Singapore metro operator SMRT Q4 profit jumps 80%
-
No stairs?Originally posted by nismoS132:i like my japanese bus.
less vibrations.
engine stops during idling.
no stairs.
bus tilts to left when passengers are alighting/getting off.
rear entrance, front exit.
200yen fixed fare.
Those here are the oldies one hor... Only SBS has stepless buses -
Think bendy buses better for an aging population.Originally posted by sbst275:1st thing 1st, so far only mainly Volvo and Scania are the regular suppliers for transit purpose double decks. So naturally, the bus co would get European supplier as they might get disc if they mass purchase vehicles with them for all models.
Another reason probably was because for SBS's case, the Japanese manufacturers did not allow them to self assemble the buses to meet their requirement such as the upper deck counter for double decks.
As for Singapore Shuttle Bus (The operator of CSS, oh yes, today is the last day of operation), the Japanese buses they use are ok, only problem with them is the suspension -
good and bad lahOriginally posted by qpicanto:Think bendy buses better for an aging population.
bendies would lead to longer travelling time -
May be Spore bus trunk route is too long unlike Hong Kong's.
-
April 27, 2007
With record profits, no need to raise fares
MEMBERS of the commuting public are likely to react to the report, 'SMRT posts record $136m gain' (ST, April 25), with mixed feelings. They are bound to recall that opposition to hikes in public-transport fares last year was ridden over roughshod, and they were imposed.
Purely on the primary grounds of unimproved service, if the numerous complaints are any guide, the deciding body, the Public Transport Council, must surely find it difficult to countenance any application for an increase now.
Commuters can logically expect that these same record earnings will be enough grounds to turn down any application for an increase in fares based on an arcane formula which disregards the reality of the situation.
After all, public-transport operations are essential for any society, and continually raising fares, even when there is no real necessity to do so, appears to be an anti-social decision. It must seem highly invidious that a couple of million commuters should be made to pay more just to benefit some hundreds, or, at best, a few thousand, shareholders of a couple of public-transport licensees.
SMRT's chief sounded an early warning that 'operating costs are also expected to rise'. This is a recurring refrain which only suggests that cost-cutting measures are not being looked into seriously enough. It seems to be a prelude to an impending application for fare hikes.
The report stated that 'the taxi division was a thorn amid the rosy picture, incurring an operating loss of $5.1 million, from a $1.5 million gain'.
If this is going to be a trend, the obvious solution is for public-transport operators to restrict themselves to their core business, and divest peripherals, even if they appear ancillary to their operations.
An ill-fated venture into property by another public-transport licensee over a decade back brings into sharp focus the truth of that old saw, 'A cobbler should stick to his last'.
There is a faint whiff of deja vu in the idea of a merger between SMRT and SBS Transit, or its parent group, ComfortDelGro.
Did not SBS itself rise from the ashes of the numerous private bus companies that were in competition, and running profitably while providing cheap and convenient-enough public transport up to the early 1970s?
Narayana Narayana -
i like too. but amazing it's manual transmission.Originally posted by nismoS132:i like my japanese bus.
less vibrations.
engine stops during idling.
no stairs.
bus tilts to left when passengers are alighting/getting off.
rear entrance, front exit.
200yen fixed fare.
-
i also want to use pasmo, but kansai area only got picapo. i miss the cute suica ads
-
Originally posted by ^tamago^:
What is the threshold b4 PTC chairman submit a call for a farecut to the minister?
April 27, 2007
[b]With record profits, no need to raise fares
MEMBERS of the commuting public are likely to react to the report, 'SMRT posts record $136m gain' (ST, April 25), with mixed feelings. They are bound to recall that opposition to hikes in public-transport fares last year was ridden over roughshod, and they were imposed.
Purely on the primary grounds of unimproved service, if the numerous complaints are any guide, the deciding body, the Public Transport Council, must surely find it difficult to countenance any application for an increase now.
Commuters can logically expect that these same record earnings will be enough grounds to turn down any application for an increase in fares based on an arcane formula which disregards the reality of the situation.
After all, public-transport operations are essential for any society, and continually raising fares, even when there is no real necessity to do so, appears to be an anti-social decision. It must seem highly invidious that a couple of million commuters should be made to pay more just to benefit some hundreds, or, at best, a few thousand, shareholders of a couple of public-transport licensees.
SMRT's chief sounded an early warning that 'operating costs are also expected to rise'. This is a recurring refrain which only suggests that cost-cutting measures are not being looked into seriously enough. It seems to be a prelude to an impending application for fare hikes.
The report stated that 'the taxi division was a thorn amid the rosy picture, incurring an operating loss of $5.1 million, from a $1.5 million gain'.
If this is going to be a trend, the obvious solution is for public-transport operators to restrict themselves to their core business, and divest peripherals, even if they appear ancillary to their operations.
An ill-fated venture into property by another public-transport licensee over a decade back brings into sharp focus the truth of that old saw, 'A cobbler should stick to his last'.
There is a faint whiff of deja vu in the idea of a merger between SMRT and SBS Transit, or its parent group, ComfortDelGro.
Did not SBS itself rise from the ashes of the numerous private bus companies that were in competition, and running profitably while providing cheap and convenient-enough public transport up to the early 1970s?
Narayana Narayana [/b]
Isnt $1 billion dollars shareholders funds of the group end 2006( bulk of which from accumulated profits) enough to call for a farecut? -
state link companies can always redefine "maximum" and declare a new maximum.Originally posted by ditzy:August lor. Of course the max they can apply for lor, or else they'll be shooting themselves in the foot.