Friday, October 17, 2008 10:25
新三块钱国币 (New three dollar)
In Guest Writers, Main Stories • 2,797 views • 21 Comments
English translation below.
邹文森
讨厌Sistic的人,请举手。(然后读下去)
很久以前,看过丁西林编写的戏剧小品《三块钱国币》,剧中女仆打破主人的花瓶,被迫赔偿三块钱国币。没钱,闹到警局,鸡犬不宁。这三块钱可了不起,当时差点逼死一个女人。
时代变了,物价上涨,货币贬值。三块钱在今天,算什么?吃一盘云吞面,喝三瓶矿泉水,看半部电影,搭地铁到乌节路来回,还一天的电费。诶,以为不算什么,其实还挺好用嘛。
近日回新加坡,恰逢新加坡戏剧节的演出,一口气帮朋友买了一出戏三张票。票价之高,令我咋舌,仔细一看,其中竟有九块钱是服务费,一张三块钱。
我唯一可以想到的直接成本就是票纸,但是一张10厘米*3厘米的细纸价值多少,不需我赘述。最近石油价格高昂,很多人起价都怪能源价格,如果是印票所耗电力高,那也太勉强了。
我傻,服务费,顾名思义,直接成本一定是得过两届新加坡优秀服务奖的典范服务。我努力观察每一位柜台小姐,是啦,笑得非常灿烂,但你笑得再灿烂,服务再快速,也不值我的一盘云吞面可口实在。
我上网买票,不用你的服务,不需还服务费吧?错,我不单要付钱,还要每张票附加额外的两毛钱,称之为取票费。所以三块钱是网络服务吗?是占用频宽的费用吗?两毛钱又是赔偿耽误柜台小姐印票的时间吗?
我朋友说是售后服务,遗失戏票可以追查。我仔细一查,每一张补票需要额外五块钱的行政费。
无论是网络还是柜台,同一出戏,买一张票和买三张票所消费的“服务”并没有差别。如果我作为顾客所消耗商家所付出的时间、精力、电力、频宽都一样,那么你凭什么收取不一样的价格?
本地每一个接洽Sistic为票务的团体,其实都需要付给一次性不菲的雇聘服务费用。这些钱涵盖了Sistic所提供的服务,宣传服务(简单地放在自己网上)和技术服务(电脑管理系统追踪票房高低)。据说除此之外,还要征收每张售票的佣金。为什么都已经向团体收取了如此高额的费用后,还需要向观众收取“服务费”呢?为什么团体所付的费用,不能承担观众的服务费?
除非,那根本不是服务费,而是利润。一场满座的戏剧表演(少过十场),大大小小所有收益,数目绝对可观,利润多少,不得而知。既然又是三块,又是两毛,又是五块,什么都讲钱,何必假以服务之名,掩人耳目。
笔者不能够接受,为何我们在付出超过30块钱,观赏艺术团体用汗水、感情和财力辛勤耕耘的产物时,尽然要让旁人从中剥削。
如果不是利润而真的是成本,那么Sistic更应该检讨自己内部的成本控制和经济效益。当然,市场的垄断,可以保证成本无论如何膨胀,都必然有人光顾。但Sistic由体育理事会和滨海艺术中心共同拥有,虽然是私人企业,依然带有一定的官方色彩,为何不顾及大众民生。
与其他城市相比,为什么生活水平比我们高的香港,服务费却比我们少?为什么台北和上海不需要服务费?
请Sistic解释三块钱的服务费到底是补偿什么服务?是纸、电力、柜台、网络、售后还是其它?请问从之前的两块涨到现在的三块,我们得到了什么更多的服务?请问Sistic有没有想过在物价高涨的今天调低服务费?
我家里真的没有多少花瓶可以典当。
———–
English version translated by Teng Jing Wei:
New “Three Dollars”
Cheow Boon Seng
Those who detest Sistic, please raise your hand. (And continue reading.)
A long time ago, I saw the play “Three Dollars” by Ding Xi Ling. A servant woman in the play had to pay three dollars as compensation for breaking her master’s vase. Because the servant woman was penniless, the case was brought up to the authorities, and it created a commotion. Those formidable three dollars nearly drove a woman to her death.
Times have changed; inflation has set in. What can three dollars buy nowadays? A bowl of wanton mee, three bottles of mineral water, half a movie, a return trip onboard the MRT to Orchard, and a day’s worth of electricity. Not much, but I guess three dollars is still something.
$3 service charge
Recently I came back to Singapore just in time for the theatre festival, and bought three tickets at a go for my friend. The high price of my purchase left me dumbfounded. Upon closer inspection, I realised $9 went to service charge – $3 per ticket.
The only “cost” of a ticket I could immediately think of was the paper it was printed on; yet, surely I do not need to elaborate on the “cost” of a 10cm by 3cm piece of paper. Increased costs have been attributed to soaring oil prices of late, but it would be ridiculous to use this reason to justify the increased cost of printing a ticket.
Then, perhaps, service charge can be attributed to Sistic’s two time award winning service. After much scrutiny, I found out: yes, the girls at Sistic’s counters do have dazzling smiles, but dazzling smiles and efficient services still cannot compare to a practical bowl of wanton soup.
If I buy my tickets online, I do not require any service, so I do not need to pay service charge, right? Wrong; not only do I have to pay service charge, I have to pay an extra 20cents, known as “ticket collection fee”. So is the $3 “internet service charge” for occupying Sistic’s bandwidth? Is 20cents the price for holding up a counter girl’s time?
My friend says 20cents may the price of “post-purchase service”, in case of lost of ticket. I did my research: a replacement ticket cost an extra $5 in administration fees.
Be it internet or over the counter, the service charge for one ticket, or three, to the same production, does not vary. If I, the consumer, spend as much time, energy, electricity and bandwidth as the producer, what gives the producer the right to impose a service charge?
In fact every organisation in Singapore that engages Sistic’s ticketing services has to pay an exorbitant, one-time “engagement fee”. This fee covers Sistic services such as publicity (basic web space on Sistic website) and technical support (tracking statistics of sale of tickets). Besides this fee, organisations also have to pay Sistic a token sum from their sales tickets. Why does Sistic still charge consumers a service fee when organisations pay a sky high price for engaging its services? Does whatever the organisation pay not cover the costs of consumer service?
Service or profiteering?
Unless, “service charge” is just a euphemism for “profiteering”. We may know the number of audience to a popular production (less than 10 full house shows), but we may never find out the profits. Sistic is allowed to arbitrarily charge $3 or 20cents or $5, since everything seems to be about money, why bother lying and calling it “service charge”?
I cannot accept the fact that we are being exploited as we fork out more than $30 to watch a production that is the result of an artistic troupe’s sweat, feelings and sheer hard work.
If the fees are truly not profits, but costs, then Sistic should question its internal operations’ cost management and its financial efficiency. Of course, in a monopoly, no matter how much costs increase, consumers are guaranteed. However, Sistic is jointly owned by the Singapore Sports Council and Esplanade Theatres – although essentially privatised but there must remain certain governmental influences – so why does it not show more consideration for the public?
In comparison to other cities: Hong Kong may have a higher living standard but the service charge there is less than what we have in Singapore. In Taipei and Shanghai, it is not even the norm to impose a service charge on consumers.
Can Sistic please explain what the $3 is charged for? Is it the price of paper, electricity, over the counter services, internet, post-purchase services, or something else? Why is it that the previously $2 service charge has increased to $3, are we receiving more service? Has Sistic thought about lowering its service charge in today’s context of rising inflation?
I really do not have many vases to pawn in my house.
————-
Related posts:
21 Comments
I wonder
adolf hitler
if everyone can boycott sistic, i bet it wonr be long before you saw $3 off from your ticket price.
sistic do not see the pt to reduce if their price of sevice charge is customer still continue to patronise their show and pruchase the ticket.
isnt it the same singaporeans vote election in and out for PAP and cry foul later only to vote for them again.
the choice is yours.
steven yang
of course, every corporation in sg is about squeezing more and more profit from the peasants, esp true for gavern-linked company. sistic is also one of them. owned by SSC/esplanade and monopoly the ticketing industry in sg.
Unfortunately everything is to do with oil…the plastic ink cartridge for the ticket printing is made from oil by-products…all plastics are, which is why everything is getting more expensive. Places charging more rents, so someone has to pay…and it is always the consumer since no company wants to see profits fall.
As for not using SISTEC…then the artists don’t get paid either when show cancels after 1 night…and how does that help a much needed growing arts movement in a country already obsessed with the dollar? Boycotting SISTEC means boycotting the artists themselves which in turn means less arts on offer.
Donaldson Tan
Indiana (#4),
Then the question begging to be asked if how come SISTIC has the monopoly?
conned,ransomed,cheated en bullied
“Unfortunately everything is to do with oil….”, unquote.
Now that oil has fallen to US$68(London 16 Oct 2008) and electricity tariff upped by 21+%, costs of all things will be up again and all things got to do with electricity, including the petrol pump, is electric powered.
My god………………………………………….!
I saw huge crowd at Geylang(Red Lantern Zone) on weekends and Public Holidays (any illegal assemblies?). Customer Service Standards must be very high?
mr E
as a person who travels abroad a lot. I never believe in paying for service charge in singapore. Its a memorable event whenever I find one that deserves it.
Donaldson Tan
邹文森,
我非常同意你的看法。我们不需要这么多中间人来提高票价。艺术表演不一定要在一个昂贵的戏剧场所举办。其实,大学,理工学院和私立中学的设备也不错啊。买卖戏票也可以通过paypal。问题是艺术家本身肯负起租场所,买卖戏票和市场营销的商业职责吗?
MMSMPMMC
这叫”抽水费”, 养肥那帮人.
k
I think someone ought to start some kind of facebook group to gather all the ‘voices’ that we have.
victor @young generation@
i hate the sistic…
did not done any thing,,but still tax…
sian..
if u do not use sistic, you cannot buy tickets to any event. so what choice do we have? as much choice as voting in a new government.
thats the price u pay living in singapore, i guess
Arthur Lee
There will always be all kind of reasons to increase our cost of living in Sg but very few reasons to help our people. And as usual the response from our leadership is ‘dun ask what the PAP can do for you but what you can do for yourselves’. so keep paying…..
They are a commercial entity, I believe they can charge as much as they like – no matter is it $9 or $90.
However I won’t agree if it was a public entity overcharging the citizens.
Daniel
“They are a commercial entity,” ” However, Sistic is jointly owned by the Singapore Sports Council and Esplanade Theatres”
Did they use taxmoney to build infrastructure ? Did they merely and happily pass the cost back to the consumer ? What happen to CASE ? No CASE investigation ?
Donaldson Tan
Where are the local entrepreneurs to compete with SISTIC? It is really bad situation that we have so many conflicts of interest in every sector of the economy.
teo soh lung
$3 is a lot of money for doing so little. Recently, I thought that by going down to the sistic outlet, I could save $3 each for the 9 tickets I wanted to purchase. I was disappointed that I still had to pay $27 extra for the 9 tickets. I had wasted my busfare and time going to the outlet which cost more than the postage of 20 cents.
Sistic being partially owned by the Esplanade should not do this shameful business of squeezing helpless customers. But how do we small time theatre goers do a boycott? We would not only hurt the government but also our friends who work so hard to put up a play! They will be suffering a bigger loss with an empty hall. Maybe we can organise a boycott of a big show. But big shows are usually sponsored and they don’t need us small time theatre goers to fill the hall.
Yes, so like everything else in this country, we are forced to pay and pay. Pay up or miss the show. Resigned …
Wah Bian A
16) Donaldson Tan, no one can complete unless you own Singapore Indoor Stadium & Esplanade.
If I am not wrong, all performances at both Singapore Indoor Stadium and Esplanade have their ticket purchased ONLY through SISTIC.
Also heard last year that SISTIC was looking to sell the company, so likely to have increased their $1 to $2 to now $3 ticketing service charge to attract high bidder but so far no news about this.
cognito
Why doesn’t anybody complain to the competition council? This is a clear case of profiteering by a monopoly.
Donaldson Tan
That sounds exactly like Microsoft does by bundling internet explorer and windows media player with the operating system. Competition is not kept in check in Singapore to ensure a level playing field for competitors and also good value for consumers.
Amused
Heh. Looks like they have learned from Ticketmasters (an American ticketing company). Brace for more charges.

where are all income chanelled to ?