Posted on 04/08/2004 6:19:49 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Edited on 04/29/2004 2:04:11 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A Reliant Resources Inc. subsidiary and four of its officers were indicted on charges of manipulating California energy markets, the Justice Department announced Thursday.
The indictments, issued by a grand jury in San Francisco against Reliant Energy Services Inc. and four of its employees, allege actions designed to drive up the price of electricity in June 2000, during the California energy crisis, the department said.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
|
|
|
![]() |
Donate Here By Secure Server
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
It is in the breaking news sidebar! |
|
Someone explain to me how a company makes more money by making less of something? If Ford shut down car plants in the middle of a car buying boom, just how does that help Ford?
If your product sells for $1.00 per unit under normal circumstances and $100.00 per unit after you shut down production for two days there is the potential for large profit.
Tell that to Reliant.
I would suspect that the DemonicRats are at work.
I wasn't aware our Attorney General (Ashcroft) was a Democrat
Economics lesson in supply / demand curves and price inelasticity.
Prices on some goods are VERY sensitive to supply.
Increase supply and price drops significantly, decrease it and it rises much more quickly than would be expected.
Gasoline, insulin, power are just some products that are like that. The more you need a product; the likelier that the price will be closer to inelastic.
It says they closed down four out of five plants (the CNN article says two). Per the indictment, Reliant operated five power generation plants in California (Coolwater, Ellwood, Etiwanda, Mandalay, Ormond Beach). It doesn't say which were shut down.
Here's a snip from the Sac Bee... it sounds like there are many legal actions continuing against Reliant.
In other proceedings, the state Department of Justice has sued Reliant for unspecified alleged overcharges, and also has requested that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission order a total refund of $8.9 billion from Reliant and other generators. FERC last October settled separate market manipulation allegations against Reliant for up to $50 million.If you're a real glutton, here's a link to the Indictment from Findlaw.com (PDF)Unlike the fines sought in the federal case, which would be payable to the federal government, money reclaimed by the state would be refunded to California ratepayers, said Tom Dresslar, a spokesman for state Attorney General Bill Lockyer.
Dresslar had no figure for Reliants share of overcharges, but he called the company one of the worst and biggest offenders.
State prosecutors also are pursuing an antitrust case against Reliant and another suit accusing Reliant of double-selling electricity - allegedly withholding electricity it had promised to deliver under state contracts and then selling it to the states suppliers at inflated open-market prices.
They are accused of conspiring to drive up power prices to avoid a multimillion-dollar loss Reliant faced in June 2000 because of a sudden drop in market prices that conflicted with the company's trading position. The company shut most of its California power plants for two days, falsely claiming environmental limits and maintenance problems, and withheld additional electricity from the state by manipulating its own prices, prosecutors said.
Ryan said Reliant had been uncooperative during the federal investigation. The company denied that and said none of its actions had violated the law or contributed to rolling blackouts later in 2000.
"During the week in question, electricity was plentiful in California . . . and prices were relatively low,'' said company attorney Mike Jines.
So the questions seems to be... Why did Reliant shut down plants on two days during a week in June 2000?
Reliant says "environmental limits and maintenance problems" and the prosecutor says "market manipulation." That should be an interersting one for a Judge and/or jury to sort out.
My recollection is that this has all been argued out before, but hey why not one more time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.