LTA buy back mrt @ 2bil?

[Tianmo]

who owns 54% of SMRT???................the major share holder already controls SMRT......................holding on to assets will make them look good on paper...........but operation losses can always go back to gov for help.........the way to go is already outsourcing.............why would LTA wants to buy it back??

[Jubilong]

dai ji wont be tua kee, because they are cheng hu. cheng hu say no improper dealings what can we do. They have Davinder singh to watch you

[Maxus-MIFA9]

 

LTA also garmen...

aiya, everything also garmen.. just left pocket transferred to right pocket.

 

 

When Gov gave money to buy buses & MRT cabins, ppl kpkb why Gov gave public fund to this privatised companies.

 

So Gov took back both the buses & MRT transportations services and when they spend $$$$$ for new buses & train cabin, public have to .

 

 

[Holdenutessv]

 

LTA also garmen...

aiya, everything also garmen.. just left pocket transferred to right pocket.

 

At the end of the day, I really don't care, as long as they don't increase MRT fares, and transport fares !

 

Don't because of this, they going to raise fares, then I will really be piss off !

 

Don't have to think one.... They sure raise fares one...

[Somewhat1975]

This Lai is just plain lazy to find out some facts before writing his stuff. The infrastructure of NSEWL is always owned by LTA. SMRT paid a yearly fee to lease it from LTA.

 

From SMRT annual report

 

 

on 1 April 1998, SMRT Trains purchased the NSeWl operating assets from lTA for approximately $1.2 billion. These assets include trains, permanent way vehicles, power supply equipment and cabling, supervisory control system, escalators and lifts, platform screen doors, environmental control system, electrical services and fire protection system, signalling system, communication system, automatic fare collection system and depot workshop equipment.

To assist SMRT Trains in its purchase of these assets, lTA provided an asset-related grant of $480 million which SMRT Trains amortises by recognising it as deferred income over the life of the relevant assets. In April 2002, SMRT Trains had fully paid for the operating assets in five equal annual instalments.

While SMRT Trains owns and maintains the operating assets, the infrastructure of the NSeWl, which includes tunnels, tracks, viaducts and station structures, remains the property of lTA and is leased to SMRT Trains at a nominal annual fee or such other amount which lTA may stipulate in the future on the first working day of each calendar year during the term of the lease. SMRT Trains is required to repair and maintain the infrastructure as stipulated in a separate lease

and maintenance agreemen

 

[Ender]

This Lai is just plain lazy to find out some facts before writing his stuff. The infrastructure of NSEWL is always owned by LTA. SMRT paid a yearly fee to lease it from LTA.

 

From SMRT annual report

 

 

just what I had thought. The gabermen owns the assets, while smrt operates and maintain them.

 

 

just re-read, and realise, SMRT owns the train which LTA needs to buy back.

Edited May 26, 2014 by Ender

[Little_prince]

SMRT shares got shoot up or not?

 

If not, time to hoot, free $2b

answer to your question. april chiong 50%

 

Edited May 26, 2014 by Little_prince

[Tianmo]

just what I had thought. The gabermen owns the assets, while smrt operates and maintain them.

 

 

just re-read, and realise, SMRT owns the train which LTA needs to buy back.

 

I think gov owns many if not all infrastructures.........be it tracks...roads....warehouses...........and appoint operators to run.......so in any case gov can ask any operators to pack up and go............new operators just move in and start operating............

 

who know one day 54% decides to sell SMRT to somebody.............and have another operator runs our mrt lines..........

[Mustank]

first is bus, then is mrt

tomorrow what new thing? what new surprise?

[Ktglfc]

first is bus, then is mrt

tomorrow what new thing? what new surprise?

 

I think I better buy SPH shares... tomorrow may be papers :)

 

Sekali GIC listed in SGX tomorrow ?!

[Xefera]

eagerly awaiting govt next move on re-possessing all the bus assets. already noises are being made about govt using taxpayers to pay for all these purchases and benefiting the 2 listed companies.

 

nothing mentioned about the MRT yet, so should be awaiting the bus episode to unfold before deciding next move.

[Maxus-MIFA9]

first is bus, then is mrt

tomorrow what new thing? what new surprise?

 

Tomorrow, COE scrape, just one lum sum of $10K to LTA accross all CAT ......

[Caravan]

No no. I don't care what he propose. I only concern if this is real. LTA buying SMRT back for 2bil when it is given for free??

 

If really the case, it will be really 'privatizing profits', 'socializing costs'. Huat ah!

[Darryn]

Not gonna talk about the SMRT / rail "buyback" - mostly because I don't know exactly what was sold back then, and what is being bought now - so I wouldn't be qualified to judge.

 

But from a "what is proper" point of view - the govt shouldn't be able to just "nationalise" assets. On the assumption that it is held by SMRT - then the govt should have to pay "fair market value" for it -

 

Of course, what exactly constitutes "fair market value" is, in itself, a very contentious issue.

 

[Knoobie]

first is bus, then is mrt

tomorrow what new thing? what new surprise?

tomorrow fare increase! surprise big big!!

[Joseph22]

Not gonna talk about the SMRT / rail "buyback" - mostly because I don't know exactly what was sold back then, and what is being bought now - so I wouldn't be qualified to judge.

 

But from a "what is proper" point of view - the govt shouldn't be able to just "nationalise" assets. On the assumption that it is held by SMRT - then the govt should have to pay "fair market value" for it -

 

Of course, what exactly constitutes "fair market value" is, in itself, a very contentious issue.

 

another talk cock post.

 

the MRT was build using national fund. and then pass to SMRT without a single cents.

 

so if they are going to take back. it shouldn't constitute a single cents.

[Mustank]

What about investors who bought SMRT shares ? :) What does it mean for them ?

 

 

 

means:

 

[Darryn]

What about investors who bought SMRT shares ? :) What does it mean for them ?

 

 

This was exactly what I was thinking.

 

But as mentioned - we are not sure what, if anything is happening.

 

Like I say - as a general principal, the govt shouldn't be able to just "nationalise" an asset worth $500 and pay $1.

 

Of course - the govt shouldn't be transferring ownership of a $500 asset to a private company for $1 either.

 

Having said that, just because one was done, doesn't make the other right. The time to complain about the transfer (if, indeed, such a transfer were made) is at the point it happened. Not 20 years later