Contrary to the line being pushed in this piece, creditors/owners can take a haircut *without* a nationalisation. Putting the costs of their greed on taxpayers - what they seem to be asking for - would be totally unacceptable. www.theguardian.com/business/202... - ThreadSky

jolyonmaugham.bsky.social • 33 days ago

Contrary to the line being pushed in this piece, creditors/owners can take a haircut *without* a nationalisation. Putting the costs of their greed on taxpayers - what they seem to be asking for - would be totally unacceptable. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/jan/25/thames-water-rescuers-seek-clean-break-before-committing-fresh-funds?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Comments

ferrickbrick.bsky.social•33 days ago

They deserve to be stripped of the licences and forced to compensate the consumers. If they go under, so what!

pete-shaw.bsky.social•33 days ago

So this is where we discover who really runs the country. Foreign wealth or an elected govt

agood1.bsky.social•33 days ago

Totally agree there.

elimuann.bsky.social•33 days ago

Water companies are a clear case for nationalisation given that they’re monopolies. Furthermore, they leave us with no choice other than to buy something absolutely essential to life from them at over-inflated prices. Meanwhile the environment suffers, infrastructure fails & execs are paid millions

agood1.bsky.social•33 days ago

The taxpayers should not bail out private corporations again. Let them fail first then rebuild.

p17ete.bsky.social•33 days ago

The entire conversation (well almost) should focus on the role & actions of the regulator

Where would we be if the regulator was efficient & effective:

-Would water companies be working harder
-Would water companies be less profitable
-Would water bills be higher
-Would water quality be better

dragonfy.bsky.social•33 days ago

Indeed. Or maybe if not corrupt...

agood1.bsky.social•33 days ago

They want corporate socialism or a corporate safety net. There ain’t no money left. The buggers took it all.

johncarrabc.bsky.social•33 days ago

This seems like a issue that taxpayers need a clear presentation on.

gerryking.bsky.social•33 days ago

this reportage is foul - all for the benefit of the shareholders at our expense.

nick-73.bsky.social•33 days ago

Exactly so. Generally speaking the supposed libertarian mindset appears to be quite reliant on the public purse when it suits.

keepinfairlieweird.bsky.social•33 days ago

These bidders sound very much like have cake / eat cake types.

joobileejoolz.bsky.social•33 days ago

Aren’t they all? That’s how they end up owning more cake than they could ever eat.

agood1.bsky.social•33 days ago

Guillotines were effective in their day.

cmirar.bsky.social•33 days ago

📌

davritz.bsky.social•33 days ago

Reminds me of the hand wringing over moral hazard re forgiveness of developing countries debt. Focus was always on ‘reckless behaviour’ even where the lenders were complicit and equally reckless. We’ve already paid for Thames Water’s mismanagement. There should be consequences for their failure.

joalo.bsky.social•33 days ago

Given their greed and incompetence, they deserve to take a haircut. And the UK's public finances could be improved by rejoining the single market and taxing the fucking rich.

dragonfy.bsky.social•33 days ago

So what can we do?

simonwatts17.bsky.social•33 days ago

I thought holding shares was holding ownership of a company. Why does that seem to exclude ownership of the company's debts? Shouldn't the shareholders be required to cover the creditors?

cillacat.bsky.social•33 days ago

No way should the tax payer lose a penny over this water company. They paid out billions to shareholders. So they all lose money now. All overseen by our incompetent regulators.

steve-scooby.bsky.social•33 days ago

They knew what they were buying. An emaciated husk stripped of assets and leveraged to insanity.

Caveat emptor

No bailout, let it fail.

dennispatton.bsky.social•33 days ago

Having cake and eating it. Nationalise it.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply