SMRT

Is like having a small head want to wear a big hat.

Just say sorry again , what is so difficult ?

I agreed that there is a rather serious issue with the transportation issue that they need to look at and figure out the underlying problem. But commenting on whether they take train or use car is uncalled for. That has nothing to do with whether they are doing their job well. So by your analogy, the CEO of macdonalds has to eat Mac everyday?

The day that smrt disclosed that they use plastic cable ties to secure the rail claws along with the use of supposedly foreigner engineers is embracing the cheaper and faster manifesto which results in the subsequent outcome

Unfortunately with a sky high coe n less than effective bus system along with maxmizing shareholder value, SMRT has some hard decisions to make as the average citizen has few alternatives.

To hear them recall the retired engineers to help look at the problem suggests that the company has lost its ability to handle its own rail network.

(12-07-2015, 10:47 AM)investor101 Wrote: My inside source told me that years ago, many of the capable engineers have been retrenched. Also, those capable senior engineers often don't go high up the hierarchy. The top people are usually the scholars from other government bodies, who have no experience in running mrts nor suitable professional expertise. But they are there at the top because they are the scholars.

A number of the engineers were let go and replaced with cheaper foreign technicians. So, don't expect the mrt to be as reliable as it was in the past.

Who were the scholars in SMRT when Saw Phaik Hwa was CEO? It will be better to look at it on case by case basis instead of tarring every scholar. I believe Desmond Kuek has brought in a mix of ex-Military and non-Military staff, including a former HK MTR as director of rail (is he still there?).

Every organization also has stories from disgruntled employees about undeserved promotions. How much is fact and how much is figment of imagination (like an apology in May for a future train breakdown in Dec)?

I find it difficult to believe that SMRT and Gahmen are not taking this seriously. There are just too much at stake. Votes in coming election (yes it will have an impact), image of the country and SMRT's expansion overseas (shareholders should be concern).

I just want to remind everyone that this thread is about SMRT as a stock.

There seems to be a lot of political discussions held in this thread which should be move elsewhere in this forum.

It would be good to keep this thread clean of other items so that when we do research on a particular stock we don't have to go pages and pages of useless information to get to details about the stock.

Appreciate your help to keep any and all stock threads of non essential information.

Moderators : I apologize if I said said something offensive. I just wanted to keep non essential info off the stock thread.

Thank You.

To me public transport is a public good. Public good shouldn't be a profit making enterprise for a start. It is unfortunate that Singapore public transport operators were listed so many years ago.

Given the changing economics and expectations of voters globally, Singapore public transport model has evolved and now mirrors that of angmo models in UK and Australia - one in which govts own the assets and service operators are being rewarded based on operating efficiency. In this way, invisible hands can look after the maintenance of the operating assets and subsidises the consuming public as they deemed fit.

This is the correct model and sustainable over the long run. In economic terms, public goods are those that require state intervention as leaving it to the private sector means that they may not be able to adequately cater to consumer wants.

In Singapore's context especially post GFC, changes in govt policies have pressured all levels of the society to their limits. Admittedly, expectations of all walks of the societies have been high due to the track record of a largely one party govt.

IMHO, Singapore is in a big transition, how much can we trust policy makers? I personally don't know as globally not many govt be it the ruling and opposition can really be trusted - in a sense if we can have a lesser devil, we are already considered very lucky.

I do agree and do highlight to my family members that the problems facing SMRT is a reflection of that of the challenges facing Singapore as a whole. SMRT has a aging infrastructure and hence like a human being, the costs of aging is high. It is probably not helped over the past decade where costs efficiency has already taken a toll on the infrastructure. Coupled with increased ridership comes the added pressure on the "old man".

Resolving the ongoing issues is highly critical and of high sensitivity. Continuing the operating model of "parachuting proven scholars" from within will unfortunately exaggerate the issue as clearly they may be proven within a certain environment but not necessarily in another. How the problems will eventually be resolved will be interesting as it will be a reflection of the govt approach to problem solving going forward.

In some sense, fixing opponents may be a proven tactic but just like trying to fix problems of a seasoned old network, the effectiveness as reflected in the continuing breakdown of essential services in a highly efficient Singapore remains to be seen.

While high COE discourages car ownership, the mass public certainly deserves better basic essential services since they have no other alternatives.

Disgraced, Disgrunted SMRT
Odd Lot Investor
Concerned Citizen
GG

(12-07-2015, 10:47 AM)investor101 Wrote: My inside source told me that years ago, many of the capable engineers have been retrenched. Also, those capable senior engineers often don't go high up the hierarchy. The top people are usually the scholars from other government bodies, who have no experience in running mrts nor suitable professional expertise. But they are there at the top because they are the scholars.

A number of the engineers were let go and replaced with cheaper foreign technicians. So, don't expect the mrt to be as reliable as it was in the past.

If you are engineer in the company whether local or foreign do you want to be the hero to tell the boss what the situation really is when he has the PM breathing down his neck and frustrated public baying for blood and probably his head too?

what is he going to say? He will stick you out on the firing line lah.

This problem has been there for years , train breakdowns had occurred since almost 4 years ago , nothing solved but they only continue to show deep concern , and still do not know the root of the problem after so many years. Many should be able to judge how serious they are in solving the issue after so many years of concern.[/u]

(12-07-2015, 01:42 PM)flinger Wrote: I just want to remind everyone that this thread is about SMRT as a stock.

There seems to be a lot of political discussions held in this thread which should be move elsewhere in this forum.

It would be good to keep this thread clean of other items so that when we do research on a particular stock we don't have to go pages and pages of useless information to get to details about the stock.

Appreciate your help to keep any and all stock threads of non essential information.

Moderators : I apologize if I said said something offensive. I just wanted to keep non essential info off the stock thread.

Thank You.

The political information is not "useless". It tells you the nature of how certain listed companies operate.

In a nutshell, shareholders like myself do not want to see SMRT spend too much of their money on repair and maintenance. It eats into profits, shareholders' returns and dividends.

That's partly why I buy into blue chip GLCs like SPH, SMRT and Sembcorp Industries. Strategic industries, especially those that most singaporeans use daily, will always be kept profitable and afloat. It's the same for certain banks like DBS and OCBC.