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.

Politics : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jacques Chitte who wrote (32410)	2/14/2011 8:40:15 PM
From: Maurice Winn	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36917

Sure, a fixed price is a reasonable idea. The consumers would be faced with a higher price instead of a floating rate because the supplier might be forced to sell at a loss [or less than what they could otherwise get]. For a decade I have advocated such pricing systems. There must be 200 rants by me about "current price is ..." My theory is give people what they want and charge them for it. Somebody might want a fixed price per year for 10,000 kilowatt-hours, another might prefer variable pricing so they can use haps when it's nearly free and turn everything off when the price is high, another might want a fixed price per kilowatt-hour anytime, another might go for an interruptible supply with a fixed lowish price but with their hot water turned off at certain times. I'm not a one size fits all salesman. All that would be required is to price it all so that at any particular time there is not a blackout and everyone can buy their contracted amount. An actuarial arithmetician could probably figure out a pricing system to keep supply and demand balanced with no blackout. Mqurice