A Sign Of Merger In Near Future? -ST Report Oct 11, 2005
-
STRAITS TIMES CORRESPONDENT CHRISTOPHER TAN REPORTS
Would a actually merger happen under Mr Gerard Ee, a person who actually boards the MRT? What are your views on this? -
Originally posted by cck_190:
A single company that runs on both buses and trains. It means that one company can control the whole of Singapore's transport system in the future.
[b]STRAITS TIMES CORRESPONDENT CHRISTOPHER TAN REPORTS
Would a actually merger happen under Mr Gerard Ee, a person who actually boards the MRT? What are your views on this?[/b] -
I think thats a good idea. The companies shld spend more time focusing on their core business.
-
as seen on the report, it states there is no direct competition or parallel routes by SMRT and SBST, except in the CBD area.
well, now the PTC boss had also support this idea, together with some ministers a few months back..
Mr Gerard Ee.. a great man with great potential.
With no competition and "territories" distribuyed as stated, i also dont see how each party actually suffer as fares are the same and no parallel routes, except NEL and MRT diff in fares -
The idea is good but I am wondering whether one company can handle the vast network of buses and trains as it is becoming more sophisticated. Just for buses alone, there are so many services and I am lazy to count how many of them. Perhaps two companies are better able to handle this huge thing.
-
I think if something like this were to happen, SBS Transit would probably take over the buses while smrt takes over all the trains.Originally posted by tanjun:The idea is good but I am wondering whether one company can handle the vast network of buses and trains as it is becoming more sophisticated. Just for buses alone, there are so many services and I am lazy to count how many of them. Perhaps two companies are better able to handle this huge thing.
SBS Transit will then own(only estimation):
~10 depots & bus parks
~ 21 Interchanges
~A fleet of over 3500 buses
~Over 300 bus services? -
Then we will see more Merc & Volvos which is getting bored sometimes
-
And we'll see a monopoly...?Originally posted by cck_190:I think if something like this were to happen, SBS Transit would probably take over the buses while smrt takes over all the trains.
SBS Transit will then own(only estimation):
~ 21 Interchanges
~A fleet of over 3500 buses
~Over 300 bus services?
But seriously speaking, having 1 company ruling both services is like throwing your eggs all in one basket...NOT? -
That's the downside of it...but we should get better service quality than what SMRT is giving nowOriginally posted by carbikebus:Then we will see more Merc & Volvos which is getting bored sometimes -
Wah!I read tis paper!Talk abt bus routes like sacred cow like tat cannot be slaughtered.Butthen hor,it doesnt make any sense hor to have smrt n sbs compete on similar routes frm bishan 2 marine parade or bishan 2 changi airport lor.Some more now wif fuel costs going up n up n up hor,then sbs profits kerna eroded as itz bizness hor,mostly need oil one lor.If smrt vs sbs directly,waste oil lor,siao lor.Butthen again,if leave bus company vs mrt company,of coz bus company will b affected lor by higher oil prices...aiyah so how ah?
-
Either that, or we have one operator for the MRT and one operator for the buses, then you still have a duopoly. The issue here is that the Government heavily subsides both operators (I think), and therefore, if it became a monopoly (or, as it were, more of a monopoly than it already is), then you still have the same service level, because the government could lose votes should bus services worsen. If anything, bus services would be competing with the MRT and probably improve instead. Whether the loss of votes is a big issue in Singapore is another matter, but I may get arrested for pushing that issue
-
There are pros and cons .
The pros is that services like service 36 and 518 can certainly use bendy buses during peak hours ! -
And long express services like 969 should be able to get VO3X or some other decent DD buses.Originally posted by Airbus330Captain:There are pros and cons .
The pros is that services like service 36 and 518 can certainly use bendy buses during peak hours !
-
What I wish for is that the government takes over all the routes and contract them out to the companies. That way, things like timetabling will be unified and maybe for once, we could have a proper multi-modal ticketing system instead of the mish-mash of transfer rebates and fare caps.
And this way, it can be considered proper public transport by the public (ie, government) instead of public transport by private companies, which is a conflict of interest. -
Yes, there is subsidy (if your definition of subsidy is the same as the one used by the government). But in my definition of subsidy, there is none provided by the government.Originally posted by Windy_hates_B10TLs:Either that, or we have one operator for the MRT and one operator for the buses, then you still have a duopoly. The issue here is that the Government heavily subsides both operators (I think), and therefore, if it became a monopoly (or, as it were, more of a monopoly than it already is), then you still have the same service level, because the government could lose votes should bus services worsen. If anything, bus services would be competing with the MRT and probably improve instead. Whether the loss of votes is a big issue in Singapore is another matter, but I may get arrested for pushing that issue -
i do not want a single operator...
i wouldnt want SMRTB and SBST to merge..
i want SMRT to be considered the company with the "faster buses". having DDs on 969 will only make it slower.. no more 20mins frm tamp int - khatib stn.
iron lady of SMRT, pls wake up and buck up on SMRTbuses. -
Quite unlikely. The buses and svcs are 2 worlds away!
-
I think this is a better alternative to one company running everything. Of course, the companies lose the ability to manage routes and can probably just come up with suggestions.Originally posted by Yusry:What I wish for is that the government takes over all the routes and contract them out to the companies. That way, things like timetabling will be unified and maybe for once, we could have a proper multi-modal ticketing system instead of the mish-mash of transfer rebates and fare caps.
And this way, it can be considered proper public transport by the public (ie, government) instead of public transport by private companies, which is a conflict of interest.
What's better if the government subcontract each route to more than 1 company than just say this route goes to this company. This is equivalent to Malaysia's subcontracting of road construction and maintenance of road stretches / highways to private companies.
Of course, I don't think the government would like to do all this heavy work themselves, so they'll probably assign a GLC or board to watch over this, something like our IDA regulating the telecommunications industry. -
hmm...isn't this sort of like Kuala Lumpur's Rapid KL? I read from the website that it is owned by the government by taking ovr the bus companies?And to standardise the ticketing system, they decided to let people use Touch & Go cards on buses & LRTs...sort of like our ezlink.Originally posted by Yusry:What I wish for is that the government takes over all the routes and contract them out to the companies. That way, things like timetabling will be unified and maybe for once, we could have a proper multi-modal ticketing system instead of the mish-mash of transfer rebates and fare caps.
And this way, it can be considered proper public transport by the public (ie, government) instead of public transport by private companies, which is a conflict of interest.
Since that, the bus services have been improving dramatically with buses now running to most of KL's Suburbs
see here: http://www.rapidkl.com.my/about_us.htm -
What happened to the IntraKota validators and farecards? Are they part of history now?Originally posted by cck_190:hmm...isn't this sort of like Kuala Lumpur's Rapid KL? I read from the website that it is owned by the government by taking ovr the bus companies?And to standardise the ticketing system, they decided to let people use Touch & Go cards on buses & LRTs...sort of like our ezlink. -
Just like DBS and POSB merged together???? and POSB still can retain their name??? Like that still ok for me. If operated by single operator like that see all the public buses in same livery can be quite sianOriginally posted by sinicker:i do not want a single operator...
i wouldnt want SMRTB and SBST to merge..
i want SMRT to be considered the company with the "faster buses". having DDs on 969 will only make it slower.. no more 20mins frm tamp int - khatib stn.
iron lady of SMRT, pls wake up and buck up on SMRTbuses.
Both companies should try to share ideas on their business tatics if they do not want to merge. Will the government forced them to merge if they do not want to do so -
Originally posted by cck_190:
No. My wish is that the government takes over the routes and contract them out to the companies.
hmm...isn't this sort of like Kuala Lumpur's Rapid KL? I read from the website that it is owned by the government by taking ovr the bus companies?And to standardise the ticketing system, they decided to let people use Touch & Go cards on buses & LRTs...sort of like our ezlink.
Since that, the bus services have been improving dramatically with buses now running to most of KL's Suburbs
see here: [b]http://www.rapidkl.com.my/about_us.htm[/b]
The fare we pay goes back to the government who then pays the bus companies whatever has been stipulated in the contract.
For RapidKL, the government runs the bus services. In my plan, the government DOES NOT run the bus services.
This way, if the fares rise unfairly, we can take action by VOTING the appropriate party in the next general elections. Unlike now whereby there is no way we can stop the money-grabbing companies from rising the fares. -
Your proposal is similar to what many ang mo countries are doing.Originally posted by Yusry:No. My wish is that the government takes over the routes and contract them out to the companies.
The fare we pay goes back to the government who then pays the bus companies whatever has been stipulated in the contract.
For RapidKL, the government runs the bus services. In my plan, the government DOES NOT run the bus services.
This way, if the fares rise unfairly, we can take action by VOTING the appropriate party in the next general elections. Unlike now whereby there is no way we can stop the money-grabbing companies from rising the fares. -
this is a possible merger.
think about the famous SPH Mediaworks and Mediacorp.. when Channel U comes, both companies starts bleeding, esp SPH, so in the end, Mediacopr acqusited SPH channel I and U, and SPH gets 40% shares in mediacorp.
in this scenario, SBS may not even want to takeover SMRT buses, like SMRT not wanting to take over NEL?
reason: NEL bleeds heavily; SMRT buses has a drastic falling revenue.
however, Mr Lim Jit Poh, comfortdelgro chairman, is only aiming for EXPANSION of operations, but NOT giving up anything, in this case, NEL.
why SMRT bus loss revenue, cos nev overseas investments, and few advetisements on buses