SBS Transit, SMRT submit applications for fare adjustment

[3Boys]

Giam has got it wrong. Very high sounding ideals, but very little practical suggestion as how to get there. It's easy to say, 'NTC will benefit, we expect no less', but can they deliver in reality?? Show me, I say.


Seriously, for a opposition member who spent the last election bashing govt stat boards for transport, health, education, he is now so enamoured about their efficiency, responsiveness and cost-control? :?

See the contradiction?

[3Boys]

limlim:

By any measurement, in absolute terms, $200mil is a large sum of money, would you think not?

And, if you are using scale as a measure, you should not be looking at it in absolute terms but in relative terms. If the $200M profit is on the back of $4bn of revenue and $4bn of assets, it is a tiny margin that can very quickly become $400M loss. If the $200M is off 1.5M ridership per day, it's 36 cents a trip, or $72 per month for a family of four. Yes, lets help the truly poor manage that extra $72 dollars, but I can't believe a middle class family who takes an annual vacation to Phuket or KL can complain about that. That is the scale and perspective I am talking about.

[limlim]

WeiHan:

For nationalised companies, they tend to over spend on many unnecessary items or even made dubious investments because they never have to worry about profit. The public will end up paying more or else where do we get all the extra money to pay for the extra cost? There will be no incentives for the company to run cost effectively and that again will escalate cost. Besides, the company has no motivation to get extra income from advertisements and other ideas that generate extra profit stream. The commuters or tax payers may well ended up paying more.

It really depends on how you manage the company.

Can't the top management have well-defined KPI that determines their salaries or bonuses?

[limlim]

3Boys:

limlim:

By any measurement, in absolute terms, $200mil is a large sum of money, would you think not?

And, if you are using scale as a measure, you should not be looking at it in absolute terms but in relative terms. If the $200M profit is on the back of $4bn of revenue and $4bn of assets, it is a tiny margin that can very quickly become $400M loss. If the $200M is off 1.5M ridership per day, it's 36 cents a trip, or $72 per month for a family of four. Yes, lets help the truly poor manage that extra $72 dollars, but I can't believe a middle class family who takes an annual vacation to Phuket or KL can complain about that. That is the scale and perspective I am talking about.

A very possible scenario.. indeed..

So, to avoid the risk of $400mil loss, the company shall squeeze/milk as much as it can from peasants.. while it can.. even thou it might result in $800mil profit the next round. How noble..

There's a good example to follow really..

When the Govt increase the GST to 7%, they say revenue not enuff or sthg like that.. isn't it?

So, the next year, what happened?

Did they return the \"obscene\" excesses..? hmm..

[3Boys]

limlim:

It really depends on how you manage the company.

Can't the top management have well-defined KPI that determines their salaries or bonuses?

And why do you believe a nationalised company can run better than a private one. What is your satisfaction level with the stat boards and ministries? You very happy with healthcare, education?

[3Boys]

limlim:

So, to avoid the risk of $400mil loss, the company shall squeeze/milk as much as it can from peasants.. while it can.. even thou it might result in $800mil profit the next round. How noble..

There's a good example to follow really..

When the Govt increase the GST to 7%, they say revenue not enuff or sthg like that.. isn't it?

So, the next year, what happened?

Did they return the \"obscene\" excesses..? hmm..

Well, you digress. You speak of the profit in absolute terms, and I am saying that is not an appropriate way of looking at it.

Not sure what you are trying to illustrate with GST. At the end of the day, it is a form of tax. Either you do it through income tax, GST or other means, someone has to pay for it. Even services that are 'free' come at the cost of providing it.

[Oppsgal]

Profit or no profit, I think the quality of service should justify to the amount consumers pay for.


MRT packed with people, buses not always on time… still ask to increase fare?

[corneyAmber]

limlim:

3Boys:

[quote=\"limlim\"]
By any measurement, in absolute terms, $200mil is a large sum of money, would you think not?

And, if you are using scale as a measure, you should not be looking at it in absolute terms but in relative terms. If the $200M profit is on the back of $4bn of revenue and $4bn of assets, it is a tiny margin that can very quickly become $400M loss. If the $200M is off 1.5M ridership per day, it's 36 cents a trip, or $72 per month for a family of four. Yes, lets help the truly poor manage that extra $72 dollars, but I can't believe a middle class family who takes an annual vacation to Phuket or KL can complain about that. That is the scale and perspective I am talking about.

A very possible scenario.. indeed..

So, to avoid the risk of $400mil loss, the company shall squeeze/milk as much as it can from peasants.. while it can.. even thou it might result in $800mil profit the next round. How noble..

There's a good example to follow really..

When the Govt increase the GST to 7%, they say revenue not enuff or sthg like that.. isn't it?

So, the next year, what happened?

Did they return the \"obscene\" excesses..? hmm..[/quote]Another case in point...COE system was supposed to be demolised after ERP came...has it been the case? Another contribution to \"obscene\" excesses. I don't think we are quipping about having huge surpluses in the budget but at whose expense? :scratchhead: And if COE is high, public transport is a highly essential necessity.

[Daddy D]

3Boys:

Giam has got it wrong. Very high sounding ideals, but very little practical suggestion as how to get there. It's easy to say, 'NTC will benefit, we expect no less', but can they deliver in reality?? Show me, I say.

If the policymakers don't adopt an alternative solution... e.g. NTC... how to show?

Below is Giam's response to Lui's rebuttal on their proposal for NTC...
http://motoring.asiaone.com/Motoring/News/Story/A1Story20110719-289947.html

\"As a result of such profit-oriented behaviour, the two PTOs’ high returns have been enjoyed by their shareholders. For example, SMRT has paid out close to 80 per cent of its net income in recent years. These generous dividends could instead have been used to provide better services or reduced fares. However, it is not possible for publicly-listed firms to do this, as their obligations are to their shareholders.
...
...
...
To achieve these outcomes, the government should set stringent key performance indicators (KPIs) for the NTC. These KPIs could include:

Affordability of fares to ordinary Singaporeans
Containment of costs;
On-time bus and train performance;
Customer satisfaction ratings (through independent surveys);
Percentage of public transport ridership;
Productivity improvements and innovation.
...
To incentivise their performance, the bonuses and pay increases of NTC executives should be pegged to the achievement of such KPIs...\"

I may not agree wholeheartedly to what Giam or his party is advocating... but it's still good to have someone keeping our ministers on their toes.

[3Boys]

ksi:

Another case in point...COE system was supposed to be demolised after ERP came...has it been the case? Another contribution to \"obscene\" excesses. I don't think we are quipping about having huge surpluses in the budget but at whose expense? :scratchhead: And if COE is high, public transport is a highly essential necessity.

They did liberalise COE for a while, and guess what happened?

We should get even more draconian about car ownership and usage, in my opinion, like many European cities. But yes, public transport needs to improve commensurately.