Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
MAS Mulling Delaying A380 EIS And QF OW Alliance  
User currently offlineqfa787380 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 18027 times:

A bit of a strange article and I have no idea how MH knows that nobody is making money with their 380s. They are lumped with old guzzling 744s or 772s, which are probably a bit small for some of their routes. Sounds like they aren't too keen to get the 380 into service, anyway and could be a bit worried about filling the beast. Sounds like the 77W might have been ideal for them but MH have ben very slow to order 787/350 and 77W.

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/b...ing-alliance-a380s-as-losses-mount

65 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAAExecPlat From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 635 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 17892 times:

Surely, with respect to the OW entry, OW partners could share some of the initial costs with MH?

User currently offlineHeavierthanair From Switzerland, joined Oct 2000, 790 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 17759 times:

G'day

No prob, just reassign the A 380'ies to Air Asia X, put 800 seats into them et voilà - problem solved. The already painted tail can be used for a new livery symbolizing the new brotherhood of the airlines. They may even decide to jointly operate the aircraft, Air Asia X using the lower level and Malaysian using the upper level in a plush premium layout that beats anything Qantas may have in mind.   

Tony's friend John Leahy over in Too Loose surely can accommodate a short term reconfiguring of the interior, this may be facilitated by the simultaneous ordering of a few dozen A 350'ies for Malaysian and top up on the number of 320 NEO's to cover for the needs of Malaysian.

My   

Cheers

Peter



"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." (Albert Einstein, 1879
User currently offlineChrisba777er From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 3, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 17723 times:

Their source seems remarkably well informed.

Nobody is making any money with the A380. This is massive. Potential showstopper for the A380 business case.

SQ unable to make money on LHR, CDG, LAX and SYD etc with them. When they were making money before? This is a catastrophe. No wonder they've taken a load more 77Ws. Will be great to have the 77Ws back at LHR!

EK - the world's most profitable airline - not making money on any of their large number of trunk/flagship routes with the A380? Wow. What are they going to do with all those redundant A380s once they are replaced with smaller twins that the airline can and does make money with? 90+ A380s sitting in the desert doing nothing? Ouch. That could destroy EK.

QF - seems the stories that they are getting rid of their A380s as they are unprofitable might be true. First they almost lose one when the engines blew up and then they defer their last batch. Expect to see the return of the 744 on SYD-SIN-LHR before too much longer. Must be really disappointing for them to have such a heralded and vaunted new plane turn out to be such a white elephant.

AF - appears they too cannot make money by replacing the 744 on routes like YYZ and JFK etc with an A380. Maybe the 744s might stick around.

I fully expect TG to finally cancel their A380s and for Skymark to take a long hard look at their daft order as well. If SQ or EK cannot make any money with an A380 what chance do they or VN or Air Austral etc stand? None, i'd say.

I wonder if some bright spark might launch a conversion kit for the A380s about to flood the second hand market to turn them into cheap housing for poor and impoverished regions? Or a cafe/hotel sort of thing perhaps? Maybe then as a Starbucks they might make some money!

Gawd this news has really made me take a long hard look at myself and how i view the commercial aviation markets, it really has. I've been such a fool.



What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
User currently offlinefrigatebird From Netherlands, joined Jun 2008, 1577 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 17676 times:

Quoting qfa787380 (Thread starter):
A bit of a strange article and I have no idea how MH knows that nobody is making money with their 380s.

Neither do I. Certainly not after SQ's decision to replace the last LHR route operated by a 77W with an A380.


Quoting qfa787380 (Thread starter):
They are lumped with old guzzling 744s or 772s, which are probably a bit small for some of their routes. Sounds like they aren't too keen to get the 380 into service, anyway and could be a bit worried about filling the beast.

MH, like TG, probably foresees a problem filling the A380 on a year round basis. An A380 will be a huge moneymaker for an airline, but only if you can fill it with enough premium seats.

Airbus has started production of their first A380 though, so I expect them to send MH a huge bill if they really are going to defer delivery. Hope it doesn't come to this, though.



146,318/19/20/21,AB6,332,343,345,388,722,732/3/4/5/G/8,9,742,74E,744,752,762,763,772,77E,773,77W,AT4/7,ATP,CRK,E90,F50/7
User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2949 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 17574 times:

Quoting Chrisba777er (Reply 3):

Just asking, sarcasm or serious??


User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4387 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 17540 times:

Quoting Chrisba777er (Reply 3):
SQ unable to make money on LHR, CDG, LAX and SYD etc with them. When they were making money before? This is a catastrophe. No wonder they've taken a load more 77Ws. Will be great to have the 77Ws back at LHR!

EK - the world's most profitable airline - not making money on any of their large number of trunk/flagship routes with the A380? Wow. What are they going to do with all those redundant A380s once they are replaced with smaller twins that the airline can and does make money with? 90+ A380s sitting in the desert doing nothing? Ouch. That could destroy EK.

QF - seems the stories that they are getting rid of their A380s as they are unprofitable might be true. First they almost lose one when the engines blew up and then they defer their last batch. Expect to see the return of the 744 on SYD-SIN-LHR before too much longer. Must be really disappointing for them to have such a heralded and vaunted new plane turn out to be such a white elephant.

AF - appears they too cannot make money by replacing the 744 on routes like YYZ and JFK etc with an A380. Maybe the 744s might stick around.



You forgot LH on your list, which has been brought near bankruptcy with their 8 A380 now. This article is written for a purpose, not for any facts.


User currently offline2175301 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 1037 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 17515 times:

I am not so sure I believe that "no one" is making money with the A380. That is not to say that I do not doubt that some of the current operators are not having problem making money with them. The A380 is a great plane for certain routes. The question has always been "how many routes?" (and I admit that I have always been on the low number or routes side versus a very large number of routes). I had many years ago predicted that it would probably take at least 75 and perhaps 100 A380 in service to start to see the shakeout on routes. Could the recent announcements indicate that it really only has taken about 50 in service to start to see where they are not profitable.

On the other hand - this may be a case where a few airlines purchased more for image than anything (similar to many early 747 sales); and those airlines are fessing up early that they do not have the economics to support a plane for image purposes that they cannot routinely fill at reasonable fares.

I suspect it will take another year or two to tell what is really going on (i.e.; my earlier 75 -100 delivery estimate).

Have a great day,


User currently offlineChrisba777er From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 8, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 17463 times:

Well if MAS is deferring A380s because nobody is making any money with them worldwide - even on trunk/flagship routes - then this is a huge deal. They would take them if people were making money with them, surely? I mean, how can you lose money on LHR-KUL? Its a goldmine!

I mean, MAS know more about the A380 and the airline business than I do. If they say something then its probably not complete rubbish right?



What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
User currently offlineparapente From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1548 posts, RR: 10
Reply 9, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 17345 times:

Just asking, sarcasm or serious??

Oh Pleeeaaase!


User currently offlineHeavierthanair From Switzerland, joined Oct 2000, 790 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 17185 times:

G'day

At least there is one good thing about all those A 380'ies ending up on the scrap yard - they can be recycled.

I do not see beer cans being made in CFRP anytime in the near future.


Cheers

Peter



"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." (Albert Einstein, 1879
User currently offlinePart147 From Ireland, joined Dec 2008, 482 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 17144 times:

Quoting Chrisba777er (Reply 3):
Gawd this news has really made me take a long hard look at myself and how i view the commercial aviation markets, it really has. I've been such a fool.

So a single story has caused you to take a long hard look at yourself and how you view the whole market? How odd! Maybe it's time for you to consider a career change  

I read the linked story AND the comments underneath and came to a very different conclusion - MAS bought A380s for the prestige rather than buying to fill their own needs, their business model is not competitive and they are loosing market share because they appear have poor management and excess staff issues - slowly bleeding them dry...

"some exco officials are leery about whether it can fill up the plane on its lucrative Kuala Lumpur-London route" [is that because the DEMAND isn't there or because they charge TOO MUCH per seat compared to their competitors?]
They aren’t too sure about the A380s because no one has made money using it yet in the competitive routes" [whose 'no-one'? Just because MAS hasn't, doesn't mean it's the same for everyone else]

...and some comments that jumps out (most of them are critical of MAS BTW, none mention the A380!)...

Mattyboy · 8 hours ago
MAS needs to get competitive if they want to win business back - I need to go to the UK next June, looking at MAS they want to charge me Rm18,570 to fly in economy on an ageing 747, I can book Emirates on the same dates for Rm4000 flying on brand new A380s, which do you think I will be booking?!?

GERARD · 10 hours ago
If Tony Fernandes has a free hand, the only way is to cut 10,000 jobs and the corruption that is so ingrained into MAS managenment. Question is : will he be given a free hand? Malaysians can tell you what has to be done for MAS to recover. Its a no brainer! AirAsia has 8,000 staff and already bigger than MAS. MAS on the other hand has 20,000 staff. This does not jive indeed. Start there then tackle the catering company and the rest.



It's better to ask a stupid question during training, rather than make a REALLY stupid mistake later on!
User currently offlineHeavierthanair From Switzerland, joined Oct 2000, 790 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 17040 times:

G'day

Quoting Heavierthanair (Reply 10):
I do not see beer cans being made in CFRP anytime in the near future.

Err,

Earlier this month in India I saw an ad of Foster's advertising beer in PET bottles Grrrrr.      

OK, PET is not CFRP, but then.....


Cheers

Peter



"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." (Albert Einstein, 1879
User currently offlinescouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3384 posts, RR: 9
Reply 13, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 17040 times:

Isn't it a bit late for this as at least 2 of MAS A380s are already at TLS being built?

User currently offlineparapente From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1548 posts, RR: 10
Reply 14, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 16873 times:

MAS needs to get competitive if they want to win business back - I need to go to the UK next June, looking at MAS they want to charge me Rm18,570 to fly in economy on an ageing 747, I can book Emirates on the same dates for Rm4000 flying on brand new A380s, which do you think I will be booking?!?

If you are going to play with the big boys you will need (much) more than the same plane.

And if you can't -( they can't),then you do what every other airline is doing in similasr situations and downsizing ,offering "non stop" great scheduling (times) and a fantastic service thus creaming off the high yeild element of the traffic mix.

You have to decide and do one job (very) well.

Comming up with some of the most stupid comments I have ever heard will not resolve their problems.


User currently offlinecol From Malaysia, joined Nov 2003, 2096 posts, RR: 22
Reply 15, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 16801 times:

One airline that should not be operating the 380 is MH. Their Management is the worse, bleating, clueless group in the industry. They have destroyed MH, and now they are an airline incapable of operating a 380. They have a monopoly to LHR, yet many people go South and use SQ. If they did not have the 380 on order, then they would be complaining that SQ did, and that is not fair    . Come on Tony, sort these goof balls out.

We have a saying here, "If MH made Submarines, the sky would be full of them"

Quoting qfa787380 (Thread starter):
A bit of a strange article and I have no idea how MH knows that nobody is making money with their 380s.

Not strange, it is MH. And as they do not know how to run their own airline, how do they know how other's are doing?


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8291 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 16662 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Not long ago on this board there was an analysis of how much money AA lost from Miami to Buenos Aires with 2 777 flights daily. It seems that same genius is claiming Singapore Airlines is loosing their shirts flying A380's to LHR, Right ?

User currently offlineIndianicWorld From Australia, joined Jun 2001, 2921 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 16498 times:

Seems an article lacking any real substance.

Wouldn't read into it much, given the sweeping statements made with no evidence. I just love the use of 'internal sources' that seem to lack any idea of the reality  


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8240 posts, RR: 10
Reply 18, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 16500 times:

MAS's business model has always been the same: Copy SQ even if it makes no sense at all.
The only reason they ordered A380's is because SQ ordered A380's.


User currently offlineSKAirbus From Norway, joined Oct 2007, 1673 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 16471 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 16):
Not long ago on this board there was an analysis of how much money AA lost from Miami to Buenos Aires with 2 777 flights daily. It seems that same genius is claiming Singapore Airlines is loosing their shirts flying A380's to LHR, Right ?

Haha... How much would you bet that the person writing the article is a spotty teenager that did well on spelling and grammar tests at school?

Well considering SQ are starting a 3rd daily rotation with the A380 to LHR in the autumn, I think they are laughing all the way to the bank.

Quoting Chrisba777er (Reply 3):
Their source seems remarkably well informed.

Nobody is making any money with the A380. This is massive. Potential showstopper for the A380 business case.

SQ unable to make money on LHR, CDG, LAX and SYD etc with them. When they were making money before? This is a catastrophe. No wonder they've taken a load more 77Ws. Will be great to have the 77Ws back at LHR!

EK - the world's most profitable airline - not making money on any of their large number of trunk/flagship routes with the A380? Wow. What are they going to do with all those redundant A380s once they are replaced with smaller twins that the airline can and does make money with? 90+ A380s sitting in the desert doing nothing? Ouch. That could destroy EK.

QF - seems the stories that they are getting rid of their A380s as they are unprofitable might be true. First they almost lose one when the engines blew up and then they defer their last batch. Expect to see the return of the 744 on SYD-SIN-LHR before too much longer. Must be really disappointing for them to have such a heralded and vaunted new plane turn out to be such a white elephant.

AF - appears they too cannot make money by replacing the 744 on routes like YYZ and JFK etc with an A380. Maybe the 744s might stick around.

I fully expect TG to finally cancel their A380s and for Skymark to take a long hard look at their daft order as well. If SQ or EK cannot make any money with an A380 what chance do they or VN or Air Austral etc stand? None, i'd say.

I wonder if some bright spark might launch a conversion kit for the A380s about to flood the second hand market to turn them into cheap housing for poor and impoverished regions? Or a cafe/hotel sort of thing perhaps? Maybe then as a Starbucks they might make some money!

Gawd this news has really made me take a long hard look at myself and how i view the commercial aviation markets, it really has. I've been such a fool.

Haha best use of sarcasm I have seen for a long time... Think you have earned my "respect".



Next Flights: LGW-SVG (738-DY), SVG-LHR (319-BA), LHR-HKG (388-BA), HKG-SYD (333-CX), SYD-HKG (333-CX), HKG-LHR (388-BA)
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24896 posts, RR: 46
Reply 20, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 16148 times:

Well the MAS earnings numbers are out - and the company indeed posted a large loss in the last quarter of 527 million ringgit (USD $178 million). Management affirmed they now expect full year loss being "though year".

During the earnings conference they stated their long-haul services to Europe, US and Japan regions were "key-challenges"
It was also mentioned they would park 3 747s 3 737s by the end of the September quarter "due to the difficult environment"


Quoting AAExecPlat (Reply 1):
Surely, with respect to the OW entry, OW partners could share some of the initial costs with MH?


I'm not sure why you expect existing OW partners to fund the integration of other members?

Cost to join is the primarily burden of each respective new member. Other members have some small cost themselves including in the IT and signage arena, but the heavy lifting and money spent is by new members to ensure they meet all the various qualification criteria.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30651 posts, RR: 84
Reply 21, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 16059 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

MH and TG do seem to have government influence so I could see the A380 purchases being driven more on political and prestige grounds than economic. But they were also ordered back in 2003 (MH) and 2004 (TG) during the start of an economic boom so there could have been legitimate economic reasons to add them to replace high-density 747-400s since the original plan would have had those planes arriving during the boom and not after the crash, as they are now.

It looks now like "mismanagement" at both carriers have made operating an A380-800 uncompetitive - especially against competitors whose management have made operating an A380-800 competitive. Their claims that nobody is making money with an A380-800 is a bald-faced lie and they know it, but they need a reason to explain their own incompetence and easier to blame the product than themselves. Or their hubris is such that they feel that if they cannot make money operating an A380, than nobody can.

TG appears to have addressed this in part by ordering 777-300ERs to replace their 747-400 fleet, keeping the A380-800s for the highest-density and most prestigious routes. MH has almost half the 747 fleet that TG does (10 vs 18 per Wiki), however, so I am not sure what a fleet of 4 777-300ERs would do for them (with the 6 A380-800s they already have). With hindsight being 20-20, they should have ordered the 777-300ER in 2004 and not the A380-800, but they didn't and now they're effectively stuck with them.


User currently offlinebehramjee From Canada, joined exactly 11 years ago today! , 4756 posts, RR: 43
Reply 22, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 15698 times:

Quoting Chrisba777er (Reply 8):
Well if MAS is deferring A380s because nobody is making any money with them worldwide - even on trunk/flagship routes - then this is a huge deal. They would take them if people were making money with them, surely? I mean, how can you lose money on LHR-KUL? Its a goldmine!

I mean, MAS know more about the A380 and the airline business than I do. If they say something then its probably not complete rubbish right? Nobody is making any money with the A380. This is massive. Potential showstopper for the A380 business case. SQ unable to make money on LHR, CDG, LAX and SYD etc with them. When they were making money before? This is a catastrophe. No wonder they've taken a load more 77Ws. Will be great to have the 77Ws back at LHR!

Well it depends on how one views the profitability of an airline of which there are 3 levels:

Level 1.....variable cost of flight operation which includes fuel, maintenence, catering, insurance, navigation, traffic handling etc etc

Level 2.....Level 1 + direct fixed costs i.e. aircraft ownership / lease cost etc

Level 3.....Level 1 + 2 + indirect fixed costs i.e. staff salaries, office space rent and other forms of expenditures

Professionally run airlines that are privately owned such as SQ, LH, AF, BA and QF look at profitability from a Level 3 perspective which is your Net Profit. Level 1 is your Operational Profit which is totally misleading in press releases. Emirates on the whole makes a profit at Level 3 as EMIRATES GROUP and not EMIRATES AIRLINE (passenger side only).

Therefore taking into account the above mentioned information, I can guarantee you that even though MH might be seeing high S/F % on its LHR-KUL route along with CDG-KUL and FRA-KUL, I guarantee you that it does not make a profit at Level 2 nor Level 3 on any of its long haul routes to Europe and Australia. It may make a profit at Level 1 but that a majority of airlines worldwide do so on most routes but at Level 2 no chance for MH. In fact, I am willing to bet that in 2011 year to date (JAN-JUL), MH did not make a profit even at Level 1 on any of its Australian, UK and EU routes because of the high cost of fuel this year versus 2010.

Now as far as SQ is concerned, I am a bit more optimistic because their yields in all cabins + cargo are very high and on a Level 3 basis, one can forecast that only LHR and SYD make a profit. However at Level 2, FRA and CDG would be but definitely not the one stop LAX service due to the high cost of operations involved!

With regards to Etihad, I can bet you that even at Level 1 with their A345s and A346s, they dont make a profit flying long haul to SYD, MEL, JFK and ORD in 2011. Even with their B 77Ws to YYZ, they dont cover Level 1 !

As far as EK is concerned, the only routes likely to be profitable at Level 2 on their A380s are Jeddah and London Heathrow only. It is impossible for anyone to convince me that at Level 2 without network benefit, they can make a profit flying daily A380s to Australia and JFK.

Last but not least comes TG and its A380s. At Level 2 on their A380s not a single route will make money, not even LHR nor SYD. The only 3 routes that have a chance for TG to make a profit at Level 2 include PEK, NRT and PVG and these are medium haul routes! No long haul route can make a profit for TG at Level 2 and definitely not Level 3 as its costs are way too high + it does not have the high yield that CX or SQ can command.

As far as BA is concerned, their A380s at Level 3 have the best of making profit on JFK, LAX and HKG only as these are prime high yielding markets with a lot of F/J travel. Other routes that could make a profit at Level 2 include SFO, ORD, GRU, DXB and IAD.

Please note that these long haul flights for many airlines act more like feeder services for their short/medium haul flights which are much more profitable as they are operated with smaller, more efficient planes on a multiple daily basis which subsidizes the losses incurred in the long haul market.

Has anyone wondered why the A380 for KE/SQ/LH have so many J class seats? Its because the more premium seats you have on board, it is the only way for airlines to make a profit at Level 2 and 3 operating long haul with an A380.

Having a high S/F on a route might make you a profit at Level 1 but not at Level 2 which is the minimum measurement as the yield over here comes into the equation.


User currently onlinefcogafa From United Kingdom, joined May 2008, 777 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 13838 times:

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 4):
Neither do I. Certainly not after SQ's decision to replace the last LHR route operated by a 77W with an A380.

As discussed in another thread, the actual capacity between LHR & SIN does not increase significantly as the lower density A380s with more business class replace 2 x higher density ones and 1 x B773.


I have been surprised by the capacity on the A380. After the initial press releases I expected it to be carrying a lot more pax than the B744s, but it now seems that the difference is not that big. An aircraft with 800+ capacity is being 'abused' by using the extra available space for larger seats for the higher end customers.

Whether this translates into profit depends on the amount of higher end pax they can attract.


User currently onlinefcogafa From United Kingdom, joined May 2008, 777 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 13837 times:



[Edited 2011-08-23 12:12:52]

25 Stitch : It seems to be that the A380 is more efficient with similar passenger loads than the 747-400, especially on routes with strong premium cabin demand.
26 jfk777 : Malaysia has a history with 777's, it seems like a natural for them to buy 777-300ER's. MH has to replace all those 744 and 777-200ER with something.
27 qfa787380 : I think any of the 330/77W/787/350 would be ideal for MH. They already have the 330 and have committed to more. They need to choose probably 2 out of
28 UpperDeck : Wow! All this hearsay and conjecture coming from a 'source'. Well excuse me whilst I soil my britches with despair. Bottom line - if you can't run an
29 B747-4U3 : I'm not sure how true this is. It has been reported in the past that BA's short-haul market has struggled to be profitable, whilst their long-haul ro
30 Eagleboy : I am sure the 'journalist' will claim this is a ploy by SQ, hoping that the 3rd flight "make a profit to cover the loss making of the previous 2"
31 Post contains images airbazar : That is not at all surprising and certainly doesn't apply only to the A380. BA has 744s with as little as 290 seats only. The size of F and J cabins
32 AAExecPlat : If the entry of MH benefited the other carriers, why wouldn't they help ease the burden? QF in particular could offload current traffic to MH especia
33 LAXintl : Its simply not the way its done. Matter of fact if current members had to financially support entry of future members I'd say many alliances would no
34 mogandoCI : maybe NH and CX were the smart ones by explicitly NOT ordering the A380 even though their hubs were absolutely prime targets for operating the whaleje
35 delimit : QF has decided to set up a premium Asian carrier to compete with MH instead. I doubt you will be seeing much cooperation between the two.[Edited 2011-
36 LDVAviation : What? QF is sponsoring MH's entry into oneworld.
37 EddieDude : Yes, that is what makes things more confusing. Seems QF and MH have a lot to gain from MH's membership. Plus, didn't QF consider merging with MH some
38 jfk777 : 10 A320 based in , Singapore?, should hardly worry Malaysia Air. Qantas has a large Changi presence with Jetstar Asia and its namesake airline. MH ne
39 Post contains links EddieDude : Guys and girls, you will find this article interesting: http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story...8/26/business/9372016&sec=business
40 Post contains links Jacobin777 : ...and something to counter that: Still expecting MAS to join oneworld as Fernandes reviews options "On local reports from the previous day that onew
41 Post contains links lightsaber : Very, worth quoting: "However, aviation analysts were told on Tuesday that the current MAS management was re-evaluating the decision, and that opting
42 LAXintl : Frankly, I don't think MH knows if they are coming our going at the moment with the management shakeup. While Tony Fernandes might be a voice of reaso
43 SKAirbus : Although that article at the top is a whole load of bollocks, one thing is for certain... MH is a 5 star airline according to Skytrax, along with Asia
44 TeamInTheSky : While they said the issue would be settled for sure by the end of the month, I have a hard time believing that MH woudl back out of oneworld and opt f
45 delimit : That 5 star rating is a bit long in the tooth honestly. They have great service, but their product is aging. The alliance with Air Asia is probably t
46 Post contains links 9MMAR : Speculation dismissed. http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/b...ow-confirms-alliance-a380-arrival/
47 scbriml : I guess they've finished their mulling then? Some will be disappointed.
48 aerokiwi : I certainly am. MH is a great airline but it simply doesn't need the 380. And Skyteam would be a far mopre sensible fit for them.
49 col : I believe MH needs the 380. They need to pull themselves out of the gutter, and the 380 is probably the only unit that could do it. A high end produc
50 qf002 : Wait so you've got access to every piece of information involved in making this decision to say that?? The people running the airline are not complet
51 aviasian : Some questions and thoughts regarding Malaysia Airlines' second thoughts on oneworld membership. 1. Didn't MAS wished for years for membership in Skyt
52 Econojetter : I think a lot of foreigners mistake MH for an entity that is business-focused. It is not. So, the normal airline business analysis does not apply here
53 fcogafa : With Air Asia X taking a stake, membership of OW and the A380 introduction, might this mean the end of Air Asia X flights to the UK? Or even X moving
54 aviasian : Over the 48 hours, it seems the new management of MAS has reversed its decision to re-think its entry into oneworld. Any talk of a possible shift to S
55 aerokiwi : This is such a fallacy of an argument. Of course nobody has access to all the details. I'm an interested observer and have been for years. An expert?
56 alangirvan : But Virgin Australia is now gone as a partner - Virgin Australia is now a partner of several airlines between Australia and Europe. There is nothing
57 qf002 : Fair enough, everyone is entitled to their opinion! Regardless of what basis the decision are being made on, they are still making the best decisions
58 IndianicWorld : It could well be the case. There is still a substantial shift in QFs Australia-Europe offering though, which MH can take advantage of. It also offers
59 aerokiwi : There's plenty wrong with it. MH are in a fairly unique situation in that they have a comparatively low-yield home base that is squeezed between two
60 aerokiwi : I interpreted what you'd said as quite the opposite - that because I didn't possess all the facts then I shouldn't be stating my opinion. After all..
61 B747-4U3 : Back in the early 2000s - I believe shortly after BA's pull out - the route went triple daily on MH. This presumably didn't work so 4 weekly inbound
62 qf002 : Wow you are taking that far too personally. Sorry if my post sounded a little abrupt, I was merely indicated that I accepted your right to have an op
63 aerokiwi : Quite right. So I'm not sure where it is that we've gone astray. Correct again, which seems to reaffirm your first statement above, that it's about t
64 jfk777 : Jala was CEO of MAS from December 2004 until August of 2009, before that he was an executive at Shell Oil based in Asia.
65 MillwallSean : Idris Jala, these days I assume he is Tan Sri Dato idris jala is an interesting character. He is something as rare as Kelabit. Kelabits are a small na
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Whats Up With DL And QF Flights To HNL posted Sun Jan 9 2011 09:00:34 by DTWAGENT
Rumor! EK To Join OW Alliance Q1 2012 posted Wed Jun 16 2010 07:08:08 by sancho99504
A380-900 And Frieghter Not Near Term Priorities posted Thu May 20 2010 15:14:37 by JoeCanuck
Question About TAM And The Star Alliance posted Wed Apr 28 2010 16:27:45 by AirCanadaA330
The Future Of QF 73 And QF 74. posted Fri Apr 9 2010 22:19:20 by SexyAdonis
Egyptair, TAM And QF Diversions At IAD 3/13 posted Sat Mar 13 2010 15:58:16 by MSJYOP28Apilot
Norwegian And Finnair Talk Alliance posted Fri Mar 12 2010 10:01:05 by OP3000
A380: Canceled And Delayed Orders posted Tue Feb 2 2010 08:42:38 by DLX737200
AF/KLM Might Delay A380, B777 And B777F Deliveries posted Wed Oct 14 2009 06:50:13 by EPA001
A380 Production And Delivery Thread #4 posted Tue Apr 7 2009 18:18:16 by AeroplaneFreak