As long as the shareholders don't suffer.

[Salty seadog]

How can this be allowed to happen time and time again? When a utility provider making mega profits year on year and plays billions out to shareholders eventually decides to invest in infrastructure it never comes from profits, it always comes from price increases which will not come down after its all paid for.

FFS.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...-for-sewage-spills?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

 

[Deleted member 28]

How can this be allowed to happen time and time again? When a utility provider making mega profits year on year and plays billions out to shareholders eventually decides to invest in infrastructure it never comes from profits, it always comes from price increases which will not come down after its all paid for.

FFS.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...-for-sewage-spills?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

No one on here own shares then?

 

[Beebo]

No one on here own shares then?

Again your argument is so binary.

Of course people own shares, most of us have pensions or ISAs.

But the point is that share ownership carries an element of risk.

And it doesn’t seem very fair to protect the shareholders who have chosen to take the risk at the expense of the general public who haven’t.

 

[Deleted member 28]

Again your argument is so binary.

Of course people own shares, most of us have pensions or ISAs.

But the point is that share ownership carries an element of risk.

And it doesn’t seem very fair to protect the shareholders who have chosen to take the risk at the expense of the general public who haven’t.

Well surely all this mention of how much is 'paid to shareholders' is rather hypocritical when people on here are some of those very shareholders being slated?

 

[Deleted member 49]

Will you think of the shareholders...

View: https://twitter.com/jrc1921/status/1659087984312954880?t=wAONd0DVQq4d6U0W4zrPjw&s=19

 

[Deleted member 49]

No one on here own shares then?

No...but I take you're point.

 

[Deleted member 28]

No...but I take you're point.

Well, you may not but I wager plenty of others do, including myself, and are more than happy to receive their 'divvies' twice a year.

 

[Unkraut]

No true Socialist owns shares.

 

[Beebo]

No true Socialist owns shares.

But what about a pension?

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

The concept of owning shares via a pension is rather irrelevant
If I write to my pension company and tell them I don;t want them investing in privatised utilities then they will tell me I have 2 choices - accept it or bugger off
and no - I didn;t get a choice about where my pension was invested - it was a company scheme and has recently been transferred to a big insurance company - I had no choice.

But anyway - those entities that do own shares have got their benefits over the last x years - if their profits are reduced for the next few years then they have already made their money - even if they never saw it personally.

However, this concept doe make me laugh - ironically
The big bosses of these companies have been getting bonuses for many years
in my world - when I worked for a big private company I got a bonus sometimes based on achieving a specified target.
For a few years the target was simply not leaving - but turnouver for IT staff was massive in the 1980s so it was worth it for the company
Later on I had to achieve certain targets to get the bonus - I could argue about what the targets were but the idea still stands

So - these bosses got their bonuses
so - they achieved their targets
so (starting to sound like an embroidery class here!) what were their targets???

probably connected to share price and profits
probably NOT connected to clean water and proper disposal of 'dirty water'

what SHOULD have happened was the regulator should have been keeping an eye on that sort of stuff and launching punitive actions against any company that failed to achieve the sort of targets the public are interested in
Punitive action produces bad publicity and reduces profits - hence share price and profits have dropped and the big bosses fail to acheive their targets - hopefully this means they loose personal money
at which point they will take notice


Either that or make them personally responsible for every serious sewage 'event' and for household water quality
with personal fines and potential prison time if they fail - ramping up for multiple instances
When I wasin that private company I was in the IT Department. A particular privacy problem was always being ignored because it actually made the company money (it is complicated!)
Every year we got fined for doing it that way
every year it was brought up as a project that needs doing and was dismissed by senior management
Until one year the Computer Security people mentioned that if we got fined again then the IT manager would be held personally responsible and would have to personally stand trial - with the evidence a slam dunk and the punishment went from large personal fines to potential prison!!!


BOY did that project go up the urgency list!!!

Same needs to be done with privatised public SERVICES!!!

 

[BoldonLad]

The concept of owning shares via a pension is rather irrelevant
If I write to my pension company and tell them I don;t want them investing in privatised utilities then they will tell me I have 2 choices - accept it or bugger off
and no - I didn;t get a choice about where my pension was invested - it was a company scheme and has recently been transferred to a big insurance company - I had no choice.

But anyway - those entities that do own shares have got their benefits over the last x years - if their profits are reduced for the next few years then they have already made their money - even if they never saw it personally.

However, this concept doe make me laugh - ironically
The big bosses of these companies have been getting bonuses for many years
in my world - when I worked for a big private company I got a bonus sometimes based on achieving a specified target.
For a few years the target was simply not leaving - but turnouver for IT staff was massive in the 1980s so it was worth it for the company
Later on I had to achieve certain targets to get the bonus - I could argue about what the targets were but the idea still stands

So - these bosses got their bonuses
so - they achieved their targets
so (starting to sound like an embroidery class here!) what were their targets???

probably connected to share price and profits
probably NOT connected to clean water and proper disposal of 'dirty water'

what SHOULD have happened was the regulator should have been keeping an eye on that sort of stuff and launching punitive actions against any company that failed to achieve the sort of targets the public are interested in
Punitive action produces bad publicity and reduces profits - hence share price and profits have dropped and the big bosses fail to acheive their targets - hopefully this means they loose personal money
at which point they will take notice


Either that or make them personally responsible for every serious sewage 'event' and for household water quality
with personal fines and potential prison time if they fail - ramping up for multiple instances
When I wasin that private company I was in the IT Department. A particular privacy problem was always being ignored because it actually made the company money (it is complicated!)
Every year we got fined for doing it that way
every year it was brought up as a project that needs doing and was dismissed by senior management
Until one year the Computer Security people mentioned that if we got fined again then the IT manager would be held personally responsible and would have to personally stand trial - with the evidence a slam dunk and the punishment went from large personal fines to potential prison!!!


BOY did that project go up the urgency list!!!

Same needs to be done with privatised public SERVICES!!!

Privatisation of the Water Companies is a relatively recent event, I actually remember it happening (1989).

I also remember that discharges of sewerage into rivers and seas happened prior to 1989.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

From a purely business point of view the Water companies have played a blinder here

They are promising to 'modernise' the sewage systems - but basically want the customer to pay for it

which reminds me of the smart meter implementation

basically "we will do what we need to do as long as you pay for it all"
except that in this case rather than it being something of advantage to the company - it is something the company should have done over the last few decades.
And I bet that if you looked carefully they will have managed to turn terrible publicity into a situation where theu get to keep their profits and share prices (after maybe a slight drop for a short while) while subtly making even more money by the way the public end up being charged for it all
Really excellent business - not so wonderful from the public's point of view!

 

[BoldonLad]

From a purely business point of view the Water companies have played a blinder here

They are promising to 'modernise' the sewage systems - but basically want the customer to pay for it

which reminds me of the smart meter implementation

basically "we will do what we need to do as long as you pay for it all"
except that in this case rather than it being something of advantage to the company - it is something the company should have done over the last few decades.
And I bet that if you looked carefully they will have managed to turn terrible publicity into a situation where theu get to keep their profits and share prices (after maybe a slight drop for a short while) while subtly making even more money by the way the public end up being charged for it all
Really excellent business - not so wonderful from the public's point of view!

If, say, Starmer, wins the next election and Nationalises the Water Companies (let us dream), then, either, sewage will continue to flow into our water ways, or, the infrastructure will have to be updated, and, paid for? So, in that situation, who is going to pay?

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

Privatisation of the Water Companies is a relatively recent event, I actually remember it happening (1989).

I also remember that discharges of sewerage into rivers and seas happened prior to 1989.

Yes - I also remember
but from what I remember part of the justification for the privitisation was that the new private companies would be better to run the modernisation of the system and fix all the problems caused by under investment by every government over many years
And if they manage to make a tidy profit at the same time then all well and good

Now - to be fair - they have stopped the interminable water main leaks and fixed a lot of problems with the supply systems and the water shortages caused by lack of maintenance at the reservoirs
but they were supposed to keep it all going and not concentrate on their own profits and bonuses once the bad publicity about leaks stopped!

BTW - as the climate seems to have changed and the water all falls in different places and at different times of the year - then I suspect they will need to be spending more on water supplies over the next few years on top of everything else!

bet they want an extra top up on the water bills for that as well!

 

[BoldonLad]

Yes - I also remember
but from what I remember part of the justification for the privitisation was that the new private companies would be better to run the modernisation of the system and fix all the problems caused by under investment by every government over many years
And if they manage to make a tidy profit at the same time then all well and good

Now - to be fair - they have stopped the interminable water main leaks and fixed a lot of problems with the supply systems and the water shortages caused by lack of maintenance at the reservoirs
but they were supposed to keep it all going and not concentrate on their own profits and bonuses once the bad publicity about leaks stopped!

BTW - as the climate seems to have changed and the water all falls in different places and at different times of the year - then I suspect they will need to be spending more on water supplies over the next few years on top of everything else!

bet they want an extra top up on the water bills for that as well!

I don't know the details, but, there appears to be some form of water transfer infrastructure under construction at present. I have encountered the works, whilst cycling just North of Peterborough. No idea which water company is funding it, or, where the water is being moved from/to. Seems feasible enough, after all, the Romans did it a couple of thousand years ago.