• 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.

Many suspicious questions unanswered in LTA Bus Contract tenders. Big Cover up?

Papsmearer

Alfrescian (InfP) - Comp
Generous Asset
So by now, everyone knows LTA awarded 2 tenders for bus services. One centred around the Bulim interchange and the other around Loyang interchange. Under the new Government Contracting Model (GCM) for Public Transport, the govt will take away bus routes (about 20 + in each of the tenders) from SBS and SMRT and give it to whoever wins the tenders. Because these tenders are for hundreds of millions of $, and because the oppo WP and the Prostitute media have not raised even a "Why is it necessary to tender question", I thought I should raise up these points. To me, these are the main questions:

1) Why do we even have to take away routes from existing companies and give them to another company from overseas who have never done business in Singapore and expect them to run it more efficiently then SBS and SMRT? The official excuse given by LTA is that the Government will restructure the public bus industry to a “Government contracting model”, enlabling the Government to make public bus services more responsive to changes in ridership and commuter needs, as well as inject more competition into the industry, thereby raising service levels for commuters over time.

But wait a minute. These 2 bus companies are GLCs, and in fact so heavily influenced and controlled by the govt that they can appoint whichever CEO they want into these companies e.g Desmond Kuek into SMRT. If the govt does not feel that these 2 bus companies are responsive to the commuter needs, don't you just fire the CEO and appoint new management? Is it not easier to put in the proper management who will do this? As for injecting competition into the industry, since when has it been the PAP goal to have competition in industries that it dominates with its own GLCs? Will they now also grant TV and radio license to foreign companies compete with Mediacorpse? Will they now allow foreign newspapers here to compete with SHit Times? How about if a foreign airline want to start a new airline to compete with SIA, Silkair, Tiger and Scoot? Can or not? The obvious answer to all of this is no, they will not be allowed. Then why only the bus business? This kind of excuse about competition is really hollow. If there is one thing the PAP hates, and that is competition.

2) How does this even work? LTA and MOT says they will own the bus depots and interchange and even the buses themselves. The winners of the tenders will then operate everything for them. So now, not only does LTA have to pay for these bus companies to run the services for them, they will also need to invest in buying the buses and arranging depot maintenance for them. This will easily cost a few hundred million $ on assets like buses which depreciate rapidly due to high use. This depreciation of assets is now absorbed by the govt instead of by a semi private company like SMRT or SBS. Why should the taxpayer take this hit? The Bus companies will hire the drivers and mechanics and operate the lines. One of the winners say they will hire a staff of 900. But again, there is no assurance that singaporeans will be given first choice. In fact NTUC has worked with the winners of the tender to rehire the old drivers employed on the same routes. Very nice of NTUC to do something about job retention for lay off workers, unfortunately, they are mostly from PRC and not Singapore. Once again FTs benefit.

3) The winner of the second tender is a UK company called Go Ahead Group. They bid the lowest bid of $497.7 million to operate the 25 bus services for 5 years. In the 5 years, the CEO has said the revenues will be $500 million, which is retained by the LTA. WTF!! You are telling me that after spending hundreds of $million buying all the buses, setting the depots and maintenance infrastructure etc. LTA is expected to earn just $2.3 million over 5 years? What is this shit business plan? Why are the taxpayers even footing this? At this rate, the the taxpayers will never recover the capital investment.

4) The winner of the first tender for Bulim was another UL company called Tower transport. Tower bid $557 million for the tender and won it. But guess what, was it the lowest bid? Not even close. SMRT had the lowest bid at $453 million, but for some reason, LTA did not award them the bid which was $113 million lower then the winning bid. Unbelievable. LTA is not interested in saving $113 million over 5 years for the taxpayers of Singapore? WP is ok with this? Now LTA will have to buy 380 buses for Tower to operate. What will it cost the taxpayer?

5) The PAP decided many years ago to nationalize the bus industry as well as with many other business sectors in singapore. They then decided to privatize them and sell them off on the stock exchange while they retain controlling interest. Now, it seems the pentulum has swung back the other way, and they are nationalizing the bus services again. If this is a fundamental shift in govt policy, lets hear it from the gay man himself.

6) If this is a ploy by the 2 bus GLCs to get money losing bus operations off their books, and concentrate on rail service, why is the govt catering to them? They are owned and controlled and beholden to the govt. Not the other way around. Its the tail wagging the dog. The taxpayers are really caught in this money sucking circle. Incompetent management cost losses in the bus line route service. PAP bails them out by transferring the money losing routes to a tender won by another foreign company. If the foreign company loses money, then it only loses on the operating portion and not on the capital investment portion. if they win, they keep the difference of their cost and their bid price as profit. In either case, the taxpayers loses because they have paid for buses and infrastructure, and cannot recover the costs. The best scenario for taxpayers is to see these 2 companies continue to operate the services. If they lose money, not the taxpayer's business. If they make money, good for the shareholders of SBS and SMRT. But for some reason, LTA has decided to step into this equation and take the losses for these 2 jack ass companies run by incompetents. This is productivity and meritocracy?

Would love to hear a truthful explanation from gay Loong and the PAP, but I guess it will snow in singapore before then.
 

lifeafter41

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
So by now, everyone knows LTA awarded 2 tenders for bus services. One centred around the Bulim interchange and the other around Loyang interchange. Under the new Government Contracting Model (GCM) for Public Transport, the govt will take away bus routes (about 20 + in each of the tenders) from SBS and SMRT and give it to whoever wins the tenders. Because these tenders are for hundreds of millions of $, and because the oppo WP and the Prostitute media have not raised even a "Why is it necessary to tender question", I thought I should raise up these points. To me, these are the main questions:

1) Why do we even have to take away routes from existing companies and give them to another company from overseas who have never done business in Singapore and expect them to run it more efficiently then SBS and SMRT? The official excuse given by LTA is that the Government will restructure the public bus industry to a “Government contracting model”, enlabling the Government to make public bus services more responsive to changes in ridership and commuter needs, as well as inject more competition into the industry, thereby raising service levels for commuters over time.

But wait a minute. These 2 bus companies are GLCs, and in fact so heavily influenced and controlled by the govt that they can appoint whichever CEO they want into these companies e.g Desmond Kuek into SMRT. If the govt does not feel that these 2 bus companies are responsive to the commuter needs, don't you just fire the CEO and appoint new management? Is it not easier to put in the proper management who will do this? As for injecting competition into the industry, since when has it been the PAP goal to have competition in industries that it dominates with its own GLCs? Will they now also grant TV and radio license to foreign companies compete with Mediacorpse? Will they now allow foreign newspapers here to compete with SHit Times? How about if a foreign airline want to start a new airline to compete with SIA, Silkair, Tiger and Scoot? Can or not? The obvious answer to all of this is no, they will not be allowed. Then why only the bus business? This kind of excuse about competition is really hollow. If there is one thing the PAP hates, and that is competition.

2) How does this even work? LTA and MOT says they will own the bus depots and interchange and even the buses themselves. The winners of the tenders will then operate everything for them. So now, not only does LTA have to pay for these bus companies to run the services for them, they will also need to invest in buying the buses and arranging depot maintenance for them. This will easily cost a few hundred million $ on assets like buses which depreciate rapidly due to high use. This depreciation of assets is now absorbed by the govt instead of by a semi private company like SMRT or SBS. Why should the taxpayer take this hit? The Bus companies will hire the drivers and mechanics and operate the lines. One of the winners say they will hire a staff of 900. But again, there is no assurance that singaporeans will be given first choice. In fact NTUC has worked with the winners of the tender to rehire the old drivers employed on the same routes. Very nice of NTUC to do something about job retention for lay off workers, unfortunately, they are mostly from PRC and not Singapore. Once again FTs benefit.

3) The winner of the second tender is a UK company called Go Ahead Group. They bid the lowest bid of $497.7 million to operate the 25 bus services for 5 years. In the 5 years, the CEO has said the revenues will be $500 million, which is retained by the LTA. WTF!! You are telling me that after spending hundreds of $million buying all the buses, setting the depots and maintenance infrastructure etc. LTA is expected to earn just $2.3 million over 5 years? What is this shit business plan? Why are the taxpayers even footing this? At this rate, the the taxpayers will never recover the capital investment.

4) The winner of the first tender for Bulim was another UL company called Tower transport. Tower bid $557 million for the tender and won it. But guess what, was it the lowest bid? Not even close. SMRT had the lowest bid at $453 million, but for some reason, LTA did not award them the bid which was $113 million lower then the winning bid. Unbelievable. LTA is not interested in saving $113 million over 5 years for the taxpayers of Singapore? WP is ok with this? Now LTA will have to buy 380 buses for Tower to operate. What will it cost the taxpayer?

5) The PAP decided many years ago to nationalize the bus industry as well as with many other business sectors in singapore. They then decided to privatize them and sell them off on the stock exchange while they retain controlling interest. Now, it seems the pentulum has swung back the other way, and they are nationalizing the bus services again. If this is a fundamental shift in govt policy, lets hear it from the gay man himself.

6) If this is a ploy by the 2 bus GLCs to get money losing bus operations off their books, and concentrate on rail service, why is the govt catering to them? They are owned and controlled and beholden to the govt. Not the other way around. Its the tail wagging the dog. The taxpayers are really caught in this money sucking circle. Incompetent management cost losses in the bus line route service. PAP bails them out by transferring the money losing routes to a tender won by another foreign company. If the foreign company loses money, then it only loses on the operating portion and not on the capital investment portion. if they win, they keep the difference of their cost and their bid price as profit. In either case, the taxpayers loses because they have paid for buses and infrastructure, and cannot recover the costs. The best scenario for taxpayers is to see these 2 companies continue to operate the services. If they lose money, not the taxpayer's business. If they make money, good for the shareholders of SBS and SMRT. But for some reason, LTA has decided to step into this equation and take the losses for these 2 jack ass companies run by incompetents. This is productivity and meritocracy?

Would love to hear a truthful explanation from gay Loong and the PAP, but I guess it will snow in singapore before then.

Hi Paps, will this below describe it?

DEFINITION of 'Privatizing Profits And Socializing Losses '

A phrase describing how businesses and individuals can successfully benefit from any and all profits related to their line of business, but avoid losses by having those losses paid for by society. Privatizing profits and socializing losses suggests that when large losses occur for speculators or businesses, they are able to successfully lobby government for aide rather than face the consequences of said losses.

BREAKING DOWN 'Privatizing Profits And Socializing Losses '

The biggest example of privatizing losses and socializing losses came during the TARP bailouts of 2008-2009 in which the United States government bailed out numerous banks, insurers and auto manufacturers after they had sustained huge losses in their business dealings, in some cases through unacceptable risk tasking and lack of due diligence.


Read more: Privatizing Profits And Socializing Losses Definition | Investopedia http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/privatizing-profits-and-socializing-losses.asp#ixzz3sOm2QH5K
Follow us: Investopedia on Facebook
 

Onitsuka

Alfrescian
Loyal
Not to worry. Pritam Singh of WP will surely grill Khaw Boon Wan in Parliament and Chen Show Mao will shed his Mr Nice Man image to provide that cut and thrust of political debate in Parliament.

Finally, after several rounds of shock and awe verbal bombing from WP, and while PAP ministers are still picking up the debris, LTK will chip in like an old master and embarrass the shit out of PAP.

Trust me. WP has reinvented itself.
 

virus

Alfrescian
Loyal
i tink it is good that you now have 2 more established operators to choose and many more to cum. this will level the field a bit. to give the current operators the chance to take over again and again only infest monopoly. paper general will say he can check himself how?
 

shittypore

Alfrescian
Loyal
Not to worry. Pritam Singh of WP will surely grill Khaw Boon Wan in Parliament and Chen Show Mao will shed his Mr Nice Man image to provide that cut and thrust of political debate in Parliament.

Finally, after several rounds of shock and awe verbal bombing from WP, and while PAP ministers are still picking up the debris, LTK will chip in like an old master and embarrass the shit out of PAP.

Trust me. WP has reinvented itself.

Only thng left in wp is their black shoes, even their socks are white. Haha.
 

blissquek

Alfrescian
Loyal
i tink it is good that you now have 2 more established operators to choose and many more to cum. this will level the field a bit. to give the current operators the chance to take over again and again only infest monopoly. paper general will say he can check himself how?

Huh..!!! 2 more established operators...

This reminds me of the stupid MDA official who commented that definitely there is competition in Singapore Media broadcasting.

And he cited that the competition between channel 5 and Channel 8.

How idiotic and hilarious can he get.?..We live in a controlled environment and our lives are controlled....Period.
 

red amoeba

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
split, merge, split, merge....many eons ago, we have many private bus companies in Singapore, then come riots and most notorious, Hock Lee, then merge...all of them merge into SBS. Then, split, to TIBS, CSS, now split even some more....soon....merge again...

split, merge, split, merge...just like how a CB look when being pumped by a LJ...
 

winnipegjets

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Somebody is making lots of money from the wheeling and dealing.

Privatize profit and socialize losses - that's the PAP way.
 

potato29

Alfrescian
Loyal
So by now, everyone knows LTA awarded 2 tenders for bus services. One centred around the Bulim interchange and the other around Loyang interchange. Under the new Government Contracting Model (GCM) for Public Transport, the govt will take away bus routes (about 20 + in each of the tenders) from SBS and SMRT and give it to whoever wins the tenders. Because these tenders are for hundreds of millions of $, and because the oppo WP and the Prostitute media have not raised even a "Why is it necessary to tender question", I thought I should raise up these points. To me, these are the main questions:

if dumb sinkies wants to object they would have deny FAP the 2/3 majority. now whatever noise WP makes it will come to nothing.
 

winnipegjets

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
if dumb sinkies wants to object they would have deny FAP the 2/3 majority. now whatever noise WP makes it will come to nothing.

Dumb sinkees don't know what they don't know. Government release so little info. Press dare not expose. Sinkees will always remain dumb.
 

Papsmearer

Alfrescian (InfP) - Comp
Generous Asset
Hi Paps, will this below describe it?

DEFINITION of 'Privatizing Profits And Socializing Losses '

A phrase describing how businesses and individuals can successfully benefit from any and all profits related to their line of business, but avoid losses by having those losses paid for by society. Privatizing profits and socializing losses suggests that when large losses occur for speculators or businesses, they are able to successfully lobby government for aide rather than face the consequences of said losses.

BREAKING DOWN 'Privatizing Profits And Socializing Losses '

The biggest example of privatizing losses and socializing losses came during the TARP bailouts of 2008-2009 in which the United States government bailed out numerous banks, insurers and auto manufacturers after they had sustained huge losses in their business dealings, in some cases through unacceptable risk tasking and lack of due diligence.


Read more: Privatizing Profits And Socializing Losses Definition | Investopedia http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/privatizing-profits-and-socializing-losses.asp#ixzz3sOm2QH5K
Follow us: Investopedia on Facebook

You know, i did look at this and thanks for bringing it to the attention of everyone in this forum. The conclusion that I have reached was that its not the same as TARPs bailout in the US, although the term privatizing the profits and socializing the losses very aptly applies to this case of the bus tenders. I say this because under TARPS, everything was done in the open. Not many americans might agree with the US govt bailing out the banks and the automakers, but every thing was done under media and congressional scrutiny. For example, the automakers when to congress and asked for billions in bailout money. They were openly scolded and criticized by congress, the press, and the taxpayers. The bailout did not take the form of outright free money. Rather in exchange for funds, the US govt received stocks and options from the automakers as well as a formal loan. When the economy turned around, all the loans were paid back, some ahead of schedule and the stocks the US govt received appreciated and were sold at a profit. In this case, what did the taxpayers of singapore receive? Big fat nothing. SBS and SMRT do receive a tangible benefit. They do not have to run these money losing bus lines anymore. But what do the taxpayers receive in exchange? You have the feeling that something was done behind closed doors among the scholar generals and all the associated mafia they have there. I mean other then Penang Cow as the minister of Transportation, you have a former scholar general air force general Ng Chee Meng, the fuck useless Perm Sec Pang Kin Keong who was director of ISD when MAS Selamat escaped. This winning combination at MOT in collaboration with LTA (who have the likes of ex Admiral Richard Lim on the BOD, and ex Navy chief Chew Men Leong) are infested with ex scholar generals/admirals. I guess this ex SAF mafia along with their other mafia members in SMRT and what not came up with this shit scheme to transfer their losses to the taxpayers. well done fucking PAP. thank you WP for your continued silence and acquiesce on this matter.
 

Papsmearer

Alfrescian (InfP) - Comp
Generous Asset
Not to worry. Pritam Singh of WP will surely grill Khaw Boon Wan in Parliament and Chen Show Mao will shed his Mr Nice Man image to provide that cut and thrust of political debate in Parliament.

Finally, after several rounds of shock and awe verbal bombing from WP, and while PAP ministers are still picking up the debris, LTK will chip in like an old master and embarrass the shit out of PAP.

Trust me. WP has reinvented itself.


Hahahaha, which fantasy is this?
Wait long long ah.
 

mojito

Alfrescian
Loyal
This version of WP is a disgrace ...bring back the spirit of JBJ.

Many years ago i have warned about the nature of Low's gang of thugs but to no avail. They intend to freeride of sinkie discontent and lack of alternatives by displacing Loong's opponents within the PAP. No need to cut your nose to spite your face i said. Now they are even more enboldened after their gains from 2011. Fortunately the astute voters in Ponggol East have wised up. Why sacrifice their estate upgrading and other amenities for a lame dog that does not bark? Surely this must have been in the thoughts of Marine Parade voters when they cast their votes. Let East Coast voters or some other constituencies take in more of these dogs. We are happy with our PAP mayors. Voting the WP will bring little benefit to oneself, and no benefit to others who desire more robust debate in parliament. Perhaps I can convince Singaporeans to give them a black eye in 2020? Say no to WP brand of opposition politics!
 
Top