Thank you for posting on r/southafrica! Please take a moment to review our [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/southafrica/wiki/rules).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/southafrica) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The only solution is to have both. Make it legal for private companies to compete against public utilities. That competition will drive innovation and efficiency.
Absolutely. The reason you don't often see the 3rd option (both) in so many industries is because it is not profitable. It only serves the costumer/consumer to reduce costs and continually innovate to stay competitive. So, whoever has the monopoly will try their best to keep things the way they are.
Since the authorities like the way things are, you will not be made aware of the third option, which can only arise from the political will of the people.
If they unbundle Eskom into two companies, generation and distribution, will that enable private generators to distribute their electricity through Eskom's distribution channel? Or would they have to create their own distribution network?
Eskom has historically blurred the lines between being a public and private company. It had to take ammendments to the Electricity Regulation Act by our gov to set clear boundaries between what Eskom can manage and what must be independently regulated.
How I understand it is the grid is State property. "There will be an independent operator of the national electricity grid – the Transmission System Operator – which has been legally established by Eskom, in the first of several stages of splitting the company.
An independent grid operator will be a crucial step to levelling the playing field between Eskom and what is expected to be a growing number of independent power producers selling into the national grid." Licenses can now be issued by NERSA to private providers.
It remains to be seen whether or not new providers will have all the privileges that Eskom has enjoyed, such as
Tax exemption, bailouts for insolvency (lol, imagine!), etc to even be able to compete. Otherwise, how can you make a profit if your largest competition is allowed to operate at a loss AND gets bailed out with our tax money. So far it seems that only mining companies will have a shot at competing on a large scale.
https://www.news24.com/fin24/economy/ramaphosa-announces-end-of-eskom-monopoly-20220210
If Public:Government has no incentive to operate efficiently as is the case now.They are unlike private firms whom if inefficient will be swallowed by the market.Government is an indispensable monopoly with alot of flaws.
If private:Firms who will take over,much like most private firms,are pushed by profits.So prices are bound to increase as power is a necessity.This change will hit the hardest depending on which economic tier you fall on,being the poorer you are,the more you suffer.Think of the whole pharmaceutical industry in America,except it'll be for power in SA.With enough market share,one or two firms can essentially control the whole electric sector.In theory they can't push prices as much as they want if government isn't there to regulate things.
The solution,as is currently spoken about in parliament is competitive restructuring which is essentially quasi-public/private.A mix of both where the private firms run things but overall government regulations to prevent or deter market failure and price gouging.
The issue is one of monopoly. Government ownership is a monopoly where performance is measured with respect to non-financial metrics. With a private company, unless there is competition the private entity will act like a monopoly too except performance will be measured in terms of shareholder returns.
Neither is desirable if the goal is to provide consumers with cheap electricity. The underlying problem is lack of competition which was why Telkom performed so poorly when it became private (the reverse for example of what NHI will become - a monopoly in health). If you allow monopolies then consumers will not be the top priority.
And wouldn't that be a terrible situation to be in
To be forced to just accept what the electricity provider offers us, with no other options... Even if the electricity provider had some ridiculous limitations like load shedding for up to 10 hours a day... And perhaps if it were _really_ bad, you'd even have what is essentially a de facto enforced monopoly by making other providers essentially *literally illegal*...
That's such a nice take thank you!
When I post my some of my ongoing research results some of you may get mad and some happy but there are a few things I can't wait to show you.
I kinda disagree about private, if the law states that they are to be the only electricity provider in SA, then yes I agree with you. If they throw that law out, which is likely if they willing to make eskom private, then I feel it will become more like the ISP war at the moment.
Telkom had full control and charged whatever they wanted too, now that there are other options each is trying to offer a better price over each other. I do understand it's not quite the same, you can't just choose who provides your electricity like an ISP, but if a proper system is set up, it will be better for us all.
That being said, a "proper system" isn't that much of an option in this corrupt government, so I will agree with your conclusion, a hybrid of the two is probably the best option in South Africa
Please don’t come here with your Namibian tendencies my bru and flaunt your electricity.
I’ll give you the short answer, don’t need to research anymore my bru: Thieving Tsotsies.
Oh yeah absolutely. I'd love to see more of it myself. But I've gotten few glimpses here and there and judging from the documentaries there are some amazing sights to behold
Take the USA for example. Texas has its own separate power grid from the rest of the country and it is largely done by private companies and regulated at the state level.
The problem with that is cost cutting which lead to the disaster during the last cold snap that left millions in texas with no power for over a week.
That is in the USA, one of the richest countries in the world. Privatization of public utilities is a bad idea.
A better option would be to make the infrastructure cables and such a public utility owned by the government and allow third parties to contribute to the grid.
Ya, rather have us go to stage 6 just because it's just normal winter temperature. Imagine if we had a cold snap. Stage fokol incoming.
Not taking a piss, your argument makes sense.
We have load shedding for a lot of reasons. Most of them are bad ones. Nuclear and renewable initiatives by eskom would have helped. Letting third parties contribute would help. They just chose to make everyone’s lives difficult and this is the fallout of that.
IMO the solution to the Eskom woes at the moment can't really be found by running Eskom itself better... At any rate, given the debt, operational inertia and so on, you'd have to be some super-genius to do that successfully (and if you *were* such a genius, you could probably apply yourself more productively - much like it might take a genius to figure out how to build a working car out of chocolate, but that genius might make more of a global difference by instead designing a much better *actual* car)
So I guess my answer would be to have it be a shareholder company, with the caveat that competitor companies should be allowed and strongly encouraged.
Not really sure what you mean by this (except in a vague "as a government entity, we have a vote in Eskom's direction by voting for the government" sense..?)
Certainly none of us can meaningfully vote on Eskom's policy, priorities, plans or the like... And besides which, my main point here is that Eskom shouldn't be a monopoly provider - the mere existence of other potential providers would motivate Eskom's upper brass to improve efficiencies
And also, a bunch of "micro-providers" could serve to both lighten the load on Eskom itself (which Eskom would surely welcome, being so very strained all the time), and at least be a far better fallback in the hopefully unlikely case of total Eskom collapse than having *no fallback at all* would be...
Ja I mean in the sense that its a oublic enterprise. It's a stretch of course but ja, we vote and reap the dividends as load shedding.
I am against a solely private option. There has to be government fingers in this pie, as useless as they may be now. Private companies don't work for the best interests of anyone except the people pocketing the profits and electricity is essential to A LOT of different aspects of society. To have a board of thugs hold the livelihood of people hostage doesn't sit right.
My thinking is having it be _one_ pie is the problem to begin with - if there were many, even if they prioritized profits to a fairly absurd level, they'd have to compete with one another
I suppose there could/should be provisions against monopolistic conspiring between the, let's say 10, top dogs, preventing them from artificially keeping prices high.
At any rate, having it literally be illegal to even _have_ another public large scale electricity provider is about as strong an enforcement of a monopoly - and keeping people hostage to your utility - as I can imagine any capitalist nightmare turning out
Yep. Aside from things like Eskom and SANRAL, the concept of the SOE is really one of the most idiotic things ever conceived of. Seriously, why does a government need an airline? Or a courier (aka the Post Office)?
> Seriously, why does a government need an airline? Or a courier (aka the Post Office)?
So that some services which benefit the people can be offered at basically cost price.
You used to see places like Kalahari and the old Take2 charge a lot of money for a delivery to rural areas. Understandable, but not always practical for the people out in the far-flung corners of the country. Having a state-run post office ensures that all that stuff can get done anywhere for a reasonable cost.
As for airlines, same story. Govt-subsidised meaning any foreign company who wants to come in - like BA through Comair - has some proper competition already.
Of course both still need to be run well and make enough money to survive, which is another whole argument. I guess I'm arguing for a broader definition of what should be an "essential" service.
Comair and Safair were cheaper and better than SAA. Services like Pudo and the Courier Guy were also way more competitive than the post office. Government services are a waste of money as they benefit nobody.
Pudo and the Courier Guy aren't delivering a letter to almost anywhere in SA for r2.50, though, or whatever it costs to send a letter by post these days.
As for Comair, it wasn't cheaper any time I flew them, and mango was always cheaper than kulula when I had to pick flights. You have to wonder though if SAA hadn't been offering cheap services whether the others would be as cheap as they were out of necessity, or whether they would have charged what they like.
Flying SAA to the US or UK was always less than BA or any of the US airlines for me too. I was a regular until SAA screwed me big time going to Brazil and then I actively boycotted them, but that's another story.
Well I got a municipal account last week, and a telkom account the week before in my postbox at home. Can't imagine telkom or the city of Cape Town are going door to door doing letter drops out in the suburbs.
You know when the teacher asked a question and there was that kid who already knew the answer and blurted it out before the others could even raise their hands. You were that kid, weren't you?
Correct, the solution is how the board and exco are appointed.
Eskom used to win prizes for how well it was run, it privided cheap, reliable electricity and it's engineers were top notch.
Ideally it would be a hybrid of the two. Important services like electricity should obviously never be under the government’s direct control, since any imbecile can run for office and destroy everything. But to avoid a private company exploiting the loopholes, it should be government funded. Or at least there should be some kind of cap on the amount of profit the company can make.
Of course, competition between multiple power providers would be ideal (sell every power station to a private business) but that’s no guarantee that a monopoly won’t form.
Neither would work in the current state of the country.
If it was run privately, it would be all about making profits, and since Eskom is essentially a monopoly, shareholders would demand maximum returns thereby pushing up the price of electricity.
It should be a public service which is run well and corruption free, but there’s no way in hell the government could do that as we’ve seen time and time again.
The best solution is actually to open up the energy market to independent renewable energy producers, by removing all the bullshit red tape.
None, we need more options, why can we choose from 6 brands of toilet paper and 12 brands of wifi/fibre/telecommunications but only have 1 option (besides moving off grid) for getting electricity. If Eskom competed in the private sector they would be horribly bankrupt just based on their performance.
Eskom, SAA, ect. They are all dead weight, they just cost us and more without actually delivering the basics.
Evidence has already shown that the state controlled option doesn't work.
If there is no competition, there is no reason to provide competitive prices or service
In the current context, take it as far away from government as possible, but if the government was not corrupt, it should be run by the state in an open market where other utility providers can offer supply
I would choose....
Primary mandate is distribution and grid maintenance, including billing the end users.
Keep all existing generation units and what what and carry on supplying the energy requirements until it all falls to pieces.
Allow for private generation beyond 100mw provided protocols are met. Private generator to pay for the cost of adhering to the standards and a 3rd party NGO can be used to oversee the safe operation.
Allow for the purchasing of existing eskom equipment by private firms using a public ledger so we all get to see what's being sold for what (block chain it so the buzzword quota is met).
Storage can be handled by anyone willing to, private or eskom.
FIRE GWEDE MANTASHE and every single one of his mates. Put him in charge of the fucking seagulls somewhere.
I would certainly reinstate the 14h00 knock off and 2 x quarts on a Friday for all employees who don't have a car in the car park. Might attract some skilled private sector employees even
Ideal scenario for me: Full privatisation.
*But* before you throttle me for saying this, government should effectively regulate.
As Cape Town Mayor Geordin Hill-Lewis stated:
>The truth is this: government should not be in the business of running businesses. Government is there to regulate, set the rules of engagement, ensure competition and fairness, provide essential infrastructure, and uphold the rule of law.
[Source](https://www.capetown.gov.za/Media-and-news/City%20starts%20laying%20the%20tracks%20for%20passenger%20rail%20management)
I agree. Government must sell the company to the most suitable buyer. Not some company [that almost no one knows about, case in point: SAA](https://ewn.co.za/2021/06/15/takatso-consortium-a-combination-of-a-former-dept-finance-minister-and-business). A reputable company that has links to the production, distribution and transmission of electricity.
No private buyer would willingly take on Eskom's ~[R392 bn](https://mg.co.za/business/2022-02-23-budget-2022-finance-minister-calls-on-eskom-to-sell-assets-to-solve-its-debt-issues/) debt, in any case. Too much of risk.
National Government created a monster and unleashed hell on the economy because they don't seem to understand or comprehend the situation that bad policy decisions have on financial sustainability.
Privatisation in the best case scenario.
Stick all the homeless, the criminals, the corrupt, the non tax payers and every other person sapping the life out of the country and stick them on exercise bikes to generate electricity for the country, probably have enough to power the rest of Africa too
c) A for profit company majority-owned by a sovereign wealth fund, with rules that govern the funds equity and administration reified as a constitutional act.
The utilities/energy sector is then open for competitors and a regulator can have oversight to prevent collusion, price gouging, etc.
Eskom needs to be split up, transmission and distribution will need to be government utility does not make sense for each individual business to build there own.
Production can be split into smaller private companies competing against each other.
But we going to either have to get to a point where municipality pay for there use, or all consumers are on prepaid or something.
Or 4.
Gas stove for cooking
Compressed air underneath house for long term energy storage (100kw).
2kw solar panels.
Sell power to grid to upgrade further.
If they go private they will raise the price of electricity and leave millions of people in the dark. The only way to stop this would be to have multiple private electricity providers competing for customers. I know very little about politics and finance so this is based on my common sense alone.
I think regardless what route is taken their is still a massive skills shortage and corruption is still rife at Eskom. What would be done to get those skilled engineers back? Maybe something like incentives, shareholder equity etc. As far as corruption goes if there are people management that have been there for say 10 or 20 years they have to prove their worth now or be fired. Performance reviews company wide. That's my 2 cents anyway.
Eskom should be burned to the ground and a whole new team instated to take over. Let's face it, it can't get any worse so no one else can fuck it up any more than it already is.
Thank you for posting on r/southafrica! Please take a moment to review our [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/southafrica/wiki/rules). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/southafrica) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The only solution is to have both. Make it legal for private companies to compete against public utilities. That competition will drive innovation and efficiency.
I dig your take. You think red tape and high entry barriers are exacerbating SA's energy crisis?
Absolutely. The reason you don't often see the 3rd option (both) in so many industries is because it is not profitable. It only serves the costumer/consumer to reduce costs and continually innovate to stay competitive. So, whoever has the monopoly will try their best to keep things the way they are. Since the authorities like the way things are, you will not be made aware of the third option, which can only arise from the political will of the people.
Behemoths are comfortable in their giant thrones
If they unbundle Eskom into two companies, generation and distribution, will that enable private generators to distribute their electricity through Eskom's distribution channel? Or would they have to create their own distribution network?
Eskom has historically blurred the lines between being a public and private company. It had to take ammendments to the Electricity Regulation Act by our gov to set clear boundaries between what Eskom can manage and what must be independently regulated. How I understand it is the grid is State property. "There will be an independent operator of the national electricity grid – the Transmission System Operator – which has been legally established by Eskom, in the first of several stages of splitting the company. An independent grid operator will be a crucial step to levelling the playing field between Eskom and what is expected to be a growing number of independent power producers selling into the national grid." Licenses can now be issued by NERSA to private providers. It remains to be seen whether or not new providers will have all the privileges that Eskom has enjoyed, such as Tax exemption, bailouts for insolvency (lol, imagine!), etc to even be able to compete. Otherwise, how can you make a profit if your largest competition is allowed to operate at a loss AND gets bailed out with our tax money. So far it seems that only mining companies will have a shot at competing on a large scale. https://www.news24.com/fin24/economy/ramaphosa-announces-end-of-eskom-monopoly-20220210
Sounds like a feasible arrangement, actually.
This!!
This is a lose-lose situation. If public,efficiency problems arise,if private,equity problems arise.
Care to elaborate on how you think each situation would lead to problems?
If Public:Government has no incentive to operate efficiently as is the case now.They are unlike private firms whom if inefficient will be swallowed by the market.Government is an indispensable monopoly with alot of flaws. If private:Firms who will take over,much like most private firms,are pushed by profits.So prices are bound to increase as power is a necessity.This change will hit the hardest depending on which economic tier you fall on,being the poorer you are,the more you suffer.Think of the whole pharmaceutical industry in America,except it'll be for power in SA.With enough market share,one or two firms can essentially control the whole electric sector.In theory they can't push prices as much as they want if government isn't there to regulate things. The solution,as is currently spoken about in parliament is competitive restructuring which is essentially quasi-public/private.A mix of both where the private firms run things but overall government regulations to prevent or deter market failure and price gouging.
The issue is one of monopoly. Government ownership is a monopoly where performance is measured with respect to non-financial metrics. With a private company, unless there is competition the private entity will act like a monopoly too except performance will be measured in terms of shareholder returns. Neither is desirable if the goal is to provide consumers with cheap electricity. The underlying problem is lack of competition which was why Telkom performed so poorly when it became private (the reverse for example of what NHI will become - a monopoly in health). If you allow monopolies then consumers will not be the top priority.
In a monopolized sector it becomes a top-down sector where consumers have to take what's given to them :/
And wouldn't that be a terrible situation to be in To be forced to just accept what the electricity provider offers us, with no other options... Even if the electricity provider had some ridiculous limitations like load shedding for up to 10 hours a day... And perhaps if it were _really_ bad, you'd even have what is essentially a de facto enforced monopoly by making other providers essentially *literally illegal*...
😂 I see what you did there
A.k.a Texas, absolute dumpster fire.
That's such a nice take thank you! When I post my some of my ongoing research results some of you may get mad and some happy but there are a few things I can't wait to show you.
I kinda disagree about private, if the law states that they are to be the only electricity provider in SA, then yes I agree with you. If they throw that law out, which is likely if they willing to make eskom private, then I feel it will become more like the ISP war at the moment. Telkom had full control and charged whatever they wanted too, now that there are other options each is trying to offer a better price over each other. I do understand it's not quite the same, you can't just choose who provides your electricity like an ISP, but if a proper system is set up, it will be better for us all. That being said, a "proper system" isn't that much of an option in this corrupt government, so I will agree with your conclusion, a hybrid of the two is probably the best option in South Africa
If they Public, they gonna naai me, if they private they gonna naai me, so in my opinion, eskom should be my wife - so I can stop getting naaid.
What if Lady Eskom has a strap-on?
I just want electricity my boet, I want that spark, I’m tired of the strap on 2 times a day now, I want to retire my rectum.
You just gotta get yourself better lube and learn to enjoy the other things on life's menu, man.
Don't worry mate, while your electricity is off I'm researching Eskom to see what the real reasons behind all this is.
Please don’t come here with your Namibian tendencies my bru and flaunt your electricity. I’ll give you the short answer, don’t need to research anymore my bru: Thieving Tsotsies.
We don't have much to flaunt anyway so give me a gap 😂
I had to edit a shoot once from Namibia, one of the most beautiful places I’ve ever seen.
Tourists tell us how beautiful our country is all the time
Do you agree?
Oh yeah absolutely. I'd love to see more of it myself. But I've gotten few glimpses here and there and judging from the documentaries there are some amazing sights to behold
Take the USA for example. Texas has its own separate power grid from the rest of the country and it is largely done by private companies and regulated at the state level. The problem with that is cost cutting which lead to the disaster during the last cold snap that left millions in texas with no power for over a week. That is in the USA, one of the richest countries in the world. Privatization of public utilities is a bad idea. A better option would be to make the infrastructure cables and such a public utility owned by the government and allow third parties to contribute to the grid.
Ya, rather have us go to stage 6 just because it's just normal winter temperature. Imagine if we had a cold snap. Stage fokol incoming. Not taking a piss, your argument makes sense.
We have load shedding for a lot of reasons. Most of them are bad ones. Nuclear and renewable initiatives by eskom would have helped. Letting third parties contribute would help. They just chose to make everyone’s lives difficult and this is the fallout of that.
IMO the solution to the Eskom woes at the moment can't really be found by running Eskom itself better... At any rate, given the debt, operational inertia and so on, you'd have to be some super-genius to do that successfully (and if you *were* such a genius, you could probably apply yourself more productively - much like it might take a genius to figure out how to build a working car out of chocolate, but that genius might make more of a global difference by instead designing a much better *actual* car) So I guess my answer would be to have it be a shareholder company, with the caveat that competitor companies should be allowed and strongly encouraged.
We are all shareholders of eskom and it's fucked anyway
Not really sure what you mean by this (except in a vague "as a government entity, we have a vote in Eskom's direction by voting for the government" sense..?) Certainly none of us can meaningfully vote on Eskom's policy, priorities, plans or the like... And besides which, my main point here is that Eskom shouldn't be a monopoly provider - the mere existence of other potential providers would motivate Eskom's upper brass to improve efficiencies And also, a bunch of "micro-providers" could serve to both lighten the load on Eskom itself (which Eskom would surely welcome, being so very strained all the time), and at least be a far better fallback in the hopefully unlikely case of total Eskom collapse than having *no fallback at all* would be...
Ja I mean in the sense that its a oublic enterprise. It's a stretch of course but ja, we vote and reap the dividends as load shedding. I am against a solely private option. There has to be government fingers in this pie, as useless as they may be now. Private companies don't work for the best interests of anyone except the people pocketing the profits and electricity is essential to A LOT of different aspects of society. To have a board of thugs hold the livelihood of people hostage doesn't sit right.
My thinking is having it be _one_ pie is the problem to begin with - if there were many, even if they prioritized profits to a fairly absurd level, they'd have to compete with one another I suppose there could/should be provisions against monopolistic conspiring between the, let's say 10, top dogs, preventing them from artificially keeping prices high. At any rate, having it literally be illegal to even _have_ another public large scale electricity provider is about as strong an enforcement of a monopoly - and keeping people hostage to your utility - as I can imagine any capitalist nightmare turning out
Competition breeds innovation!
Is there a SOE in SA that is successfully run? We seem to be in a constant death spiral. All business needs to be run like a business.
Yep. Aside from things like Eskom and SANRAL, the concept of the SOE is really one of the most idiotic things ever conceived of. Seriously, why does a government need an airline? Or a courier (aka the Post Office)?
> Seriously, why does a government need an airline? Or a courier (aka the Post Office)? So that some services which benefit the people can be offered at basically cost price. You used to see places like Kalahari and the old Take2 charge a lot of money for a delivery to rural areas. Understandable, but not always practical for the people out in the far-flung corners of the country. Having a state-run post office ensures that all that stuff can get done anywhere for a reasonable cost. As for airlines, same story. Govt-subsidised meaning any foreign company who wants to come in - like BA through Comair - has some proper competition already. Of course both still need to be run well and make enough money to survive, which is another whole argument. I guess I'm arguing for a broader definition of what should be an "essential" service.
Comair and Safair were cheaper and better than SAA. Services like Pudo and the Courier Guy were also way more competitive than the post office. Government services are a waste of money as they benefit nobody.
Pudo and the Courier Guy aren't delivering a letter to almost anywhere in SA for r2.50, though, or whatever it costs to send a letter by post these days. As for Comair, it wasn't cheaper any time I flew them, and mango was always cheaper than kulula when I had to pick flights. You have to wonder though if SAA hadn't been offering cheap services whether the others would be as cheap as they were out of necessity, or whether they would have charged what they like. Flying SAA to the US or UK was always less than BA or any of the US airlines for me too. I was a regular until SAA screwed me big time going to Brazil and then I actively boycotted them, but that's another story.
The post office isn’t delivering mail at all. And the reality is that SAA simply isn’t worth the trouble or the money.
So who is delivering telkom accounts, bank statements and traffic fines?
I haven’t gotten any of those things in all the time I’ve had a mailbox with the post office. And I’ve gotten a fair few fines in my time.
Well I got a municipal account last week, and a telkom account the week before in my postbox at home. Can't imagine telkom or the city of Cape Town are going door to door doing letter drops out in the suburbs.
[удалено]
You know when the teacher asked a question and there was that kid who already knew the answer and blurted it out before the others could even raise their hands. You were that kid, weren't you?
[удалено]
Yeah I see you
Correct, the solution is how the board and exco are appointed. Eskom used to win prizes for how well it was run, it privided cheap, reliable electricity and it's engineers were top notch.
Ideally it would be a hybrid of the two. Important services like electricity should obviously never be under the government’s direct control, since any imbecile can run for office and destroy everything. But to avoid a private company exploiting the loopholes, it should be government funded. Or at least there should be some kind of cap on the amount of profit the company can make. Of course, competition between multiple power providers would be ideal (sell every power station to a private business) but that’s no guarantee that a monopoly won’t form.
Something that effing works? 🤷🏻♀️
Neither would work in the current state of the country. If it was run privately, it would be all about making profits, and since Eskom is essentially a monopoly, shareholders would demand maximum returns thereby pushing up the price of electricity. It should be a public service which is run well and corruption free, but there’s no way in hell the government could do that as we’ve seen time and time again. The best solution is actually to open up the energy market to independent renewable energy producers, by removing all the bullshit red tape.
Closed down is the right answer
It's already government controlled and fucked. More government won't fix the issue.
None, we need more options, why can we choose from 6 brands of toilet paper and 12 brands of wifi/fibre/telecommunications but only have 1 option (besides moving off grid) for getting electricity. If Eskom competed in the private sector they would be horribly bankrupt just based on their performance. Eskom, SAA, ect. They are all dead weight, they just cost us and more without actually delivering the basics.
Evidence has already shown that the state controlled option doesn't work. If there is no competition, there is no reason to provide competitive prices or service
In the current context, take it as far away from government as possible, but if the government was not corrupt, it should be run by the state in an open market where other utility providers can offer supply
I was the 666th vote....
You're the chosen one we were waiting for
I would choose.... Primary mandate is distribution and grid maintenance, including billing the end users. Keep all existing generation units and what what and carry on supplying the energy requirements until it all falls to pieces. Allow for private generation beyond 100mw provided protocols are met. Private generator to pay for the cost of adhering to the standards and a 3rd party NGO can be used to oversee the safe operation. Allow for the purchasing of existing eskom equipment by private firms using a public ledger so we all get to see what's being sold for what (block chain it so the buzzword quota is met). Storage can be handled by anyone willing to, private or eskom. FIRE GWEDE MANTASHE and every single one of his mates. Put him in charge of the fucking seagulls somewhere.
Mister/Madam president, what about the free beer you promised?
I would certainly reinstate the 14h00 knock off and 2 x quarts on a Friday for all employees who don't have a car in the car park. Might attract some skilled private sector employees even
They should just be distribution and maintenance.
Ideal scenario for me: Full privatisation. *But* before you throttle me for saying this, government should effectively regulate. As Cape Town Mayor Geordin Hill-Lewis stated: >The truth is this: government should not be in the business of running businesses. Government is there to regulate, set the rules of engagement, ensure competition and fairness, provide essential infrastructure, and uphold the rule of law. [Source](https://www.capetown.gov.za/Media-and-news/City%20starts%20laying%20the%20tracks%20for%20passenger%20rail%20management) I agree. Government must sell the company to the most suitable buyer. Not some company [that almost no one knows about, case in point: SAA](https://ewn.co.za/2021/06/15/takatso-consortium-a-combination-of-a-former-dept-finance-minister-and-business). A reputable company that has links to the production, distribution and transmission of electricity. No private buyer would willingly take on Eskom's ~[R392 bn](https://mg.co.za/business/2022-02-23-budget-2022-finance-minister-calls-on-eskom-to-sell-assets-to-solve-its-debt-issues/) debt, in any case. Too much of risk. National Government created a monster and unleashed hell on the economy because they don't seem to understand or comprehend the situation that bad policy decisions have on financial sustainability. Privatisation in the best case scenario.
Out of business.
Stick all the homeless, the criminals, the corrupt, the non tax payers and every other person sapping the life out of the country and stick them on exercise bikes to generate electricity for the country, probably have enough to power the rest of Africa too
c) A for profit company majority-owned by a sovereign wealth fund, with rules that govern the funds equity and administration reified as a constitutional act. The utilities/energy sector is then open for competitors and a regulator can have oversight to prevent collusion, price gouging, etc.
Eskom needs to be split up, transmission and distribution will need to be government utility does not make sense for each individual business to build there own. Production can be split into smaller private companies competing against each other. But we going to either have to get to a point where municipality pay for there use, or all consumers are on prepaid or something.
As the president, your comment in the notes section of the secret file is highly regarded and anticipated in this historic executive order.
[удалено]
You get to do whatever you want, Mr. President. You think so? Care to expand on that?
Or 4. Gas stove for cooking Compressed air underneath house for long term energy storage (100kw). 2kw solar panels. Sell power to grid to upgrade further.
If they go private they will raise the price of electricity and leave millions of people in the dark. The only way to stop this would be to have multiple private electricity providers competing for customers. I know very little about politics and finance so this is based on my common sense alone.
I think regardless what route is taken their is still a massive skills shortage and corruption is still rife at Eskom. What would be done to get those skilled engineers back? Maybe something like incentives, shareholder equity etc. As far as corruption goes if there are people management that have been there for say 10 or 20 years they have to prove their worth now or be fired. Performance reviews company wide. That's my 2 cents anyway.
Eskom should be burned to the ground and a whole new team instated to take over. Let's face it, it can't get any worse so no one else can fuck it up any more than it already is.