Should SMRT and SBS Transit merge?
-
It's a well-known fact: SMRT runs their trains far better than their buses, and SBS Transit runs their buses far better than their trains. If both of these companies merge, there would be no competition and buses and trains would run much more smoothly (not sure about SMRT Taxis though). What do you guys think?
-
Hmmm... Been wondering this. But if they merge, bus services freq may not be too frequent coz they're a company and when they're not merge, they can have a competition and freq for bus svc will be better.
-
maybe both companies should be
-
Originally posted by At the Bed:
Hmmm... Been wondering this. But if they merge, bus services freq may not be too frequent coz they're a company and when they're not merge, they can have a competition and freq for bus svc will be better.
True, but frequency is the least of our worries because the quality for bus services will be higher (especially for prior-SMRT services) with a higher (albeit only slightly) margin of maintenance on trains and buses alike as a company. They'll probably wait till the people complain again to improve frequencies which is possible with a larger fleet at their disposal. Or not.
-
Originally posted by SBS7777Y:
maybe both companies should be
Your head 3 years ago was like
*insert picture above*
-
Originally posted by SBS7777Y:
maybe both companies should be
U don't seem to be a new user in sgf. What's ur previous account ID?
PS: We don't need anything Off Topic pictures, for any OT pics, please post it at Chatbox
but MAKE SURE THAT THE CONTENT IS NOT VIOLENT, OR ELSE PLEASE TAKE DOWN THE PICTURE
-
Originally posted by SBS9067A:
True, but frequency is the least of our worries because the quality for bus services will be higher (especially for prior-SMRT services) with a higher (albeit only slightly) margin of maintenance on trains and buses alike as a company. They'll probably wait till the people complain again to improve frequencies which is possible with a larger fleet at their disposal. Or not.
I don't think merging will be a great idea though :/.
-
Originally posted by At the Bed:
I don't think merging will be a great idea though :/.
True, there will be cons attached, but if you recall November 1973 when SBS was formed, it made things a whole lot better as far as we can see.
-
O. I'm from the young generation, so um... At least having a competition between SMRT and SBST shld be better le bah
-
Originally posted by At the Bed:
O. I'm from the young generation, so um... At least having a competition between SMRT and SBST shld be better le bah
I'm from the younger generation as well (born in 2000).
So how would having competition with SMRT and SBST be better?
-
Originally posted by SBS9067A:
Your head 3 years ago was like
*insert picture above*
You knew that and you all still decided to feed the troll. And then wonder why it keeps returning and craves for more attention.
Told you not to feed the troll.
-
It's kinda hard to explain it, but I will try my best.
It will have the kind of feeling like competing, and both operators try their best to achieve the best. And erm, fleet will be different, example DD from SBST, and powerful buses/comfortable from SMRT. SMRT chose to provide us with the comfortable fleet, making us "happy" sort of, while SBST chose to buy buses which are enough for containing us.
-
Originally posted by At the Bed:
It's kinda hard to explain it, but I will try my best.
It will have the kind of feeling like competing, and both operators try their best to achieve the best. And erm, fleet will be different, example DD from SBST, and powerful buses/comfortable from SMRT. SMRT chose to provide us with the comfortable fleet, making us "happy" sort of, while SBST chose to buy buses which are enough for containing us.
That seems like a legit explaination, though now the fleet for SMRT is becoming more similar to SBST's, since they are purchasing DDs and as of now, they have Citaros similar to SBST.
-
Originally posted by sgbuses:
You knew that and you all still decided to feed the troll. And then wonder why it keeps returning and craves for more attention.
Told you not to feed the troll.
-
Originally posted by At the Bed:
Hmmm... Been wondering this. But if they merge, bus services freq may not be too frequent coz they're a company and when they're not merge, they can have a competition and freq for bus svc will be better.
That is what the government wants you to believe.
Do you think commuters in Choa Chu Kang, Sembawang and Pasir Ris really have a choice?
If there is real competition, Transdev or Arriva would be operating in Singapore already.
-
Originally posted by sgbuses:
That is what the government wants you to believe.
Do you think commuters in Choa Chu Kang, Sembawang and Pasir Ris really have a choice?
If there is real competition, Transdev or Arriva would be operating in Singapore already.
Real competition is this
-
Competition but with same owner indirectly..Whatever profitable companies in Singapore sure got links with Temasek Holdings or other Govt related companies
-
This is an old topic. Was mentioned before during GE, mainly by the Workers' Party.
Workers' Party proposal on Transport during GE 2006:
- Pros:
- prevents redundant duplication of service and unnecessary costs of overheads.
- [from WP's beliefs] makes the transport system more costs-efficient and of higher quality.
- [from WP's beliefs] makes public transport more affordable.
{Nationalised transport system has its downsides: Minister Lui (since I cannot quote the entire article, or else posts will be edited and shortened, I shall list down summarised points)}
- Cons:
- We would have to pay more tax and higher transport fares, as operators would get funding from Government.
- This would instead tempt operators to increase transport fares as they would be after profits.
- Quality of service may be lower, even when we pay higher transport fares and more tax.
-
Originally posted by sgbuses:
That is what the government wants you to believe.
Do you think commuters in Choa Chu Kang, Sembawang and Pasir Ris really have a choice?
If there is real competition, Transdev or Arriva would be operating in Singapore already.
Exactly! SBST and SMRT competition isn't like how London's transport competition is.
And yes, I'm a commuter in CCK. We actually don't have a choice... Bus freq is still not very good. Downroute buses... heh.. boliao -
Even if SMRT and SBST were to merge, can you be certain that their profit-centric behaviours are going to disappear and behave like proper PTOs?! Absolutely not!
The problem as id see it is getting corporations to provide public goods like public transit (which require subsidy and arent as profit making as expected). Pervertedboy has stated the econs case against nationalising the transport system, but to swing to the other extreme (as is the case now) isnt beneficial as our PTOs can and may cut corners to keep their books in the black (which is as, or even more impt than having the buses and trains run ontime).
For profit-centric organizations to grasp the social implications and dimensions of their provision isnt something i want to touch on, but is something that the LTA and PTOs need to appreciate because using taxpayers dollars to bail out profit-centric PTOs (as was the case with BSEP) isnt the best way to use public funds, nor the best way to improve bus services because the govt has to absorb losses from non-profiting BSEP routes while the PTOs are just tasked to provide the buses at the prescribed frequencies. I would go as far to suggest that the PTOs take the lead to improve bus services because they know their fleet and pax better than LTA does, and to have LTA initiate all the improvement in services... hell the PTOs are getting away too easily.
-
Basically, what the Government wanted to do is to make the operators go into the commercial industry and make money from retail, while the funds for Public transport mostly come from the retail business.
- The intention is to let Public Transport be a loss-making business (not-for-profit) and let other forms of business cover up the loss and also help the operators (or the parent companies) make profits.
Actually, was SBS bought over by Comfort Delgro, or has SBS been part of Comfort Delgro all along?
- If that's the case, SMRT should also be bought over by another company. For instance, CapitaMall.
-
Con. of merger:
- Having a national public bus company monopolising the public bus system and a national public train company monopolising the public train system would result in exploitation of consumers (because they are the monopoly. even if they deliver bad service, people would still have to use their service), leading to fall in service standards.
- It would be worse if there is a single National Public Transport company operating both modes of Public Transport, because there may be diseconomies of scale (hard to control operations and ensure quality because the company is too large, which may lead to fraud, corruption, etc.), leading to fall in service standards.
Therefore, I disagree that SMRT and SBS Transit should merge.
(Sorry. I am not good in Economics but basically, my point is that having a single company operating the entire system would lower service standards.)
-
Originally posted by SBS7777Y:
maybe both companies should be
-
Originally posted by Pervertedboy:
Basically, what the Government wanted to do is to make the operators go into the commercial industry and make money from retail, while the funds for Public transport mostly come from the retail business.
- The intention is to let Public Transport be a loss-making business (not-for-profit) and let other forms of business cover up the loss and also help the operators (or the parent companies) make profits.
Actually, was SBS bought over by Comfort Delgro, or has SBS been part of Comfort Delgro all along?
- If that's the case, SMRT should also be bought over by another company. For instance, CapitaMall.
can you support that claim? by saying that youre suggesting that the PTOs should do MORE retail and leave their CORE COMPETENCIES to rot/die.
Also, what do you mean by 'let public transport be a loss-making business?' As a division manager (retail) of a transport company, is it FAIR that my division's profits GO TO a LOSS-MAKING train/bus section? ABSOLUTELY NOT! Cross-subsidying suggests and implies that something is DEAD WRONG with a division in terms of cost management/revenue generation, and can reflect deeper and more chronic issues within the said division. As a paying commuter, Im not interested in whether the PTOs are in the black, but WHETHER their trains and buses divisions can make profits RESPECTIVELY.
Onto a little history, SBST is OWNED by CDG which was formerly SBS. Bus operations of SBS were spun off to form the subsidary SBST, and SBS eventually changed name to CDG and went listed.
-
Originally posted by SBS7777Y:
Photoshop.