I seriously doubt this is a matter of Jobs being trumped by his Board. One of the biggest gripes from the financial markets has always been that Apple's Board of Directors is not nearly independent enough and that they often succumb too easily to Jobs' whims.
It may be fair to claim that they encouraged the licensing of the iPod, but to suggest that Jobs' was strong-armed by them flies in the face of precedent. Somehow I don't see Al Gore and Larry Ellison, among the others, successfully pressuring Jobs to any significant degree. And if you don't believe that, I'd point to the rather authoritative way that Jobs runs both Apple and Pixar. Most everything done in each are because "Jobs' will be done".
It should be important to note that the head of the DWP of L.A. (or L.A. Power as it has been put) was not subject to the same laws as other, private, utilities. Although legislation in California forced private utlities to sell off some of the power plants they owned and drove a large stake between generation and distribution in the market, municipal power companies were not subject to the same regulations. The DWP has been used as an example in this case, so let's go with that. The DWP owns enough of its own generators to not be dependent upon the rest of the power grid for the power that it distributes to its customers in L.A. The only reason that they still own enough generators to be able to do this and to sell some of the excess back into the grid is because they were not forced to deregulate. To praise the head of the DWP as being somehow more insightful than others is a mistake. His insight or tuition is nothing of the sort, rather it is a break of good luck.
There also seems to be some blurring between the processes and companies involved in generation and distribution. The companies that deliver power to you in California, except if you live in a place serviced by a municipal power company, are no longer the companies that are primary generators of that electricity. When legislation for deregulation was passed, it forced private power companies to divest a certain amount of generators. Several companies, Southern Calfornia Edison included, sold generators at very high prices, hoping that the monies made from the sales would be enough to float them until the rate freeze would be over. They made a gamble and lost. The reserve cash has turned out to not be enough to keep the utility clear of debt and the rate freeze is still far from over.
The true problem with deregulation is that in an attempt to eliminate a captive market and allow users to choose whom they buy their power from, the State has instead built a brick wall of debt around the captive market. With the generators unrestricted in the dollar amount they can sell their electricty (and they are selling it significantly over cost. Most companies owning generators are averaging a 150% profit increase from last year) for, the utilities that deliver the power have been forced to bite the bullet. As a result of rate freezes, the utilities are unable to pass costs along to consumers, thereby digging themselves deeper and deeper into debt. Just last week the crippled state of the utilities credit was made evident by the down-grading of Southern California Edison's credit rating to junk bond status. Pacific Gas and Electric is likely to follow soon.
The only reason that the generators are capable of selling at such high prices is due to the slow down in the building of power plants (due to a number of factors discussed throughout this thread) and to the shut down of current plants as they are retooled to meet environmental standards. The combination of all these elements has lead to this runaway market.
Slashdot Mirror
I seriously doubt this is a matter of Jobs being trumped by his Board. One of the biggest gripes from the financial markets has always been that Apple's Board of Directors is not nearly independent enough and that they often succumb too easily to Jobs' whims.
It may be fair to claim that they encouraged the licensing of the iPod, but to suggest that Jobs' was strong-armed by them flies in the face of precedent. Somehow I don't see Al Gore and Larry Ellison, among the others, successfully pressuring Jobs to any significant degree. And if you don't believe that, I'd point to the rather authoritative way that Jobs runs both Apple and Pixar. Most everything done in each are because "Jobs' will be done".
It should be important to note that the head of the DWP of L.A. (or L.A. Power as it has been put) was not subject to the same laws as other, private, utilities. Although legislation in California forced private utlities to sell off some of the power plants they owned and drove a large stake between generation and distribution in the market, municipal power companies were not subject to the same regulations. The DWP has been used as an example in this case, so let's go with that. The DWP owns enough of its own generators to not be dependent upon the rest of the power grid for the power that it distributes to its customers in L.A. The only reason that they still own enough generators to be able to do this and to sell some of the excess back into the grid is because they were not forced to deregulate. To praise the head of the DWP as being somehow more insightful than others is a mistake. His insight or tuition is nothing of the sort, rather it is a break of good luck.
There also seems to be some blurring between the processes and companies involved in generation and distribution. The companies that deliver power to you in California, except if you live in a place serviced by a municipal power company, are no longer the companies that are primary generators of that electricity. When legislation for deregulation was passed, it forced private power companies to divest a certain amount of generators. Several companies, Southern Calfornia Edison included, sold generators at very high prices, hoping that the monies made from the sales would be enough to float them until the rate freeze would be over. They made a gamble and lost. The reserve cash has turned out to not be enough to keep the utility clear of debt and the rate freeze is still far from over.
The true problem with deregulation is that in an attempt to eliminate a captive market and allow users to choose whom they buy their power from, the State has instead built a brick wall of debt around the captive market. With the generators unrestricted in the dollar amount they can sell their electricty (and they are selling it significantly over cost. Most companies owning generators are averaging a 150% profit increase from last year) for, the utilities that deliver the power have been forced to bite the bullet. As a result of rate freezes, the utilities are unable to pass costs along to consumers, thereby digging themselves deeper and deeper into debt. Just last week the crippled state of the utilities credit was made evident by the down-grading of Southern California Edison's credit rating to junk bond status. Pacific Gas and Electric is likely to follow soon.
The only reason that the generators are capable of selling at such high prices is due to the slow down in the building of power plants (due to a number of factors discussed throughout this thread) and to the shut down of current plants as they are retooled to meet environmental standards. The combination of all these elements has lead to this runaway market.