~by: Sharon Ng~

Much has been said on why the S$1.1B injection into SBS Transit is wrong. Since SBS Transit operates 75% of the bus fleet in Singapore, I will take a quick look at the financials of SBS Transit.

According to the annual report available on the SBS Transit website, it can be seen that the group has a 3.42% increase in revenue, a 4.02% increase in operating profit (year-on-year 09/10), and a 3.35% increase in operating expenses . Its EPS has actually decrease a little by 0.56%, while the net asset value has increased by 9.72%. The total dividend per ordinary share has not increased, and the return on shareholders’ equity has actually decreased by 10%.

Taking the data on a 5-year period from 2006 to 2010, it has enjoyed a 14.61% increase in revenue, 13.51% increase in operating profit, 14.72% increase in operating expenses, a decrease of 12.62% decrease in shareholders’ equity, a decrease of 4.86% in EPS, and a decrease of 62.23 of total dividend per ordinary share.

This makes me wonder if shareholders should be angry with SBS Transit, and perhaps that’s why it cannot raise money through issuing more shares. I do not know the rating of SBS Transit, but I will doubt it has difficulty borrowing, since it is backed by Temasek Holdings.

Taking a deeper look at the Group Income Statement between 2009-2010, it has an increase of 1.27% in staff costs, 3.02% decrease in repairs and maintenance, and a 10.45% increase in fuel and electricity costs. Operating profit increased by 4.04%. As a percentage of operating expense, staff costs represent 44.62%, while fuel and electricity costs represent 20.43%. Repairs and maintenance represent 13.67%. Just like an airline, most of SBS Transit’s expenses come from labour and fuel costs.

Again, for the period 2009-2010, the Bus segment information reveals that revenue has increased very little by 0.55%, while the additions of vehicles, premises and equipment has decreased a whopping 43.88%. Segment assets has increased by 10.53%. According to the financial report, segment assets include all operating assets and consist of operating receivables, inventories, vehicles, premises and equipment, net of allowances and provisions. So if additions of vehicles (etc) have decreased, this means that this asset increase is in inventories and receivables. So why is SBS Transit hogging this much inventories and receivables? Does this make good financial sense?

Taking a look at the Group Income Statement between 2006 and 2010, one statistics that jumped out is the increase in depreciation expense, at 91.38%. Another interesting number to look at is the steep decrease in net income from investments, at 93.36%. The increase in revenue is 14.69%, while the increase in staff costs is 7.16%. Repairs and maintenance have increased by 19.91%, while fuel and electricity costs increased by 10.38%. The basic EPS has actually decreased by 4.81%.

Taking a look at the Bus segment information 2006 and 2010, segment assets has increased by a whopping 137.77%, while depreciation expense also increased at 92.35%. Addition of vehicles, premises and equipment increased by 13.23% and segment liabilities increased by 9.55%. As said earlier, segment assets include addition of vehicles (etc) among other things, but yet the steep increase in segment assets is not explained by the addition of vehicles (etc), but is possibly due to the increase in operating receivables and inventories.

This can be further seen on the Cash Flow Statement of 2010, where there is a steep increase in inventories from -3.7M to 1.45M. The Trade Payable for buses has also increased from -4.55M to -26.73M. Cash generated from operations has actually decreased about 55.9%. As we know, commuters pay by ezlink and cash, and this is actually a cash-based business where SBS Transit receives cash from its operating activities. In years 2007-2010, bus ridership has increased by 8.19%, however, this did not help in the cash flow situation.

Taking a closer look at the addition of vehicles(etc) and the amount of vehicles (etc), it can be seen that for the period 2007-2010, the Bus segment has added 113% of vehicles (etc) while ridership has increased by 8.19%. Of course, there are new buses to be added to the fleet due to buses being replaced. This addition of assets has also led to high depreciation costs.

According to the website, it operates about 3000 buses. Taking a very crude way to average, the cost per bus (including premise and equipment) is $178, 616. Of course, not all buses are new and cost the same, hence this is a crude number. Now if we take the number of buses to estimate the operating expenses for these 3000 buses, it will be about 218,720 per bus. Together, with a mix of buses of different age and types, it can be estimated that a bus costs about 178,616 on book, and costs about 218,720 to operate, which gives us $397,336 per bus.

Now with a $1.1B injection, how many buses (not new buses, but just the “average bus” on the SBS transit fleet) are we talking about? The answer is 2788.43 “average SBS buses”. Wow, that’s a lot of buses, given that SBS transit operates 3000 now. 

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Will HDB prices keep rising?

~by: Leong Sze Hian~ I refer to the articles “HDB resale prices up,…

街访被质问水电费调涨? 英兰妮部长亲自驳斥“传言”

一则网络贴文声称总理公署部长英兰妮,在街坊中峇鲁巴刹时,被一名老者斥责,最后灰头土脸离开。此事真伪引起网民热议,甚至英兰妮本身也出面驳斥,有关贴文扭曲事实。 该帖文称,英兰妮拜访该巴刹群众,靠近一堆老夫妇时,主动伸出手作自我介绍,说她是部长暨国会议员。但是老者没有站起来,告诉她:“你是谁我不在乎,我吃饭的时候不想被打扰。” 英兰妮再问老先生,是本地人还是马来西亚人,这时老者回答:“我是土生土长新加坡人,而且我对于今天开始第二次调涨水费至15巴仙和电费6.9巴仙,非常有意见。” 帖文称,在附近观众的围观下,英兰妮没有和老人继续对话,灰溜溜地走了。 英拉妮:未和老者深谈 不过,丹绒巴戈集选区国会议员的英兰妮,则在其个人脸书驳斥,该传言扭曲了他与老者之间的对话,因为老者说不愿被打扰后,她就转而拜访其他民众,根本没有时间再继续进行对话。 英兰妮在其脸书如是阐述: 我到中峇鲁巴刹进行长约探访,借此聆听基层民声,也方便有需要的民众可在现场直接与我沟通。 聚集在此的多是附近邻里,也有来自其他地方的访客。我一般都会询问他们来自哪里,略微了解下他们的身份背景。 当然,在探访过程选民给我的反应不一,有些感到惊讶,有者很热情欢迎,或要求一起合照。有些选民愿意与我分享早餐,非常亲和。 也有少部分民众不愿倍打扰。当时我接触一对老夫妇,也自我介绍我是议员,老太太很友善,只是他的丈夫不想被打扰,我也尊重他们并离开。 奇怪的是,不久后网络流传一则文章,为我和老先生的对话加油添醋。事实上当老先生说不愿被打扰,就没机会在有进一步对话了。…

商人外出遭掳 马国警方驳火救肉票歼二匪

绑匪趁商人外出享用早餐时将他掳走,并开出1000万新元的赎金价码,最后透过警方的缜密布置,与匪徒驳火救出肉票并歼灭其中两名匪徒。 综合媒体报道,该绑架案发生于邻国柔佛,被绑架的是41岁当地华裔塑料厂商人,据马国警方形容,上周二(17日),他离家出外享用早餐时,被4名绑匪掳走,随后家属即向警方报案,并表示绑匪向他们索取1000万元的赎金。 警方在接获通报后,立即展开特别调查小组跟进。截至本周一,调查小组发现受害者位置,他被关押在丰盛港一油棕园内,警方试图靠近绑匪车辆时,却遭匪徒开枪射击,当时射中其中一名警员,导致警员的左右腿中弹,另一枪则是被警员的腰带阻挡,未伤及要害。 为了阻止匪徒潜入油棕园内,难以追寻,警方便开始驳火反击。 警还击两名匪徒被歼 “其中两人绑匪警觉到警方的存在后,便向警方却开枪,而警方也随即还击,两名匪徒当场被歼。” 该两名匪徒为39岁与52岁,使用了两支9毫米与0.45口径的半自动手枪。 据悉,俩人曾参与抢劫、驳火等犯罪记录,相信是今年早些被警方瓦解的犯罪集团成员。 他指出,警方相信在油棕园内的绑匪团伙不仅两人,目前仍在追查其余绑匪的下落。 而针对受害者目前的情况,警方表示,他目前正在柔佛苏丹后阿米娜医院接受治疗。 马国媒体,根据警方所掌握的情报,绑匪在绑架的一周内,每天都与家属联络,谈判赎金事宜,直至家属答应交赎金后,绑匪就将头套脱下,让肉票看到绑匪的脸,因此推断无论绑匪有没有收到赎金都会撕票,也同时逼迫警方提早行动以救出肉票。 询及为何索取的赎金是新币而不是令吉,警方则表示,新币有1000新币或1万新币的大纸币,而令吉相对只有100令吉,不易取走,才改用新币。…

两教堂开放供街友夜宿,9点后可到教堂过夜

两教堂开放给街友,提供他们夜宿,是首个宗教团体以提供住宿的方式解决街友露宿街头的问题。 据《海峡时报》报导,位于宏茂桥的耶稣君王堂(the Church of Christ the King)自1月起,已向无家可归的街友开放晚上暂住服务;而位于武吉巴督的天使之后堂(The Church St Mary of the…