I was just wondering if anyone has taken a look at the airline's load factors for the past week or two.

I was wondering the same kind of thing but I was wondering more about new reservations, reservation flow, passengers "booking away" from MH.

2 of the 3 accounts I work on at " the Very Big Travel Agency"

have travel bans for their employees on MH right now.

Not sure how long that will last though.

I read in a thread on here the week following the crash loads were pretty poor. But I don't know what truth there was to it.

Quoting Sooner787 (Reply 2): 2 of the 3 accounts I work on at " the Very Big Travel Agency" have travel bans for their employees on MH right now. Not sure how long that will last though.

Same thing at my employer and my parent's employer. They're normally stingy when it comes to spending, but they told their employees to cancel tickets (even if nonrefundable) and fly someone else. Not good for an airline who is already struggling.
Pat

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 3): They're normally stingy when it comes to spending, but they told their employees to cancel tickets (even if nonrefundable) and fly someone else. Not good for an airline who is already struggling.

That's drastic, and perhaps somewhat an overreaction IMO.

Personally I think MH have handled it as best they could, given the nature of this disaster and the lack of an actual crash site etc...

Maybe this happens and is the "norm" with all airlines that have experienced a crash/accident. im not sure. It would be an interesting exercise to go through, just to see what loads are like in the immediate aftermath of a crash according to the airline/company ?

I was just looking at flights from SYD-BKK and out of the 20 or so airlines that come up in the search results MH is the third most expensive! Qantas, Thai, Emirates, Cathay and even Singapore (which I consider all to be better than MH with the first three offering non-stop flights) are cheaper! If MH want to charge the prices I saw then they should expect nothing more than to have pax that would consider flying MH to fly other airlines. Also, MH only use a 737 on BKK-KUL flights  

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 5): I was just looking at flights from SYD-BKK and out of the 20 or so airlines that come up in the search results MH is the third most expensive!

I've had reason in recent days to check flights from eastern Australia to Beijing in mid-year. MH are some 25% cheaper than SQ and QF. Could be a function of carriage on KUL-PEK sector?

Quoting cbrboy (Reply 6): Quoting 777Jet (Reply 5): I was just looking at flights from SYD-BKK and out of the 20 or so airlines that come up in the search results MH is the third most expensive! I've had reason in recent days to check flights from eastern Australia to Beijing in mid-year. MH are some 25% cheaper than SQ and QF. Could be a function of carriage on KUL-PEK sector?

Yes, the difference is interesting. I used to always fly MH between SYD-BKK as they were the best value for money. Not necessarily the cheapest, but one of the cheapest of the better airlines. Then their fares went above those of better airlines. They changed the KUL-BKK leg from a wide-body (usually a 333) to a 737. They started serving breakfast in a box instead of on a tray. And, the last time the KUL-SYD flight was delayed 6 hours and they did not even give me a coupon worth enough to buy a medium sized McDonalds meal at the airport. That was in 2011 and the last time I flew MH. I recently booked SYD-BKK-SYD on QF (I had the choice of EK as well but went with the QF 332 as I will travel with one other so the 2-4-2 config and outbound time is better) for $680 AUD! More than $150 less than I've ever paid on that route before and with QF on a non-stop flight. No way I was going to pay $1,085 on MH to stop in KL for a few hours and then ride a 737 to BKK...

Reports in the hk press today about Chinese visitor numbers to Malaysia down over 50% since the accident.

Never a better time to visit in my opinion as Malaysia is a fantastic destination.

Companies canceling reservations and passengers booking elsewhere because of the accident is a major over reaction, MAS has always been safe and this incident has nothing to do with MAS being an unsafe airline. It would be no different from people not wanting to fly on the 777 because of the accident, it just doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I am very confident that no matter what the investigation shows it will not be that MH was at fault for mass system-wide safety problems. What China is doing is completely political and if they want to take this fight into the safety of MAS I think China will find themselves on the losing end of things. Something about throwing rocks in a glass house!!!

Quoting ual747den (Reply 9): What China is doing is completely political and if they want to take this fight into the safety of MAS I think China will find themselves on the losing end of things. Something about throwing rocks in a glass house!!!

Exactly correct..flawlessly stated. Society wants answers..and fast. We're accustomed to having answers to everything and we're not comfortable when there is no answer. All the hysteria is out of line...it obvious that intense international effort is being put forth to find the plane and get the answers we crave. Until then, speculating and fabricating answers and scenarios is pointless. The truth is what matters, and there's not a person alive on this planet who knows the truth about what happened to this airplane and it's unfortunate crew and passengers.

Hopefully answers will come. But there is also a possibility there will never be answers.

Quoting ual747den (Reply 9): Companies canceling reservations and passengers booking elsewhere because of the accident is a major over reaction

  

Equivalent to avoiding the 777 now, without having any idea what has happened to an airline and an airplane with an otherwise very good safety record. But then, you can't fly the A330 or AF either, QF A380 have cracks in their wings, SQ have crashed a 747... and so on and so forth. But you can always ride a bike or row your boat.   

Same thing here, Travelling on MH is strictly prohibited except for domestic route that is only operated by MH, effective until further notice.

Our company have a similar ban on the following airlines, speaking of over-reacting:

- Hong Kong Ailrines (HX)
- Hong Kong Express (UO)
- China Airlines (CI)
- Cebu Pacific (5J) - except domestic route with no other options

I'll have to go find the internal memo for the complete list of airlines that we're not allowed to travel on, there are like 50 of them.

YLWbased

I actually just booked my a flight with MH home from FRA-KUL-MEL this christmas. I dont know about
anyone else but I have no issue flying with them or the 777. If this accident was caused by a malfunction or fire of
some sort or if it was a hijack. Could happen to anyone else too...

I think that if people are not flying MAS or visiting Malaysia now, it's more down to the specific case of this pilot possibly flying this plane into the ocean due to political unrest. I think people understand, at least on a subconscious level, that planes sometimes go down due to malfunction with the actual aircraft, but people get scared when it's possible that it's down to actual people. Obviously we don't know what happened, but when people from other countries hear that a government threw it's opposition leader in jail on charges that aren't even crimes in most western countries, and that a pilot was in the courtroom and that he then went right to the airport and flew a 777 full of people out to the middle of the most remote ocean in the world and crashed, they get a bit frightened. When you hear this in places like the U.S. or Australia, it reaffirms the idea that Malaysia is still a long way off being a developed first world country. I've personally been there a few times and know that while it is developing, there is a lot of Malaysia that has a long ways to go.

In most people's minds, mechanical failures tend to be freak occurrences, while at the same time we understand that humans tend to think in groups. In regards to whatever madness possibly came over whoever crashed the plane, it's very possible that someone else from a similar background and of similar political persuasion will feel the same thing and possibly do the same thing. It's a well established idea that suicide numbers go up in the wake of well publicize suicides. People/passengers know that others do crazy things when they see or hear other people do crazy things. That's why people are avoiding MAS and Malaysia.

I think that when this all gets sorted out, if it ever does, and turns out to be a depressurization problem not related to MAS, people will shift their concern to the plane and away from the airline and country.

Quoting YLWbased (Reply 12): I'll have to go find the internal memo for the complete list of airlines that we're not allowed to travel on, there are like 50 of them.

I, for one, would be very interested to see such a list. To the best of my knowledge US companies do not impose travel bans on airlines--most prefer that you fly on a US carrier and for government and official travel that is still the rule. Does anyone out there know of any bans on non-US airlines at their company?

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 15): I, for one, would be very interested to see such a list. To the best of my knowledge US companies do not impose travel bans on airlines--most prefer that you fly on a US carrier and for government and official travel that is still the rule. Does anyone out there know of any bans on non-US airlines at their company?

Many U.S. companies have travel bans on specific carriers. Though for varying reasons. Some for safety, most airlines on the E.U. blacklist for example, some for not holding up contracts in the past perhaps, or other reasons the company has (maybe they represent a competitor). But there are some carriers that are bane because of situations like this, where there was an accident, and the cause is not know yet. Once the cause is determined, that ban may be released, or may continue depending on the company's insurance provider.

I just booked a ticket on MH and have around 9 flights coming up (4 of them on the 772ER) and am not worried at all. I think people overreact and probably Asiana faced similar issues after their incident in SFO.

I just hope however that they can survive as they were bleeding money already even before MH370. However maybe in the long run maybe they have to go bankrupt and then restart the airline like Swiss did.

Quoting lax888 (Reply 17): However maybe in the long run maybe they have to go bankrupt

The Malaysian government won't let this happen. The airline is one of the prides of the country.

Quoting Vulindlela (Reply 14): I think that if people are not flying MAS or visiting Malaysia now, it's more down to the specific case of this pilot possibly flying this plane into the ocean due to political unrest.

Correct. I will continue to avoid MH for now until a probable cause of the MH370 incident is determined. Even if that takes a while, there a plenty of other airlines to choose from. I am not at all worried about the 777 though. It has a proven record that is almost second to none. In fact, I have a few 777 flights coming up and I will continue to go out of my way to fly on the 777 as I feel safer on it than on any other type. The other two big 777 incidents (British Airways and Asiana) had nothing to do with a fault of the 777 airframe and so far what we know about the flight pattern and timeline of events of MH370 gives me a feeling that the 777 will eventually be found not at fault in this case. The reason I will continue to avoid MH (which I started doing in 2011 anyway after a bad experience) is mostly due to the possibility that MH370 MIGHT have been the result of a MH employee losing it... That is the only reason. However, I would have no problem visiting Malaysia as a result of this and I doubt that too many people would be put of visiting a country just because its national carrier lost an aircraft and its authorities seem clueless about what happened.

The terrorists of 9-11 had to use box cutters to fight their way into the cockpit. With the introduction of vault like cockpit doors, they may have decided that a better approach was to start from within the cockpit. To enact that strategy requires real flight training which takes time. We may now be seeing the results of that new terror strategy. Certainly hiding the airplane two miles deep could be a part of that strategy.

If this turns out to be either suicide....(how many do we know of now 4?)... or terrorism, it will be interesting to see what measures the authorities or airlines put in place to hopefully prevent it. It should be interesting.

Since certain religions seem prone to "accelerated entrance to heaven" via terrorist suicide bombings, perhaps it is time to avoid airlines which are likely to hire such pilots. I certainly will.

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 15): Does anyone out there know of any bans on non-US airlines at their company?

I know at my former employer there were a couple. Former coworkers tell me MH is now on the list. Some others that come to mind that were included at some point were Hong Kong Airlines, Air China, Air India (though I'm pretty sure this was because of a bad experience an exec had than for safety), and Lion Air. I've been gone for two years now so I'm not exactly how up to date that list is.

Quoting Vulindlela (Reply 14): I think that if people are not flying MAS or visiting Malaysia now, it's more down to the specific case of this pilot possibly flying this plane into the ocean due to political unrest.

That's exactly what some coworkers have told me. They still have business to do in Malaysia, but they will fly Singapore or Korean to get there.
Pat

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 15): Does anyone out there know of any bans on non-US airlines at their company?

We have a pretty long list. It's a compilation of requirements from our insurance carrier (any airline that cannot operate in the EU or half a dozen countries such as Canada, the US or Japan is automatically included), suggestions from a risk management vendor and decisions from corporate based on past contract compliance issues (which includes a US carrier interestingly enough). My guess is most other large companies arrive at their own list the same way.

One of these three (my guess the risk management vendor, they're often the very definition of closing the barn after the horses have left) did have Malaysian Airlines added to the list a few days after the accident.

That said, it may not make much of a difference. Our CTM vendor is in charge of compliance and won't offer or process itineraries that include banned airlines, but itineraries are also selected based on whether or not "acceptable options" from contracted carriers are available, and when they are, their system doesn't offer or process non-contract alternatives without a manual override. Since we have a contract carrier that covers the area well, it is doubtful that Malaysian Airlines would have been an option for most/all international flights to and from Malaysia anyway.

Chinese media reports suggest some China based online travel sites stopped offering MH.

http://www.scmp.com/news/china-insid...ban-malaysia-airlines-ticket-sales

Over react or not, how they handle the press confrences everytime, giving wrong information or take words back, sending an sms to the family of the victims, and many more like these kind of things, they just handle very poorly and amateuristic since day one. For me it would be reason not to fly with them either, but that would be more out of principle, so i guess more people would think this way. I never excpected from this airline that they were so poorly in handling this case.

[Edited 2014-03-28 06:52:35]

I don't believe this was terrorism... No one has taken responsibility (no point in doing it if you don't want to publicise it) so I am enclined to think it was either a technical malfunction that knocked out the pilots and comms and so the plane just kept flying on autopilot until it ran out of fuel... OR... suicide.

Anyway, I wouldn't avoid MH at all. I would avoid Malaysia however, as I am a gay man and I do not visit places where I can be imprisoned for simply being myself. I visited once before and didn't like it. Anyway, that is another story...

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 22): We have a pretty long list. It's a compilation of requirements from our insurance carrier (any airline that cannot operate in the EU or half a dozen countries such as Canada, the US or Japan is automatically included), suggestions from a risk management vendor and decisions from corporate based on past contract compliance issues (which includes a US carrier interestingly enough). My guess is most other large companies arrive at their own list the same way.

I guess it makes sense if the airline is banned from the EU or by US authorities. I know airlines like Air Zimbabwe cannot fly in European airspace. At one point in the 1990's KE was a problem due to numerous hull loses (we wondered how they kept insurance) but after a safety assessment and changes in procedures they are ok again.

As you said, if a senior executive has a problem a particular airline they may put a ban on it. Air China was mentioned but I wonder if they really meant China Air? Sometimes it is hard to keep the two separated.

Quoting YLWbased (Reply 12): I'll have to go find the internal memo for the complete list of airlines that we're not allowed to travel on, there are like 50 of them.

Is it due to safety or some other issues?

Blame me of overreacting if you like. I rebooked my MH flights for last week last minute to KL for premium money. The thing is: we have no clue what happened. This is not just an accident.

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 15): Quoting YLWbased (Reply 12): I'll have to go find the internal memo for the complete list of airlines that we're not allowed to travel on, there are like 50 of them. I, for one, would be very interested to see such a list. To the best of my knowledge US companies do not impose travel bans on airlines--most prefer that you fly on a US carrier and for government and official travel that is still the rule. Does anyone out there know of any bans on non-US airlines at their company?

Wouldn't surprise me if companies have such lists, for example banning travel on many of the smaller carriers in Africa where the safety record is much worse than most of the rest of the world. Or they may base it on carriers that haven't passed the IATA Operational Safety Audit (IOSA)

Emirates will keep the A380 away from Kuala Lumpur. The A380 service was due to be resumed from July 1 but has now been postponed until February 2015.

http://airlineroute.net/2014/03/27/ek-kul-apr14update2/

Though not sure if it's related the the MH370 event.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 30): Emirates will keep the A380 away from Kuala Lumpur. The A380 service was due to be resumed from July 1 but has now been postponed until February 2015.

Would be interesting to know why. Maybe there has been a drop in travel to and from Malaysia as a result of all the media attention given to MH370 so EK has just selected the most appropriate equipment type until a time when they assume loads will increase.

Quoting anstar (Reply 27): Is it due to safety or some other issues?

The list consist of Airlines from countries that our staffs will likely be deployed to or have relations with, since we have no presents in Africa with the exception of a small representation office in South Africa, no African Airlines are on the list (except Ethiopian, becoz they operates HKG-BKK, the ban on them started a few months ago, after a series of problem reported on ET's aircraft)

Here comes this List:

- Aeroflot (SU) / except domestic routes with no other options / Read: Travel Ban on Russia
- Aerolíneas Argentinas (AR) / except routes with no other options
- Air Asia Zest (Formerly Zest Air) (Z2)
- Air Bagan (W9)
- Air India (AI) / except domestic routes with no other options / Read: Travel Ban on India
- Air India Express (IX) / except domestic routes with no other options / Read: Travel Ban on India
- Air Macau (NX)
- Alitalia (AZ)
- Ariana Afghan Airlines (FG) / Read: Travel Ban on Afghanistan
- Batik Air (ID)
- Beijing Capital Airlines (JD)
- Biman Bangladesh Airlines (BG) / except domestic routes with no other options / Read: Travel Ban on Bangladesh
- Cambodia Angkor Air (K6)
- Cebu Pacific Air (5J) / except domestic routes with no other options
- Chang'an Airlines (2Z)
- China Airlines (CI)
- China Eastern Airlines (MU)
- China United Airlines (KN)
- China Xinhua Airlines (XW)
- Cubana de Aviación (CU) / Read: Travel Ban on Cuba CANCELLED
- Easyfly (EF) / Read: Travel Ban on Colombia
- EL AL (LY) / Read: Travel Ban on Israel
- Estonian Air (OV)
- Ethiopian (ET)
- Garuda Indonesia (GA) / except routes with no other options
- Hong Kong Airlines (HX)
- Hong Kong Express (UO)
- Iran Air (IR) / except routes with no other options / Read: Travel Ban on Iran
- Iraqi Airways (IA) / Read: Travel Ban on Iraq
- Lao Airlines (QV) / except domestic routes with no other options
- Lao Central Airlines (LF)
- Lion Air (JT)
- Lucky Air (8L)
- Mahan Air (W5) / Read: Travel Ban on Iran
- Malaysia Airlines (MH / except domestic routes with no other options
- Mandarin Airlines (AE) / except domestic routes with no other options
- Mega Maldives (LV)
- Myanmar Airways International (8M) / Read: Travel Ban on Myanmar
- Nok Air (DD) / Read: Travel Ban on Thailand
- Pakistan International Airlines (PK) / except domestic routes with no other options / Read: Travel Ban on Pakistan
- Ryanair (FR)
- Saudi Arabian Airlines (SV) / except domestic routes with no other options / Read: Travel Ban on Saudi Arabia
- Spirit Airlines (NK)
- Spring Airlines (9C)
- SyrianAir (RB) / Read: Travel Ban on Syria
- Tianjin Airlines (GS)
- Tigerair Mandala (Formerly Mandala Airlines) (RI)
- Ukraine International Airlines (PS) / Read: Travel Ban on Ukraine
- VivaAerobus (VB) / Read: Travel Ban on Mexico
- West Air (PN)

I won't get fired for flying with the above listed airlines, however I won't be able to claim back the airfare paid for it.

YLWbased

[Edited 2014-03-29 13:02:28]

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 21): That's exactly what some coworkers have told me. They still have business to do in Malaysia, but they will fly Singapore or Korean to get there.

Sorry, is this the same Singapore than crashed a 744 on take-off once and the same Korean that had many an accident back in the nineties ? Seems some of the companies with their banned-from-using airline list have short memories, if having one accident is all it takes to join the list of banned airlines.

Quoting TC957 (Reply 33): Sorry, is this the same Singapore than crashed a 744 on take-off once and the same Korean that had many an accident back in the nineties ? Seems some of the companies with their banned-from-using airline list have short memories, if having one accident is all it takes to join the list of banned airlines.

Agree fully......

Apparently short memories are the way to go with many here ?

Quoting YLWbased (Reply 32): Here comes this List:

Where is KLM, why isn't it on the list ?

And for that matter, Asiana and the crash in LAX ?

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 34): And for that matter, Asiana and the crash in LAX ?

SFO.

hmmmm touchy subject, but i will add my 2 cents worth of idas here -
1. i have a friend who is a F/A for MH, The way that they are holding thier head up high and getting on with the job at hand is incredible, while all hurting for their fellow collegues.
2. Im a F/A for a airline in the same alliance and also from Australia where our govt have been handed the task at finding MH370 - i have faith that we will do this well.
3. From the loads i can see, MH is still full out of Australia.
4. Ive just finished booking on MH for June and August, at no stage do i or will i feel unsafe on MH, ive had nothing but excellent experiences with them and will cont. to fly them in the future, when any major incident happens, in-house, and im sure for MH too, safety is at its highest, security is at its highest, so i feel safe.

Quoting JimJupiter (Reply 11): Equivalent to avoiding the 777 now, without having any idea what has happened to an airline and an airplane with an otherwise very good safety record.

Well, you have to remember that it will struggle to maintain altitude once the fuel rans out.  

Quoting YLWbased (Reply 32): - VivaAerobus (VB) / Read: Travel Ban on Mexico

I wouldn´t fly them even I got a free fly for life ticket.

Quoting lax888 (Reply 17): However maybe in the long run maybe they have to go bankrupt and then restart the airline like Swiss did.

This is where Air Asia will likely come into the picture if it does come to that point.

I am sure that an arrangement for a full-service carrier, with a lower cost base could be achieved under such a scenario, but it would depend on the political willingness.

YLWAerobus

Does that mean that flights to Cuba are OK, but Cubana is not?.

Also, what is wrong with FR?.

Quoting bennett123 (Reply 39): YLWAerobus Does that mean that flights to Cuba are OK, but Cubana is not?. Also, what is wrong with FR?.

I'm YLWbased :p

Flight to Cuba is okay as we're not US based company, we actually have a healthy operation in Cuba that brings in good profit.

Our HR didn't go into details and explain the reason of each ban, but I've heard that FR's ban have to do with a few of our staffs have booked them and end up being stranded somewhere else, costing the company far more than flying legacy in the beginning to recover them.

YLWbased

I can imagine loads to China will suffer. Especially since MH seem to take tourgroups etc. However these have probably been booked a few months in advance so it would be interesting to see whats happening after the summer etc.

My company allows travel on MH. Were part of a network of large European multinationals that have a joint list. usually follows EU:s travelbans and the insurers recommendations.
One large US based network carrier is not allowed same goes for Ryanair in Europe.

Flying MH shorthaul next month as always when in East Malaysia.

I just had a cursory check on fares for SIN-SHA-SIN & SIN-PEK-SIN for my possible trip in the middle of this month to either of these Chinese cities, and also SIN-FRA-SIN for mid September. In all three cases, MH prices are the lowest. Looks like they have no choice but to slash them to arrest the declining bookings. Really pity them. I would have considered them but due to violent objection from my travelling-together colleague, I had to drop the idea. Sigh, the over-reaction of the mis-informed!

Quoting MillwallSean (Reply 41): However these have probably been booked a few months in advance so it would be interesting to see whats happening after the summer etc.

But will China-based agents honour the flights with MAS ? Reports in Asia say some major agents are now boycotting MAS.

http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking...cies-ban-mas-ticket-sales-20140328