(25-04-2012, 04:48 PM)shanrui_91 Wrote: [ -> ]http://app.lta.gov.sg/corp_press_content...u8381p6o95
LTA has already forked out $370m to procure for 34 trains (yes, train is very cheap $10m can be used for 25 years). As they cannot raise train and bus fare now, the government needs to subsidize them indirectly.
Seriously, they should just nationalize it and there won't be anything like listed co needs to earn money. Competition is useless here as even if SMRT gives you the lousiest service, you cannot choose to take NEL to go from Jurong East to Yishun. They earn money by giving you the lousiest service as there is no alternative route. And if they compete for the same route, they will suffer losses for sure. Is the government trying to say that if they run it, there will not be competition and the government will give you lousy services?
They are allowed to capitalise till 2028 as these are long-term maintenance that has never been carried out since the start of MRT line. I don't think they will be doing a resleepring, changing of claw and signalling system every 10 years. 900 millions can get you 800 buses for 4+ years
I check with the depreciation policy of SMRT, rolling stock depreciation is 15 to 30 years, while signalling is 3 to 30 years. I assume the rolling stock mean related stuff like resleepring etc. Depreciating the expense by 16 years is possible, which normally been done in 20-25 years
(25-04-2012, 05:00 PM)freedom Wrote: [ -> ] (25-04-2012, 04:56 PM)CityFarmer Wrote: [ -> ] (25-04-2012, 04:29 PM)freedom Wrote: [ -> ]why must it be shared by either LTA or commuters? why can SMRT not offset the expense with its own profit?
It is SMRT management interest (it is also the shareholder interest) to request co-sponsorship of the un-plan expenses. SMRT management is accountable to shareholder. Shareholders will not happy if SMRT management decided to offset the full expense with its own profit, without a final verdict that SMRT should bear full responsibility of the faults.
My 2 cts
so the public should just be okay with years' profit from low maintenance? anyway, better to wait for the final judgement about the whole saga to have a better understanding.
but the SMRT service really is getting worse and worse. not just EW, NS lines, but circle line.
As commuters, i condemn the poor service provided by the SMRT.
But if i am a shareholder, i will end the above with "but SMRT should not bear the full cost.....bla bla..."
Who are the largest share holder and associate holders of SMRT? i think all Singaporeans should know the answer. So is SMRT really a private company? i don't think so. So friends and citizens think about it. In actual facts, who is actually subsidising who? Ha! Ha!
So i think/suspect many facilities, utilities, hospitals, etc are all run on the same principles like running SMRT. especially if you compare to other countries.
NB:
The above is only my personal's take nothing to with anyone else.
Problems are - breakdown, people complain. To up the maintenance, must raise fare. Raise fare by 1 cent, people complain. Singaporeans haiz, want cheap, want good, want space big big. Public transport for the masses is not where my investment $ will go.
SMRT is garhment owned mah... so garhment saving themselves...
"Raise fare by 1 cent, people complain."
That's exactly one of my points. Singaporeans know actually who benefited the most. Is it you? Sad to say, it has never been the people but the elitist class. i think it is O. K. if even the people benefited some. So actually "who is holding up the sky"?
(25-04-2012, 05:05 PM)CityFarmer Wrote: [ -> ]I check with the depreciation policy of SMRT, rolling stock depreciation is 15 to 30 years, while signalling is 3 to 30 years. I assume the rolling stock mean related stuff like resleepring etc. Depreciating the expense by 16 years is possible, which normally been done in 20-25 years
Rolling stock actually refers to the train.
The sleepers should be part of the track infrastructure or refer to as P-Way (or Permanent Way). Not sure if SMRT depreciation policy mention anything about P-Way.
I have a question though. If the rail infrastructure assets does not belong to SMRT, why do they have a depreciation policy on those items? So does this mean the trains (the older batch) and the P-way and the signalling equipment belongs to SMRT?
Its a little confusing when MRTC (the statutory board) becomes SMRT (the pte ltd company), did those assets went to SMRT? Maybe need to go and dig out a copy of SMRT prospectus to have a better idea.
all these years shareholders happy to get good fat dividend. If they paid so much dividend could they also have at the same time enough money to go in to having proper maintainence for equipment or not?
As long no problem all these years nobody complain, now so many issues they will start to dig, no wonder run first lah whomever catch this ball ....
I think maybe they want to add 500 buses because the MRT issue will take years to resolve so 500 buses suppose to absorb additional load spilled over from MRT woes but roads are already very congested, every time there's an accident or breakdown on roads it will start to jam, another 500 bus may absorb ridership from MRT but I don't think going to improve traffic wait later you see people also start to complain about traffic jams on roads.
I'll put it this way. TH alone has deemed interests of nearly 55%. I'm sure if MOT/LTA wants it done certain way, this voice can easily squelch all the kacang putih noise.
The Straits Times
Apr 26, 2012
SMRT stock derailed by $900m upgrading plan
By Christopher Tan
TRAIN operator SMRT Corp's share price took a beating yesterday after it announced a $900 million upgrading package to address a spate of breakdowns.
The stock fell 7.5 cents or 4.14 per cent to close at $1.735, just above its 12-month low of $1.725, with 4.8 million shares changing hands.
It came on a day when the benchmark Straits Times Index ended 5.41 points higher, at 2,979.78 points.
The trigger was Tuesday's surprise announcement of a $900 million package to renew and upgrade its operating assets and rail infrastructure on the ageing North-South and East-West lines.
Although SMRT said the bill will be split with the Land Transport Authority (LTA), investors were obviously jittery over what could be a period of profit dilution.
Nomura Singapore transport analyst Lisa Lee said she has had a neutral recommendation on SMRT shares for the past year while the consensus of analysts polled by Reuters is between hold and sell.
Ms Lee said that even before the $900 million upgrade package was announced, she was expecting the company's capital expenditure to be around $600 million this year and $300 million next year, largely on new train purchases.
The figures are far higher than the $100 million or so it has been spending in recent years, Ms Lee added.
She said the additional budget for the upgrading programme might also impact dividend yield, although she has not been able to meet its management to get a clearer picture.
SMRT interim chief executive Tan Ek Kia would not comment on how the outlay might impact profitability.
'The figure is still indicative, and we are still in talks with the LTA on a co-sharing arrangement,' he said on Tuesday.
He added that the company might have to spend more money 'if more measures are recommended' by a Committee of Inquiry convened to investigate last December's massive breakdowns.
Industry watchers also point to a suspension of the annual fare adjustment exercise this year.
Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew announced this last month, saying 'we should not rush to implement this year's fare adjustment' while the public transport fare adjustment formula is being reviewed.
SMRT's Mr Tan noted however that public transport ridership is expected to continue growing.
The dividend payout ratio has been around 70-75%, TH has been huating all these years.