At cost energy

[Heinz]

http://www.atcostenergy.com/default.aspx

Looks interesting to me, so I signed up. Will wait and see what happens, if anything...

Heinz

[Ivan]

Looks like some kind of scam / pyramid-selling /sponsorship opportunity to me.

Reminds me of the free dial-up internet companies that preceeded broadband. I joined one for a one-off £90 fee. It looked ok, worked ok, but after a few months I was kicked-off because I hadn't installed an 'update' that was necessary to maintain membership. The update was issued on Friday evening and to be installed before Monday morning.

[ecogeorge]

Saw an interview on telly , - chap  seems genuine , has done a lot for charity.

[knighty]

applied for the hell of it !

no idea how much cheaper it will be tho....

ok the electrisity/gas providers make a hell of a lot of money..... but I wonder what percentage that is of the totaly money spent on electrisity/gas ?

if they're making a billion accross the uk, but have a turnover of 100 billion.... then thats only 1% ?

[noelsquibb]

'At cost'  will almost certainly include their running costs.

So rather like a politicians choice of words, its headline meaning is latched onto by the majority ...

Now what would those running costs include ?

How about a nice salary etc for me, cos it was my idea and no point in being mean with pay for everyone else, we dont do profit after all.

Easy enough to build a viable operation with no profit margin I reckon.

The real test is price comparison but they seem keen to avoid that one.

[JohnS]

'At cost'  will almost certainly include their running costs.

So rather like a politicians choice of words, its headline meaning is latched onto by the majority ...

Now what would those running costs include ?

How about a nice salary etc for me, cos it was my idea and no point in being mean with pay for everyone else, we dont do profit after all.

Easy enough to build a viable operation with no profit margin I reckon.

The real test is price comparison but they seem keen to avoid that one.

You mean like Branson

[ecogeorge]

'At cost'  will almost certainly include their running costs.

So rather like a politicians choice of words, its headline meaning is latched onto by the majority ...

Now what would those running costs include ?

How about a nice salary etc for me, cos it was my idea and no point in being mean with pay for everyone else, we don't do profit after all.

Easy enough to build a viable operation with no profit margin I reckon.

The real test is price comparison but they seem keen to avoid that one.

Sorry to criticise and please don't take this personally but why the Huge cynicism about someone trying to provide an essential (energy ) at an almost cost price?
If you prefer to support  share holders in companies like British gas that's fine.
You do not have to buy your energy from "atcost" so why the negative response?
Puzzled and now behind the parapet -George.

[martin]

I'm keeping an open mind on this one, but I don't blame anyone who has a somewhat jaundiced and cynical view of the world, particularly with the recent shenanigans in politics, banking and "the renewables world"............. whether it's fiddled expenses, gazillions for bent bankers, chocolate teapots or bent schemes for renewables, "they're all at it"...........
(and on top of it all I noticed today that there's a disconcerting trend for the "gurus" of eco awareness to go completely "off-trolley, gibbering doolally" in the end....... poor old Monbiot would appear to have totally lost the plot, embraced nukes with a passion, and is now ranting that pvs are the tool of the devil, and a plot by the middle classes to starve the poor - (sic)

[RichardKB]

The only downside I see to this is if it is significantly cheaper, then it may cause some to use more, or think less about the energy they are using.

Rich