Why PAPee Refuse to Lower Taxi Rental?

[makapaaa]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>To help cabbies, lower taxi rent
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>




<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I REFER to last Saturday's letter by the Comfort Taxi Operators' Association and CityCab Taxi Operators' Association, 'Lowering taxi fares will hurt cabbies'.
The writers' reasoning that lowering taxi fares may hurt cabbies' income does not seem to hold water. To date, cabbies still ignore potential fares outside the city area, especially the fringes such as Orchard Road in front of Shaw House.
I wrote to Forum ('Tax reliefs? Cabbies still choosy', Feb 2) after I was stranded with my family after our reunion dinner on the eve of Chinese New Year at Shaw House. Since then, I have observed that every evening, on the same stretch of Orchard Road and other parts of the fringes of the city area where cabbies cannot collect the $4 city area surcharge, commuters are left stranded with no cabbies willing to stop.
I cannot agree that lowering taxi fares will hurt cabbies' income. In fact, lowering taxi fares is like giving a special offer. Why do customers flock to department stores when there is a special offer? By the same theory, if taxi fares were lowered, many customers who switched to public transport would take taxis again as buses and trains are perpetually overcrowded.
The only sure way to help cabbies is to lower their taxi rent. Taxi certificates of entitlement have dropped to less than 25 per cent of what they were five years ago. The lower cost of buying a taxi should be passed on to the cabby in lower rent? With so many cabbies returning their vehicles, the taxi companies should lower rent rather than leave unhired taxis to gather dust and incur storage charges.

=> No problem cos loss is charged to Sporns' CPF?
Raymund Koh

 

[makapaaa]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>Cab fares: Cut rental, ERP charges
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>




<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->LAST Saturday's letter, 'Lowering taxi fares will hurt cabbies', by two taxi operators associations seems to convey the wrong message that the taxi industry should be spared during this economic downturn to maintain comfortable fares.
It is natural for commuters to ask why taxi fares stay put when oil prices, air fares, tour fares and profits of big businesses are falling. It is inevitable that the taxi industry should lower fares to ease the burden of commuters.
Discounted taxi vouchers will benefit only taxi companies. They may not help commuters. They do not help cabbies because, if fares remain high, commuters would still shun taxis.
To mitigate lower ridership, it is more fruitful for taxi drivers' associations to negotiate with taxi companies to cut rent and other surcharges, and appeal to the Land Transport Authority to halve Electronic Road Pricing charges so as to achieve lower costs to entice commuters.
In trying times like these, people think twice before taking a taxi. The first thing on everyone's mind, including cabbies, is to save. When public transport fares have been adjusted down by about 5 per cent, there is no reason why taxi fares should be kept high. Cabbies should be realistic and accept reduced earnings.
To stay competitive, the taxi industry should follow the airline, retail and tour industries in this downturn and work towards a 20 per cent to 30 per cent fare cut. The keyword is survival.
Paul Chan <!-- end of for each --><!-- Current Ratings : start --><!-- Current Ratings : end --><!-- vbbintegration : start -->

 

[R4g3]

license issued increase by 40++%, but instead of lowering the rental, they propose to lower the cab fare. anyone who can do some basic calculation will know what kind of people they are.

 

[congo9]

Loweer the cab rental to $40 per day!!!!

 

[besotted]

taxi drivers average $2,250 a month in a protected market

rental can be cut but in exchange for opening 25% of the licenses to PR and foreigners

 

[2lanu]

1st the Ezlink card suka suka change the deposit policy, now taxi asked to lower fares, they say cannot. Why the f**k are they to say no? :oIo:

 

[Lestat]

Lower rental = lower fixed income.

Lower fees = lower earnings by taxi drivers = more drivers giving up their taxis = less income

So do you think they will LOWER THE FARES?

 

[nickers9]

1st the Ezlink card suka suka change the deposit policy, now taxi asked to lower fares, they say cannot. Why the f**k are they to say no? :oIo:

This is Leegapore, you only can say Yes and cannot say No.

If you say No, I will sue you till the cows come home.

 

[HakkaThaileen]

'Lowering taxi fares will hurt cabbies'[/COLOR], by two taxi operators associations seems to convey the wrong message that the taxi industry should be spared during this economic downturn to maintain comfortable fares.
Paul Chan <!-- end of for each --><!-- Current Ratings : start --><!-- Current Ratings : end --><!-- vbbintegration : start -->

Lowering taxi fares will not hurt cabbies, but lowering taxi rental will certainly hurt the pockets of CEOs and management staff of the taxi companies as the companies will have lesser $ to pay the CEOs..

 

[Lestat]

One more thing to add:

Taxis are considered 'Private transport', no 'Public transport'

So why is everybody complaining about the fares?

If you find it expensive, don't take the bloody taxi!