Thames Water nearing the cliff edge.

[motorbiking]

Exactly. They have to tread carefully. Investors are watching, they need to find the right balance.

 

[Highway Man]

We were better off when all utilities and services were all Nationalised, it's how it should be, British Gas, British Rail, The Electricity Board, The Water Board. British Steel, We are paying well over the odds for a lesser service and to fund the lucky share holders and fat cat bosses to become richer with hideous salaries. These services should never have become privatised company's.

 

[morqthana]

Exactly. They have to tread carefully. Investors are watching, they need to find the right balance.

No investor who worries that he might lose his money if he engages in pillaging privatised infrastructure businesses is welcome.

 

[IT Minion]

Isn't the main reason Thames Water is at risk of being renationalised that the investors don't want to invest any funds?

 

[morqthana]

Why is a significant investment needed?

Given investors' rational analysis of the returns they have had so far,and where they came from, why should they balk at further investment?

It's a sound business, competently run by its executives, isn't it?

 

[Justin Passing]

Most of Thames Water Dividendees, if that's a word, are in Abu Dhabi, China, and Canada afair.
Many of the major Creditors, who would stand to lose money now ( the shareholders would have given up hope long ago) are US hedge funds,. I don't know the details.

Some privatisations of things which "shouldn't have been" turned out OK, depending on your point of view. I wouldn't support if meself.
BT, BG, BA, BP, and RR.

It's a sound business, competently run by its executives, isn't it?

Yes, But.
It's the debt which is the problem, it's drowning. The business itself, is getting better. Or less bad.

 

[morqthana]

Some privatisations of things which "shouldn't have been" turned out OK, depending on your point of view. I wouldn't support if meself.
BT, BG, BA, BP, and RR.

Yo have to think about whether they should have been nationalised in the first place. BT, probably, as it was then the monopoly provider of the country's comms infrastructure. BG, yes. BA & RR were rescued when they failed. BP was formed for strategic reasons.

But should airlines, oil companies, and engineering firms be state owned?

Yes, But.
It's the debt which is the problem, it's drowning. The business itself, is getting better. Or less bad.

The people running it did not wake up one morning to find the company saddled with debt, and not a clue how it got there..

 

[motorbiking]

Where there is competition there is no need for state ownership, where there isn’t it doesn’t make much sense for privatisation.

 

[fixitflav]

where there isn’t it doesn’t make much sense for privatisation.

Particularly when no control is retained over executives' pay, bonuses and dividends etc. It's gone just the way anybody could have predicted.

 

[morqthana]

Where there is competition there is no need for state ownership,

Domestic or foreign competition?

 

[motorbiking]

Domestic or foreign competition?

It depends.

But for the main if a consumer has no choice then privatisation makes no sense. If you want to improve the quality and service etc. then that could be achieved through outsourcing. This is how you can create competitiveness.

 

[Justin Passing]

Yo have to think about whether they should have been nationalised in the first place. BT, probably, as it was then the monopoly provider of the country's comms infrastructure. BG, yes. BA & RR were rescued when they failed. BP was formed for strategic reasons.

But should airlines, oil companies, and engineering firms be state owned?

The people running it did not wake up one morning to find the company saddled with debt, and not a clue how it got there..

Water surely should be nationalised?
Anything perhaps where the state as an emergency backer has to be there as a last resort.
Power too maybe, it seems crazy to be buying the same lectric from the same power stations, at different prices because there's a swathe of middlemen trying to make money out of you. OK some is "green", etc, so deal with that.
Some just need a strict set of regulations. Privatising some gives "problems we never had before".

Anything big and important seems to go wrong far too easily.
They need to be run by captains of industry, rather than bureaucrats?
The UK hybrid ownership railways are a great example of how not to do it. If you compare ours with say the French, it's pretty embarrassing.
Fares here are about double. It's 33% less subsidised, but hobbled by a lot of private debt. Drivers here earn far more (& try comparing that with a nurse's pay). It's difficult to get objective comparisons, because most information sources parrot the unions' descriptions.
The French certainly have problems with strikes, though. The "holding to ransom", problem.
(Both systems rely on the drivers learning all the details of the routes, which is mad!)

Private debt, hmm, cf Thames Water.
You get foreigners to buy part of the company so they can benefit from any profit it makes??
No, please, who wants that?

 

[morqthana]

Water surely should be nationalised?

It should never have been otherwise.

And I'd have no problems with a "we are taking it back, no compensation, f--- off" approach. THe only people that would dissuade from future "investment" in the UK would be more of the sort of people who gleefully privatised the profits and socialised the losses, and I would love it if we never saw them again.

Power too maybe, it seems crazy to be buying the same lectric from the same power stations, at different prices because there's a swathe of middlemen trying to make money out of you. OK some is "green", etc, so deal with that.
Some just need a strict set of regulations. Privatising some gives "problems we never had before".

Our European chums are gobsmacked by what we did to our power generating operation.

Anything big and important seems to go wrong far too easily.
They need to be run by captains of industry, rather than bureaucrats?

Like Michael Edwardes at BL?

The UK hybrid ownership railways are a great example of how not to do it.

I read a comment some years ago along the lines of "Even Hornby know that a train set has track and rolling stock in the same box".

If you compare ours with say the French, it's pretty embarrassing.

Much of what we do is embarrassing when compared to France, Germany, etc.

Fares here are about double. It's 33% less subsidised, but hobbled by a lot of private debt.

I wonder what that debt was used to fund...

Private debt, hmm, cf Thames Water.

Exactly.

You get foreigners to buy part of the company so they can benefit from any profit it makes??
No, please, who wants that?

Neo-liberals.

 

[Justin Passing]

BL Cars evokes memories of such engineering pinnacles as the Morris Ital
but google says better:
Michael Edwardes was notably successful at British Leyland, where he implemented significant restructuring that improved profitability and reduced strikes. His leadership led to a successful partnership with Honda, resulting in the Triumph Acclaim and revitalizing the company's product line.

 

[morqthana]

BL Cars evokes memories of such engineering pinnacles as the Morris Ital
but google says better:
Michael Edwardes was notably successful at British Leyland, where he implemented significant restructuring that improved profitability and reduced strikes. His leadership led to a successful partnership with Honda, resulting in the Triumph Acclaim and revitalizing the company's product line.

Indeed.

Like Michael Edwardes at BL?

Wasn't sarcasm.