Energy firm Bulb on brink of collapse amid government talks with creditor

Published

3 years ago

November 22, 2021

admin

Bulb, Britain’s seventh-biggest energy supplier, is facing collapse within days amid eleventh-hour talks between the government and the company’s biggest secured creditor.

Sky News has learnt that the company, which launched in 2015 and has amassed 1.7 million customers, is expected to appoint insolvency practitioners imminently.

The precise timing remained unclear on Monday because of the complexity of the looming administration process and ongoing talks between the government and Sequoia Economic Infrastructure Income Fund, which has an outstanding secured loan of roughly £50m to Bulb’s parent company Simple Energy, according to industry sources.

Sequoia is said to have demanded the repayment of its loan prior to Bulb being placed into administration, they added.

A range of government departments and Ofgem, the industry regulator, began accelerating contingency plans for the collapse of Bulb last month.

Bulb executives and their advisors have been working on an emergency sale of the company, with the likes of Octopus Energy, Ovo Energy, Shell Energy Retail and Centrica, the owner of British Gas, expressing varying degrees of interest.

The ‘challenger’ energy company has also made a series of requests to the government in the last few weeks to help it structure a rescue support package, but these have been rejected, according to another industry executive.

Talks about a solvent rescue deal have also faded, they said.

Bulb’s demise would mark by far the biggest insolvency of the crisis engulfing the sector.

Its customer base is nearly as large in aggregate as the roughly-20 suppliers which have collapsed during the last three months.

About 2 million households have seen their energy provider succumb to soaring wholesale prices since the start of September.

Bulb’s demise may place at long-term risk the jobs of the roughly-1000 people who work for the company, which was launched in 2015 by Amit Gudka and Hayden Wood, although the bulk of its workforce will not be at risk in the short-term as they will be required to continue in their roles during the special administration.

A Bulb spokesperson said: “We’ve decided to support Bulb being placed into special administration, which means it will continue to operate with no interruption of service or supply to members.

“If you’re a Bulb member, please don’t worry as your energy supply is secure and all credit balances are protected.”

Significantly, the insolvency of Bulb will entail the first use of a resolution process called a Special Administration Regime (SAR), which would guarantee funding for Bulb from the Treasury while administrators seek a restructuring deal, buyer or transfer of the customer base.

That would mean hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money being used to fund Bulb’s obligations in the wholesale energy markets to ensure that it can continue operating.

Sky News revealed in September that Ofgem had lined up Teneo Restructuring to oversee the insolvency of a large energy supplier, although it was unclear whether it or AlixPartners, Bulb’s restructuring advisor, would handle the administration.

The largest of the suppliers to collapse during the current crisis, Avro Energy, had about 580,000 customers.

Bulb has been regarded for some time as being too large to go through Ofgem’s Supplier of Last Resort (SOLR) process – the method by which all of the UK’s other collapsed energy companies have been resolved in recent months.

In the SOLR process, a company’s operating licence is removed and bids are sought from other industry players for its customer base, with losses incurred by the acquirers of those customers then recouped through an industry levy.

Under the SAR, the administrator has a legal duty to consider the interest of customers, unlike a conventional insolvency process where the primary duty is to creditors.

In a long-established statement on its website about SAR, Ofgem said a memorandum of understanding had been drawn up between itself, the Treasury and BEIS, adding: “Provisions for this administration scheme for energy suppliers were included in the 2011 Energy Act.

“It has never been used before because a large energy supplier has never been insolvent.”

A government spokesman did not immediately comment on Monday but said three weeks ago: “Ofgem – as the expert regulator – is monitoring the situation across the energy market for the continued impacts on high worldwide wholesale gas prices.

“We have put in place the powers and robust processes to ensure customers do not experience any disruption to their energy supply and that costs are minimised if a supplier should exit the market.”

The regulator added in late October: “There has been an unprecedented increase in global gas prices which is putting financial pressure on suppliers.

“We know this is a worrying time for many people and our number one priority is protecting customers.

“In the event a supplier fails, Ofgem and government have robust processes in place to ensure customers’ electricity and gas supply continue and domestic customers’ credit balances are protected.”

The ongoing crisis in the energy sector has sparked demands from some executives for a removal of the industry price cap or a bailout fund to help with the rescue of smaller suppliers.

Kwasi Kwarteng, the business secretary, has rejected both demands.

Last week, Ofgem said it would seek to adjust the industry price cap more frequently as a result of recent challenges, meaning British consumers are expected to face even higher bills in the years ahead.

The collapse of one of the biggest challengers to the big players – the largest of which are British Gas, E.ON Next, EDF Energy, Scottish Power and Ovo Energy,, which acquired SSE’s retail business – would be a blow to hopes of a more varied and competitive market.

Octopus Energy, which like Bulb supplies 100% renewable energy, has established itself as an independent, well-funded challenger and now boasts 2.5 million customers across more than 4 million accounts.

Business

Trump trade war escalation sparks global market sell-off

Published

3 hours ago

April 3, 2025

admin

Trump trade war escalation sparks global market sell-off

Donald Trump’s trade war escalation has sparked a global sell-off, with US stock markets seeing the biggest declines in a hit to values estimated above $2trn.

Tech and retail shares were among those worst hit when Wall Street opened for business, following on from a flight from risk across both Asia and Europe earlier in the day.

Analysis by the investment platform AJ Bell put the value of the peak losses among major indices at $2.2trn (£1.7trn).

The tech-focused Nasdaq Composite was down 5.8%, the S&P 500 by 4.3% and the Dow Jones Industrial Average by just under 4% at the height of the declines. It left all three on course for their worst one-day losses since at least September 2022 though the sell-off later eased back slightly.

Trump latest: UK considers tariff retaliation

Analysts said the focus in the US was largely on the impact that the expanded tariff regime will have on the domestic economy but also effects on global sales given widespread anger abroad among the more than 180 nations and territories hit by reciprocal tariffs on Mr Trump‘s self-styled “liberation day”.

They are set to take effect next week, with tariffs on all car, steel and aluminium imports already in effect.

Price rises are a certainty in the world’s largest economy as the president’s additional tariffs kick in, with those charges expected to be passed on down supply chains to the end user.

The White House believes its tariffs regime will force employers to build factories and hire workers in the US to escape the charges.

Economists warn the additional costs will add upward pressure to US inflation and potentially choke demand and hiring, ricking a slide towards recession.

Apple was among the biggest losers in cash terms in Thursday’s trading as its shares fell by almost 9%, leaving it on track for its worst daily performance since the start of the COVID pandemic.

Concerns among shareholders were said to include the prospects for US price hikes when its products are shipped to the US from Asia.

Other losers included Tesla, down by almost 6% and Nvidia down by more than 6%.

Many retail stocks including those for Target and Footlocker lost more than 10% of their respective market values.

The European Union is expected to retaliate in a bid to put pressure on the US to back down.

The prospect of a tit-for-tat trade war saw the CAC 40 in France and German DAX fall by more than 3.4% and 3% respectively.

The FTSE 100, which is internationally focused, was 1.6% lower by the close – a three-month low.

Financial stocks were worst hit with Asia-focused Standard Chartered bank enduring the worst fall in percentage terms of 13%, followed closely by its larger rival HSBC.

Among the stocks seeing big declines were those for big energy as oil Brent crude costs fell back by 6% to $70 due to expectations a trade war will hurt demand.

The more domestically relevant FTSE 250 was 2.2% lower.

A weakening dollar saw the pound briefly hit a six-month high against the US currency at $1.32.

There was a rush for safe haven gold earlier in the day as a new record high was struck though it was later trading down.

Sean Sun, portfolio manager at Thornburg Investment Management, said of the state of play: “Markets may actually be underreacting, especially if these rates turn out to be final, given the potential knock-on effects to global consumption and trade.”

He warned there was a big risk of escalation ahead through countermeasures against the US.

Sandra Ebner, senior economist at Union Investment, said: “We assume that the tariffs will not remain in place in the
announced range, but will instead be a starting point for further negotiations.

“Trump has set a maximum demand from which the level of tariffs should decrease”.

She added: “Since the measures would not affect all regions and sectors equally, there will be winners and losers as in 2018 – although the losers are more likely to be in the EU than in North America.

“To protect companies in Europe from the effects of tariffs, the EU should not respond with high counter-tariffs. In any case, their impact in the US is not likely to be significant. It would be more efficient to provide targeted support to EU companies in the form of investment and stimulus.”

Business

British businesses issue warning over ‘deeply troubling’ Trump tariffs

Published

3 hours ago

April 3, 2025

admin

British businesses issue warning over 'deeply troubling' Trump tariffs

British companies and business groups have expressed alarm over President Donald Trump’s 10% tariff on UK goods entering the US – but cautioned against retaliatory measures.

It comes as Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds launched a consultation with firms on taxes the UK could implement in response to the new levies.

Money blog: Pension top-up deadline days away

A 400-page list of 8,000 US goods that could be targeted by UK tariffs has been published, including items like whiskey and jeans.

On so-called “Liberation Day”, Mr Trump announced UK goods entering the US will be subject to a 10% tax while cars will be slapped with a 25% levy.

The government’s handling of tariff negotiations with the US to date has been praised by representative and industry bodies as being “cool” and “calm” – and they urged ministers to continue that approach by not retaliating.

Business lobby group the CBI (Confederation of British Industry) said: “Retaliation will only add to supply chain disruption, slow down investment, and stoke volatility in prices”.

Industry body the British Retail Consortium (BRC) also cautioned: “Retaliatory tariffs should only be a last resort”.

‘Deeply troubling’

While a major category of exports, in the form of services – like finance and information technology (IT) – has been exempted from the tariffs, the impact on UK business is expected to be significant.

Mr Trump’s announcement was described as “deeply troubling for businesses” by the CBI’s chief executive Rain Newton-Smith.

The Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) also said the tariffs were “a major blow” to small and medium companies (SMEs), as 59% of small UK exporters sell to the US. It called for emergency government aid to help those affected.

“Tariffs will cause untold damage to small businesses trying to trade their way into profit while the domestic economy remains flat,” the FSB’s policy chair Tina McKenzie said. “The fallout will stifle growth” and “hurt opportunities”, she added.

Companies will need to adapt and overcome, the British Export Association said, but added: “Unfortunately adaptation will come at a cost that not all businesses will be able to bear.”

Watch dealer and component seller Darren Townend told Sky News the 10% hit would be “painful” as “people will buy less”.

“I am a fan of Trump, but this is nuts,” he said. “I expect some bad months ahead.”

Industry body Make UK said the 25% tariffs on cars, steel and aluminium would in particular be devastating for UK manufacturing.

Cars hard hit

Carmakers are among the biggest losers from the world trade order reshuffle.

Auto industry body the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) said the taxes were “deeply disappointing and potentially damaging measure”.

“These tariff costs cannot be absorbed by manufacturers”, SMMT chief executive Mike Hawes said. “UK producers may have to review output in the face of constrained demand”.

The new taxes on cars took effect on Thursday morning, while the measures impacting car parts are due to come in on 3 May.

Business

Trump trade war: The blunt calculation that should have spared UK from reciprocal tariffs

Published

3 hours ago

April 3, 2025

admin

Trump trade war: The blunt calculation that should have spared UK from reciprocal tariffs

Economists immediately started scratching their heads when Donald Trump raised his tariffs placard in the Rose Garden on Wednesday.

On that list he detailed the rate the US believes it is being charged by each country, along with its response: A reciprocal tariff at half that rate.

So, take China for example. Donald Trump said his team had run the numbers and the world’s second-largest economy was implementing an effective tariff of 67% on US imports. The US is responding with 34%.

Trump latest: UK considers tariff retaliation

How did he come up with that 67%? This is where things get a bit murky. The US claims it studied its trading relationship with individual countries, examining non-tariff barriers as well as tariff barriers. That includes, for example, regulations that make it difficult for US exporters.

However, the actual methodology appears to be far cruder. Instead of responding to individual countries’ trade barriers, Trump is attacking those enjoying large trade surpluses with the US.

A formula released by the US trade representative laid this bare. It took the US’s trade deficit in goods with each country and divided that by imports from that country. That figure was then divided by two.

So, in the case of China, which has a trade surplus of $295bn on total US exports of $438bn, that gives a ratio of 68%. The US divided that by two, giving a reciprocal tariff of 34%.

This is a blunt measure which targets big importers to the US, irrespective of the trade barriers they have erected. This is all part of Donald Trump’s efforts to shrink the country’s deficit – although it’s US consumers who will end up paying the price.

But what about the small number of countries where the US has a trade surplus? Shouldn’t they actually be benefiting from all of this?

That includes the UK, with whom the US has a surplus (by its own calculations) of $12bn. By its own reciprocal tariff formula, the UK should be benefitting from a “negative tariff” of 9%.

Instead, it has been hit by a 10% baseline tariff. Number 10 may be breathing a sigh of relief – the US could, after all, have gone after us for our 20% VAT rate on imports, which it takes issue with – but, by Trump’s own measure, we haven’t got off as lightly as we should have.