• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

SMRT CEO: We are accountable to shareholders

makapaaa

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
33,627
Points
0
[h=2]SMRT CEO: We are accountable to shareholders[/h]
PostDateIcon.png
October 1st, 2012 |
PostAuthorIcon.png
Author: Correspondent

75_o.jpg
In an interview with ChannelNewsAsia, SMRT Interim CEO Tan Ek Kia said his successor Desmond Kuek, the former Chief of Army, will need to do more to restore public confidence in this means of public transport. The outgoing CEO praised Desmond Kuek for having a “proven track record” when the former civil servant actually has no experience of managing a train company and has never stepped foot in a listed company. Why is someone from the army chosen to be the CEO of SMRT? Do you think he is better and more experienced than any Singaporean who has worked for SMRT for many years? All these questions are unanswered.
Tan Ek Kia emphasized the profits of SMRT which have been hurt by the series of train disruptions. He reminded everyone that SMRT is a listed company and that it is ultimately answerable to its shareholders. Despite the fact that SMRT has monopolized Singapore’s train system, Tan said he is improving revenue by “promoting ridership” and enhancing the non-fare business arms of SMRT. There is no mention of the anguish and inconvenience caused to affected commuters and how the train corporation is going to be answerable to Singaporeans as opposed to investors.
The Public Transport Council oversees any train fare adjustments SMRT would like to make, but the statutory board has to date approved every single request by the train company to raise fares. While the nationalization of Singapore’s train system brought about an efficient and low-cost public service to Singaporeans in the past, privatization today has led to corporate greed and incompetencies. That SMRT did not raise its maintenance budget for ten years is widely believed to be the main cause of the slew of paralyzing breakdowns. Ever rising train fares have enabled the company to report tens of millions of profits every year. The PAP government has created a 1.1 billion fund using Singaporeans’ tax money to help SMRT and SBS pay for 550 new buses. It is now apparent that profits are privatized and losses are nationalized.
PAP MP Lim Biow Chuan has suggested that SMRT apply for welfare from the government to helping them cope with the loss of income from the breakdowns:
“All these maintenance regimes, the cost should be borne by SMRT. It shouldn’t have any impact on train fares for commuters to have to pay more fares. In the event that all these additional maintenance works cost too much, SMRT may want to put up a request to the government to see if they can receive any kind of government assistance. And if that were to happen, then the government should study carefully to make sure that SMRT is justified in making any such requests,”~PAP MP Lim Biow Chuan
Singapore’s public services have largely been privatized with the major shareholder being Temasek Holdings, a sovereign wealth fund company whose CEO is PM Lee’s wife, Ho Ching.
 
SMRT is ultimately responsible to shareholders. When the SMRT trains fail to perform and cause massive disruption, hurting the economy, that company must pay up big time. But the PAP government merely gave a slap in the wrist fine.
That's the problem here ...the PAP is in cahoots with business to fleece sinkees.
 
SMRT = Singapore Mass Rapid Transit.. correct?
A national transport.. public transport... public not means owned by government? Owned by shareholders?
Someone can explain to me how a public transport can haf shareholders?

something's not rite!!
 
SMRT Interim CEO Mr Tan Ek Kia,please wake up from your dream?
SMRT is ultimately responsible to shareholders,the major shareholder being Temasek Holdings, a sovereign wealth fund company whose CEO is PM Lee’s wife, Ho Ching and whose stakeholders are the citizens of Singapore,SMRT major customers are also the citizens of Singapore.
that is the actual situation for you from a citizen.
 
privatise work only when there are a fair control board, but in singapore, it is in cahoon with the ruling party and rich investors. Therefore though it might work in the west, it will not work well here, but it work well for pap, lots of saving, more bonus.
 
If what he said is true why is isn't that FT butch taken in to question how come she gets over 1mil in pay to screw up the system. Instead she left scotts free of any wrong doing and can turn around yah yah tell we sinkies off that she deserve her mil? For 10 years she was in office the maint. cost had not went up should have rung alarm bells all over LTA n SMRT Directors her ways of cost cutting aka corner cutting measurs are wrong but noooooo they just close a blind eye. I can tell you this if not for the NO man at management she sacked and stubbon condem staff at floor level this system would have gone down the drain in 5yrs instead of 10.
 
LTA just gave them about $1billion of taxpayers money to upgrade their bus services. The incestuous relationships that abound in the PAPzi government breeds fucktards like these. They are shameless and shameful which are typical attributes of kuniangs. :oIo:
 
SMRT Interim CEO Mr Tan Ek Kia,please wake up from your dream?
SMRT is ultimately responsible to shareholders,the major shareholder being Temasek Holdings, a sovereign wealth fund company whose CEO is PM Lee’s wife, Ho Ching and whose stakeholders are the citizens of Singapore,SMRT major customers are also the citizens of Singapore.
that is the actual situation for you from a citizen.



hi there


1. hahahaha!
2. what is there to be responsible for such a sheep?
3. the bottomline is its kpi hoh!
4. the public commuters, you die your biz.
5. till today, nobody is accountable for the big one last december!
6. that coi was indeed the big wayang.
 
SMRT = Singapore Mass Rapid Transit.. correct?
A national transport.. public transport... public not means owned by government? Owned by shareholders?
Someone can explain to me how a public transport can haf shareholders?

something's not rite!!

Public transport because they use public fund/tax payer money.
 
What fuck shareholder when the trains are bought using taxpayer money?
 
LTA just gave them about $1billion of taxpayers money to upgrade their bus services. The incestuous relationships that abound in the PAPzi government breeds fucktards like these. They are shameless and shameful which are typical attributes of kuniangs. :oIo:

but doesn't this $1B benefit all those who take public transport? in fact, its the rich who drive who don't benefit directly from this $1B.

so generally speaking, this $1B benefits the non-rich more than the rich.
 
but doesn't this $1B benefit all those who take public transport? in fact, its the rich who drive who don't benefit directly from this $1B.

so generally speaking, this $1B benefits the non-rich more than the rich.

The billion will gladly be used as part of director's fees, bonuses and pay out to shareholders. Without the $1billion it will be difficult to do so. The PAPzis are cleaverest in taking tax payers money and dividing it among themselves.
 
but doesn't this $1B benefit all those who take public transport? in fact, its the rich who drive who don't benefit directly from this $1B.

so generally speaking, this $1B benefits the non-rich more than the rich.

Don't be fooled. This $1B benefits the shareholders, otherwise that $1B has to be from foregone profits or if that is not enough from company's own fund raising. Isn't it the transport company's obligation in its operating licence to meet the standards required of a world class network?

The reason why the Govt chose to do this, other than it being a key shareholder of the company, is that it is too lazy to work out a more fairer solution. It is desperate to appease the commuters and you always get back this $1B from taxes.
 
Who's the majority shareholder of SMRT, or any other GLC?
 
but doesn't this $1B benefit all those who take public transport? in fact, its the rich who drive who don't benefit directly from this $1B.

so generally speaking, this $1B benefits the non-rich more than the rich.


hi there


1. come on!
2. get real too.
3. you believe what sheep said about the billion thing.
4. :mad::*::(
 
Don't be fooled. This $1B benefits the shareholders, otherwise that $1B has to be from foregone profits or if that is not enough from company's own fund raising. Isn't it the transport company's obligation in its operating licence to meet the standards required of a world class network?

The reason why the Govt chose to do this, other than it being a key shareholder of the company, is that it is too lazy to work out a more fairer solution. It is desperate to appease the commuters and you always get back this $1B from taxes.

You right!
1 billion is going to share holder,director,party all unnecessary expenses(1st class air ticket/oversea 5 start hotel meeting, director car worth each $500k.....................
 
but doesn't this $1B benefit all those who take public transport? in fact, its the rich who drive who don't benefit directly from this $1B.

so generally speaking, this $1B benefits the non-rich more than the rich.


.


Quote of the Month !!!

"PAP MP Lim Biow Chuan has suggested that SMRT apply for welfare from the government to helping them cope with the loss of income from the breakdowns "


Apply for Welfare ?
 
.

Quote of the Month !!!

"PAP MP Lim Biow Chuan has suggested that SMRT apply for welfare from the government to helping them cope with the loss of income from the breakdowns "

Apply for Welfare ?

A profitable company should apply to the govt for welfare whereas an impoverished household should work out its own solutions. I definitely need some enlightenment on the logic here.
 
A profitable company should apply to the govt for welfare whereas an impoverished household should work out its own solutions. I definitely need some enlightenment on the logic here.


It means that the country belongs to the Lees and we have to pay tributes as tax to the Lees for building what we have today. The fishing village and the Merlion stories will carry on to the next generation. The children will continue to worship the great and holy one of Singapore.
 
You right!
1 billion is going to share holder,director,party all unnecessary expenses(1st class air ticket/oversea 5 start hotel meeting, director car worth each $500k.....................

famiLees knows how to privatize everything to gain everything.
 
Back
Top