[sustran] Re: Manila MRT

[tjb]

So let's get real. Why is it that ALL MRT systems except Hong Kong lose
money (and Hong Kong is losing money on new lines too)

. The fact is that the figures NEVER add up and the only ways for MRT
systems to operate is either
a) Government subsidies or
b) other subsidies to operators - normally provision of prime land in city
centres for commercial development

These conclusions from numerous MRT/LRT projects around the world are so
obvious that the only conclusions I can draw from the failed systems are
that

a) developer/operators are simply STUPID
and/or
b) developer/operators are politically well connected and simply expect to
get bailed out when things go wrong
c) I am missing the point!!??

----------------------------------------------------------------
Tony Barry
EValue Engineering Sdn Bhd

www.evalueco.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Heckler <heckler at quickweb.com.ph>
To: Sustran Discuss <sustran-discuss at jca.ax.apc.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2000 12:00 PM
Subject: [sustran] Manila MRT


> To those of who interested in what's been happening to the EDSA MRT since
> its opening last Dec. 15, here's the scoop as far as I can tell.
>
> The main thing is no one's riding the train which is, of course, too bad.
> Personally, I think it shows what corporate greed can do despite this
> supposed age of "corporate social responsibility." Well. the market
> responded and rejected the fares set for the MRT. I think commuters
> generally appreciate the convenience (comfort, time savings, throw in
> everything you can think of) the MRT offers since the trains were
supposedly
> packed on the first day of operations -- when a ride was free. After that,
> only a handful have been using the trains -- 10% of the projected daily
> ridership of 300,000 (to a maximum of 500,000).  Someone calculated that
it
> would cost Php100 for someone living in Quezon City (one end of the
tracks)
> to commute to Makati (the opposite end) because when you get off the
> station, you still have to find transport to get to your final
destination.
> That's a substantial chunk out of the wages of us folks who don't have
slush
> funds.
>
> The government, specifically the Dept. of Transportation and Communication
> (DOTC), operator of the MRT, believes that it's the half-finished
condition
> of the stations that's discouraging ridership.  I've been on the train
twice
> and I can vouch for that. The stations are about three storeys high which
is
> the height of the stairs one has to climb to get to the platform.  (In
some
> stations, one has to climb up this flight, walk down another flight and
then
> walk up again a second set of stairs to get to the platform.) I say people
> taking breathers mid-way as they tried climbing up to the platform. The
> government has had to get the builder to build escalators. The built-in
> elevators for the disabled and elderly are supposed to be small and narrow
> and I haven't seen anyone using them. It's probably because the disabled
and
> elderly can't even get to the stations because access to them isn't easy
> even for us temporarily abled types. OK, so the DOTC says when the
stations
> are all finished, they expect ridership to increase to projected levels.
But
> if that doesn't happen (which by all indications won't), only then will
they
> reconsider the fare levels. I don't think the bureaucrats even believe it
> themselves because they are already trying to get the MRT builders to take
> less than the guaranteed $1 million a year or so that they've been
promised
> as lease payment.
>
> So, trying to determine a fare that will attract ridership (i.e, a fair
> price for the comsumer), not just to line the pockets of the
> owner/operator/builder and their banks, is important after all. I wonder
> what's the story with the Bangkok Sky Train?
>
> Ramon Fernan III
>
>