Here's my 2 cents' worth:
I believe competition is good so that both companies can strive
to work harder to give the best they can offer. But like
what TS say, each company seems to run their own
routes, cannabalise their own network, what's there
competition to say about? I believe competition to them is
defined as who earns the most at the end of the day? SMRT
have the main rail network as their trump card, while the
larger bus network is under SBST's hands. Both seem to earn good
money in parallels.
If competition is underway, I believe we ought to really get
better service in terms of the bus frequencies, service
standards of BCs etc... However, in a recent survey,
the figures aren't very pleasing although it's showing signs
of improving. The only time the 2 bus companies cooperated, in
a sense, is their fare structure. We still witness lousy news
articles and stomp reviews about buses each week. This seems to
void the outcome of competition between the 2 bus companies.
Complementary, instead of complimentary, network is essential to
save running costs for transport companies. I believe SBST has
thought of implementing single bus routes to areas where SMRT
monopolised and vice versa but I think they aren't going to earn
much. From a businessman point of view, I will rather
consolidate my strengths, improve and tweak it, rather than
betting on a plan that might backfire. This might give me more
returns. Afterall, both are private companies that survives on
revenue and profits.
I feel the transport system, both rail and bus, is doing
fine. Although improvements can still be made, both companies
are set to survive independently and we can only continue to
watch the dominance of the 3Cs helplessly. However, since the PTC
is the guardian of the 2 companies, at least there is a neutral
governing body that is able to give us their listening ears to
whatever feedback that we have.
