University of Wales Master of Business Administration

An Economic Evaluation of the current MTR Fare SystemBy CHAN Ngai On Norman 28 February 2011

1

Chapter 1: Executive SummaryAfter a comprehensive analysis among all internal and external issue of the current economic environment and consideration of public interest, it has highlight that majority of the passenger and public monitoring pressure group were not familiar or well accept the structure of current fare system and the adjustment mechanism.

A few of the using factor within the fare adjustment mechanism formula were strongly arguable and has not broadly calculate the mico-economic factors of the Hong Kong society. Also it missed of macro-economic and cost effective analysis among the exchange rate, inflation issue and the profitability of the corporation. Although the current fare system were developed under the

resolution of the government transport policy especially the fare adjustment mechanism, it was recommended to the management for consideration of re-adjust the fare system by using zonal system and proportional distance fare structure plus the potential marco-economic factors consideration.

Chapter 2

Introduction

This paper was done as part of the MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL) fare system evaluation study for the profitability of the corporation. The study has divided into four major sections, the first section part will provide an overview of the corporation status, the second section part will evaluating the current fare system status by taking primary research, follow with a comprehensive analysis on the internal and external economic environment and challenges towards the current fare system, finally summary and recommendations will be given for the management among the current fare system effective towards for their success of future corporation development from different economic prospective.

2

Chapter 3: Corporation BackgroundHong Kong based MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL) is one of the worlds leading rail-based transport service providers. Originally established in 1975 as Mass Transit Railway Corporation (MTR), the company was besprinkled after the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government sold 23 per cent of its issued share capital in an initial public offering in 2000. Later in 2007, MTR were forced by the government to acquired and merged with the Kolwoon-Canton Railways Corporation (KCRC).

As apart of the government resolution of this merge process, MTR and KCRC has unified their the fare system which were governed by the government under the Fare Adjustment Mechanism (FAM) policy to control the fare adjustment level for the overall benefits to the community and balance the interests of all stakeholders.

The purpose of this research survey was not only to ascertain if the Hong Kong residents used the MTRCL for their prior mode of transport, but to collect data on the following for the for the MTRCL management to evaluation the potential impacts among fare system change in order to develop a comprehensive business strategy for the best benefit of the corporation.

3

Chapter 4: MethodologyThis report will be conducted under both primary and secondary research. The first part will be based on primary research, data via personal interview by field research through a survey from Dec 26, 2011 to Jan 25, 2011. (Appendix 1) People were approached randomly and asked if they were age over 18 years old and analysis by using correlation analysis method.

4.1 Target Population The Survey will focus on the 8-line commuter territory-wide network of MTRCL as follow: Kwun Tong Line (running between Yau Ma Tei and Tiu Keng Leng) Tsuen Wan Line (running between Tsuen Wan and Central) Island Line (running between Sheung Wan and Chai Wan) Tseung Kwan O Line (running between Po Lam/LOHAS Park and North Point) Tung Chung Line (running between Tung Chung and Hong Kong) East Rail Line (running between Hung Hom and Lo Wu/Lok Ma Chau) West Rail Line (running between Hung Hom and Tuen Mun)

The target population excludes the Airport Express & Disneyland Resort Line as the two line were mainly use for visitors and tourists.

4.2 Sampling Size The acceptance sample size of this survey will be 100 under random sample survey with a 95 percent confidence level and a plus or minus 4 percent margin of error along the MTRCLs Eight territories stations. The selected passenger will be at least 18 years of age, that they be residents of Hong Kong.

4.3 Sample Limitation and Exception4

The study excluded the age group below 18 years segment since the economic terms of the survey are too complicated for them to understand, and also neglected those visitors as their economic impact on the fare system change are relatively low in according to their usage of MTRCL service.

4.4 Research Design The research was designed under 4 major prospective as listed follow: 1. Demographic Information towards the selection of transport 2. The passenger behavior towards the selection of transport 3. The passenger attitudes towards and the current fare system and fare increase impact 4. The correlation between the income, education level and usage of MTRCL service

Four questions were included in the questionnaire that referred to demographic issue towards the selection of transport, five in passenger behavior towards the selection of transport, five questions in the passenger attitude towards current MTRCL fare system and the fare increase impact. Respondents were asked how the fare affected their selection of transport, how had the fare influence their usage of MTRCL service, how many frequency they used, what is the rationale behind their selection of transport in according to their demographic background. The data was analyzed using SPSS statistical analysis of frequencies, means and crosstabs.

4.5 Secondary Data Secondary data were also being used to conduct this report by taking information form different electronic and printed materials such as The MTRCL annual report, official government report and data, professional analytical data and report, plus those empirical data from different prospective. A group of statistical data such as the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) Nominal Wage Change Ratio, Composite Consumer Price Index (CCPI), Foreign Exchange Rate and Inflation

5

Rate will be used for this analysis as those are the core value for the current MTRCL fare system.

Chapter 5: Data Collection and AnalysisThe study was first attempt by the MTRCL to obtain statistically valid data from both primary and secondary data.

The first part of this section will provide a summary of the collected data from the survey according to the survey summary result on Appendix 2 from passenger prospective, followed with a correlation analysis between the demographic issue towards the passenger behavior among the selection of transport and fare increase.

5.1 Passenger Preference among Mode of Transport and Impact of Fare System In addition, the study shows that the price was not the major concern for the passenger selection of transport instead MTRCLs reliability service with their unique characteristic traffic congestion free feature towards their competitors. Therefore MTRCL will have certain level of advantage among their service and fare changes towards their competitors in according to the mico-economy theory of the second law of demand according to the correlation analysis result from Table 5.2 to 5.7 and Table 5.10 to 5.12.

5.2 Passenger Demographic Impact towards the fare system The study has discovered that high income groups between $20,000 and above, well educated degree holder with professional or executives position group were less fare sensitivity than the income below $20,000, secondary and primary educated clerical workers. This phenomenon implied that MTRCL may be affect by the change of micro-economic under the substitution effect and income effect

6

according to the law of demand during inflation period of local economy.

Distinctively, the substitution and income effect doesnt not imply among those respondents who was living far from their working and studying location for more than 1 hours especially on those respondents who used East, West, Tung Chung and Ma On Shan line service in according to the result from the correlation analysis result from Table 5.1, 5.9 & 5.11. The lack of alternative substitution supply among the region and less time consuming in taking MTRCL service are the major reason. Exclusion also being found from the younger generation respondents with age between 18 to 28, they have less impact among fare increase, income and substitution effect due to the usual practice habit philosophy of consumer behavior form the correlation analysis result from Table 5.8. Table 5.1 Correlation Analysis between the passenger traveling time and their transportation expenses Traveling Time Transportation Expenses Traveling Time 1 Transportation Expenses 0.746219 1 Table 5.2 Correlation Analysis between the passenger job nature and their knowledge among the MTRCL fare mechanism MTRCL fare mechanism Job Nature knowledge Job Nature 1 MTRCL fare mechanism -1 1 knowledge Table 5.3 Correlation Analysis between The passenger Usage frequency on MTRCL service and their intension after fare increase Usage frequency on MTRCL Continue use MTR Service service after fare increase Usage frequency on MTRCL 1 service Continue use MTR Service -1 1 after fare increase Table 5.4 Correlation Analysis between passenger job nature towards the major influence factor of selecting MTRCL service Influence factor of selection Job Nature MTRCL Service Job Nature 17

Influence factor of selecting MTRCL Service

0.696366

1

Table 5.5 Correlation Analysis between passenger job nature towards their frequency of using MTRCL service Frequency of using MTRCL Job Nature service Job Nature 1 Frequency of using MTRCL -0.7464 1 service Table 5.6 Correlation Analysis between passenger job nature towards their intention of using MTR service after fare increase Continue use MTR Service Job Nature after fare increase Job Nature 1 Continue use MTR Service -1 1 after fare increase Table 5.7 Correlation Analysis between The passenger education level opinion of current fare system Education level Opinion of current fare system Education level 1 Opinion of current fare system -1 1 Table 5.8 Correlation Analysis between The passenger age group and their intension of using MTRCL service after fare increase Continue use MTR Service Age Group after fare increase Age Group 1 Continue use MTR Service 1 1 after fare increase Table 5.9 Correlation Analysis between the passenger household income and influence factor of using MTRCL service Influence factor of using MTR Household Income Service Household Income 1 Influence factor of using MTR 0.567215 1 Service Table 5.10 Correlation Analysis between the passengers means of commute behavior and influence factor of using MTRCL service Passengers means of commute Influence factor of using behavior MTRCL Service Passengers means of commute 1 behavior Influence factor of using 0.929268 1 MTRCL Service8

Table 5.11 Correlation Analysis between the passenger boarding location and their transportation expenses Boarding Location Transportation Expenses Boarding Location 1 Transportation Expenses 0.229416 1 Table 5.12 Correlation Analysis between the passenger education level and influence factor of using MTRCL service Influence factor of using Education Level MTRCL Service Influence factor of using 1 MTRCL Service Education Level 0.61859

1

9

Chapter 6:

MTRCL Fare System Analysis

With the analysis of the MTRCL fare system, it has discovered that the current fare structure were irrational develop since its neither adopt zonal system base nor proportional calculated according to the distance of travel.

Since the merger of MTR and KCR system, the MTRCL fare system is governed by the Fare Adjustment Mechanism (FAM) under the government transportation policy with the following equation include a six years preset fix rate of 0.1% productivity factors after the merger which it is essential to look at all the foundation formulation ratio of the to assess the reliability of the system:

Overall fare adjustment rate = 0.5*CCPI* Wage Index Productivity Factors

According to the research finding, it was addressed that the two FAM formulas core developed elements for the overall fare adjustment rate Composite Consumer Price Index (CCPI) and Nominal Wage Change in Transport Sector could not completely reflect the actual economic aspects of the Hong Kong society. Following section will further discuss the limitation and shortage of this two

elements and their affection towards the FAM formula conduction.

6.1 Railway fares upward and downward flexibility In according to the research finding that MTRCL fare and current system has less elastic towards other means of transport and less affection towards the reaction of passengers in Hong Kong which are exactly same as Hensher and Bullock finding in his study of the Sydneys fare flexibility and reduced fare rates and passenger usage are not moving symmetrically. (Hensher and Bullock, 1979)

10

6.2 Irrational Fare Structure As mentioned before the MTRCL fare structure was neither adapted zonal or proportional distance fare development structure. Every section of the fare was designed according to the supply and demand as well as the competition of the market which has created certain level of difficulties for public to evaluate the cost and benefit of every distance or geographical coverage usage and hardly for them to evaluate and compare with other mean of commute such as Light Rail Transit and KCRC fairly which has also been addressed by the highway department in 2005 under the personal survey on the Ma On Shan Rail to Tai Wan and interchange to East Rail to University Station at a fare of $5.8 which should be charge $9.5 with the same distance. (Highway Department Newsletter Issue 3, Railway Development 2005)

6.3 Shortfall of Nominal Wage change in Transport Sector The nominal wage it used only cover the general employees up to supervisory categories which excluding those managerial and professional employees. (Census and Statistics Department, 2010) Further argue has been addressed among the using rate of the change in the transport hasnt represent the change among the general public wage which are supported by the Coalition to Monitor Public Transport and Utilities in 2010. (Chiang, 2010).

The different could be more than 1% serves change which will affect the projection and calculation of the fare system and affect the public acceptance as shown from Table 6.3.1.

11

Table 6.3.1 : Nominal Wage year percentage change different between Transportation Industry and the average of all industries Year-on-year % change Transportation All industries average wage % Different change # Dec 2009 +1.7 0.16 + 1.54 Sep 2010 +1.0 +2.13 - 1.13# Refers to all industries covered by the Wage Enquiry, including Manufacturing, Import/export, wholesale and retail trades, Transportation, Accommodation and food service activities, Financial and insurance activities, Real estate leasing and maintenance management, Professional and business services, personal services, the electricity and gas supply industry, sewerage and waste management activities industry, and publishing activities industry, whose statistics are not separately shown. Source: Wages & Labour Costs Statistics Section (1), Census and Statistics Department 2010

6.4 Limitation of Composite Consumer Price Indices The exclusion of the lowest or highest expenditure ranges and those households receiving Comprehensive Social Security Assistance within the Composite Consumer Price Index were another major influential element towards the fair calculation of imposing the FAM formula for the adjustment of the MTRCL Fare System in long run.

In addition, the increasing demand and impact from the Chinese tourist among those 984 selected consumer goods and services items has not disregard from the calculation of the pricing index which may not be able to reflect the real price index of the actual price moment within the local resident and household. This may causes another chain reaction same as the nominal wage change in transport sector in boosting the whole FAM formula into an unrealized projection of the fare system in affecting the public acceptance.

12

Chapter 7:

Internal and External Economic Environment Analysis

7.1 Cost Effective Analysis of the MTRCL Fare System Table 7.1.1 shows that the operating profit per passenger carried was decreased 0.12% under the current fare system between 2007 and 2009, however the operating costs are reversely increase of 0.18 percentage. This implied that MTRCL has 0.3% combination lost and demonstrated the current fare system has led to a cost ineffectiveness situation for MTRCLs railway operation especially among every passenger they carried.

This ineffective phenomenon has further proven at the trend in Graph 6.1.2 that the operating costs per passenger carried has already ahead of the operating profit which has led to the fall of fare revenue after the merge of MTR and KCRC in 2007 and the implementation of current fare system. Table 7.1.1 MTRCL Cost Effective Analysis Items/Year HK$ per passenger carried (all services) Fare Revenue Operating Costs Operating Profit 2007 7.50 3.39 4.11 2009 7.63 4.01 3.62

% change between 2007 and 2009 0.02 0.18 -0.12

Source: MTRCL Annual Report 2009 Ten Year Statistics, 2009

Graph 7.1.2 MTRCL Railway Financial Performance Trend for Every Carried Passenger from 2000 to 2009HK$ per passenger carried 9.00 8.00 7.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 Fare Revenue Operating Costs Operating Profit 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Year13

7.2 Inflation and Deflation and Cost of Transport Services As Hong Kong dollar was pegged with US dollars, and change of global currency fluctuation will direct affect the MTRCL real cost of things purchased. In according to the follow Graphic 1, Table 1, Hong Kong dollars were under deflation among the past 10 years against most of the major foreign currency and from the Table 2 further illustrated that there was an average of 31.21 % deflation rate between Hong Kong Dollars and the 6 major foreign currencies and was expected to last for the upcoming years. (Market Oracle, 2011). This implies an inflation of overseas things purchased will happen which will directly increase the MTRCL operation cost in certain extends and may cause a pressure for the MTRCL finance, a potential burden for the current fare system and revenue may able to catch up and balance off the increment percentage of those overseas foreign currencies.

Exchange Rate in HK$

Graph 7.2.1 Exchange Rate between Hong Kong Dollars and Six Major Foreign Currencies

18.00 16.00 14.00 12.00 10.00

AUD CAD JYP GBP EUR # CNY

8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Source: Trade Analysis Section, Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department, 01 Feb 2011

Table 7.1: Ten Years Exchange Rate change between Hong Kong Dollar towards Six Major Foreign Currencies from 2001 to 201014

Currency Increase Percentage

AUD 57.84%

CAD 43.62%

JPY 22.82%

GBP 1.69%

EUR # 43.19%

CNY 18.12%

Average 31.21%

# Euro is a unified currency of 17 European Union's member countries, which was launched on 1 January 1999. The 17 European nations are Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands AUD: Australian Dollars, CAD: Canadian Dollar, JPY: Japanese Yen, GBP: Great Britain Stering Pound, EUR: Euro Dollar, CNY: Chinese Renminbi Source: Trade Analysis Section, Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department, 01 Feb 2011

7.2 Government Policy and Fare System With the HKSAR government railway strategy blueprint in 2000 reported, railways will be the core the Hong Kong economy development, most of the major infrastructure, economic activities, resident and commercial properties will be developed along the railway network. The Government has further addressed that railway will be key mode of transport to bring and transport Hong Kong residents to different part of the territory therefore it will be foresaw that MTRCLs passenger supply could be sustained to cope with the challenge from their rivals.

This may also imply that MTRCLs current fare system were well accepted by the shareholders for projecting a profitable revenue as the fare system were developed seven years after the government railway strategy blueprint imposed and the HKSAR government was acting as the major shareholders of the corporation after the merge of MTR and KCRC. (Source: HKSAR LEGO Railway Development Strategy 2000)

15

Conclusion and Recommendation With different dimension analysis of the MTRCL fare system, it discovered that the system were developed with number of shortfall among the concern of mico and macro economic factors which may lead to certain level of lost for the corporation and being questioned by the public such as the missing of cost effective analysis as well as the exchange rate, inflation impact among the profitability of the corporation, the selection of throughout the formation the fare adjustment mechanism.

It would be highly recommended to the management to consider using either the zonal fare or proportional distance structure in the future development and include all the essential marcoenvironment factors for the profitability of the corporation which has also essential to provide broadly level of transparency to the public in understanding the current operation challenge of the corporation towards global economy by eliminating those noise from the pressure group and avoid public concern according to their mis-understanding of the current fare structure and adjustment mechanism issue.

16

Appendix 1 MTRCL Fare System Survey 2010

Welcome to MTRCL's 2011 Passenger Survey towards the fare system. Each year MTRCL surveys our customers to gain a better insight to their commuting needs towards the current fare system. Your answers will help us add and improve service, and keep you as a satisfied customer. We realize the form is a bit long, however, the information we collect is very important. Please help us help you by taking the time to respond to the following questions. Your individual responses are strictly confidential and will be used for statistical analysis only. Thank you for your time and for riding the MTRCL train.

Please circle the letter of your response.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

At which railway line are you usually board the train? Island Line Kwun Tong Line Tsuen Wan Line Tung Chung Line Tseung Kwan O Line East Rail Line West Rail Line Ma On Shan Line

17

2.

What is your age group?

10. 18 28 11. 29 38 12. 39 - 48 13. 49 58 14. 59 and above

3.

How long will it take to reach your final destination?

15. Less than 30 mins 16. 1 1 hours 17. 1 hours - 2 hours 18. 2 hours 3 hours 19. 3 hours +

4.

Which best represents your monthly household income? (in HK$)

20. Under $10, 000 21. $10,001 - 25,000 22. $20,001 - $35,000 23. $35,001 - $50,000 24. $50,001 and above

18

5.

What type of work would be considered? Please check one

25. Professionals 26. Executive 27. Junior Staff 28. Students 29. Others

6.

Before you began using MTRCL, what was your usual means of commuting?

30. Driving 31. Franchised Bus 32. Taxi 33. Public Light Bus 34. Others

7.

How many days do you normally use MTRCL service?

34. Once a week 35. Twice a week 36. Three to Four times a week 37. Five times a week 38. Daily

19

8. What influences your decision to use MTRCL service instead of other mode of transport? (Select one most appropriate) 39. Price 40. Reliability 41. Avoid Traffic Congestion 42. Reliability 43. Others

9.

Which of the following choice is best to describe your educational level?

44. Primary 45. Secondary * 46. Tertiary or above * Include Certificate, Diploma but exclude Higher Diploma Education

10. Do you familiar with the MTRCL fare adjustment mechanism? 47. Yes 48. No

11. Do you agree that the MTRCL fare mechanism formulas calculation based on the Nominal Wage Change Ratio of Transport Sectors and Composite Consumer Pricing Index (CCPI)? 49. Agree 50. Disagree

20

12. If MTRCL fare increase, would you continue use their service? 51. Yes 52. No

13. What the reason for not choosing MTRCL service? 53. Too expensive 54. Have alternative option 55. Others

14. Which mode of transport will you rely on when you choose not to use MTRCL service? 56. Franchised Bus 57. Taxi 58. Public Light Bus 59. Others

15. What are your daily transportation expenses? (in HK$) 60. $0 $15 61. $16 $30 62. $31 $45 63. $46 $60 64. $61 and above

21

Appendix 2

Survey SummaryQuestions 1. At which railway line are you usually board the train? 1. Island Line 2. Kwun Tong Line 3. Tsuen Wan Line 4. Tung Chung Line 5. Tseung Kwan O Line 6. East Rail Line 7. West Rail Line 8. Ma On Shan Line 2. What is your age group? 9. 18 28 10. 29 38 11. 39 - 48 12. 49 58 13. 59 and above 3. How long will it take to reach your final destination? 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. Less than 30 mins 1 1 hours 1 hours - 2 hours 2 hours 3 hours 3 hours + Result 10 10 8 10 22 11 18 11 100 34 12 18 20 16 100 10 22 36 18 14 100 16 22 36 16 10 100

4. Which best represents your monthly household income? 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. Under $10, 000 $10,001 - 25,000 $20,001 - $35,000 $35,001 - $50,000 $50,001 and above

22

5. What type of work would be considered? Please check one 24. Professionals 25. Executive 26. Junior Staff 27. Students 28. Others

20 26 28 14 12 100

6. Before you began using MTRCL, what was your usual means of commuting? 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 7. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. Driving Franchised Bus Taxi Public Light Bus Others How many days do you normally use MTRCL service? Once a week Twice a week Three to Four times a week Five times a week Daily 12 48 16 20 4 100 6 12 16 28 38 100

8. What influences your decision to use MTRCL service instead of other mode of transport? (Select one most appropriate) 39. Price 40. Reliability 41. Avoid Traffic Congestion 42. Reliability 43. Others 9. Which of the following choice is best to describe your educational level? 44. Primary 45. Secondary * 46. Tertiary or above * Include Certificate, Diploma but exclude Higher Diploma Education 12 36 24 22 6 100 16 36 48 100

23

10. Do you familiar with the MTRCL fare adjustment mechanism?

47. Yes 62 48. No 38 100 11. Do you agree that the MTRCL fare mechanism formulas calculation based on the Nominal Wage Change Ratio of Transport Sectors and Composite Consumer Pricing Index (CCPI)? 49. Agree 58 50.. Disagree 42 100 12. If MTRCL fare increase, would you continue use their service? 51. Yes 72 52. No 28 100 13. What the reason for not choosing MTRCL service? 53. Too expensive 57 54. Have alternative option 33 55. Others 10 100 14. Which mode of transport will you rely on when you choose not to use MTRCL service? 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. Franchised Bus Taxi Public Light Bus Others 66 6 20 8 100 12 18 28 18 24 100

15. What are your daily transportation expenses? (in HK$) 0 15 16 30 31 45 46 60 61 and above

24

References Books1. Parkin, Michael, 2010, Economics, 9th edition, Pearson Education, Inc. 2. Baye, Michael R., 2009, Managerial Economics And Business Strategy, McGraw-Hill/Irwin, 6th edition 3. Rikkie Yeung, 2008, Moving millions: the commercial success and political controversies of Hong Kongs Railways, pp235 261 Hong Kong University Press

Websites1. Merger of the MTR and KCR Systems, viewed 16Dec 2010, http://www.thb.gov.hk/eng/policy/transport/issues/pmmks/Fact%20Sheet%20%28Eng%29.pdf 2. Adjustment to MTR Fares in 2010, viewed 16Dec 2010, http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr0910/english/panels/tp/papers/tp0629cb1-2333-1-e.pdf 3. Panel on Transport Follow up action, viewed 16Dec 2010, http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr0809/english/panels/tp/papers/tp0108cb1-1582-1-e.pdf 4. MTR staff salary and benefits matters after the Merger, viewed 16Dec 2010, http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr08-09/english/panels/tp/papers/tp0522cb1-1613-4-e.pdf 5. Possible Merger of MTR Corporation Limited and Kowloon-Canton Railway Corporation, viewed 16Dec 2010, http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr03-04/english/panels/tp/papers/tpetwb_tcr_1_986_00_pt9-e.pdf 6. Merger of MTR and Kowloon-Canton Railway Systems - Proposed Way Forward, viewed 18Dec 2010, http://www.thb.gov.hk/eng/policy/transport/issues/pmmks/M.Panel%20paper%20_060411_ %20_Eng_.pdf 7. Rail Merger - Proposed Steps for the Legislative Exercise, viewed 18Dec 2010,25

http://www.thb.gov.hk/eng/policy/transport/issues/pmmks/LegCo%20Panel%20Paper%28Eng %29_060526.pdf 8. Fare Adjustment Mechanism and Fare Reduction Proposal, viewed 18Dec 2010, http://www.thb.gov.hk/eng/policy/transport/issues/pmmks/Bills%20Comm%20Paper_FAM %20and%20Fare%20_Eng_.pdf 9. Fare Concessions of Franchised Bus Companies and MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL) and Issues Relating to Fare Adjustment of MTR, viewed 18Dec 2010, http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr0809/english/panels/tp/papers/tp0108cb1-516-1-e.pdf 10. Report of the Bills Committee on Rail Merger Bill, viewed 20Dec 2010, http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr06-07/english/hc/papers/hc0525cb1-1681-e.pdf 11. Hong Kong section of Guangzhou Shenzhen Hong Kong Express Rail Link, viewed 20Dec 2010, http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr07-08/english/panels/tp/tp_rdp/papers/tp_rdp0502cb1-1749-1e.pdf 12. Administrations Response to the Follow-up to Bills Committee Meetings on Clause-by-Clause Examination of the Bill, viewed 20Dec 2010, http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr0506/english/bc/bc03/papers/bc030512cb1-1577-2-e.pdf 13. Administrations Response to the Follow-up to Bills Committee Meetings, viewed 16Dec 2010, http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr05-06/english/bc/bc03/papers/bc030517cb1-1628-1-e.pdf 14. Temporary Retention of Two Supernumerary Posts in the Transport Branch of the Environment, Transport and Works Bureau, viewed 20Dec 2010, http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr0607/english/panels/tp/papers/tpcb1-1417-1-e.pdf 15. KCRC Corporate Governance Manual, viewed 22Dec 2010, http://www.kcrc.com/en/investor/cg/corporate_governance_manual_7th.pdf 16. Merging Hong Kong's Railways: The Public Interest Perspective, viewed 22Dec 2010, http://www.civic-exchange.org/eng/upload/files/200412_MergingHKRailways.pdf

26

17. Staffing Proposal in the Environment, Transport and Works Bureau on Proposed Merger of MTR and Kowloon-Canton Railway (KCR) Systems, viewed 22Dec 2010, http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr05-06/english/panels/tp/papers/tp0428cb1-1347-4e.pdf 18. Emergency preparedness response and recovery in the transport industry, viewed 22Dec 2010, http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rrd_87.pdf 19. Public Interest, Private Rights and Sustainable use of urban space, viewed 28 Dec 2010, http://www.bre.polyu.edu.hk/BRE_workshop/pdf/Public%20Interest,%20private %20rights_revised.pdf 20. The Annual Traffic Census, viewed 28 Dec 2010, http://www.td.gov.hk/filemanager/en/content_1950/annual%20traffic%20census%202007.pdf 21. study to review and analyse MTR's past performance and to sustain its future growth and performance, viewed 28 Dec 2010, http://www.hkiaat.org/images/uploads/Cognitio%20College %20%28Rpt%29.pdf 22. Hong Kong MTR A Success Story, viewed 28 Dec 2010, http://www.istructe.org/BRANCH/NORTHTHAMES/pictures/news/Hong_Kong_MTR__A_Success_Story.pdf 23. Universal Services and Access Pricing, viewed 28 Dec 2010, http://www.fbe.hku.hk/doc/courses/tpg/mecon/2006-2007/ECON6034/lecture.10.pdf 24. Sustainability Report 2009, viewed 04Jan 2011, http://www.mtr.com.hk/eng/sustainability/2009rpt/20Final/pdf/MTR_SR09Summary_Eng.pdf 25. Hong Kong Monthly Digest of Statistics April 2010, viewed 04Jan 2011, http://www.statistics.gov.hk/publication/feature_article/B71004FC2010XXXXB0100.pdf 26. MTRC rules out fare cuts as profits double to $5.17b, viewed 04Jan 2011, http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=383367 27. MTR Customer Service Research Presentation 2008, viewed 04Jan 2011,

27

http://www.mtr.com.hk/eng/sustainability/sustainrpt/pdf/customerresearch.pdf 28. Composite Consumer Price Index, viewed 04Jan 2011, http://www.censtatd.gov.hk/hong_kong_statistics/statistical_tables/index.jsp? charsetID=1&tableID=052 29. Announcement of audited results for the year ended 31 December 2009, viewed 06Jan 2011, http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/listconews/sehk/20100309/LTN20100309184.pdf 30. MTR Corporation Limited: Making progress in mass transit railway systems, November 1, 2009, viewed 06Jan 2011, http://www.globalmasstransit.net/archive.php?id=431# 31. Passenger Journeys by Public Transport Operator, viewed 08 Jan 2011, http://www.td.gov.hk/filemanager/en/content_4434/table21.pdf 32. Average Daily Public Transport Passenger Journeys by Public Transport Operator, viewed 22 Dec 2010, http://www.td.gov.hk/filemanager/en/content_4434/table21s.pdf 33. Passenger Journey by Fixed Route Public Transport Operator Oct 2010, viewed 08Jan 2011, http://www.td.gov.hk/filemanager/en/content_280/chart21.pdf 34. Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Transport Bureau Railway Development Strategy 2000, viewed 08Jan, 2011, http://www.hyd.gov.hk/eng/public/publications/rds/doc/rds.pdf 35. Railway Development Strategy 2000, Hong Kong Legislative Council 2000, viewed 08Jan 2011, http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr99-00/english/panels/tp/papers/a1672e01.pdf

28

Journals, Articles and Newspapers1. Chris_Vermeulen (2011) Gold, Stocks and Dollar Trend Analysis and Forecast, The Market Oracle 2. Rail Fare in Hong Kong, Highway Department Newsletter Issue 3, 2005, Railway Department of Hong Kong SAR 3. Wan Shiu Kee (2008) Business and Financial Analysis on Public Enterprises - Case Study of MTR Corporation Limited Hong Kong Institute of Accredited Accounting Technicians 4. Scarlett Chiang (2010) MTR fares up 15 cents, The Standard 5. Joy Lu (2010), MTR announces details of fare increase, China Daily Hong Kong Edition

29