EZ link card with Giro

[shutterfly7]

We are talking about public service mind you. I understand this system is run by the government, or quarsi-government? No? :think:

The problem is that this new system is not government run. ezylink is a private company.

The GIRO auto-top up system attached to the old card used to be run by Transitlink (the old one) and Transitlink did not charge for the GIRO top ups because Transitlink already has all the infrastructure of top up like machines and stuff, its like their legacy left down from those days when we used to use the thin loose pink/blue plastic Transitlink card, only those old enough, above 20 years old will remember this. Any younger and you will only know ezylink card.

The new cepas-compliant ezylink card's auto top up however, must be run by the card operator according to cepas..so now ezylink has to run it. ezylink say they are charging because they dun have the infrastructure and they are charging to cover operating costs only.

 

[Virgo]

The problem is that this new system is not government run. ezylink is a private company.

The GIRO auto-top up system attached to the old card used to be run by Transitlink (the old one) and Transitlink did not charge for the GIRO top ups because Transitlink already has all the infrastructure of top up like machines and stuff, its like their legacy left down from those days when we used to use the thin loose pink/blue plastic Transitlink card, only those old enough, above 20 years old will remember this. Any younger and you will only know ezylink card.

The new cepas-compliant ezylink card's auto top up however, must be run by the card operator according to cepas..so now ezylink has to run it. ezylink say they are charging because they dun have the infrastructure and they are charging to cover operating costs only.

Thank you for the explanation. I can see where you are coming from, but it's not a valid reason for ezlink to say that they don't have the infrastructure and starts charging the commuters to cover operating costs. As what you may have read from previous postings in this thread, the amount they have collected so far already can cover all operating costs, and why are they charging extra?

Also, the reason given by them is not due to what you have mentioned. It is for additional convenience of being able to top-up through Giro via non-commuting installations and applications. If given the choice, I would not even consider such convenience, as I don't do any other purchase using this card other than travelling in MRT/LRT/buses.

 

[shutterfly7]

Thank you for the explanation. I can see where you are coming from, but it's not a valid reason for ezlink to say that they don't have the infrastructure and starts charging the commuters to cover operating costs. As what you may have read from previous postings in this thread, the amount they have collected so far already can cover all operating costs, and why are they charging extra?

Also, the reason given by them is not due to what you have mentioned. It is for additional convenience of being able to top-up through Giro via non-commuting installations and applications. If given the choice, I would not even consider such convenience, as I don't do any other purchase using this card other than travelling in MRT/LRT/buses.

I haven't had the time to read through the whole thread, not sure what the stupid company said earlier or how it was misinterpreted. I complained to my reporter friends about this issue and told them to ask ezylink for the 'real' explanation or whatever this ezylink company wants to claim, and this was what they said. :thumbsd: I also only use my ezylink card to take public transport.

 

[shutterfly7]

I also hate them. lets boycott them but not using the GIRO one.;( EVEN if they will 'incur' additional costs they should absorb it like any other business.

Other businesses such as AXS machines (also privately run), internet banking, credit cards (I never ever pay for the annual fee, always call to ask for it to be waived and I never let any CC earn a single cent before from late charge or interest) also do not charge for their service.

 

[Virgo]

I also hate them. lets boycott them but not using the GIRO one.;( EVEN if they will 'incur' additional costs they should absorb it like any other business.

Other businesses such as AXS machines (also privately run), internet banking, credit cards (I never ever pay for the annual fee, always call to ask for it to be waived and I never let any CC earn a single cent before from late charge or interest) also do not charge for their service.

Support! :thumbsup:

I've already changed to a normal top-up card. Never go for Giro. Wouldn't want to give them a single cent for such a CONVENIENT service.

 

[vince123123]

Do you know who the major shareholders in EzLink are? Are they in fact, government shareholders/glc shareholders?

The problem is that this new system is not government run. ezylink is a private company.

 

[Parka]

This is retarded.

Even topping up at ATMs don't have the bank charge.

This is basically the anti-competition tax. Just like how TicketMaster (US) is charging dollars for printing tickets people buy online.

We don't see airlines charging convenience fees for printing air tickets we buy online.

 

[johnlim]

Do you know who the major shareholders in EzLink are? Are they in fact, government shareholders/glc shareholders?

This new company created and owned by LTA. It is government owned. :bsmilie:

 

[vince123123]

Which was the point I was trying to tell shuttefly when he tried to pose the whole idea of a separate corporate entity.

Looks like the usual propaganda about privatisation actually convinces some people

This new company created and owned by LTA. It is government owned. :bsmilie:

 

[CYRN]

Hahaha.... Juz read LTA's reply on CNA.

GIRO top up is now classified as PREMIUM SERVICE.

 

[Limsgp]

No doubt GIRO provides convenience to the commuter. And the service provider may bet on the consumer willing to pay for the convenience. However, consumer can always do away with the "convenience at a fee", and they can choose to use the GTM to top up their farecard.

If majority of the consumer uses the GTM and only a handful uses GIRO, it'll be a real test on the infrastructure whether it can efficiently handle the volume of transactions.

Sooner or later, the service provider will realise that GIRO will save them a lot of money, and may introduce some measures to entice consumers to apply for GIRO, and maybe waiving the "convenience fees" for good.

Let's see who are the one that suffers more inconvenience w/o GIRO. If consumers can stand together and act in unity, we'll see who will hold on longer w/o GIRO. Of course this is based on the assumption that they do not use "increase in operating cost (due to under utilization of GIRO and over utilization of counters & GTMs)" as a reason to raise fares, when the "increase in operating costs" is due to their incompetence and refusal to provide a cost-saving and efficient system like GIRO foc to commuters.

 

[CYRN]

No doubt GIRO provides convenience to the commuter. And the service provider may bet on the consumer willing to pay for the convenience. However, consumer can always do away with the "convenience at a fee", and they can choose to use the GTM to top up their farecard.

If majority of the consumer uses the GTM and only a handful uses GIRO, it'll be a real test on the infrastructure whether it can efficiently handle the volume of transactions.

Sooner or later, the service provider will realise that GIRO will save them a lot of money, and may introduce some measures to entice consumers to apply for GIRO, and maybe waiving the "convenience fees" for good.

Let's see who are the one that suffers more inconvenience w/o GIRO. If consumers can stand together and act in unity, we'll see who will hold on longer w/o GIRO. Of course this is based on the assumption that they do not use "increase in operating cost (due to under utilization of GIRO and over utilization of counters & GTMs)" as a reason to raise fares, when the "increase in operating costs" is due to their incompetence and refusal to provide a cost-saving and efficient system like GIRO foc to commuters.

that's only if all commuters "demand" for more GTM and extended service hours. ;p

 

[Limsgp]

That's only if the queue or waiting time gets too long.. due to provider's inadequacy..

that's only if all commuters "demand" for more GTM and extended service hours. ;p

 

[johnlim]

I see no reason why transports' fare & fees should increase for next few years. With the liberalisation of the foreign work force into our country, you can see that busses & MRT are always packed & full most of the time.

The government companies are making lots of profit from the increase in human population recently. Foreigners who work here also bring with them their families here, their children also study here,......

 

[ZerocoolAstra]

I can't believe that Gregory Gerald Danker VP Marketing & Communications EZ-Link could reply in BOTH the todayonline and straitstimes forums with THE SAME text!
Anyone knows where he lives? I wanna super-glue cut-outs of his replies to his car!!!

 

[Staro]

Me too, using the card only for MRT/bus rides only. I refused to apply for Giro on the "forced to changed" new card.

Should we stop using the Giro, the operating cost for manual work would increase.:thumbsd:

What next, I bet, actions will be maded to obsolete the Cash Cards.......

The reason, since one card rules all.

 

[scanner]

Me too, using the card only for MRT/bus rides only. I refused to apply for Giro on the "forced to changed" new card.

Should we stop using the Giro, the operating cost for manual work would increase.:thumbsd:

What next, I bet, actions will be maded to obsolete the Cash Cards.......

The reason, since one card rules all.

In the first place, will they listen to the public?
The whole market is monopolize by the one and only service provider which is "mandated" by the relevant authority.

Taking for example, despise public uproar of intention of increasing public transport fee, they still go ahead with the increment.
After the increment, do you see any Singaporean make further noise about it? Well maybe local is those "guai" type, only complain but no action. :bsmilie:

Well, do you think the relevant authority will listen to you this time round? Maybe when there is a general election around the corner that any increment will be put on hold, period.

I believe the same rules apply.

 

[shutterfly7]

Which was the point I was trying to tell shuttefly when he tried to pose the whole idea of a separate corporate entity.

Looks like the usual propaganda about privatisation actually convinces some people

I didn't know, I asked staff of ezylink and they told me they are a private entity loh.:dunno::dunno::dunno::dunno:

 

[shutterfly7]

can CASE handle this?

CASE is the most useless organisation in Singapore. :thumbsd::thumbsd:

 

[vince123123]

That is not incorrect, but it just tells the story partially. They are a private entity fully owned by a government statutory board.

I didn't know, I asked staff of ezylink and they told me they are a private entity loh.:dunno::dunno::dunno::dunno: