WP's Managing Agent's issue

[SgParent]

............

You should ask that MA question to all condo MA - why they dun hire their own sweeper, window cleaner, rubbish disposer, pool cleaner, security guards.............

Your desperation to nail the WP on imaginary crime is hilarious

 

[aurvandil]

I am surprised no one has pointed out the most obvious discrepancy for this storm in a teacup. If MA fees of PAP TCs are so low, why then are the S&C charges of PAP TCs HIGHER than those of the WP TCs?

Leong stated that he could not make any conclusion without all the details. I will be surprised if you can.

The fair thing to do is get an foreign independent body to make a finding based on all the facts available.

 

[wwabbit]

I am surprised no one has pointed out the most obvious discrepancy for this storm in a teacup. If MA fees of PAP TCs are so low, why then are the S&C charges of PAP TCs HIGHER than those of the WP TCs?

Maybe need the money to cover for this? http://therealsingapore.com/content/pap-town-councils-exposed-lehman-brothers-investments

The various MAs may be covering different scopes of work. Could it be possible that FMSS handle more responsibilities of the running of the TC than the other MAs, so charge more for the work, while leaving AHTC itself operating on a lower budget?

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

You either do it or you don't.

This is the PAP's problem. While it claims that the TC system will put MPs to the test but the fact is that most of PAP TCs employed MA and now, WP also followed suit. Thus, TC system has failed one of its most important aim of measuring "abilities" of MPs, be it PAP or opposition.

Granted, even if TCs are not run by MA, one could still employ good estate managers to do the job. The variations will lie in the distribution of resources in minor improvement.

The reason against MA running TCs is of economic values. For WP's case, apparently there is no competitive edge in employing a MA like FMSS and it will definitely cost more. Thus, in the interests of residents, it should not be done so.

Goh Meng Seng

First you stated you do not want estate management to be done by MPs and then you claim that they should run the estate by themselves without a MA. You do realise that the positions are mutually exclusive.

So do you want sugar in your coffee or not?

 

[tanwahp]

Leong stated that he could not make any conclusion without all the details. I will be surprised if you can.

The fair thing to do is get an foreign independent body to make a finding based on all the facts available.

In Page 25 of Aljunied-Hougang's TC report, the figure of $3,827,113 Managing Agent fee is derived. However, nothing indicates that the fee was for 8.5 months. The start of the AR clearly stated that the report includes the standing of its predecessor Aljunied TC .

http://www.ahpetc.sg/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Annual-Report-2011-2012.pdf

We can't always trust information from "enemy sources". When it comes to that, the same kind of people who enjoys using such massaged figures to present a case against WP would turn a blind eye to PAP's treatment of Chee and SDP were fined for wrong healthcare figures.

 

[tanwahp]

I am surprised no one has pointed out the most obvious discrepancy for this storm in a teacup. If MA fees of PAP TCs are so low, why then are the S&C charges of PAP TCs HIGHER than those of the WP TCs?

That may not be a strong argument because additional S&C charges are ultimately savings (and not profits) that go into the maintenance and sinking fund and are still the residents money, unlike overcharging companies like SMRT whose directors can live a life of extravagance.

 

[yellowarse]

Bro, that was silky smooth. Did not even see the knife go in and go out until I read it again. Liked the part where you tied GD to Locke via CSJ and LTK. I rate you as top of the league. I suppose you can understand why people are cautious of SDP.

Ha ha. Credit was given where none was due, bro. As for knives, I'm a total klutz in the kitchen.

Still, a small clarification:

1. Second time I'm trying to disabuse WMM of his delusion that Locke is a lawyer hailing from the AG's Chambers
2. In an anonymous online forum, anyone and everyone can be a PAP agent. Or WP IB or SDP IB. Take your pick.

BTW, didn't you agree with GD that LTK and CSJ were PAP agents, even as I was expressing my doubts to GD about his assessment?

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear GMS.

I believe all the PAP TC employ an MA through a contract like the ones with CPG (BPTC excepted ). Footnote. All the condo's I have stayed in all my life have never employed a condo manager directly. They have a condo manager who is an employee of the condo management company which has won the contract from the Strata Title company. I would like to repeat that no one can force an employee to remain an employee if she choses to become an entrepreneur.

Your view is that it is easy to find an estate manager to RUN town council services and manage all the contracts under a town council as a paid employee for x amount. For some reason the WP and the PAP both disagree (largely). Do remember that if and when NSP wins a GRC and they chose to run a GRC on the model proposed by you and the estate manger employed by you fucks it up and all the complaints built up, you might than acknowledge that appearances can be deceiving.

If on the other hand you succeed in managing it better and directly than kudos, but until that point really all you have is theory.


Locke

You either do it or you don't.

This is the PAP's problem. While it claims that the TC system will put MPs to the test but the fact is that most of PAP TCs employed MA and now, WP also followed suit. Thus, TC system has failed one of its most important aim of measuring "abilities" of MPs, be it PAP or opposition.

Granted, even if TCs are not run by MA, one could still employ good estate managers to do the job. The variations will lie in the distribution of resources in minor improvement.

The reason against MA running TCs is of economic values. For WP's case, apparently there is no competitive edge in employing a MA like FMSS and it will definitely cost more. Thus, in the interests of residents, it should not be done so.

Goh Meng Seng

 

[zhihau]

If on the other hand you succeed in managing it better and directly than kudos, but until that point really all you have is theory.

you damn bloody mean... you know how big that IF is?

 

[scroobal]

It has been raised elsewhere, can't recall where though. Tampines is a mystery. Lowest MA unit price but they jacked up the SCC for the residents after the MA took over.

Anyway in the big picture of things, there is no way that one opposition held TC can compete with the behemoth that is the GLC of the this govt. Once they boycott bids the battle is lost. You can get away with Potong Pasir which is unusually small and maybe an SMC like Hougang but the rest is no different to pushing water up a hill. Even if the GLCs are involved, there will be a level of mistrust and angst. It a no win situation.

I am surprised no one has pointed out the most obvious discrepancy for this storm in a teacup. If MA fees of PAP TCs are so low, why then are the S&C charges of PAP TCs HIGHER than those of the WP TCs?

 

[scroobal]

Bro, don't go into the weeds. There are insufficient information to come to an informed conclusion. Any comparison on the limited data would be wrong.

The story of Ho Thian Poh has not been asnwered for more than a year. Its has more legs than a centipede. How a PAP party branch secretary can be party to a tender is beyond me. That is like old man contracting to clean the Istana.

In Page 25 of Aljunied-Hougang's TC report, the figure of $3,827,113 Managing Agent fee is derived. However, nothing indicates that the fee was for 8.5 months. The start of the AR clearly stated that the report includes the standing of its predecessor Aljunied TC .

http://www.ahpetc.sg/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Annual-Report-2011-2012.pdf

We can't always trust information from "enemy sources". When it comes to that, the same kind of people who enjoys using such massaged figures to present a case against WP would turn a blind eye to PAP's treatment of Chee and SDP were fined for wrong healthcare figures.

 

[tanwahp]

You either do it or you don't.

This is the PAP's problem. While it claims that the TC system will put MPs to the test but the fact is that most of PAP TCs employed MA and now, WP also followed suit. Thus, TC system has failed one of its most important aim of measuring "abilities" of MPs, be it PAP or opposition.

Granted, even if TCs are not run by MA, one could still employ good estate managers to do the job. The variations will lie in the distribution of resources in minor improvement.

The reason against MA running TCs is of economic values. For WP's case, apparently there is no competitive edge in employing a MA like FMSS and it will definitely cost more. Thus, in the interests of residents, it should not be done so.

Goh Meng Seng

The topic was triggered by AIM and not FMSS. I am beginning to see what others mean when they spoke of proportion.

If one day, PAP in a Marcos fashion siphons $10 billion of Singapore's reserves to a private bank account of Lee family and the country is in the verge of bankruptcy, and Goh Meng Seng will insist that the most important issue of the nation right now is WP's town council awarding a 14th month bonus for staff that year. And you will expect to come out unscathed and unattacked from that argument.

Granted that WP shouldn't be emulating PAP in the wrong ways, but the importance of proportion seems lost on you.

Assuming I agree with you to have a better alternative to WP which reeks of cronyism, I look at NSP which has a husband-wife team in important positions in the CEC, I look at SPP which has a husband-wife team in even more important positions and I look at SDP which has a brother-sister sibling pair in the CEC. Which alternative do I look at?

If I don't have a solution to that, for now, I suggest we will go by proportion of scrutiny to proportion of crimes.

 

[Thick Face Black Heart]

I am surprised no one has pointed out the most obvious discrepancy for this storm in a teacup. If MA fees of PAP TCs are so low, why then are the S&C charges of PAP TCs HIGHER than those of the WP TCs?

Spot on! Now let's see GMS try to spin that against WP.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

Dear Locke,

I don't think PAP and WP disagree... WP used to run HGTC without MA and PAP still have Bishan TP running without MA.

Goh Meng Seng

Dear GMS.

I believe all the PAP TC employ an MA through a contract like the ones with CPG. Footnote. All the condo's I have stayed in all my life have never employed a condo manager directly. They have a condo manager who is an employee of the condo management company which has won the contract from the Strata Title company. I would like to repeat that no one can force an employee to remain an employee if she choses to become an entrepreneur.

Your view is that it is easy to find an estate manager to RUN town council services and manage all the contracts under a town council as a paid employee for x amount. For some reason the WP and the PAP both disagree. Do remember that if and when NSP wins a GRC and they chose to run a GRC on the model proposed by you and the estate manger employed by you fucks it up and all the complaints built up, you might than acknowledge that appearances can be deceiving.

If on the other hand you succeed in managing it better and directly than kudos, but until that point really all you have is theory.


Locke

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

Dear Aurvandil,

I too observe such discrepancy. However, this is not a good indicator. MA fees indicate how resources are used or profits transferred while S&C indicates cost to residents. One can be populist by reducing S&C but transferred most contracts to kaki while reducing spending on other places...

If AHTC as problem with S&C collections as reported while paying higher MA fees while reducing S&C charges, money must come from somewhere or some spending must be compromised or that, Sinking Fund affected... It may not be a good sign at all.


Goh Meng Seng

I am surprised no one has pointed out the most obvious discrepancy for this storm in a teacup. If MA fees of PAP TCs are so low, why then are the S&C charges of PAP TCs HIGHER than those of the WP TCs?

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

You must always remember WP is the choice you want to choose to replace PAP one day. Rotting started from small proportions.

Goh Meng Seng

The topic was triggered by AIM and not FMSS. I am beginning to see what others mean when they spoke of proportion.

If one day, PAP in a Marcos fashion siphons $10 billion of Singapore's reserves to a private bank account of Lee family and the country is in the verge of bankruptcy, and Goh Meng Seng will insist that the most important issue of the nation right now is WP's town council awarding a 14th month bonus for staff that year. And you will expect to come out unscathed and unattacked from that argument.

Granted that WP shouldn't be emulating PAP in the wrong ways, but the importance of proportion seems lost on you.

Assuming I agree with you to have a better alternative to WP which reeks of cronyism, I look at NSP which has a husband-wife team in important positions in the CEC, I look at SPP which has a husband-wife team in even more important positions and I look at SDP which has a brother-sister sibling pair in the CEC. Which alternative do I look at?

If I don't have a solution to that, for now, I suggest we will go by proportion of scrutiny to proportion of crimes.

 

[tanwahp]

You must always remember WP is the choice you want to choose to replace PAP one day. Rotting started from small proportions.

Forget WP. Tell me of a political solution that meets your standards. Maybe anarchism - the ideology of no government.

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear GMS

Honestly just looking at the list of which TCs have MA's or not, Bishan Toa Payoh is I believe the only PAP TC without an MA. So the question is why have the other PAP MPs PAP TCs not followed suit ? I mean if it was so easy to hire a Manager whether a PAP member or not why is BPTP the only one which has no MA ? Could it be that really, the talent is really really hard to find and that the current GM of BPHTC is a hold over from a different time.

What if he had a heart attack the next day or just retired ? Look at PP. Sitoh appointed EMS, he did not join forces with BPTC.


MA Fee's and contracts are not standard. MA fee's are a function of responsibility what is managed by the MA and what is not. Why pay someone to do it when you can do it yourself and save costs is your repeated question.

The answer is the perenial contractor issue. Why does a contractor earn a profit but subs out most of his work ? Why are u paying him ?




Locke

Dear Locke,

I don't think PAP and WP disagree... WP used to run HGTC without MA and PAP still have Bishan TP running without MA.

Goh Meng Seng

 

[gobuster]

Dear Locke,

I don't think PAP and WP disagree... WP used to run HGTC without MA and PAP still have Bishan TP running without MA.

Goh Meng Seng

GMS forget most GRCs engage MA, typical selective bias argument from this joker.

 

[aurvandil]

As you will recall, the PAP TCs ran up huge surpluses which they then lost in bad investments. To this day, we still do not have a proper accounting of what happened to all the money.

To sum up, WP pays its MA more. This seem justifiable considering that they are doing a good job of running the estates. The best KPI for this are the lower S&C charges. Despite the lower charges, the estates under WP appear to be as well maintained as those under the PAP.

PAP appears to pay less to their MAs. The PAP MAs do not appear to be as competent. Residents have to pay higher S&C charges without any significant improvement over WP run estates. While it is possible that they are making more savings, their poor investment track record calls into question as to whether it is wise to allow them to chalk up large surpluses. Also when I pay my S&C charges, I am paying to have the rubbish cleared and the estate I live in cleaned. I should not be forced to contribute to an investment fund over which I have no control.

Dear Aurvandil,

I too observe such discrepancy. However, this is not a good indicator. MA fees indicate how resources are used or profits transferred while S&C indicates cost to residents. One can be populist by reducing S&C but transferred most contracts to kaki while reducing spending on other places...

If AHTC as problem with S&C collections as reported while paying higher MA fees while reducing S&C charges, money must come from somewhere or some spending must be compromised or that, Sinking Fund affected... It may not be a good sign at all.


Goh Meng Seng