前几天看报道，终于有人质问当局了，为毛SP不给消费者discount at the first place???
我一直都在想这个问题，既然其他电力供应商都能给出，随你电费多少，我直接给你25八仙折扣，且还有什么rebate, voucher之类的，而且消费者啥也不用做，无押金，无需换电表，甚至帐单都还是由SP寄来，那为毛SP雷打不动一路来就是这么贵。
刚开始我想不大明白，貌似目前来看，有点头绪了。(对于电力行业，本人是门外汉，以下文字纯属本人根据有限的常识做出的推断分析。恳请有关专业人士指点迷津)
1. SP就相当于国家电网，目前大多用天然气发电，外加城市的变电站，电力设备及基础设施等等，都是他们在干。
2. 其他电力供应商，我没有研究全部，但肯定是某些供应商是可以自己发电的，但是他们的电很多是新能源啊，waste to energy 之类的附加产品，打个比方，某电力供应商他有垃圾焚烧业务，大家知道，热能可以转换为电能的，他自然能利用垃圾焚烧去发电(即所谓的waste to energy), 那发的电其实还蛮多的，自己肯定用不完，要是能卖给普通消费者就好了，但所有的电网都是SP的，没办法，SP就说了，你把发的电卖给我( 即所谓的进入电网)，价钱嘛，嘿嘿嘿, 1毛一度电( 随意assume的，鄙人不知道),电力供应商想，考，黑啊，你卖给消费者2毛多呢，但没办法，他是国家电网，就算他让，我也不可能去修电网送电去每家每户啊。
3. 很多年过去了， 政府一看，可能砍得太狠了，这些能发电卖电网的(电力供应商) 貌似对于提高生产率等积极性不高嘛，没啥动力去多发电，提高科技水平嘛。于是乎，开放电力市场出炉了。政府说了，我可以开放，你们发的电，还是卖给我的电网，价格给你1毛5一度(方便阐述，个人assume的),然后你们自己去拉客。各大电力供应商一算，这划算啊，我就出点营销的费用嘛，赶紧的，想办法改进工艺，提高生产力，发更多的电卖给SP。
4. 最后消费者得到了实惠(相比较以前的电费，而言，你懂的), SP也赚(从电力供应商批发价1毛5，他们卖1毛8,这差价嘛，自然是我的). 电力供应商自然赚(以前卖1毛，现在卖1毛5,拉的客越多，还有额外奖励分成)
5. 结论。貌似所有人都赚了，三方共赢。而且还能促进科技水平和生产力的提高。至于为啥以前SP的电价那么高，我觉得也没必要再问当局了(可能以前生产力没现在高，也可能他是当局，他是垅断的)
9 条回复
-
#1
还以为这些第三方都是sp分销商
-
#2
跟那些虚拟运营商一样
-
#3
很有道理，给赞。
-
#4
哈哈，你见过分销商比批发商价格更便宜的么？？？
-
#5
批发商对散客的价格和给分销商的价格是不一样的，批发市场很常见。
另外针对楼主的分析，我想说有几家分销商并没有自己发电，完全是单纯的分销商，这就和楼主的分析说不通了。 -
#6
自己发电的就相当于直接零售，没发电的就相当于拿别人的货来卖，电都是在一个电网上的。
-
#7
SP昨天终于开口回答了，为毛SP这么贵。。唉，不知道如何评论，我只想说，要么这些人智商有问题，要么这帮人认为人民的智商有问题。。。简直是侮辱人的智商，难怪local对Cheng Hu 如此不满，可以理解了，还有那个CPF对大众的回复也是一样。就是侮辱人民的智商。很替小新担忧啊。。
-
#8
爲什麽呀？好像沒看到報道啊。
-
#9
看这里
https://www.theonlinecitizen.com ... vering-electricity/
EMA: Current lower prices offered by retailers due to electricity production capacity exceeds demand
In response to Mr Tang's letter, Ms Dorcas Tan, Director of Market Development and Surveillance Department of the Energy Market Authority (EMA), replied on ST Forum today ('Why electricity retailers' rates are better',23 Jan).
She said that the regulated tariff, charged by SP Group and approved by EMA, reflects the "long-term costs of producing and delivering electricity in Singapore".
Such long-term costs include the costs of building and operating the power plants and maintaining the power grid, she added.
"On the other hand, the electricity rates offered by retailers typically reflect the current market conditions, level of competition and short-term costs of producing electricity," she said.
"Under current market conditions where electricity production capacity exceeds demand for electricity, we can expect market prices to be lower than the regulated tariff. However, this may change over time based on market demand and supply."
That is to say, the current low prices offered by the electricity retailers are due to over-capacity supplied from SP Group.
But she cautioned that retailers, like all businesses, may adjust their prices and discounts over time.
So, the question remains, if SP Group -- which is owned by Temasek -- has been over-generating electricity all these while, why didn't it lower the electricity tariff for Singaporeans in the first place, instead of allowing them to suffer with the high cost of living in Singapore for the last many years?
Indeed, according to blogger Philip Ang after he combed through every SP Group's annual report since 2005, he has discovered that SP Group has been making an average of almost S$1 billion for some 13 years. From 2005 to 2017, its annual net profit averaged almost S$1 billion.