Wednesday, September 13, 2006

Increase is small but ....

Well, fares are up.

From October, adult EZ-link fares for buses and trains will increase by 1 to 3 cents, which amounts to an overall fare hike of 1.7 percent. On the surface, it doesn't account to much, however please do remember it is per trip and it does add up.

Any normal commuter would take at least 2 trips a day, and with a good percentage taking 4 trips. If we made a rough esitmate of 10 cents increase per day, an average person would had to fork out around $3 more per month.

In my opinion, the increase isn't much. But is the increase fair?

The mainstream media had gone on the offensive, highlighting the 1.7% percent and 1-3 cents increase but they had totally skipped around the question if the fare increases is justisfied in the first place.

The Public Transport Council (PTC) says that given the positive economic outlook, it assessed that there were no "extenuating circumstances" to vary or reject the proposal. However, I would also say that there were no "extenuating circumstances" to submit the proposal in the first place.

Simply take a peek at the dividend yield of SMRT and SBS Transit.

SMRT Corp's total gross dividend for the financial year ended March of 7 cents per share — S$84.6 million net — represents 81.6 per cent of its S$103.6million net profit.

For SBS Transit, it pays even better. 19 per cent dividend per share and "1 Year Total Return" of 71 per cent.

Both companies seems to be more interested in "increasing shareholders' value" then to invest some of the profits back into their business. Why is so?

It is because they can ask for regular fare increase and never had to justisfy for it.


~~~~~~~~~
Technorati: ,

posted by wert | Wednesday, September 13, 2006 | 2 comments | Link to this post | Email This!


Sunday, September 03, 2006

Transport Hikes : Followups from CASE.

I had been trying to write a followup on the open letter to CASE on the subject of public transport hikes. I had receive some sort of reply from them a couple of weeks ago but I kept putting it off. Why? Simply because there is nothing to report.

Well, I shall not put up the correspondences in full due to privacy issues and frankly they are very boring indeed.

Let me put up at timeline of the events.

26 July 2006
I had sent my open letter to CASE, cc: PTC, Strait Times, Today and Newpaper as well as SMRT.

27 July 2006
I had recieved a prompt and polite acknowledgment from Consumer Relations Officer, Katherine Lee (Ms)of CASE.

06 August 2006
I sent CASE a polite reminder, asking for their stand.

10 August 2006
A more senior officer gave me the courtesy of a reply. In her email, Ang Yiying, Executive (Marketing & Communications) of CASE had refered me to PTC and went on to describe the council and its functions, which is almost totally taken word for word from the PTC website. She had very politely but plainly told me to appeal to PTC instead of CASE.

11 August 2006
Being thick skinned, I persisted. I asked why CASE had been so silent on this round of price hikes while they seems be very vocal and prompt on the proposed transport hikes in 2005. I further asked for CASE's stand in this round of transport hikes.

14 August 2006
Ms Ang don't have any answers to my first question but she did state CASE's stand in the matter. I would like to quote her directly in full here.
Our position is that the PTC is the appropriate independent body to deliberate and subsequently comment on the fare hike applications. As the PTC has got various independent representations, we believe that commuters' interests would be taken into account in their deliberations. We also expect the PTC to give its reasons for its decision subsequently when it reaches its conclusion.

We note that you are aware of the functions of the Public Transport Council and that you have sent your feedback to them. As the deliberation on the applications for fare adjustment is on going, we advise that you wait for PTC's announcement.

We hope this clarifies our position on the matter.
To summarise, CASE has no views other than the views (which are not announced as yet) of the PTC on the subject matter and urged me to share the same view as they do. I notice CASE have this unshakeable faith in the PTC, so much as that CASE's stand is totally dependant on the independent PTC's views. Whatever PTC decided is good, PTC is infallible.

I also find it a little strange why CASE had this sudden surge of faith in the PTC. Isn't the PTC just as independent and appropriate body in 2005? Moreover, she is telling as politely as she can, not to bother CASE further on this issue. Maybe their hands are tied or they are truthfully independently dependent on PTC.

For the benefit of the readers, I would put up a link to the members of Public Transport Council so that maybe you might see something that explains the confidence CASE had on them.

To be fair, CASE had been very prompt in replying. At the very least, they did bother to reply and state their stand, something which none of the other organisations I email did.

Lastly, I would like to apologise for the lateness of this update. In my defence, I am waiting in hope of a late reply and secondly there isn't really much to report.


Technorati: , , ,

posted by wert | Sunday, September 03, 2006 | 3 comments | Link to this post | Email This!


Disclaimer: This blog is not intended to be authorative or clever in any way. It was based on rambling of a half crazed creature, so treat it as such and let it be! I was asked to keep my dangerous thoughts and unbalanced views all in one safe place , and so I did. Objectivity, Accuracy, Responsiblity and any High Standards are certainly not part of this blog's features. However, I must stress that I do not strive to mislead people, confuse people, and much less undermine our national strategy.