Grex Aaypsi Conference

View Responses

Grex Aaypsi Item 23: Consumers Power vs. Detroit Edison in Ypsi Township
Entered by hawkeye on Thu Dec 23 17:38:43 UTC 1993:

According to what I've been reading in the papers, Ypsi Townships electricity
franchise was up for grabs again.

Rather than going with the cheaper Consumers Powers, they went back to Detroit
Edison (unless there are some last minute changes).

Is this a good thing or not?  From the articles, it seems that CP is about
30% cheaper than DE, but choosing CP would make the Township an island
surrounded by DE wires and customers.

Me?  I'm always for the cheaper utility.  Is there *really* a difference
in the two companies?

10 responses total.

#1 of 10 by scg on Thu Dec 23 18:26:56 1993:

Would it cost a lot to set up?  That might have been a factor.

#2 of 10 by shf on Thu Dec 23 20:33:22 1993:

CP is cooler; more user friendly in my experience.

#3 of 10 by polygon on Thu Dec 30 02:26:14 1993:

The East Lansing neighborhood where I lived in 1982-88 (called "Flowerpot"
due to floral street names) was "traded" to Consumers Power in 1963 by
the Lansing Board of Water and Light.  All of Lansing, and almost all
of East Lansing (except that one neighborhood and a couple of smaller
areas) are served by the "BdWL", which has about the cheapest electric
rates in the state.  Consumers Power is vastly more expensive.  And at
the time, Consumers Power (always referenced in the media as "the troubled
Jackson-based utility") was a pariah among investor-owned utilities due to
a long history of greed, arrogance, and gross mismanagement.

Naturally, during the entire time I lived there, the Flowerpot residents
were struggling to get out of the grips of Consumers Power.  I don't think
they ever succeeded.

I wouldn't think there'd be any contest between Detroit Edison and
Consumers, unless the latter has greatly cleaned up its act while I was
out of state for a few years, and/or Edison has been taken over by crooks.
I'm EXTREMELY skeptical of the claim that Consumers Power is cheaper.
If it appears cheaper, it's probably a scam or a lie.

#4 of 10 by srw on Thu Dec 30 07:01:33 1993:

#3 is more like what I thought to be the case, though I have no
first-hand experience with CP.

#5 of 10 by pegasus on Mon Jan 10 05:40:30 1994:

On a different tack... I got a call from a company selling long distance
phone service recently. The unusual part was that they claimed to be
funded in part by the Michigan Dept. of Commerce because phone rates in
Michigan are like the highest in the country. What gives here?  Is this
true? AT&T, Sprint and MCI can all charge MI people more than say, Ohio
people? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Anyone have real info on
this?

#6 of 10 by danr on Mon Jan 10 12:23:35 1994:

Why don't you call the MI Dept. of Commerce?  I bet they'd be plenty
interested in someone using their name illegally.

#7 of 10 by wh on Tue Oct 11 01:18:49 1994:

Re #5. Sounds bogus to me.

#8 of 10 by roz on Wed Oct 12 17:48:30 1994:

re #5:  I got a call from a phone plan offering me flat discounts off
of whatever the cheapest rate (between ATT, MCI or Sprint) was for that
call.  No sign up charge, no surcharge.  I never heard about the Mich.
Dept. of Commerce, but it sounded so fishy I didn't even keep on with
the phone call.  I can't remember the outfit's name.  Did anyone else
get a call like that?

#9 of 10 by pegasus on Fri Oct 14 15:31:02 1994:

Ros,

I think I did a long time ago... I might even has posted an item about
it, when it happened.

        Pattie

#10 of 10 by wh on Sun Nov 6 09:08:42 1994:

Uh, Pattie, we were talking about *your* post of Jan 10.

Response not possible - You must register and login before posting.