SMRT: SMRTB is a liability, no future
-
It's on 28/01/10's ST money section.
SMRTB has been making losses, hence SMRT is now saying it bought Tibs too much (in price).
They're now claiming buses has no future w/ more MRT lines built (NSL/ EWL corridor is alrdy matured in capacity and how much can MRT take? Can it fully replace buses?) and it says it fears losing out in e new bus operation env i.e. bidding for e contract of svs. It's mentioned by e lady CFO.
bo xim/ no heart in operating public trunk rts still want to comment so much. Can put so much resources on RWS8 n take Airshow shuttle though do not have e resources to provide.
SMRT is really the CMB of Hong Kong, hopeless
-
Originally posted by sbst275:
It's on 28/01/10's ST money section.
SMRTB has been making losses, hence SMRT is now saying it bought Tibs too much (in price).
They're now claiming buses has no future w/ more MRT lines built (NSL/ EWL corridor is alrdy matured in capacity and how much can MRT take? Can it fully replace buses?) and it says it fears losing out in e new bus operation env i.e. bidding for e contract of svs.
bo xim/ no heart in operating public trunk rts still want to comment so much. Can put so much resources on RWS8 n take Airshow shuttle though do not have e resources to provide.
SMRT is really the CMB of Hong Kong, hopeless
You mean you are condemning SMRTB?
-
Originally posted by SBS7322B:
You mean you are condemning SMRTB?
It's not a condemn, it occured to Hong Kong w/ CMB (the 2nd gen had no interest in operating buses) only it's occuring to us now.SMRT started as a stat board back in 1987, wat's then and now in service level is a real difference
-
Originally posted by SBS7322B:
You mean you are condemning SMRTB?
That's all he does. So everytime he starts a new thread I can imagine what he's going to say again. -
Originally posted by TIB1232Z:
That's all he does. So everytime he starts a new thread I can imagine what he's going to say again.
why now say I'm saying against themSMRT's CFO says it from her mouth abt buses.
And for those against what I'm typing, go outside e world and see how ppl operate public tpt overseas if you still think we're world class.
Thks to complacency, ppl has catched up and overtaken us
-
Originally posted by sbst275:
It's not a condemn, it occured to Hong Kong w/ CMB (the 2nd gen had no interest in operating buses) only it's occuring to us now.SMRT started as a stat board back in 1987, wat's then and now in service level is a real difference
In the past it called TIBS, in 2004, they change to SMRT. -
oh well, thats what u get from PLC companies.. but then even government statutory boards also talk profits and commercialisation to you (think HDB).
its makes full sense what SMRT says.. of cos bus fans wont accept that statement. seems that SMRT is treating its buses as toxic assets, as a liability rather than some non-performing asset.. also should write off and forget the purchase from tibs
if thats the case, best if they can sell their entire bus unit to some other operator (easier said than done!), but too bad if they have some binding obligation to continuing running their bus operations -
actually true la.. buses really have no future with more MRT lines built.. maybe got future for feeder buses lo..
give me a choice i rather buy SMRT than SBST 500 or CDG
-
Originally posted by 105090:
actually true la.. buses really have no future with more MRT lines built.. maybe got future for feeder buses lo..
give me a choice i rather buy SMRT than SBST 500 or CDG
actually if buses are to survive then gotta revitalise it i.e. rapid svs and sort.Anyway it wun be possible for everywhere to have MRT. Even so, the new DTL isn't tat convenient for everyone along e line.
-
Originally posted by 105090:
Oh well, thats what u get from PLC companies.. but then even government statutory boards also talk profits and commercialisation to you (think HDB).
its makes full sense what SMRT says.. of cos bus fans wont accept that statement. seems that SMRT is treating its buses as toxic assets, as a liability rather than some non-performing asset.. also should write off and forget the purchase from tibs
if thats the case, best if they can sell their entire bus unit to some other operator (easier said than done!), but too bad if they have some binding obligation to continuing running their bus operationsIn the strictest sense, SMRT Corp is still a GLC.
We have already known that the moment the rebranding was announced. They should just divest off the bus operations and sell it to another MNC (e.g. KMB/MTR/FirstGroup) or by management buyout who knows how to run it better. It makes finanical sense, too.
Better still rename it back to TIBS. De-mergers have happened before, just look at the auto industry.
BTW today's papers have again announced the possible rationalisation of bus routes with the opening of the Stage One/Two Circle Line.
-
dun forget SMRT is mentioning public bus svs and obligation.
SMRT give up public bus obligation and become full fledge private bus operator. But also difficult in reality
Hopefully the bus route rationalistion is not a simple reduce bus services. Population is growing and they still never grow up and play the zero sum capacity game
-
yup.. the rationalisation.. biggest loser? thats SBS, because people will take MRT and CCL belongs to SMRT.. smrt dont pay sbs for any loss revenue...
k la.. in this case smrt shld keep quiet and sbs shld kpkb.. (SBS profit already so meagre, w/o advertising revenue, its in the red) -
Originally posted by 105090:
yup.. the rationalisation.. biggest loser? thats SBS, because people will take MRT and CCL belongs to SMRT.. smrt dont pay sbs for any loss revenue...
k la.. in this case smrt shld keep quiet and sbs shld kpkb.. (SBS profit already so meagre, w/o advertising revenue, its in the red)
Actually SMRT also lugi, some pt to pt dist might end up be reduced and they've to saddle w/ opeating 1 more MRT line but in a diluted average fare issue.But many ppl dun see it (incl analyst)
-
next year or so they gonna take into account CCL operating losses.. good luck to shareholders~!
but dont forget.. SMRT strategy is to be defensive.. -
Originally posted by 105090:
but dont forget.. SMRT strategy is to be defensive..
Defensive, are you sure?
- The corp top management previously hails from a business that demands aggressive marketing to survive. They constantly ran promotions, full-body ads on win free travel and go green, while SBST only have gone as far as Moove Media.
- While keeping fixed operating assets (other than retail) at constant they have increased their variable operating costs in the recent years. They have hired so many platform staff and drivers than ever before.
- Increasing reliance on chartered services. Bus-Plus is probably the most profitable. SMB contracted services next. Look at how much they have devoted into RWS services.
-
The platform is only during peak hrs.
On weekends stations like Orchard you dun see them. At e same time they dun even encourage ppl to spread out across e platform
Not to say TOs these days love to keep on pressing e 2nd buzzer even though ppl has not even alighted from e train yet. Dunno rush for wat, want to create stampede is it?
-
Can only blame the ex Transport Minister, Malboro Tan. He is the one who suggested to have one /two transport operators to run multi modal transports..... Mr Mah Bao Tan. Forcing TIBS to merge with SMRT.
Now gone to HDB, and prices of our flats have gone so high. How to buy a decent flats in these years???? Still can claim that is affordable by Singaporean. Cannot believe the above statements.
-
Originally posted by phillipC:
Can only blame the ex Transport Minister, Malboro Tan. He is the one who suggested to have one /two transport operators to run multi modal transports..... Mr Mah Bao Tan. Forcing TIBS to merge with SMRT.
Now gone to HDB, and prices of our flats have gone so high. How to buy a decent flats in these years???? Still can claim that is affordable by Singaporean. Cannot believe the above statements.
Flats bo bian. Now HDB is simply left w/ 120,000 to 150,000 new units to build forever. It's unless SAF trg ground in e northern corridor are cleared for housing devt.Land usage intensity would only get intensed as e yr goes. Even Jurong Island has problems of storing chemicals/ oil products alrdy
But price of flats still has to be reasonable. But 1 thing abt ex flats is it'll make ppl think twice of buying cars.
-
sell TIBS to SBS!!!!!!
-
there's not much heart put into the branding of the company. it makes buses feel unimportant.
-
The OC500LE seats are good enough examples...I pity the folks maintaining the seats cos its gonna be tougher when there's 2 colours and patterns. Lest you think it is something trivial, that's because you've not been through such shit.
So what if the bus looks good? Isn't cleanliness and mainteinance and the ease of it far more important?
-
Well, SMRT is improving their passenger service a little too much. They invested in new PIS systems, bought new buses that aren't cheap, eventhough they are reliable and economical and unnecessary mobitec Electronic Display Signs. Also, their bendies are quite fuel hungry. It requires $500 worth of diesel to fill the fuel tank which would run out by the end of a regular AM/PM slot.
To make things more worse, the drivers are wasting the fuel by not sticking to schedule. One good example is Service 912. The buses bunch up very often, even during off-peak with even both buses with little or worst, no passengers. This is wasting precious money on precious diesel. Sorry if my reply turned into somesort of a rant.
Anyway, i fear LTA building more MRT lines because of inadequate land mass and the vast enviromental destruction involved. The downtown line depot at Kranji is already a clear example. They had to dig up quite alot of earth and cut vast amounts of forest and even exhumed a few graves which made me quite cross. It's better LTA improve our current lines and not build somemore. Also, if you depend too much on trains and one day a big disruption happens, Singapore's transport system would just stop like a snap of a rope.
-
The scholars are hedging a hell lot on the MRT lines. It had better work out although I dont think it would cos there's no way we can just suka suka shift the lines. Even expanding or contracting the capacity is next to impossible. It is possible actually. But for some reasons "costs" keep coming up as the main factor.
We've got our CPF and yet we're being held hostage by profits. Which part of that makes sense?
-
smrt just cant operate buses and taxis as good as tibs...
-
Thing is tat we can't be forever building MRT lines being very costly for one and looking at the DTL, new lines wun be tat convenient either (like buliding for e sake just for MRT to serve smaller neighbourhood and likely to take longer travelling distance mileage for transfer and to destination, resulting in even more expensive fares than current direct bus system).
Anyway they can tell me replacing ez-link single trip ticket w/ RFID chip technology (end up e chip no need to queue up again and return as the returning slot is located at the exit gantry) ish too costly. They dun even get it why there's long queues at GTM for stations like Orchard on weekends and they blindy tell me they're going to control e queue length
.Funny, they can be so willing to spend millions that e scholars themselves will never get to earn in their lifetime on MRT, yet small investment to improve our current quality of life they get scared over cost
Rent seekers they're
SMRT's CFO says she expect stiff competition on e tendering public bus sv system. Pls la, the output they give to commuters currently would really end up like CMB in no time.