For advertisement

Sample

4/30/2008

SMRT profit soars to $150 mil

Full year profit soared despite higher fuel and operating cost. Profit rose by 10.7% due to higher ridership and other incomes. So will fare price come down? I don't think so looking at oil prices. I think more increases are likely if the mindset and past precedence are to go by. And the reasons of the past can always be pushed out again and again. And don't forget that they are answerable to the shareholders to bring in ever increasing profits.

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

I understand that NTUC fairprice made more money last year than the previous year, but they still keep on increasing the prices of its housebrand products.

So will 'fare price' come down? Even if oil prices go down and they make even higher profits, fare price will never come down. You should count your blessings if they do not increase fares when the next increase is due later this year. That right to increase faares is already cast in stone by the LTA.

Anonymous said...

agree. these companies made huge profits, yet instead of adjusting the fares downwards, they are likely to raise it. well i think it is a simple reasoning, that if they double the fares, they will double the profits which will double their pay and also the gst and tax collections. so everyone should be happy? (you shud buy their shares if you are unhappy abt this.)

i have long suspected that these people must have a prepared template of reasons. so before increasing the fares, they will transfer the points from that checklist to fill in the ...blah blah blah reasons.
:)

Anonymous said...

anyone knows what the difference between public and private transport ?

Is SMRT public or private?

Anonymous said...

listed co.,is a private company.

PTC regulates the fares etc..
(do read the link)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Transport_Council

Anonymous said...

sorry the link shud be:
(they wear helmets to work)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Public_Transport_Council

Anonymous said...

Hi Redbean;

do allow me to digress from the topic. I thank You as an apology.

In an article to the Forum Editor of the Straits Times on 1 May 2008, one Mdm Lily Cheong described her shopping experience in NTUC Fairprice(Fairprice??). She specifically mentioned rice and cooking oil prices. (Please read said Article in ST Forum Page dated 1 May 2008).

In the same publication on the same date(day), a supermarket chain advertised(in page H6) a premium brand(Royal Umbrella) rice at $9.80 per 5kg pack. See huge differences in the prices of rice between NTUC Fairprice Chain and others?

Yet, Minister Lim Swee Say claimed time and again NTUC champions workers/members' welfares and wellbeings. I enjoy the howls of the wolf more.

patriot.

Loh Hon Chun said...

Whatever goes up NEVER comes down! How often do you see a proposal to a fare hike gets rejected?

SMRT is a listed company and they need to answer to their shareholders. It seems that profit is more important than taking care of customers. We are taking private transport instead of public transport. Guess we need to live with it isn't it? Even if they are going to increase by large percentage, do we have a choice of not taking their trains? Does this ring a bell? Yes, that's a monopoly.

Regards
hongjun

redbean said...

hi hongjun, welcome to the blog.

many of you have expressed views on this, and all quite similar. smrt was a public company that has been privatised. it is now a private company performing a public service. yes, it is not public transport but private transport.

if any of you can remember, the initial $5b or $6b that were spent on the mrt infrastructure were public money. i still can trace how this was accounted for or return to the people. or the money is now smrt's money or smrt shareholders money.

but the main issue is this crap called privatisation. privatisation in name to make profit and more profit from the people who were the original owner through public funding.

hospitals too have gone that way. education also. and so essential services and govt services.

privatisation is a very dangerous word.

Anonymous said...

Privatization has its pluses only if competition exists. This does not apply to public transport.

Anonymous said...

It is totally ridiculous that a public transport establishment makes such a lucrative profit at the expense of the public for providing essential services as part of the national efforts.

Anonymous said...

Privatization means turning, making anything to be privately owned, managed and TO PROFIT THE SHAREHOLDERS AND SENIOR MANAGERS.

BUT NOT TO BENEFIT THE PUBLIC USER/BUYER AND OR EVEN BE ACCOUNTABLE TO THEM.

If these so-called 'PRIVATIZED' Entities have to account for anything(mistakes/poor services/high prices/accidents etc), they are answerable to THE GOVERNMENT AND NOT THE PUBLIC.

ONLY THE AUTHORITY(GOVERNMENT) CAN make THEM(Privatized Entities) answerable and accountable. AND levy fine and caution(reprimand) whichever it(Authority) deems fit as punishments. The Public hardly gets benefitted from the results of complaints of poor services, high costs and mishaps.

NEITHER WILL THE GOVERNMENT BE MADE RESPONSIBLE for any lapses/mistakes and poor qualities of goods and services OF THESE PRIVATIZED COMPANIES!

So, my final conclusion is, PRIVATIZATION is a DIRTY PROCESS(MANIPULATIONS) INTENDED TO ABSOLVE THE PRIVATIZED ENTITIES FROM ACCOUNTABILITIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.

I concur fully with Redbeans' interpretation of 'privatization'.

patriot.

Anonymous said...

Having read this I thought it was rather enlightening.
I appreciate you spending some time and effort to put this
content together. I once again find myself spending a lot
of time both reading and posting comments. But so what, it was still
worthwhile!
Also visit my homepage ; cheapest way get 3 credit scores