Except during events like this, that people are not and cannot be prepared for. Griddy going out of business is nothing -- if someone else wants to take up the business model, they can tomorrow. Individual people being charged thousands for debts difficult to discharge is the real harm.
For one, I suspect that ERCOT wouldn't allow a new company with this model access to the grid immediately, at least until this blows over a bit.
But regarding "thousands in debts"; I'm curious how that will be handled. It seems that these are debts to Griddy, but Griddy no longer exists, apparently for non-payment, which implies that ERCOT does not expect to be paid. Do these customers now owe this debt to ERCOT directly?
Griddy is shutting down. They exist for the moment, the debt they are owed is an asset, and even if they are dissolved their assets will be sold off to pay their creditors, so someone will be owed the money.
Maybe, because it's going to (on average) be hard to collect. But the debt doesn't go away automatically or get reduced, it goes to whoever paid that penny...
(Now, if that's John Oliver [0], maybe it also gets forgiven, but that's not the usual case...)
There's a statute of limitations on collecting debt. Looks like in Texas, it's 4 years. A creditor (or its assignees) can certainly take debtors to court and get a judgement, which would reset the statute. But that's a lot of expense, and may not be recouped.
If Griddy is booted out of ERCOT, Griddy (or its assignees) probably can't prevent them from switching to other providers with a balance due, and probably can't have their electricity turned off for non-payment, so for customers that ended up with a balance due in the thousands, I expect they'll have to write off a lot of that.
(I'm not a lawyer, if I was a lawyer, I wouldn't be admitted in Texas, I didn't even read the law, just a web page that looked appropriate)
Presumably it would only cost a penny because whoever buys it doesn't expect to collect very much and will be motivated to negotiate.
It would be really nice if rather than taking a low amount they sell it directly to the debtors themselves for such a markdown, but I guess they'd think that sets a bad precedent.
But on net, people _would_ be better off having taken the savings from Griddy and stuck it in the bank. Consumers aren't losing money overall in the Griddy model -- it's just happening at once.
The other providers can only survive (assuming they do) by having overcharged for years.
That wasn't overcharging. They had infrastructure costs to meet.
I mean, I could be wrong, I"m not a CPA with their books in front of me... But I cannot see running a power network as anything but expensive.
Now whether they imvested properly or not, that remains to be seen. The fact that arlt least we didn't totally lose everything shows it wasn't all for naught.
