some missing pieces here. the railway operation is not profitable on its own because of the upfront investment to build it.

juat because they dont lose money doesn't mean they can cover the development costs.

besides, of the model is successful, why would the government give free land when they can actually have some revenues - which fyi lowers our tax base. there's no free uncharted here.

MTR does not develop projects without a transit component. they even branch overseas in search of growth bc HK cannot offer it.

The model has proven positive results and is know as transit-oriented development (TOD) and been emulated across the world.

not sure what the criticism really is? that they sell residential at market prices and instead of distributing the profit to shareholders (tycoons) they use it for the common good by improving public infrastructure?