SMRT reported profit of...
-
S$27.5 million
-
where u get this information leh?
-
CNA
-
i think 2 days ago news....
-
so why are fares increasing?
-
Originally posted by the Bear:so why are fares increasing?
Sad to say, from a business perspective, just because they are making profits doesn't mean they don't have to increase fares. -
i think they shd prove to us their services are improved first before raising fares
not raise fares first n "promise" us the services will be improved. -
i dun really think that's a very huge profit. considering the high amount of traffic that they have everyday and the monopoly on the market.
-
Personally, I am not against raising fares.
I'm against raising fares when the alternative is something people won't choose, because of inefficiency.
E.g. If people don't take public transport like bus or trains to work, do they walk? -
cab asspensive
mrt/bus asspensive
nxt time we ride bicycle to work or shop oso must pay road tax liao -
Originally posted by beavan:i dun really think that's a very huge profit. considering the high amount of traffic that they have everyday and the monopoly on the market. Agree totally.
It's actually shameful for them to post this kind of profits when they have a risk free guaranteed stream of income on a daily basis, from people taking transport.
Apple makes a few times more and they are not making from a guaranteed source. -
-
thread business u oso wanna snatchOriginally posted by Manager433: -
not huge money? then u have anot?Originally posted by beavan:i dun really think that's a very huge profit. considering the high amount of traffic that they have everyday and the monopoly on the market.
not huge money, then why is the govt not spending the same amount to provide better welfare or entertainment of any sort to the people? -
Originally posted by quency:not huge money? then u have anot?
not huge money, then why is the govt not spending the same amount to provide welfare or entertainment of any sort to the people? That's small money, for a company that's literally covering Singapore.
Jack Welch, previous CEO of General Electic, has an annual salary of US$94 million.
You haven't even seen the big money yet.
Singapore is but, so small. -
can you answer my questions?Originally posted by Parka: That's small money, for a company that's literally covering Singapore.
Jack Welch, previous CEO of General Electic, has an annual salary of US$94 million.
You haven't even seen the big money yet.
Singapore is but, so small. -
Originally posted by quency:can you answer my questions?
Don't have that kind of money.
The Singapore government doesn't spend that kind of money on welfare because, simply put, they don't benefit the economy. I mean it benefits to the point where it doesn't benefit anymore, then the government stops there. Everything's about economics, macro view.
From a business point of view, making profits doesn't mean I have to lower the price for my products. There's totally no relation between profits and lowering of prices. -
thing is.. it is a essential public service.. profits are not the main aim.. in fact, it should never even be an aim...
some companies must never ever be run like one that maximises profit..
this is one of them -
cos those CCTV they are going to install later and the cost needed to maintain them needs money mah.Originally posted by the Bear:so why are fares increasing?
-
If you dont have that kind of money, and you want to make that kind of money, that is your personal business which we are not bothered with.Originally posted by Parka:
Don't have that kind of money.
The Singapore government doesn't spend that kind of money on welfare because, simply put, they don't benefit the economy. I mean it benefits to the point where it doesn't benefit anymore, then the government stops there. Everything's about economics, macro view.
From a business point of view, making profits doesn't mean I have to lower the price for my products. There's totally no relation between profits and lowering of prices.
In fact, if the govt spend on providing better welfare or entertainment to the people, it creates additional jobs and increasing income of the people, and as income increases, so does their consumption and thus stimulating the economy and benefiting the economy.
So, what do you mean that it does not benefit the economy? -
Originally posted by the Bear:thing is.. it is a essential public service.. profits are not the main aim.. in fact, it should never even be an aim...
some companies must never ever be run like one that maximises profit..
this is one of them Not the main aim, but profits is a must. Company is just another word for making money. The profits are good to tide over situations when they are needed. Some form or back up or insurance against frustrating events, e.g. sars.
-
Originally posted by quency:If you dont have that kind of money, and you want to make that kind of money, that is your personal business which we are not bothered with. Just answering your question, in a tone intended to be neutral.
In fact, if the govt spend on providing better welfare or entertainment to the people, it creates additional jobs and increasing income of the people, and as income increases, so does their consumption and thus stimulating the economy and benefiting the economy.
So, what do you mean that it does not benefit the economy? The key point of my previous argument is "benefits to the point where it doesn't benefit anymore"
That's the equilibrium.
You study economics too?
-
note the words "maximise profits"
they have profits... already sufficient profits to tide them over everything..
oh well... -
27.5m only. 80% of transportation of whole Singapore and Profit is only 27.5m !!. I sense a conspiracy.
-
Originally posted by Parka:
after you eat, you shit it out, that's the equilibrium, so why dont you stop eating? The key point of my previous argument is [b]"benefits to the point where it doesn't benefit anymore"
That's the equilibrium.
You study economics too? [/b]