Minister explains why bus fares cannot remain unchanged
-
Originally posted by Othello_Red:
Its just an excuse to increase their coffers.
[b]Minister explains why bus fares cannot remain unchanged
"Transport Minister Raymond Lim commented on the bus fare hike during his visit to Thomson division of Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC on Sunday, 7 Oct 07. He urged Singaporeans not to politicise the issue.
If fares were to be frozen, the bus service standards will suffer, according to Mr Lim. He cited other countriesÂ’ experiences and when governments give in to such pressures, the service standards would deteriorate.
The reason: bus companies, unable to afford new buses, will have a shrinking fleet, resulting in overcrowding. As the situation worsens, people will complain to the government, which will feel compelled to raise fares.
Freezing fares will be a popular move, but it would not be a responsible thing to do, he added.
Responding to a residentÂ’s comment that the two public-listed companies, SBS and SMRT, look out for their shareholders and not the commuters, Mr Lim said even if the government takes over the running of the public transport companies, fares will still rise, and either the user or taxpayer pays for the increase."
I wonder why the $56.1 million in net profit for FY06 is not enough for new buses? Are new busses that expensive? Maybe they are built with carbon-fiber bodies, with cutting-edge F1 technology in the engines?
It's not as if every single bus in Singapore is air-conditioned with comfy leather seats. It's not as if the bus-captains are earning ever increasing salaries. I believe the public would accept it more willingly if the reason for the raise was to better compensate the bus-captains. They aren't earning much and work long hours even on public holidays. Surely the raises should go to helping them out? Why is it ending up in retained earnings then?
Seriously, with replies like this, they are really inviting criticism. The only believable line there is that either way, the citizens pay. [/b]
Being a private company, SMRT and SBS can blatantly work on maximizing their profits (since this is the objective of a private corp), and give this cash back to Temasek, which is their biggest shareholder
Just imagine what happens if SMRT and SBS are run by the govt? It would be the most disastrous move in our govt's perspective, because they cannot make profits out of the 2 vehicles.
His response is unacceptable. I can think of many reasons why it should be run by the govt.
YES, fares may still rise if run by the govt. But if the govt runs this as a cooperative, then a cooperative would run this ensuring its able to cover its costs, and not make blatant profits.
Even if there are profits earned by the cooperative, this can then be returned to the people. In a way, it can be used as a tool to narrow the gap between the richer and poorer Singaporeans. The profits can be returned in the form of cash to the poorer income group.
The above beats the current model, whereby we are taxed from numerous invisible forces that ultimately direct our money back to the Govt. -
ministers salary increase... hmm.. suggesting that they are corruptive by nature? since they say doing so to prevent they getting corrupted..Originally posted by club18:sounds very familiar..
they always use the same excuse change abit can use again.
-ministers salary increase, cos scared later our ministers become corrupt.
-gst hike, cos scared the FDIs leave us
-bus fare increase, cos scared service standards drop.
if you are a minister, u sld serve the nation with passion, not money..
money driven ministers..*sigh*..
bus fare increase, justification? it would be acceptable if increase is to raise bus captain pay.. any breakdown of what the increment would do to help? -
why is a Minister, who is suppose to be working for the interest of the people, supporting companies who they keep insisting are "private businesses"? Why is a Minister trying to save the ass of a private business? If the shareholders of these companies are unhappy that the transport company is not making enough money, sack the management first before passing the buck to consumers. So really, the Minister is saving the ass of these million dollar directors in these transport companies. Who are they? Why are their jobs more important than the lives of ordinary citizens?
-
increase also increase liao, pple still have to take it...so suck thumb...when is the next GE
-
Hmm....2010...should beOriginally posted by de_middle:increase also increase liao, pple still have to take it...so suck thumb...when is the next GE -
his explaination = no explaination
-
Increase in Transport Cost, Valid Reasons PleaseÂ….
I have been shocked with the recent revision of transport prices, even more stunned to know the reasons behind them and there is more to come.
The reason citied by the Minister was to ensure “good service” by making sure that the transport companies remain profitable.
To me, this is an impossible way of thought in a normal business environment. In a competitive environment, there are various way to increase profits, the last resort will only be increasing the price of your product/service. Why? Because consumers have a choice, if Stall A suddenly increases the prices of his coffee, you can always visit Store B or C, etc.
Imagine this situation, when you are confronting a company with regards to increase in its price, would it be absurd that he explained that it is to allow his company to make more money, so that he will provide better service!
Therefore, in a normal competitive business environment, to increase sales, we provide better services or revamp ourselves FIRST, rather than ask for more money from consumers to do so.
Another point, being in a monopoly in our Transport sector, consumers do not have a choice, but to resign their fate to such inappropriate fare increases. With competition, we will definitely look within to improve profitability rather than outright product/service price hike.
Talking about rising costs, which company does not experience such a “phenomena”, but which company dares to raise its selling price without fear of disturbing loyal customers? For one, I would love to be able to use the reason from our transport companies to increase my products prices without incurring the wrath of customers.
There are more than 1 way to improve a company’s earning and profitability, why did not the company look within? To develop more efficient operating system? Why can’t there be layoff or salary reductions? Isn’t that common among private sectors? And if transport companies are to be considered a “private company” to achieve profitability, do allow them to compete fairly too. To comment on internal revamp and profitability is difficult too, as it should be relative and based on sectors. This is because lack of competition among their industry.
To put things in a crude manner, why can each of the board of directors, Executive Officers or Managers take a pay cut to allow the company to earn more? Rather than inflict the damage on 4million Singaporeans.
Lastly, can anyone do a rough calculation of the amount of money it stand to earn from a mere 1-2 cent increase? And also, rising oil prices is a sad and sorry excuse, it goes up and down, so when it hits a valley, would the transport company automatically apply for a fare decrease? -
Originally posted by Othello_Red:
56.1m is not said not enough to buy busses....is NOT ENOUGH for the share holder's pocket
[b]Minister explains why bus fares cannot remain unchanged
"Transport Minister Raymond Lim commented on the bus fare hike during his visit to Thomson division of Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC on Sunday, 7 Oct 07. He urged Singaporeans not to politicise the issue.
If fares were to be frozen, the bus service standards will suffer, according to Mr Lim. He cited other countriesÂ’ experiences and when governments give in to such pressures, the service standards would deteriorate.
The reason: bus companies, unable to afford new buses, will have a shrinking fleet, resulting in overcrowding. As the situation worsens, people will complain to the government, which will feel compelled to raise fares.
Freezing fares will be a popular move, but it would not be a responsible thing to do, he added.
Responding to a residentÂ’s comment that the two public-listed companies, SBS and SMRT, look out for their shareholders and not the commuters, Mr Lim said even if the government takes over the running of the public transport companies, fares will still rise, and either the user or taxpayer pays for the increase."
I wonder why the $56.1 million in net profit for FY06 is not enough for new buses? Are new busses that expensive? Maybe they are built with carbon-fiber bodies, with cutting-edge F1 technology in the engines?
It's not as if every single bus in Singapore is air-conditioned with comfy leather seats. It's not as if the bus-captains are earning ever increasing salaries. I believe the public would accept it more willingly if the reason for the raise was to better compensate the bus-captains. They aren't earning much and work long hours even on public holidays. Surely the raises should go to helping them out? Why is it ending up in retained earnings then?
Seriously, with replies like this, they are really inviting criticism. The only believable line there is that either way, the citizens pay. [/b]
there are none of a coy in sg like them....sure make money de...nt enough?? just ask the public to pay 
doubt if my company going to close, can i just ask the public to pay?? 
-
X1Originally posted by dragg:because their standard will drop.... -
X1 X2 X3......Originally posted by confused?_?:wat service do they provide? they just drive the bus, stop bus, open door, close door. i dont see them providing foot massage, stock advices, financial consultancy... -
so, lets say the economy is now going down, downturn, pple losing jobs.....
so, PTC say. oei, adjust your fare lower, economy not doing gd.
so SBST and SMRT decrease fare, or didnt change it.
so when economy dowturn = lousy service cause fare decreased or reminaed unchanged???? -
my 1st impression when i saw it in newspaper:
The monopoly must be damn inefficient for not being able to raise its service quality through other measures. Instead, to do so, they have to spend more money, and pass this extra spending to the consumers. Yet our government supports it -
Very Well said!!! X10Originally posted by PachelbeL_20:Increase in Transport Cost, Valid Reasons PleaseÂ….
I have been shocked with the recent revision of transport prices, even more stunned to know the reasons behind them and there is more to come.
The reason citied by the Minister was to ensure “good service” by making sure that the transport companies remain profitable.
To me, this is an impossible way of thought in a normal business environment. In a competitive environment, there are various way to increase profits, the last resort will only be increasing the price of your product/service. Why? Because consumers have a choice, if Stall A suddenly increases the prices of his coffee, you can always visit Store B or C, etc.
Imagine this situation, when you are confronting a company with regards to increase in its price, would it be absurd that he explained that it is to allow his company to make more money, so that he will provide better service!
Therefore, in a normal competitive business environment, to increase sales, we provide better services or revamp ourselves FIRST, rather than ask for more money from consumers to do so.
Another point, being in a monopoly in our Transport sector, consumers do not have a choice, but to resign their fate to such inappropriate fare increases. With competition, we will definitely look within to improve profitability rather than outright product/service price hike.
Talking about rising costs, which company does not experience such a “phenomena”, but which company dares to raise its selling price without fear of disturbing loyal customers? For one, I would love to be able to use the reason from our transport companies to increase my products prices without incurring the wrath of customers.
There are more than 1 way to improve a company’s earning and profitability, why did not the company look within? To develop more efficient operating system? Why can’t there be layoff or salary reductions? Isn’t that common among private sectors? And if transport companies are to be considered a “private company” to achieve profitability, do allow them to compete fairly too. To comment on internal revamp and profitability is difficult too, as it should be relative and based on sectors. This is because lack of competition among their industry.
To put things in a crude manner, why can each of the board of directors, Executive Officers or Managers take a pay cut to allow the company to earn more? Rather than inflict the damage on 4million Singaporeans.
Lastly, can anyone do a rough calculation of the amount of money it stand to earn from a mere 1-2 cent increase? And also, rising oil prices is a sad and sorry excuse, it goes up and down, so when it hits a valley, would the transport company automatically apply for a fare decrease?
my company is going to make a lost of S$600k this yr....
we're going to increase our products price.....Raymond!! pls...help to explain to my customers...no rejection allow....we sure will improve our services de... -
Originally posted by baby hunter:my company is going to make a lost of S$600k this yr....
we're going to increase our products price.....Raymond!! pls...help to explain to my customers...no rejection allow....we sure will improve our services de...
I wonder if that will make it into business textbooks. Imagine teaching this. If your business is not doing well, or your service standards are dropping, increase the price!!! Keep increasing it until your service standards improve!!! -
Originally posted by Othello_Red:
I wonder if that will make it into business textbooks. Imagine teaching this. If your business is not doing well, or your service standards are dropping, increase the price!!! Keep increasing it until your service standards improve!!! -
Think it this way. More and more foreigners are staying in this country. So theoretically there would be more people using the public transport and hence more revenue for the transport companies; the companies have been increasing bus and mrt intervals and not following the schedule given, they would probably save some more biz costs here. Aircon not cold - another biz cost savings here. With these, won't they earn even more profits? So where's the rationale for transport hike?
-
Originally posted by holygoh:
[/b]
why is a Minister, who is suppose to be working for the interest of the people, supporting companies who they keep insisting are "private businesses"? Why is a Minister trying to save the ass of a private business? If the shareholders of these companies are unhappy that the transport company is not making enough money, sack the management first before passing the buck to consumers. So really, the Minister is saving the ass of these million dollar directors in these transport companies. [b][b]Who are they? Why are their jobs more important than the lives of ordinary citizens?[/b]
they are his friends and relatives, or more pbly, the relatives, family or friends of his boss. -
Hanor.Originally posted by Othello_Red:
I wonder if that will make it into business textbooks. Imagine teaching this. If your business is not doing well, or your service standards are dropping, increase the price!!! Keep increasing it until your service standards improve!!!
Pay your ministers million dollar salaries.
Then they will work for the people.
Maybe just a little. -
When bus fares increase, the profits increase too times the number of people taking public transport. So i dun see a reason for the increase because whether increase or never increase, SBS transit and SMRT are still making profits. So the higher the increase, the more profits are being reaped out.
-
SINGAPORE : SBS Transit has confirmed that it has ordered 500 buses from Scania, the world's third largest maker of buses and heavy trucks.
The order is worth S$180 million and is to replace the older buses.
The public transport operator has a fleet of 2,850 buses.
The vehicles are expected to be delivered later this year and next year.
Scania said the order is the largest it has received in Asia.
The buses ordered by SBS Transit are believed to have a low operating cost, while being environmentally friendly. - CNA/ms -
The govt would never pass up on this chance to milk the monopoly.Originally posted by soul_rage:Its just an excuse to increase their coffers.
Being a private company, SMRT and SBS can blatantly work on maximizing their profits (since this is the objective of a private corp), and give this cash back to Temasek, which is their biggest shareholder
Just imagine what happens if SMRT and SBS are run by the govt? It would be the most disastrous move in our govt's perspective, because they cannot make profits out of the 2 vehicles.
His response is unacceptable. I can think of many reasons why it should be run by the govt.
YES, fares may still rise if run by the govt. But if the govt runs this as a cooperative, then a cooperative would run this ensuring its able to cover its costs, and not make blatant profits.
Even if there are profits earned by the cooperative, this can then be returned to the people. In a way, it can be used as a tool to narrow the gap between the richer and poorer Singaporeans. The profits can be returned in the form of cash to the poorer income group.
The above beats the current model, whereby we are taxed from numerous invisible forces that ultimately direct our money back to the Govt.
Cooperative? Never....impossible.
Raymond Lim's explanation is simply a very profit oriented stand, much like the way the govt functions. Nothing surprising actually. -
After a while, people stop listening to their explanations.Originally posted by Rock^Star:The govt would never pass up on this chance to milk the monopoly.
Cooperative? Never....impossible.
Raymond Lim's explanation is simply a very profit oriented stand, much like the way the govt functions. Nothing surprising actually.
It's all about money and how much more they can make.
Welfare for the people?
Pfffttt. -
Basically after they have quickly pocketed some of the money, they would prefer to quickly give the rest of the money away to outsiders rather than help citizens keep their money and lessen their burdens.Originally posted by kramnave:SINGAPORE : SBS Transit has confirmed that it has ordered 500 buses from Scania, the world's third largest maker of buses and heavy trucks.
The order is worth S$180 million and is to replace the older buses.
The public transport operator has a fleet of 2,850 buses.
The vehicles are expected to be delivered later this year and next year.
Scania said the order is the largest it has received in Asia.
The buses ordered by SBS Transit are believed to have a low operating cost, while being environmentally friendly. - CNA/ms -
Yah lor, good points. Why the minister is speaking for private companies ????Originally posted by holygoh:why is a Minister, who is suppose to be working for the interest of the people, supporting companies who they keep insisting are "private businesses"? Why is a Minister trying to save the ass of a private business? If the shareholders of these companies are unhappy that the transport company is not making enough money, sack the management first before passing the buck to consumers. So really, the Minister is saving the ass of these million dollar directors in these transport companies. Who are they? Why are their jobs more important than the lives of ordinary citizens?
OTHER REASON FOR BUS FARE HIKE :
:: SBS, SMRT monopolise the small Sg market
=>Doing Sales is not needed. Directors and Shareholders can sleep today, tmr the sales (profit) is still as good. It's a kind of sleeping income.
ANOTHER POSSIBLE REASON FOR BUS FARE HIKE:
=>Profit generated from THIS SALES CENTER (transport) are channelled to other (overseas) SBS/SMRT investments.
=>Other investments are then considered "OTHER" sales center, and therefore profits derived are not profits from local business
=>If we do not have local transport fare hike, local business will not thrive, and local service will drop. Overseas investments are not related.
=>Pragmatic but not un-principled. -
whahahahahahahaha.........best best best......Originally posted by Othello_Red:
I wonder if that will make it into business textbooks. Imagine teaching this. If your business is not doing well, or your service standards are dropping, increase the price!!! Keep increasing it until your service standards improve!!!