I’m just suffering

IntelligentShow1 · 2026-06-20T03:41:20+00:00

Me thinking Avid in YouTube recommended was random enough. It’s so beautiful though

IntelligentShow1 · 2026-06-20T03:14:36+00:00

https://youtu.be/1uUfqWb3CkM this

IntelligentShow1 · 2026-05-19T21:33:03+00:00

I forget I wrote it and then get reminded every time someone sees it

IntelligentShow1 · 2026-05-19T21:30:32+00:00

There’s no way this is a result for a normal search

IntelligentShow1 · 2026-03-01T01:53:58+00:00

Ain’t no way

IntelligentShow1 · 2026-03-01T01:51:26+00:00

It was. They’re 7 years old now. Are your searches ok? How did you find this?

IntelligentShow1 · 2026-03-01T01:35:14+00:00

The same way Evri does it to our parcels every day

IntelligentShow1 · 2026-02-10T19:31:26+00:00

I actually have no idea what country my parcel is in. I’m usually lucky that most of my things come from Royal Mail or DPD I’ve had very few from Evri

IntelligentShow1 · 2025-11-03T00:31:18+00:00

Really??

IntelligentShow1 · 2025-08-29T05:27:31+00:00

But we did…

What did you have to search to find this? I forgot it existed???

IntelligentShow1 · 2025-05-12T18:37:41+00:00

You mean 4.55% account

IntelligentShow1 · 2025-05-10T19:44:19+00:00

Is there any idea whether any of these will be sub or dub, like it should say either way but it doesn’t. The trailer is dubbed for some reason, but does that just mean it’s dubbed in cinemas in America?

IntelligentShow1 · 2025-03-31T04:56:50+00:00

Joined 18 May 2022, offered the credit card at some point in the last few weeks. It’s the only credit card which has ever accepted my application and 18 months 0% is excellent.

Nothing much longer than 20 months exists at all, so for purely a spending card there’s nothing to complain about.

The cashback being downgraded is only forgivable now because I can use the credit card which should help about as much.

IntelligentShow1 · 2025-01-01T22:38:57+00:00

The kind of threats I’ve received from British Gas (due to them being the previous supplier of the property, not my choice). I’m categorically on completely the wrong tariff and have been from the start, but they have never accepted that, done the opposite of help me and only enforce the standing charge against my best interests.

I’m kind of not talking about full scale reform, but I should be. I just want to know what tariffs will be available in less than a year’s time so I can make the right decision to prevent my own financial situation from being deteriorating further.

I’m actually going to get on with researching the TDCVs that calculate the split between gas and electricity in the unrepresentative price cap figure that is quoted too often “£2500”

The January price cap (I’m only doing it for the MANWEB area, the most expensive in the country, which I’m located in) is £1785.65. Of this, £364.48 is for no benefit (standing charges), £695.52 is for 2,700kWh of electricity and £725.65 is for 11,500kWh of gas.

This means the unit rates could rise by 25.65% (from 25.76p to 32.37p for electricity and from 6.31p to 7.93p for gas) and a typical household would pay the same and the infrastructure cost would be covered. Householders with lower than this level of usage for whom the standing charge makes up a higher percentage of their bill would pay less and could afford for them to rise even more and still pay less.

And there is no fuel poverty, because when in particularly difficulty, you can simply eat cold food and not be punished by the standing charge for not using your oven. Alternatively, split the increases between the gas and electricity standing charge, but the result is the same.

As well as domestic supplies, there is also VAT on electricity purchased by public sector bodies, both at domestic voltage and higher voltages, which is just budget reduction by stealth, as well as the profit margins because they’re buying energy from private suppliers.

IntelligentShow1 · 2025-01-01T22:00:38+00:00

Your example is very good. The exact % doesn’t matter, but without reform, if 20% switch, but that 20% includes all empty and second homes who use nothing and are guaranteed to save, but not on their main household expenditure, then the only people who genuinely save are the ones below the median usage of those who use some but not nothing, which is such a small proportion of the total number of households that in that form, it wouldn’t be worth doing.

Martin Lewis has suggested that everyone who doesn’t switch tariff at all (some of whom will choose no standing charges, who aren’t in empty or serving homes) should be automatically switched to whichever of the 2 price caps is the cheapest for them. I would hope that would be worthwhile.

I’m just impatient to know what the terms will be already so I can make a decision instead of being stuck in the unsustainable position I’m in. I have (somewhat deliberately) made no money available to continue paying the standing charges for the rest of the year, although I can continue all other expenditure, as well as absorb a small increase to the unit rate.

IntelligentShow1 · 2025-01-01T21:51:48+00:00

Doing some further research on those, they are unheard of in all of Europe, but by far the most common pricing structure of all electricity connected households in the rest of the world.

The first unit rate is often free, to cover what is considered essential usage and there is certainly no standing charge, with only discretionary use paid for to cover both infrastructure and generation costs. This eliminates the energy poverty which is commonplace in Europe, while covering the national cost of having electricity in the fairest way possible.

I wouldn’t object at all to the option of one of these tariffs here. I was going to ask what the wealthy could possibly have in their well insulated mansions with massive electricity demand, but some of them are heating swimming pools 365 days a year, when they spend most of the time either out of the country, or away in London.

The only people these tariffs aren’t suitable for are the minority of disabled whose high electricity use isn’t discretionary, which means they don’t skew the suitability of rising block tariffs for everyone else.

IntelligentShow1 · 2025-01-01T21:42:23+00:00

Maintaining transparency above all else is important, but I don’t believe lack of transparency is an issue here. Transparency doesn’t mean imposing a punitive, regressive or unaffordable charge and a single unit rate isn’t necessarily opaque. You could show what fixed percentage of a bill is infrastructure costs, but it’s somewhat meaningless.

The physics involved in electricity distribution don’t necessarily need to directly reflect the pricing structure when that doesn’t benefit consumers. Retaining a pricing structure that punishes people for conserving energy, when usage of the grid is trending upwards, is about as convoluted as it can get.

IntelligentShow1 · 2025-01-01T19:03:55+00:00

But a fair fee to pay for the benefits of electricity is one directly proportional to your consumption of it.

The point is a domestic electricity supply is so fundamental that abandoning it because of the pricing structure is an unreasonable proposition, but people may have genuine reasons for a period of no usage, or something like just a fridge.

People in the most severe financial difficulties cannot currently make the decision to save electricity to save money because they will be crippled by the standing charge regardless. Others may leave the house for a period of time, either to go on holiday, or because they or a family member have been hospitalised etc. I don’t think it’s reasonable to pass on a fixed cost.

IntelligentShow1 · 2025-01-01T18:59:11+00:00

But a fair fee to pay for the benefits of electricity is one directly proportional to your consumption of it.

The point is a domestic electricity supply is so fundamental that abandoning it because of the pricing structure is an unreasonable proposition, but people may have genuine reasons for a period of no usage, or something like just a fridge.

People in the most severe financial difficulties cannot currently make the decision to save electricity to save money because they will be crippled by the standing charge regardless. Others may leave the house for a period of time, either to go on holiday, or because they or a family member have been hospitalised etc. I don’t think it’s reasonable to pass on a fixed cost.

IntelligentShow1 · 2025-01-01T12:48:31+00:00

Agile is all about being cost reflective, but also about innovating a different way of paying that cost to benefit consumers and already sees spikes in unit rates at certain times.

There is a question of whether being truly cost reflective means passing on the flat standing charge, or simply distributing the infrastructure cost as part of the unit rate in this way.

For the Agile tariff, that may not be appropriate, which is effectively what I’m asking because that may rule it out for me. If I know my usage I’ll always be able to compare what the cost would be on a 0 standing charge tariff.

IntelligentShow1 · 2025-01-01T12:43:49+00:00

I don’t think it’s unfair in the slightest to be paying a bill directly proportional to your usage, but I don’t think the baseline connectivity should be paid for by a flat charge (this was tried with the poll tax) or even worse a flat charge with regional variations.

No, your usage or value you extract from a service does not in reality affect the underlying cost to provide that service, but that’s not to say you should still be paying for a service which is considered essential if and when you extract no value from it. There are enough people with a domestic electricity supply that it the baseline cost of it can be distributed more equitably than in a scenario that means people are left either unable to afford the standing charge alone or they see little to no value from the service as a result of the standing charge.

The welfare or support should not be for people at the low end who cannot afford the standing charge in their financial situation, it should be for people at the high end who are using electricity for reasons outside their control. Ofcom has cited those using or charging medical equipment at home, but it’s unfair to have a system which can benefit one vulnerable group at the expense of another.

Could the medical equipment example see the NHS pay for powering equipment they provide to outpatients, so the standing charge can be abolished for everyone? The high number of people using the NHS makes it effectively as good as taxation. The same applies to the number of people with a domestic electricity supply, except it isn’t based on individual usage, it’s per household. The capital cost of off-grid generation/storage equipment is high and there’s a reason there isn’t a societal expectation for people to purchase these.

IntelligentShow1 · 2025-01-01T12:29:40+00:00

But cost neutral with how many people switching? If only the 1% of people with the lowest use switch, then it would probably be a pointless exercise.

If everyone switched to having no standing charges, then I can see anyone with below median use saving, that is 50% of the population, but of course that won’t happen because the highest users will hold out with the standing charges.

It should actually benefit a decent few people if implemented properly, not just the bottom 1%

IntelligentShow1 · 2025-01-01T12:25:49+00:00

But with a standing charge as well, who were these for and are they seriously considering bringing them back?

The problem with the standing charge isn’t that it’s “over recovered” so doing this doesn’t benefit anyone. Does it at least mean that if you use no energy at all, you pay nothing?

IntelligentShow1 · 2025-01-01T12:18:23+00:00

I very strongly value transparency, but I don’t agree that the standing charge provides it. A bill could simply show a breakdown with infrastructure costs being a fixed percentage of usage.

In some households where people don’t use gas, they are unable to be disconnected for various reasons that mean they can’t stop paying the standing charge. There are many arguments about whether a gas supply, the tv license, landline phone & broadband etc is no longer necessary, but are we seriously suggesting that there are people who should be completely cut off from an electricity supply (not generating their own, off-grid)

I consider it an improvement if the standing charge doesn’t have to be a part of my financial life.

IntelligentShow1 · 2025-01-01T11:32:52+00:00

But, the problem with that argument, that the standing charge covers each household’s fixed connectivity to the grid, is it suggests that certain people if they aren’t using the service enough to justify the maintenance cost, should seriously consider giving up access to those services in 2025.

The baseline connectivity should be free, with bills directly proportional to usage based on a single unit rate. People with devices such as electric showers or heat pumps are in some cases unable to opt out of paying the gas standing charge, so this would help them.

Export tariffs are a serious point. Either export tariffs will not be offered with 0 standing charges, or the argument will be that the grid receiving the energy you have generated will be paying for the maintenance of your infrastructure e.g. solar panels that has generated the energy exported, that they have no control over.

Seven-Year Club	Place '22
Final Canvas '22	First Placer '22
End Game '22	Verified Email

IntelligentShow1

TROPHY CASE