Comments on: New EZLink not so easy?

By: SunWuKong

SunWuKong — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 08:53:47 +0000

The number of ez-link Cards in circulation, as of 30 September 2209, totals some 3.1 million cards or so.
At $3 a card that would be approximately 9.3 million dollars held in trust by the government on your behalf and as a safeguard against the opportunistic driving the card’s balance into the red with a long trip and then leaving it there.
The average daily number of trips (2009) made on Singapore’s public transport totals approximately 5 million. At a bare minimum that equates to a cost to consumer of approximately 3.5 million SDG per day.
So, with a little perspective it turns out that that precious deposit or minimum balance, whichever you like to call it, would not keep Singapore’s public transport system running three whole days.
And in fact probably not even that long. The truth is there is not a government on earth that actually makes money from it’s public transport portfolio.

By: noname

noname — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 00:44:05 +0000

How come London don’t need non-refundable deposits?

http://www.asiaone.com/Motoring/News/Story/A1Story20080814-82299.html

By: duhh

duhh — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 02:55:24 +0000

Usually you pay a deposit for the old card.. dat deposit is about $3-$5.. somethink like dat.. the reason why they request that you have a minimum of $3 inside is to safeguard our residents from being fined. As you all know, Singaporeans are typical citizens who will take things for granted and there are only a few who will really be responsible and not take chances.

Thus they make known that everyone has to have the mininum lah.. fyi.. they will actually top up the deposit into your new card oso hor.. so u oso dun lose out.. see how good and responsible the staff are to ensure everyone has a win win situation..

nway im not a fellow staff but i ask to understand so dat i dun be like some ppl.. say gov cheat our money.. sigh.. if only ppl will see the bigger picture.. sigh…

By: hongjun

hongjun — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 11:51:45 +0000

Anyone knows the below?

Original EZLink

- What is the deposit value? And is this redundable?
- How much is the card? And is this redundable?

New EZLink

- What will happen if minimum balance is not enough to pay for a bus ride? Commuter pay the balance or pay full amount and get the tap in reversed?
- How much is the card? And is this redundable?

Thanks a lot.

hongjun

By: To kingrant

To kingrant — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 06:49:41 +0000

“19) kingrant on January 10th, 2009 2.08 am Hallo! Min $3 in card ok what. Read carefully that this is if ur travelling on MRT mah. Then what u expect – want to ride “pah ong” is it?”

This thread says : -

“$3 Travel Deposit Now Changed To $3 Minimum Balance. Don’t insult my intelligence with crap notices like these, ok?”

What is the difference between $3 Travel Deposit from $3 Minimum Balance. Any improvement. “pah ong” ?

So easy meh ? If I am not mistaken, the ‘pah ong’ that you may be referring is there because of taxpapers money. You know what the meaning of ‘ong’ is. ‘Ong’ means you have to listen to him and he does not need to listen to you.

‘Ong’ has power and have a lot of enforcers who do not mind and feel so proud of doing the catching work. People like us who dare to be ‘pah ong’ will get fined lah. Now train stations have security guard and police to catch ‘pah ong’ lah.

By: Ganga

Ganga — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 05:01:09 +0000

Take note that this minimum balance is separate from the $5 you have to pay for the ‘purchase’ of the card…

By: anonymous

anonymous — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 23:29:29 +0000

#19 Kingrant says `Min $3 in card ok what’. NO it is NOT ok . You can’t keep these kind of money and profit from the large sums as they like – e.g. cashcards, spore power utilities, cpf, etc

Kingrant also chided us – `Then what u expect – want to ride “pah ong” is it?’ – Another diversionary red herring. Nobody is asking for free transport. The point is that they tell you no deposit but still must have at least $3 before you ride. I am against this sort of lack of forthrightness in their attitude.

By: SingaporeanCA

SingaporeanCA — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 20:09:40 +0000

FYI. No minimum $ balance required for Metro card in LA and great discounts unlimited rides for monthly pass which can be top up monthly…. Singaporeans do not have these previledges(as taxpayers) to encourage taking more public transports e.g. trains or buses…….but instead taking more money out of everyone’s pocket…tough life!

By: SingaporeanCA

SingaporeanCA — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 19:57:58 +0000

This is call “Daylight Robbery”. In LA, the Metro Card is free of charge.

By: kingrant

kingrant — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 18:08:30 +0000

Hallo! Min $3 in card ok what. Read carefully that this is if ur travelling on MRT mah. Then what u expect – want to ride “pah ong” is it?

By: Weaskforit

Weaskforit — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 14:38:31 +0000

I heard that there are 8 million cards in circulation. Cool…..$24 mil held by them. Man…I could do with some of it.

Actually we are lucky they cap it at $3.00. Imagine if they raise that to $5 or even $10. Or is it in the pipeline after the next GE????

You guys think about it.

By: anonymous

anonymous — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 14:34:10 +0000

the problem with these people is that they treat us as fools. Playing with words but still they want to keep the $3 which multiplied by the number of cards equals millions of $ – enough to bring down the costs of transportation.
How to ever trust their words and credibility? This is how they have lost touch with the masses which are regarded as morons to be fleeced in every way possible by wily schemes and doublespeak like the Ez 1-1 replacement propaganda.

By: EZYcon

EZYcon — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 10:31:08 +0000

Min $3 is for MRT only.

Bus still can but if not enough, must pay cash. (this will be difficult to implement). Assuming $1 value going for $1.50 journey.

By: hongjun

hongjun — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 09:36:55 +0000

This minimum sum requirement is going to be a big confusion to tourist in my opinion.

I would prefer EZLink to stick to original idea of travel deposit instead of minimum balance to avoid confusion. When I see ZERO or negative, I top up. That’s more normal.

hongjun

By: Ganga

Ganga — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 07:00:46 +0000

Thanks for all these comments that let me know that I am not alone in feeling insulted. As one commenter mentioned, yes, the amounts involved are the same. Previously, you paid a $3 travel deposit which was not reflected in the stored value of the card. That was why you could still travel if you had only 10 cents or 20 cents left in value – because there was a pre-paid $3 buffer.

For the new card, this buffer in effect still exists, that’s why you need at least $3 in value on your card before you can travel. So, as in reality there is no change except to see this $3 buffer reflected in the card value, I don’t see any justification for EZLink to simply proclaim there is no travel deposit in the first place.

But what really takes the cake is that instead of explaining this change properly, they treat consumers like morons by giving a ‘feel-good’ message (ie. “No Travel Deposit”) – and that pisses me off.

FYI, the full article that this quote is taken from and the poster in question are on my blog at http://gangasudhan.com/blog/2009/01/how-stupid-do-you-think-i-am-no.html

By: moshedyan

moshedyan — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 06:38:15 +0000

if 1 user is made to pay $3 upfront
how much is 1 million cards holders?
now you know
why
NETs was introduced
how much is your balance in your cash cards?
multiply for 3 millions users
catch the drifts?
now you know
why
the mental1 is tryin to flog singapoor into
6 millions peoples……….

By: Zefly (aka Joshua Chiang)

Zefly (aka Joshua Chiang) — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 06:26:32 +0000

“minimum sum is a sensitive term in singapore..”

MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

By: me

me — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 05:58:58 +0000

minimum sum is a sensitive term in singapore..

By: TskTskTsk

TskTskTsk — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 05:22:15 +0000

I guess the logical thing is that Ezlink will transfer your balance from the old card to your new one. Isn’t it so? Also since the new card can be used like a cash card, a more appropriate name will be Minimum Sum instead of Travel Deposit.

By: gemami

gemami — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 05:13:35 +0000

Should we write in and enquire on this matter?

Yah, write in, write in . . . cc the Transport Minister also.
Better still, cc the SM, MM , PM, M&M and the Big Yellow M.

See how the wriggle out of this. Another honest mistake? Move on?