6000 people pledge to use Buangkok MRT station but only 2500 used it monthly?

[tom]

The train operator should not worry how many people are using " A " station, how many people are using " B " station. They should take the whole NE line and have a grand total on the number of commuters.

People living in Punggol North, not necessary has to use Punggol station. They may want to take bus 83, go to Compass Point, do some shopping, have breakfast before going to town. Similarly, people living near Buangkok station, may stay with FIL or MIL and use another station to work.

There may be other reasons, we don't know. Ultimately as long as we are staying near to NEL, we have to use NEL. Did NEL do a survey as to how, why there is an increase in commuters in other stations ?

So, the number of people pledge to use and the actual number of people using Buangkok station, makes no difference. RIGHT ?? NEL is still making millions.

 

[da]

Well then, firstly, are u a user of public transportation? Have you considered the implication of the loss of the MRT operator revenue with respect to the overall commuter using the MRT. Looking forward, I predict that this will be one of the justification for the operator to apply for price hike. It will not just affect users of Buangkok station but all who use the MRT station. Perhaps people should think carefully their actions that might affect other people. I have no sympathise for people who do things at the expense of others.

i am a user of public transportation. however, whether i am or not should not affect the views i put forward.

in the articles you posted, the cost stated to build the buangkok station is $80 million. this amount is not paid by SBS Transit. the $80 million comes from tax payers. SBS Transit is only a lessee.

assuming the station will last 20 years. it is depreciating at $4 million per year if we do a straight line depreciation.

SBS Transit is thus wasting 4 millions of tax payers money in order to save 1 million for themselves. of course there's more details to it, and the devils in the details. but if you want to talk about money, depreciation of the station, and the cost of the land that the station is on, needs to be taken into consideration.

of course, this leads to the question of what conditions were in the tender documentations for the lease of the NE line. were there conditions for the lessee to operate all stations ? if not, why not? if SBS Transit is incapable of operating the NE line profitably, why did it put in a bid? It is disgusting that these huge companies are allowed to set conditions in a way that allows them to be ALWAYS profitable.

this is of course besides the issue of why SBS Transit is allowed to monopolize public transport in the NE area at all.

now, you say buangkok should not be opened.. it would be used to justify raising prices. if SBS Transit gets to chose which station to open, which to close; don't forget, the next station after buangkok with the lowest traffic is Punggol. without the punggol station, sbs transit would be more profitable, since you have to take their buses anyway.

in the end, SBS Transit will ask for raises, and it will be given. does the reasons themselves really matter?

if you want prices to come down, get SMRT to run the NE line. then you get a choice to take bus and benefit SBS or take bus and benefit SMRT. unless they "cooperate" and divide up the territory in the name of efficiency. that would be anti-competitive and there might be laws against that, but if you look at mediacorp and channel u, they compete and earn less money, and joined together in the end. most companies in singapore has temasek as one of the owner; usually a significant owner.

[hansolo76]

im definitely with forumer da and the views put forward is perfectly sensible. if it takes a million to ease the lives of thousands, then i'd say its $ well spent and income tax worth paying. at least this is way better than paying ministers crazy salaries and yet seeing the country being led to benefit big coorporations rather then the common people

[rxhxn]

i am a user of public transportation. however, whether i am or not should not affect the views i put forward.

in the articles you posted, the cost stated to build the buangkok station is $80 million. this amount is not paid by SBS Transit. the $80 million comes from tax payers. SBS Transit is only a lessee.

assuming the station will last 20 years. it is depreciating at $4 million per year if we do a straight line depreciation.

SBS Transit is thus wasting 4 millions of tax payers money in order to save 1 million for themselves. of course there's more details to it, and the devils in the details. but if you want to talk about money, depreciation of the station, and the cost of the land that the station is on, needs to be taken into consideration.

of course, this leads to the question of what conditions were in the tender documentations for the lease of the NE line. were there conditions for the lessee to operate all stations ? if not, why not? if SBS Transit is incapable of operating the NE line profitably, why did it put in a bid? It is disgusting that these huge companies are allowed to set conditions in a way that allows them to be ALWAYS profitable.

this is of course besides the issue of why SBS Transit is allowed to monopolize public transport in the NE area at all.

now, you say buangkok should not be opened.. it would be used to justify raising prices. if SBS Transit gets to chose which station to open, which to close; don't forget, the next station after buangkok with the lowest traffic is Punggol. without the punggol station, sbs transit would be more profitable, since you have to take their buses anyway.

in the end, SBS Transit will ask for raises, and it will be given. does the reasons themselves really matter?

if you want prices to come down, get SMRT to run the NE line. then you get a choice to take bus and benefit SBS or take bus and benefit SMRT. unless they "cooperate" and divide up the territory in the name of efficiency. that would be anti-competitive and there might be laws against that, but if you look at mediacorp and channel u, they compete and earn less money, and joined together in the end. most companies in singapore has temasek as one of the owner; usually a significant owner.

That's precisely the issue. Are we really providing public transport? I wouldn't be concern if the transport are manned by the authority. But in reality SBST is a private company answerable to shareholders. Until this conflict is resolved, every loss made by the private company will be borne by the commuters.