Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 61

Thread: My letter to ST Forum got published online

  1. #41

    Default Re: My letter to ST Forum got published online

    Quote Originally Posted by G-man
    As someone who does business, albeit a small one, I'd just like to give my 2 cents worth.

    It may offend and if it does, you have the option of not reading further.

    Disclaimer outta the way, here's what I have to say.

    Businesses big or small have running costs. They have big things to worry about, like where do I find money to pay my overheads, which includes rent and staff. They charge based on what the market can bear, and more importantly, what they deem a fair price. I think in many instances, there're alot of costs that have come into the picture, through no fault of the company, in this case, the airline.

    I might come across as uncaring, unsympathetic to the common man or even clueless. Well the truth is, if you're running a business, you'd like to think you charge a fair price for your services and in many cases, businesses DO charge a fair price for their services. We cannot compare apples to oranges.

    As someone who often has to face clients telling me to go lower, I know how everyone wants the best deal but on the other hand, I've also turned down jobs that ask for too low a price, a price I know I am not prepared to drop to. I may be desperate for business sometimes but I also need to know that I am not planning to run a charity. Heck, even charities sometimes have a little reserve on the side to pay their staff.

    At the end of the day, as dkw illustrated, it's the nett price you should concern yourself with and not the nitty gritty. Life's too short for that.
    totally agree with you and dkw. i also do not see what the fuss is all about. i used to fly singapore airlines but since tiger allows me to fly 3 times for the same price, i fly with them. sometimes even 5 times for the same price when i am lucky.
    Last edited by wolf; 13th April 2006 at 12:39 AM.

  2. #42
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: My letter to ST Forum got published online

    I think maybe Philip Tan should start a ticketing service, buy Tiger Airways tickets from him. He buys from Tiger at S$100 (for example), and sells to those people who say there's no fuss, for say S$150. Its still cheap, you get reliablity, same budget terminal, and can fly more times than SQ. There's no fuss aint it?

    Hehehe, just a suggestion

  3. #43

    Default Re: My letter to ST Forum got published online

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123
    I think maybe Philip Tan should start a ticketing service, buy Tiger Airways tickets from him. He buys from Tiger at S$100 (for example), and sells to those people who say there's no fuss, for say S$150. Its still cheap, you get reliablity, same budget terminal, and can fly more times than SQ. There's no fuss aint it?

    Hehehe, just a suggestion
    Good suggestion...

    Honestly, it's not about the quantum... it's a matter of relativity... If u are moved to a "poorer" place without any form of compensation, it just doesnt make too much good sense to a paying customer.

    However, the point of the letter may not be a "demand" for lower price. It is, imho, merely a request for the explanation of the lack of rationale which an interested party discovered. TA may not lower the price eventually, the least they could is to give a proper reply...

    As for dkw... I do understand his stand... I never bothered about such details becoz I have been brought up in the "just pay, dont ask" environment... like most of us here... It may be a small issue, but i personally think it's a good issue to be brought up. Cheers to Philip!

    Just my 2 cts.

  4. #44

    Default Re: My letter to ST Forum got published online

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123
    I think maybe Philip Tan should start a ticketing service, buy Tiger Airways tickets from him. He buys from Tiger at S$100 (for example), and sells to those people who say there's no fuss, for say S$150. Its still cheap, you get reliablity, same budget terminal, and can fly more times than SQ. There's no fuss aint it?

    Hehehe, just a suggestion
    Ok, lah... tomorrow I go buy! Still cheap hor...
    The Art of Flying - Aviation Art Prints for sale
    http://TheArtofFlying.wordpress.com/

  5. #45

    Default Re: My letter to ST Forum got published online

    There are two new letters on ST Online in response to Tiger Airway's PR response.

  6. #46

    Default Re: My letter to ST Forum got published online

    I have sent in my response to Tiger Airways' reply...
    The Art of Flying - Aviation Art Prints for sale
    http://TheArtofFlying.wordpress.com/

  7. #47
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    CCK
    Posts
    1,051

    Default Re: My letter to ST Forum got published online

    Quote Originally Posted by philliptan
    Ok, let's talk abt nett prices...

    It's also still the same. Before or after the move. Everything is the same. So why move? Why do I have to use budget facilities while still paying the same price? What's in it for the passenger? If nothing, then can I ask to fly from T1? I can't, can I, despite paying the same tax? So my point is, if you wanna move to the Budget Terminal, who gets the benefit? Definitely not the paying passenger.
    Phillip,
    if you recall the origins of the Budget Terminal, it was basically industry driven. Budget airlines simply found flying out of the main terminals too expensive. The transport ministry and CAAS felt it essential to draw budget carriers to Singapore as obviously that is the next wave of air travel. I put it to you that passenger preference was pretty low in their priorities when making this consideration. Obviously as a passenger I would prefer all the bells and whistles of the main terminals. If you ask me, Singaporeans are way too spoilt by Changi. If you've been to some of the so-called hub airports in the US, some of them are real dumps and who knows how much they charge in landing fees.

    In the long term, if the small savings can keep the budget airlines afloat, one can hope that eventually some of these savings can be passed on to passengers.

    At the end of the day, you still have a choice, you can go mainstream and pay the so-called same airport tax of $97.50 but maybe $100 more in airfare, to enjoy the cushioned seats and plasma screen TVs, but do you really want to? Its still the total cost that matters, isn't it?

  8. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    eastern past
    Posts
    108

    Default Re: My letter to ST Forum got published online

    Philip's initial query was simple and merely asking Tiger Airways to clarify. instead of answering properly, Tiger Airways has to mess it up by giving such further 'amusing' reply. i just saw the 2 replies pertaining to Tiger Airway. so much for PR Consultancy a little offtopic.. i do wonder how much the frontline staffs (hotline service) as well as this PR Consultancy guy are paid
    Last edited by furrycake; 13th April 2006 at 10:09 AM.
    爱是要时间慢慢培养的。。

  9. #49
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    CCK
    Posts
    1,051

    Default Re: My letter to ST Forum got published online

    Quote Originally Posted by ajneo

    As for dkw... I do understand his stand... I never bothered about such details becoz I have been brought up in the "just pay, dont ask" environment... like most of us here... It may be a small issue, but i personally think it's a good issue to be brought up. Cheers to Philip!

    Just my 2 cts.
    Har har! I've never really bought into the Pay And Pay policy. You still can be careful about what you spend, but at a more macro level. Why on earth you do you want to dictate how much a service provider should charge you for every single item? Some degree of cross-subsidisation always occurs in this kind of complex business, we should give them some lee-way, as long as the final cost is too your liking.

  10. #50

    Default Re: My letter to ST Forum got published online

    Quote Originally Posted by philliptan
    Let me list it in summary form...

    Before 26 March - Tiger Airways + T1 + gate departure + dozens of shops = Tax $94.50 for 2
    On and after 26 March - Tiger Airways + Budget Terminal + walk to plane + around 3 shops = Tax $94.50 for 2

    You do the math?
    If it's $94.50 for 2, then I believe Changi Airport, wanting to remain competitive, might have been absorbing the taxes for Tiger, allowing them to use the facilities at budget pricing for the time being until the budget terminal is built. If I'm not wrong, airport taxes are in the region of $180 per person.

  11. #51

    Default Re: My letter to ST Forum got published online

    Whatever deal TA has struck with the airport authority is basically, none of our biz. We are not concerned if TA is making a profit or in the red, if TA is going to turn profit in 1 year or 10 year. But we are concerned about how TA is with regards to the pricing decides to levy on its passenger. i believe, as consumers, we have the right as to how the price is worked out as.

    If TA decides to "absorb" all taxs and charge X amount for the ticket, good and fine. They simply pay for taxs, insurance and fuel out of their profits. And if we are happy with price X, than we will pay it and let TA earn a "fatter" profit.
    But if TA says it is going to charge Y amount for the ticket and add in Z amount for things like airport tax, insurance and fuel surcharge, than TA does have a responsiblity to disclose the actual breakdown of these charges. This is even if X = Y+Z

    I wonder how large the reaction will be like should it turn out that the airport AUTHORITY decided to impose a smaller airport tax for passengers flying budget airlines relative to those that are flying full-service airlines. Do note that the airport authority is different form ground handlers such as CIAS and SATS which provide services such as check-in, aircraft turn around, package handling for the various airlines. If this is really the case, than it would be "unfair" trade practise already.

  12. #52

    Default Re: My letter to ST Forum got published online

    Don't get me wrong, I understand that Tiger Airways is still the best option in terms of price... but why is there no difference btw the prices after the move to the Budget Terminal. Given a choice, surely the paying passengers would prefer to fly from Terminal 1 rather than the Budget Terminal if it costs the same. Since we are 'forced' to use the Budget Terminal, there has to be a difference in price right?

    In light of this controversy, check out Tiger Airways CEO's comments... http://travel.asiaone.com.sg/news/ne...60327_002.html
    The Art of Flying - Aviation Art Prints for sale
    http://TheArtofFlying.wordpress.com/

  13. #53

    Default Re: My letter to ST Forum got published online

    Esp interested in this sentence...

    "While airlines using the terminal will incur lower ground services charges, passenger services charges, at $13, is also lower than the $21 charged at Terminals 1 and 2. "

    This is just the passenger services charges set by CAAS... we haven't talked abt the ground services charges (eg, we're not boarding at a gate)
    Last edited by philliptan; 13th April 2006 at 11:27 AM.
    The Art of Flying - Aviation Art Prints for sale
    http://TheArtofFlying.wordpress.com/

  14. #54

    Default Re: My letter to ST Forum got published online

    I don't really think the below illustrate phillips point and my view as well. I'll try to give my analogy....

    Imagine a world of SLR manufacterer called SIA and Tiger which uses 3rd party lens SG lens mount.
    Imagine SLR Model SIA comes with kit lens T2 at $600.
    Now along comes a Budget SLR Model Tiger (with same features as model SIA) which comes with the same kit lens T2 selling at $300 but w/o the frills of any box, camera strap, batteries, s/w etc. Some people, like me, will go for the budget version of course. Some others will want the convenience of these frills. No problem with that.
    Now suddenly, there is is new Budget kit lens announced by SG lens, which has no USM and Budget SLR Model Tiger will be using this Budget kit lens. Guess what? Price is still $300.
    I will not like that. I may be barking up the wrong tree at Tiger, and should be barking at SG lens. But still, I made a purchase of SLR Tiger and SLR Tiger should resolve it with SG lens. Heck, SG lens may have given Tiger some cost savings, which is not translated to me. I've been charged for something I get less of.
    Worse, I CAN't choose my Budget SLR Tiger to use kit lens T2.

    Quote Originally Posted by dkw
    Let me try and illustrate with an example. Imagine you were buying a camera. Store A is a solo store with low economies of scale. They are selling Canon Model XX at $600, and they tell you that they "absorb" GST for you. The true cost of the camera to them may be $450 from the wholesaler and in fact they did have to pay GST because they have registered with IRAS and the cost is now approx $480. So they made $120 from you. Store B is a chain, they tell you the camera is $550 but GST is chargeable, so the cost of the camera to you is $575.50, which is $22.5 cheaper than Store A. In fact, because they are the top reseller of the camera in Singapore, they leverage a better price from Canon and are getting the Model XX at $400 + GST = 427.9. Store B makes $130 from you.

    Based strictly on costs to you, which store do you buy the camera from? Store A or B? Do you care if the GST is taken on top of purchase price or "absorbed"? Should the company profit even have any bearing on your decision (i.e. do you say I buy from store A because they make less profit)?

    You see where I'm coming from? All the ancillary factors are to a certain extent, irrelevant. The final price is what matters, the rest I don't see any reason to fuss about.

  15. #55

    Default Re: My letter to ST Forum got published online

    Quote Originally Posted by philliptan
    This sort of reply seems to tell me they have something to hide. I've already called their hotline which gave a stupid answer. So if writing in means getting a different answer, then something wrong with their hotline right?

    And this sentence... "We will answer every letter we receive in the order that it arrives so as to maintain our customer service at a level appropriate to our being Singapore's largest low cost carrier, while optimising scarce resources."

    Scarce resources? So they got no time to respond to public feedback? But they did respond , so why not respond with an answer? By the way, it was a public relations consultancy who replied... scarce resources but able to hire a PR consultancy? Hardly scarce.
    Let's be fair, and wait for their answer since you have written to, perhap they can't 'leak' their pricing plan to public as it will be used by their competitors?
    Personally, they may have a good answer or no? $$ may not be a big deal, but since all of us have doubts, then why not ask?

    good to have people like Phillips Tan that brought it up ha.

    Didn't know how what Micheal Moore did? Phillips Tan, why not an interview with them? i will be there to record the singapore version ..'crouching Tigers, hidden cost'

  16. #56

    Default Re: My letter to ST Forum got published online

    Quote Originally Posted by nuts
    I don't really think the below illustrate phillips point and my view as well. I'll try to give my analogy....

    Imagine a world of SLR manufacterer called SIA and Tiger which uses 3rd party lens SG lens mount.
    Imagine SLR Model SIA comes with kit lens T2 at $600.
    Now along comes a Budget SLR Model Tiger (with same features as model SIA) which comes with the same kit lens T2 selling at $300 but w/o the frills of any box, camera strap, batteries, s/w etc. Some people, like me, will go for the budget version of course. Some others will want the convenience of these frills. No problem with that.
    Now suddenly, there is is new Budget kit lens announced by SG lens, which has no USM and Budget SLR Model Tiger will be using this Budget kit lens. Guess what? Price is still $300.
    I will not like that. I may be barking up the wrong tree at Tiger, and should be barking at SG lens. But still, I made a purchase of SLR Tiger and SLR Tiger should resolve it with SG lens. Heck, SG lens may have given Tiger some cost savings, which is not translated to me. I've been charged for something I get less of.
    Worse, I CAN't choose my Budget SLR Tiger to use kit lens T2.

    Hahaha! you got it rite...

    Anywayz... Airport taxes are not determined by the Airline services but by the airport authorities... that's why even if you fly SIA, different airports will tax differently and SIA just lump these amount to the ticket charges. But effectively they are different components like cess and GST.

    As for airfares... budget airlines to use budget terminal could mean 2 things... they cannot afford the airport charges for long term and the use of normal terminal is just interim solution... But to grab a share of the market, they are willing to forgo the initial additional airport charges.

    Or it could mean that budget airline already have an agreement with CAAS that they would be charged at the same rate (budget terminal rate) till the completion of budget terminal then they have to shift there.

    The former is most likely.
    Gallery | Facebook Page Spreading the Good photography.

  17. #57

    Default Re: My letter to ST Forum got published online

    Quote Originally Posted by dkw
    Har har! I've never really bought into the Pay And Pay policy. You still can be careful about what you spend, but at a more macro level. Why on earth you do you want to dictate how much a service provider should charge you for every single item? Some degree of cross-subsidisation always occurs in this kind of complex business, we should give them some lee-way, as long as the final cost is too your liking.
    I think we may be missing the point here... Not all their actions are wrong, or right.... but without questioning them, we would be kept in the dark, it may culmulate into a collective unhappiness in future...

    So point being... it's always good to ask when disparities are discovered. That does not mean that we will condemn the disparity... mere questioning can only improve communications and hence transparency... which I think can only be good for the system...

    Think out of the box my friend....

  18. #58
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: My letter to ST Forum got published online

    I think the Budget airlines made a boo boo when calculating profits and costs initially - all jumping in to provide cheap airline services. Later on they found out that they cannot sustain that kind of price - and after that when the Budget Terminal came up - they heaved a sigh of relief as this means that the lower costs they incurr can now enable their company to stay afloat. Otherwise, they would have closed down

  19. #59
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: My letter to ST Forum got published online

    Yes, they shd reply either

    1. Yes we cocked up, we are operating at a loss, the BUdget Terminal allows us to stay alive

    2. Yes, we are a profit driven company, now got budget terminal to reduce cost, means more profit for us!

    3. None of the above, but a reply which substantially addresses the queries.

    But to hope that they'll give the real reason is sorta expecting too much

    Quote Originally Posted by ajneo
    TA may not lower the price eventually, the least they could is to give a proper reply...

    As for dkw... I do understand his stand... I never bothered about such details becoz I have been brought up in the "just pay, dont ask" environment... like most of us here... It may be a small issue, but i personally think it's a good issue to be brought up. Cheers to Philip!

    Just my 2 cts.

  20. #60
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    CCK
    Posts
    1,051

    Default Re: My letter to ST Forum got published online

    Quote Originally Posted by nuts
    I don't really think the below illustrate phillips point and my view as well. I'll try to give my analogy....

    Imagine a world of SLR manufacterer called SIA and Tiger which uses 3rd party lens SG lens mount.
    Imagine SLR Model SIA comes with kit lens T2 at $600.
    Now along comes a Budget SLR Model Tiger (with same features as model SIA) which comes with the same kit lens T2 selling at $300 but w/o the frills of any box, camera strap, batteries, s/w etc. Some people, like me, will go for the budget version of course. Some others will want the convenience of these frills. No problem with that.
    Now suddenly, there is is new Budget kit lens announced by SG lens, which has no USM and Budget SLR Model Tiger will be using this Budget kit lens. Guess what? Price is still $300.
    I will not like that. I may be barking up the wrong tree at Tiger, and should be barking at SG lens. But still, I made a purchase of SLR Tiger and SLR Tiger should resolve it with SG lens. Heck, SG lens may have given Tiger some cost savings, which is not translated to me. I've been charged for something I get less of.
    Worse, I CAN't choose my Budget SLR Tiger to use kit lens T2.
    It matters not how they price the budget SG lens. They could conceivably price it at $500! And give you less features! The point is, how does the total cost compare with something else you can get. If the next best lens is $250, then jump ship and buy the cheaper lens. If the next best lens is $1000, then too bad, you just have to suck it in and pay $500 for the lens with even fewer features than before. Alternatively, if you totally don't like budget SG lens with Tiger SLR, you always have the choice of going to SIA or THAI SLR brand, just pay more! BUT, the most important thing is this, you have the choice NOT to spend the money! If it stays in your wallet, what have you lost?

    In fact, if I were a shareowner in Tiger SLR company, I would DEMAND that they extract the maximum value from their product. i.e. manufacture at the lowest cost possible and charge the highest price that the market can bear. Companies exist for 1 main reason, to turn a profit.

    When the government lowers corporate taxes, is it primarily a) to help companies with profitability or b) the consumer with lower prices? Think about that!
    Last edited by dkw; 13th April 2006 at 05:38 PM.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •