Government contracting model for public bus industry
-
I guess the following bus routes may be in the Ulu Pandan package:
Jurong East - 51, 52, 105, 197, 506.
Clementi - 7, 14, 99, 147, 156, 165, 166, 175, 196.
Ghim Moh - 92, 100, 111
In total, there are 17 bus routes.
Currently, these routes use up to 397 buses.
In GCM, they will use 455 buses.
There will be spare capacity for 45 buses (39 buses in today's context), which means there can be around 4-8 new bus routes in future. This should be enough for future developments in Jurong East, Clementi and West Coast.
-
I do not think they will touch Joo Koon or Boon Lay let alone 61 & 852.
Soon Lee still going strong after TT takeover of the J East service.
Jurong East:51,52,105 & 506
Clementi:96,99,147,166,175,282,284,285(In exchange of 4 Boon Lay svc to Bulim instead)
Kent Ridge:33,95,201
Buona Vista:48,74,91,191,200
Ghim Moh:92,100,111
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
I do not think they will touch Joo Koon or Boon Lay let alone 61 & 852.
Soon Lee still going strong after TT takeover of the J East service.
Jurong East:51,52,105 & 506
Clementi:96,99,147,166,175,282,284,285(In exchange of 4 Boon Lay svc to Bulim instead)
Kent Ridge:33,95,201
Buona Vista:48,74,91,191,200
Ghim Moh:92,100,111
In my opinion, these are the services that will be for the Ulu Pandan GCM.
(Sorry if I take out some of the services as I prefer them to be operated by incumbent company)Jurong East: 52, 197, 506
Clementi: 99, 147, 156, 175
Kent Ridge: 95, 201
Buona Vista: 48, 91, 191, 200
Ghim Moh: 92, 111
Marina Centre: 195
New Bridge Road: 120, 121, 122 -
When Tower Transit begins its bus revenue service on 29 May, we can expect the buses to be in a mixture of liveries and advertisements.
According to the picture created by LTA, "you will see a different logo on the buses".
I guess this means the buses will be in a mixture of liveries, while they all have the Tower Transit logo.
-
so as per LTA, there will be new operator logos on the GCM (TT) buses... wonder whether they will just simply remove the SBST/SMRT logo and repaste with TT logo for the time being? or they will deploy those new buses first, and take their time to resticker/repaint those SBST/SMRT buses..
-
Originally posted by lemon1974:
so as per LTA, there will be new operator logos on the GCM (TT) buses... wonder whether they will just simply remove the SBST/SMRT logo and repaste with TT logo for the time being? or they will deploy those new buses first, and take their time to resticker/repaint those SBST/SMRT buses..
If other cities are an indicator, probably so:
-
Originally posted by lemon1974:
so as per LTA, there will be new operator logos on the GCM (TT) buses... wonder whether they will just simply remove the SBST/SMRT logo and repaste with TT logo for the time being? or they will deploy those new buses first, and take their time to resticker/repaint those SBST/SMRT buses..
i have the feeling they will deploy new buses 1st. then the existing buses they will go resticker/repaint
-
Originally posted by azharjj:
i have the feeling they will deploy new buses 1st. then the existing buses they will go resticker/repaint
this is what i think also...that why LTA have given so many new buses to TT...
-
Originally posted by lemon1974:
this is what i think also...that why LTA have given so many new buses to TT...
yup... given TT citaros doing 941, 947 & 189 route TRG as well as wright on 189 route TRG
i guess that is a sign
-
TT facebook show 5 of the Wrights with green livery and TT logo....
-
SG5016M, SG5014R, SG5015K, SG5032M, SG5018E
-
If more profits can be generated using this contracting model, I hope the authorities can use the enhanced profits to purchase better buses and/or provide better bus infrastructure.
Otherwise, a reduction of bus fares would be appreciated. :)
-
Originally posted by gekpohboy:
If more profits can be generated using this contracting model, I hope the authorities can use the enhanced profits to purchase better buses and/or provide better bus infrastructure.
Otherwise, a reduction of bus fares would be appreciated. :)
Not going to happen.
Costs in this industry is soaring (especially labour). Even if they did, they will aim to reduce their subsidy on bus services once cost savings are realized (and use it to fix the MRT, for example).
-
Originally posted by sgbuses:
Not going to happen.
Costs in this industry is soaring (especially labour). Even if they did, they will aim to reduce their subsidy on bus services once cost savings are realized (and use it to fix the MRT, for example).
but, isn't the costs lower in GCM? and, won't the government collect higher revenue in GCM?
actually, considering the incumbents are actually making huge profits from the bus business, I think GCM can actually make our public bus services self-sustainable.
if our public bus services can be self-sustainable, it is good. then don't need subsidy, and less tax would be collected from us. :)
-
Originally posted by gekpohboy:
but, isn't the costs lower in GCM? and, won't the government collect higher revenue in GCM?
actually, considering the incumbents are actually making huge profits from the bus business, I think GCM can actually make our public bus services self-sustainable.
if our public bus services can be self-sustainable, it is good. then don't need subsidy, and less tax would be collected from us. :)
No. Fare revenue has not changed.
The government has, in effect, subsidizing bus commuters through BSEP.
It is not sustainable in its current form. Not when you are effectively paying about 0 to 5 cents for a feeder bus ride on transfer.
There is a reason why share price of incumbents have increased when they lost a parcel tender.
By introducing GCM, the lid on driver salaries for decades has been lifted and wages are now subject to market forces.
Do you really think a government agency will want to be publicly embarrassed by having its fare increase application refused by PTC?
I will be very surprised if bus fares do not double or triple in five years.
-
Originally posted by sgbuses:
No. Fare revenue has not changed.
The government has, in effect, subsidizing bus commuters through BSEP.
It is not sustainable in its current form. Not when you are effectively paying about 0 to 5 cents for a feeder bus ride on transfer.
There is a reason why share price of incumbents have increased when they lost a parcel tender.
By introducing GCM, the lid on driver salaries for decades has been lifted and wages are now subject to market forces.
Do you really think a government agency will want to be publicly embarrassed by having its fare increase application refused by PTC?
I will be very surprised if bus fares do not double or triple in five years.
no matter what, it will never be self-sustainable. right?
-
Originally posted by gekpohboy:
no matter what, it will never be self-sustainable. right?
Not with the current fares.
GCM operators do not care. They receive a fixed basic sum. It does not finanically matter whether they pick up an extra passenger or not (this is also the same model for Transperth until very recently).
-
Originally posted by sgbuses:
No. Fare revenue has not changed.
The government has, in effect, subsidizing bus commuters through BSEP.
It is not sustainable in its current form. Not when you are effectively paying about 0 to 5 cents for a feeder bus ride on transfer.
There is a reason why share price of incumbents have increased when they lost a parcel tender.
By introducing GCM, the lid on driver salaries for decades has been lifted and wages are now subject to market forces.
Do you really think a government agency will want to be publicly embarrassed by having its fare increase application refused by PTC?
I will be very surprised if bus fares do not double or triple in five years.
I will be surprised that bus fares could have been combined together, and say it is a zonal price (like Zone 1-5), express pegged. Thus fares could have been decreased to 66 cents again. The maximum of $2.02 only applies to marathon services (30, 51, 61, 67, 961).
Student fares will be 36 cents, all the way to 59 cents. The 64 cents applies to marathon services.
-
Originally posted by TPS Timothy Mok:
I will be surprised that bus fares could have been combined together, and say it is a zonal price (like Zone 1-5), express pegged. Thus fares could have been decreased to 66 cents again. The maximum of $2.02 only applies to marathon services (30, 51, 61, 67, 961).
Student fares will be 36 cents, all the way to 59 cents. The 64 cents applies to marathon services.
If zone fares are adopted, you should be scared. Very scared.
Transperth charges up to 9 zones, $12.10 cash fare or $10.29 card fare (non-GIRO) for adults, $4.80 cash fare and $4.08 card fare (non-GIRO) for students.
-
Originally posted by SBS3004X:
SG5016M, SG5014R, SG5015K, SG5032M, SG5018E
+ 5017 that we alrdy know of in the beginning. so 6 buses so far. i believe there will be more
-
Originally posted by gekpohboy:
but, isn't the costs lower in GCM? and, won't the government collect higher revenue in GCM?
actually, considering the incumbents are actually making huge profits from the bus business, I think GCM can actually make our public bus services self-sustainable.
if our public bus services can be self-sustainable, it is good. then don't need subsidy, and less tax would be collected from us. :)
Cost lower? Maybe u should go n read up more on GCM. Now 300 buses for bulim package by SBST n SMRT. TT will be operating 400 buses on the same number of services with the SAME number of paxes. So cost is higher or lower (cost of buses/diesel/BC salaries etc). Revenue will still be the same.
N Suggest u go read those financial report to see where the profit of SBST n SMRT came from.
-
Originally posted by lemon1974:
Cost lower? Maybe u should go n read up more on GCM. Now 300 buses for bulim package by SBST n SMRT. TT will be operating 400 buses on the same number of services with the SAME number of paxes. So cost is higher or lower (cost of buses/diesel/BC salaries etc). Revenue will still be the same.
N Suggest u go read those financial report to see where the profit of SBST n SMRT came from.
all depend on PTC and LTA want to adjust the cost. as both new operators has to work around the price they had tendered. any thing more is bonus from LTA. like good service etc
-
Originally posted by wsy1234:
all depend on PTC and LTA want to adjust the cost. as both new operators has to work around the price they had tendered. any thing more is bonus from LTA. like good service etc
the cost will have to bear by someone... either all the paxes, or all the taxpayers...
total revenue from bus operations is around S$1 billion per year,
estimated cost of GCM = S$100m x 12 packages = S$1.2 billion (this is just cost that pay to the operators),excluding cost of buying buses/building of depots etc.. so basically LTA will be losing money... -
Originally posted by gekpohboy:
If more profits can be generated using this contracting model, I hope the authorities can use the enhanced profits to purchase better buses and/or provide better bus infrastructure.
Otherwise, a reduction of bus fares would be appreciated. :)
You're assuming that GCM, or the government having increased control of the bus industry, is a profit generating activity.
-
Originally posted by gekpohboy:
but, isn't the costs lower in GCM? and, won't the government collect higher revenue in GCM?
actually, considering the incumbents are actually making huge profits from the bus business, I think GCM can actually make our public bus services self-sustainable.
if our public bus services can be self-sustainable, it is good. then don't need subsidy, and less tax would be collected from us. :)
Costs are lower for operator, not the government.
And about the incumbents making huge profits from buses, like others here have said, you should scrutinize their annual reports before making such an assumption.