isn't provided for free.

Ubbquittious

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Do you really believe that they compete to keep the prices down, it's only those who constantly switch who get the least highest price.
They still have to pay for the additional costs involved in operating these companies.
That extra layer isn't provided for free.

True. All those TV advertising campaigns and door to door agents don't come cheap. Each electricity reseller needs its own billing systems and staff to run it.

martingriff

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you really believe that they compete to keep the prices down, it's only those who constantly switch who get the least highest price.
They still have to pay for the additional costs involved in operating these companies.
That extra layer isn't provided for free.

I know that but you can say about anyone who is looking for your business but you still haven't shown how having only 1 company will give you the low price what incentive do they have

[Deleted User]

martingriff wrote: »

I know that but you can say about anyone who is looking for your business but you still haven't shown how having only 1 company will give you the low price what incentive do they have

Depends on whether it's state owned or not, if its state owned, then the government department will already have a hand in to avoid unfair pricing.

If privately owned with a contract to run the service, the government would step in and appoint another company to run the service.

martingriff

Talk to people when ESB and the telephone was state owned and asked would they like to go back. I suspect the answer would be no.

[Deleted User]

martingriff wrote: »

Talk to people when ESB and the telephone was state owned and asked would they like to go back. I suspect the answer would be no.

The world has changed a lot since those days, the biggest difference is that now profits go to shareholders instead of to the state to reinvest in the country.

Most people are not old enough to remember the state services anyway and the old equipment they had to work with.
What can be achieved today by a few seconds of keyboard bashing and mouse clicks would have taken a phone engineering team several days back in the 1970s, because it would have needed physically going to several different locations and moving jumper wires.

It really depends on whose pocket you want the profit to go into?

rizzodun

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It's like going into a pub and the bar has five levers with different labels and prices, but they all go back to the same barrel.

I would've thought it would be like 5 different barrels all going through the same line to same lever... No?

martingriff

Reinvest in what. The state will run everything and own it what shareholders. Competition is good. Why would a company compete for 1 job to have the job they would need the tools, people and if they lose what do they have. You will have 1 company and 1 price and it will not be the best. If you dont want to do the switching then do not i don't. Do not answer the door tell them no. People want choice

[Deleted User]

rizzodun wrote: »

I would've thought it would be like 5 different barrels all going through the same line to same lever... No?

No, the electricity that is flowing in the grid is already "blended" the customer is choosing which lever the barman pulls to supply the beer.

You could also say there are five barrels going to one pipe (in the cellar) that splits out to five levers in the bar if you want, and that would also be correct, but the end user never knows or can control what happens at the start of the supply chain.

Ubbquittious

Would d'EU give out to us if we tried to get rid of the switching business?

martingriff

Ubbquittious wrote: »

Would d'EU give out to us if we tried to get rid of the switching business?

Yep competition rules. In fairness every industry has a switching business. We see and hear it everyday in ads. Supermarkets telling you how much you can save a shop, loans and mortgages with low low rates, car dealerships with finance deals etc and of course fuel at the pumps. Its not like electricity gas and oil are any different.

Ubbquittious

martingriff wrote: »

Yep competition rules. In fairness every industry has a switching business. We see and hear it everyday in ads. Supermarkets telling you how much you can save a shop, loans and mortgages with low low rates, car dealerships with finance deals etc and of course fuel at the pumps. Its not like electricity gas and oil are any different.

You are really getting it from the same place so in this case it's only pretend.

A lot of the fixed line broadband switching business is only pretend as well. Switch from Sky to the almighty Vode and you're doing feck all really

martingriff

Ubbquittious wrote: »

You are really getting it from the same place so in this case it's only pretend.

A lot of the fixed line broadband switching business is only pretend as well. Switch from Sky to the almighty Vode and you're doing feck all really

Not broadband I have had a few broadband providers from dongles to Virgin and I can say they are not the same. Also you paying for the service provider and they also can be very different

Ubbquittious

martingriff wrote: »

Not broadband I have had a few broadband providers from dongles to Virgin and I can say they are not the same. Also you paying for the service provider and they also can be very different

Not those. There's a bunch of the fixed line providers pigging off of BT Ireland which uses Telecom Eireann's network.

I wonder would one be allowed to create their own grid. If you had a bunch of houses willing to sign up and a means of generating electricity would it be possible to bypass eirgrid?

Keith186

SafeSurfer wrote: »

It’s not just taxpayers who pay for electricity.

I wish my electricity bill had no tax on it.

0lddog

Ubbquittious wrote: »

You are really getting it from the same place so in this case it's only pretend.

A lot of the fixed line broadband switching business is only pretend as well. Switch from Sky to the almighty Vode and you're doing feck all really

From the suppliers point of view its not pretend, its an excuse to charge some people more.

You should understand that much of EU regulation ( and expenditure ) exists due to corporate lobbying. ( the list is endless e.g. where carbon credits were gifted, the underwriting of the A380 development, wind turbine manufacture or Alcatel trams for almost every major EU city ......)

namloc1980

Ubbquittious wrote: »

We now find ourselves in the rather strange situation where at any one time there are the best part of a dozen companies running around the place vying to get their hands on that silly little number on your electricity bill. In order for them to send you a different colour bill for the same electricity that you have always been getting from the same place.

Who came up with this nonsense? Surely the end result is just the granny who is with the ESB since rural electrification began cross subsidising the stingy person who can be bothered to switch provider every year since they all only do introductory offers. I can see why they would want to allow companies to supply power to the grid but why bother with the consumer side "switching" malarky at all and not charge everyone the same rate?

What could possibly go wrong with a monopoly.

[Deleted User]

I love it when the state breaks up a hugely profitable state company, whose profits were being returned to the Irish people, and gives it to some private businessmen under the guise of encouraging "competition".

With the acceptance of this rightwing "privatise everything" ideology, one of the greatest ways of redistributing wealth to the needy in our society becomes one of the greatest ways of redistributing wealth to a parasitic private enterprise class. No wonder inequality in the western world has, in fact, rocketed since the 1970s. Corporate welfare, everywhere. But, this being After Hours, let's focus on social welfare and ignore all these colossal handouts to "rightwing" businesses.

Because, apparently, privatisation is more efficient - whether it's building hospitals on budget, broadband networks or motorways where the state guarantees a minimum income to the brave free marketeer. And of course if it goes belly up spectacularly you can be sure the taxpayer will be forced to come in and bail the great, efficient private business out. Such great risktakers we now have.