Octopus Energy has completed the migration of all 1.5 million Bulb customers onto its platform in what the company said is “record time”.
The retailer began migrating the customers on 23 December last year, two days after the official completion date of the Bulb acquisition. Furthermore, all of Bulb’s employees were offered roles at Octopus, with the vast majority (94%) choosing to stay.
Octopus has hailed the move as a “pivotal moment in the energy crisis”, ending “a long period of uncertainty” for Bulb customers and staff.
The company said the government is set to make a profit of £1.21 billion from the deal.
| Amount (£bn) | |
| Total hedging support received by Octopus Energy | 1.63 |
| Amount Octopus will pay back to government | 2.84 |
| Government profit from wholesale amount | 1.21 |
Greg Jackson, founder and chief executive of Octopus Energy, said: “This outcome has been the best case scenario for taxpayers, customers and Bulb’s team after the torrid period of uncertainty and risk prior to Octopus’ acquisition.
John Marshall, chief executive of Zoa, a company created after Bulb’s technology assets were transferred from Bulb parent company Simple Energy, said: “We’re delighted to have successfully migrated Bulb’s 1.5 million customers to Octopus.
“Zoa’s technology brings all customer data cleanly together into one place, unlocking migration at a pace never seen before. Combined with Kraken’s ability to receive and process new customer data, this allowed us to complete the migration in just six months.
“Over that time, we’ve worked closely with the people at Bulb, Octopus and Kraken, and I’m immensely proud of everyone involved.”
Despite the swift transfer of customers to Octopus, the deal to acquire Bulb was not without controversy.
Rival energy suppliers British Gas, Eon and Scottish Power brought a legal challenge against the government on the grounds that Octopus was offered different terms to other suitors for the nationalised energy supplier and that the secretary of state could have secured a better deal.
British Gas owner Centrica said it was subject to “discrimination” in the bidding process and in court documents Centrica argued that the decision was “arrived at by an unlawful and unfair process”.
The government hit back at these claims however, saying allegations made by rival suppliers were all “without merit”.
High Court judges Lord Justice Singh and Mr Justice Foxton rejected the suppliers’ claim for a judicial review on the grounds that they took too long to lodge their claim.
The ruling added that even if the suppliers had acted earlier, the case would have still been rejected.