esodoscuro t1_iy4a8rt wrote on November 28, 2022 at 5:21 PM

Not that it will matter, but /u/senatorduff have you seen this?

My sister-in-law and I had the same issue. Got an email from Constellation saying there was an issue and to call them, call and was told they don’t know why there was an issue, call Eversource and was told there shouldn’t be an issue, call Constellation back and was told there’s nothing they can do to honor our original transfer request at 13.1¢/kWH other than resubmit at their new, higher rate of 15.76¢/kWh (using the ESAVES5 offer code, it’s 16.59¢ otherwise). I refused to accept because I was emailed a contract at the lower rate when I signed up, and I expect that contract to be honored.

Steady_Habits_CT t1_iy4sxhp wrote on November 28, 2022 at 7:24 PM

Rather than argue with Bob about whether you deserve a 13 cent, 15 cent, or 17 cent rate from Constellation, the bigger question is how can Constellation offer a 13 to 17 cent rate while Eversource is allowed to double its rate to 24 cents!

Bob Duff and the rest of the leadership of the CGA don't care. If they did care, they could have addressed these issues years ago. It hasn't put their reelection at risk, which is all they really care about.

And go ahead--set the AG or PURA on a path to fine Constellation and you may end up chasing one of the few remaining power suppliers with competitive rates out of CT! It is thinking such as that which leads to digging CT into an even deeper hole.

hamhead t1_iy6scsn wrote on November 29, 2022 at 4:03 AM

>how can Constellation offer a 13 to 17 cent rate while Eversource is allowed to double its rate to 24 cents!

I'm not really sure I understand this question. It's an open market. Eversource has a somewhat higher rate than alternative suppliers because lazy and/or risk adverse people will stick with them. They maintain an X% buffer, constellation cuts it finer. That's the entire point of a [sort of] deregulated marketplace.

Steady_Habits_CT t1_iy804ks wrote on November 29, 2022 at 12:59 PM

It's not an "open market". In an open market, suppliers can enter at will, which results in lower prices as capacity expands. However, one cannot become a supplier of electricity at will in CT because the state has control over one's ability to build a power generation facility. If it were a truly open market, power costs would be materially lower.

Note that in the "fake" competitive market implemented in CT about two decades ago, the number of suppliers has DECREASED over the years! So much for a "competitive" market. "Competition" managed by state control, is NOT a free market. That is why states such as China and Russia are not truly capitalistic--many capital allocation decisions are regulated, if not controlled, by the state. The same is true of the electrical power mkt in CT.

Our power costs are high because of an ongoing series of boneheaded decisions by politicians over the years that continue to this day. It's nice to pin the blame on Eversource, but Eversource has been enabled by CT politicians.

hamhead t1_iy80be5 wrote on November 29, 2022 at 1:01 PM

In the context in which your question was asked, it’s an open market. You asked why, given the same generation bundle, some offer lower prices than others. The answer is that they can price as desired since it’s an open market, for that segment of the vertical market.