A tale of two companies
Yesterday, Singapore’s exchange market was rife with speculation about a possible merger of the two land transport giants: ComfortDelGro and SMRT. As a result, their share prices skyrocketed between 5.9% and 6.6% at closing.
ComfortDelGro is the “world’s second largest public listed land transport company with a fleet of more than 40,000 vehicles”. It is the parent company for Comfort and SBS Transit which are the market leaders in taxi and bus industry in Singapore respectively. SMRT, the market leader for train services, is a multi-modal public transport company offering train, bus and taxi services, as well as expertise in consultancy and project management in railway systems. Both companies have advertising arms.
In a newspaper report by The Straits Times (attached below), it was reported that ComfortDelGro has submitted a position paper to the Ministry of Transport, giving their two-cent worth on how the public transport industry should be structured. Two specific suggestions are given: to merge with rival SMRT to create one big giant transport company, or to have two separate companies with different areas of expertise – one running buses while another operating trains. (Note: It should be quite obvious that SBS Transit will be the natural bus company and SMRT will be the train company).
It is not hard to fathom why ComfortDelGro is keen to push for the two scenarios because they will have the upper hand in both scenarios. For the first scenario, if they were to merge with SMRT, it would most likely to be a take-over exercise rather than merger. With a market capitalisation of S$4.8 million over SMRT’s S$2.6 million and a ferocious appetite for aggressive acquisition, it would be quite unthinkable that they are willing to “merge” with SMRT. I speculate that they would have said something like this in their position paper:
Having a one giant company would create a company that can offer a holistic transport solution to Singapore with economy of scale. Also, bytaking overmerging with SMRT, we will hasten the process of achieving our mission of creating the world’s number one land transport operator. This would be Singapore’s pride: the largest land transport operator which is profitable.”
For the second scenario, though left with buses only, they will be able to use buses to compete with the trains by offering point-to-point services and direct bus services which are what the passengers wanted – faster and more direct services without the hassle of transfers.
Hitherto, SMRT has not yet put forth any position paper. Judging by their rival’s move, I would think they would be forced to come out with one. Already, they are managing shareholder and market’s expectation by responding to media about the position paper submitted by ComfortDelGro. A day after the news was reported, SMRT responded:
“(SMRT) Having operated trains and buses for over five years, we have grown to understand the synergistic benefits of a multimodal model. This is our preferred mode.”
What could we read from this statement? It could mean that they are supportive of the merger to create one big giant company, but this is quite unlikely as they will be a takeover subject. Another possibility is that they are against the one-bus-one-rail industry structure advocated by their rival. It is not hard to think why they are against bus-rail competition because the bus company could employ a bus network strategy that degrade the attractiveness of feeder buses to train stations while offering direct trunk services that offer door-step services or point-to-point services to compete with the trains (which SBS Transit is already doing so by replacing feeder services with passing through trunk services). Without the support of feeder buses, the trains will be left with pockets of small catchments area around the train stations.
What then is the government preferred industry structure? Minister for Transport Raymond Lim had previously state that there is no sacred cow that cannot be slaughtered, but they would not be slayed for the sake of doing so. Ultimately, with a pragmatic government, what is more important is to find solutions that achieve the outcome they want, rather than be engaged in an academic argument that debate which theoretical model best fit Singapore.
So far, the Ministry has made clear that in the next 10 to 15 years, the key solution to land transportation is to make public transport more attractive. It can no longer act as a captive market which attracts users who are unable to afford a car. As part of the land transport industry review, Ministry of Transport and Land Transport Authority have lately engaged the public in first of the many focus groups. One issue touched on is the possibility of bus route-tendering system, where bus routes are centrally planned by an independent body while the operation of the routes is being awarded to bus transport companies through competitive bidding.
In light of this, you might want to add one more possible industry structure to ComfortDelGro’s list: one rail company with multiple bus companies with route tendering.
Let us continue to wait in anticipation for the final outcome of the public transport industry review.
ComfortDelGro shares climb on SMRT merger whispers
Shares in ComfortDelGro, operator of the world's second-largest fleet of buses, taxis and rental vehicles, gained as much as 6.8 per cent after a report said chairman Lim Jit Poh suggested a merger with rival SMRT Corp.
Mr Lim's other proposal reportedly was for one company to operate bus services and the other to run Singapore's subway system to boost the use of public transport. The company does not comment on market speculation, spokeswoman Tammy Tan said.
Singapore is encouraging more people to use public transport to ease road congestion. The Ministry of Transport is reviewing the public transport sector.
“This piece of news could lead to more analysts factoring in the possibility of Singapore having one operator for rail and one operator for the bus system,” UOB Kay Hian analyst Leng Seng Choon said.
Shares of ComfortDelGro gained 13 cents (5.9 per cent), to $2.33 at the close of trading, while SMRT shares jumped 11 cents, (6.6 per cent), to $1.77.
SMRT, Singapore's biggest subway operator, also provides bus, taxi and charter services.
“Having operated trains and buses for over five years, we have grown to understand the synergistic benefits of a multimodal model,” SMRT said in an emailed statement. “This is our preferred mode.” — Bloomberg
Source: TODAY, 21 April 2007
Mega-merger of transport operators or separate all-bus, all-train entities
By Christopher Tan, Senior Correspondent
TRANSPORT giant ComfortDelGro's chairman, Mr Lim Jit Poh, has made a formal proposal to the Government on restructuring the public transport industry.
The Straits Times understands he is suggesting two options:
• A mega-merger with rival SMRT to create a single public transport group, or
• Have one operator run the buses and the other, trains.
Mr Lim has in the past mooted 'inter-modal' competition between separate all-bus and all-train operators.
He submitted his paper to Transport Minister Raymond Lim, following the ministry's call six months ago for an industry review to raise public transport ridership sizeably.
The paper was mentioned in the latest annual reports of ComfortDelGro and its subsidiary SBS Transit, although its contents were not revealed.
The Transport Ministry would not say what ComfortDelGro has proposed, but its spokesman said: 'We treat these as useful inputs coming from a key stakeholder and will give due consideration as part of the ongoing land transport review.'
The ministry is expected to release results of its review by year-end.
Currently, the two key stakeholders - SBS Transit and SMRT - have bus and train operations. SBS Transit does not make much money from rail and SMRT does not make much from buses.
Caught in the middle are commuters who complain that travel in many parts of the island is far from 'seamless'.
In the present set-up, commuters find they require more transfers to get to their destinations because too many bus services were removed to avoid duplicating MRT services.
In his chairman's statement, Mr Lim said: 'I note the public calls for more competition. I also note the cry for centralised and integrated services. These are extreme positions.'
In its General Household Survey 2005, the Department of Statistics found that although buses were the public transport network's fastest way to get around, the proportion of commuters who could take a straight bus to work had fallen from 25 per cent in 2000 to 21.9 in 2005.
The proportion who had to take both bus and train went up from 13.9 to 15.1 per cent.
Asked for her comments on the two options, SMRT president Saw Phaik Hwa said it was unnecessary to overhaul the industry, but improvements could be made.
Ms Saw said a bus-versus-train set-up could mean duplication of resources and, as a result, higher fares. She also said it may not be environmentally sound.
'That's what's happening in Hong Kong, where you see buses occupying five lanes in Causeway Bay. The pollution is bad,' she told The Straits Times yesterday.
The suggestion for one operator to run all the trains was made in 2003 by former transport minister Yeo Cheow Tong, who said 'a lot of the overheads can be saved'.
He even said SMRT would be allowed to operate all future lines if it took over SBS Transit's North-East Line (NEL), which was loss-making then.
Ms Saw said she would not acquire a loss-maker.
But last year, the NEL became profitable. Asked if she would now reconsider her position, Ms Saw said: 'I don't have a problem running the NEL, but the price must make sense. It's a business deal.'
Source: The Straits Times, 20 April 2007

8 comments:
Dear Daniel,
Thanks for providing such an insightful post. I had a suspicion that you would be writing on it when I heard about the news.
To be honest, I did not expect ComfortDelGro to be so forthcoming on its position, ahead of the ongoing Public Transport Review.
Also, I expected SMRT chief to say what she said. SMRT had always been supportive of a multimodal model and I do not think they would forsake that stand so easily.
I share your sentiments that in the (unlikely) event that ComfortDelGro "merges" with SMRT and takes over the buses operations while the latter focuses on train operations, the clear cut winner would be ComfortDelGro.
While trains are a faster choice of mode for many commuters, having more direct buses to the city (which I am sure ComfortDelGro and their subsidiary SBS Transit would be keen to explore) would make it very attractive for commuters. They would be fleecing commuters from the trains in no time. I can foresee that would be less feeder bus services in this scenario, and instead the introduction of more long haul trunk bus services.
I still believe in a "one train, many bus companies" model of public transport. You cannot have too many cooks spoiling a broth (trains) that needs to be cost efficient. Also, you cannot have a single competing broth (buses) that would compete against your best-selling broth (trains). A monopoly of the bus industry would result in an abstraction of ridership from the trains, as well as an inefficient deployment of resources from a broad perspective (too many resources serving the same market).
Anyway we will wait and see how interestingly this story will unfold.
Regards,
Maz
What does the Competition Commission of Singapore have to say with regards to this?
It certainly looks like no matter which way this moves, be it a merger or a takeover, it will create an entity that looks and smells exactly like a monopoly.
Does it really matter whether it's a monopoly anymore? The market do not seems to determine the fare but PTC does.
Dear both,
Thank you for your comments. Hope you find the article insightful and meaningful.
Ted, I have to admit I do not know much about the new Competition Act so I won't be able to comment. However, you are right that it will create a situation close to monopoly for bus and train services in land transport industry (excluding the private operators that offer charter or niche businesses). Having a monopoly is not necessarily an evil. You may wish to refer to a Straits Time article (dated 29 Aug 2006) titled "Monopoly is not a dirty word" where the writer highlighted that the 'forced competition' of either one-rail-two-bus (SBS, TIBS, SMRT) or two multi-modal companies (SBS Transit, SMRT) has produced little or no tangible gains for commuters.
Responding to anonymous, you are also right that commuters need not afraid that the fares will be artificially marked up when there is no competition under a monopoly situation, In any fare increase, the company has to apply to PTC and justify for it. In fact, the fare increases are capped as determined by a formula. You may wish to refer to the paper released by Committee on the Fare Review Mechanism which detailed the fare formula. The paper was accepted and implemented by the Government in 2005.
Even though customers are protected from higher fares by the fare cap, they may experience degradation in service levels under a monopolistic situation, unless the service standards are also regulated. This is already being done. Under current framework, the bus companies need to comply with Quality of Standards that stipulates how buses are deployed. It ensures that customers do not have to wait too long for the next bus to arrive, and are able to board the buses.
Hope the above clarify. :)
Regards,
Daniel Chin
Note: I am keen to know my readers better so you may wish to consider putting a name for future comments (available in identity option of "Other").
Thanks for the article,
I think that the SMRT CEO should go around and experience the situation that is happening to the bus company. Seeing the poor frequency for some services and the bad condition of some of the buses let me to think whether they are really experienced in this industry. Even though they are new to it in the first place but they have those former TIBS members to help them out which is not a problem for them.
Dear anonymous,
Your comment reminds me of the reminiscent of the good old days. Then, I prefer TIBS buses over SBS buses because they are cleaner and more comfortable. Plus, their cute smiling buses and bright corporate colours sure perks up one's day. Now, I encounter many crawling pests and dusty seats.
I think your statement that SMRT has former TIBS members to help is definitely true, but I'm not sure how many of them are still around. It is common to have high attrition in the takeover company. Having said that, I think what is more important is that there is good leadership to chart the company forward.
I read a newspaper paper article about two years that many senior TIBS members had left the company since integration with SMRT. The news reporter Christopher Tan reported that there is now only one former management figure still standing in SMRT. I would think that without guidance from leaders who are experienced in the industry, it takes considerable effort to move the company in the right direction.
About the poor frequency, it is most likely due not having enough buses. Let's hope they buy more new buses to increase their capacity.
"In any fare increase, the company has to apply to PTC and justify for it. In fact, the fare increases are capped as determined by a formula. You may wish to refer to the paper released by Committee on the Fare Review Mechanism which detailed the fare formula. The paper was accepted and implemented by the Government in 2005."
This just so reminds me of the formula for our ministers' salary increase
"Even though customers are protected from higher fares by the fare cap, they may experience degradation in service levels under a monopolistic situation, unless the service standards are also regulated. This is already being done. Under current framework, the bus companies need to comply with Quality of Standards that stipulates how buses are deployed. It ensures that customers do not have to wait too long for the next bus to arrive, and are able to board the buses."
Do you take bus by the way? Have you seen or even experience buses that packed like a sardine can, to the extent of not allowing for passengers to board the bus? Have you even experience buses that with creepy crawlers?
So is having a dualpoly or oligopoly good, or even necessary?
Even our ruling party in the govt is out to get a one party system (aka monopoly status) too. Who says monopoly is not good?
Dear Mr Neo,
Welcome to Singapore's Land Transport. I hope you enjoyed your stay here and thank you for your comments.
Yes I do take buses, and had my fair share of sardine packed buses, especially during evening peak. What this means is that the Quality of Service Standards which was announced by PTC in July 2006 was not fully successful. I wonder if the companies are actually meeting the criteria. What I meant to say that the intention of the QoS is good, but in reality it is hard to achieve those benchmark. As what we read in newspaper forum replies, the bus companies always fall back to "unexpected traffic conditions" to explain why buses are late and sardine-packed.
My personal opinion is the current situation of having two multi-modal transport companies is not ideal. The former SBST-TIBS-SMRT arrangement actually serves passengers better as there are bus-rail competition to provide more choices. Unless you are staying near MRT and going to places near MRT, buses are more convenient as they provide more door-step service. If only they can provide more direct routes and faster journey...
Regards,
Daniel Chin
Post a Comment