Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The California Energy Crisis - Information & Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (551)	6/15/2001 4:17:46 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1715

Hawk, I find a lot to agree with in your latest, but I take exception to this statement: That said, given that PG&E is now bankrupt, I would suggest that few executives would have desired such an outcome. Wrong! PG&E, the parent company is not bankrupt. What is bankrupt is the transmission and distribution subsidiary. This has always been part of the master plan. I've commented on this upstream in this thread, and folks like T.U.R.N. were commenting on this as early as 1996 in the Bay Guardian, a regional weekly newspaper in the SF Bay area. What the utes get is a three-fer. 1) Elimination of unionized workforce 2) Elimination of regulated businesses 3) Elimination of low growth business The bankruptcy of PG&E's T&D arm is a cynical policy by the parentco to avoid taking responsibility for the traditional service offered by electrical utilities. By bankrupting the T&D business, the ute executives intend to dump the T&D business on the State. I see no other willing buyer for the assets. -Ray