Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13350
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Thu Aug 06, 2015 2:55 am

Quoting dank (Reply 101):
EK's longest flight DXB-LAX is 7250nm and 16h 35m. EWR-SIN is 8300nm and 18h35m... that's not insignificant

Sure, but then again, why invest in NYC at such extreme logistics? Nothing's forcing them to. They had easier options.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
HKG212
Posts: 137
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 1:50 pm

Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Thu Aug 06, 2015 3:02 am

Quoting Coal (Reply 54):
I wouldn't call HKG well planned, not with the T2 fiasco, certainly not with the poor immigration facilities and the waiting times reminiscent of TBIT.

The T2 fiasco has nothing to do with the planning for airport operations; it was built as a landside shopping mall, clearly a commercial mistake which the Airport Authority has come to regret (do you hear that, Project Jewel?....). Immigration staffing levels, indeed very poor sometimes, again has nothing to do with airport planning.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 58):
SIN is still a world class hub and SQ and world class airline, whatever their deficiencies compared to HKG and CX. That is due more to the exceptionality of Hong Kong and Cathay Pacific than any poor performance on the part of Singapore.

I am not debating that. My point is, that's what happens when aviation excellence is a national priority and money is no object. Dubai copied the model, less successfully in terms of the product, but probably more successfully in terms of commercial performance.

Quoting infinit (Reply 67):
Expansion plans in the form of T2 and T3 were already on the drawaing board from Changi's conception in 1980.

Yes. It's called a master plan. Unfortunately they used the template of LAX, DFW, CDG etc., which is not efficient for hub operations and a disaster for retail (every shop has to be duplicated multiple times).

Quoting infinit (Reply 67):
Just because Changi took the approach of building multiple smaller terminals instead of one big terminal like HKG doesn't mean it is poor planning. Have you ever tried to transit in SIN? I've gone between T2 to T1 and T2 to T3 and it is very well planned by any yardstick- I've never had to walk for more than 10 minutes.

As I said, it is poor for hub operations; do you think SQ enjoys flying out of two terminals? To solve this obvious deficiency they had to build a gazillion people movers, connecting each two nodes at the airport both landside and airside. The easy transfers prove you can buy your way out of any bad situation if money is no object.

Quoting infinit (Reply 67):
On your other point about Changi being a vanity project, you do know that Changi is the largest airport in Southeast Asia by international passenger volume right? Unless you're implying the number of people they claim pass through the airport yearly isn't real and they've been making people up, that doesn't make any sense.

I'm not claiming they are making anything up in terms of passenger statistics. Singapore is an important business center, a magnet for tourists, and a successful regional (though no longer international) hub. Of course it has a busy airport. I'm just saying that building a mega-hub terminal when there is still much excess capacity in the existing terminal complex, and when the hubbing activity is relatively small and shrinking, is sheer vanity. Unlike Hong Kong (not to mention real accountable democracies), the Singaporean government did not have to present the public with a business case, or otherwise defend such lavish spending. Or did I miss something?
 
747megatop
Posts: 1785
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Thu Aug 06, 2015 3:31 am

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 100):
Quoting RJ321 (Reply 88):
, I am just tired from hearing and reading many people blaming great airlines for the bad financial performance of other airlines.

Like i have said, ME3 isn't any different than the other airlines out there. They are a reasonanly good airline with a great geography (for the target traffic flows) backed by a visionary cash rich govt. It would take a great effort to screw things up inspite of all these advantages.

And i forgot to mention one unparalleled thing that EK specifically (and QR,EY perhaps) has brought to the table; opening up secondary cities in Europe and India that previously would have required a stop at another hub or sometimes 2 hubs as was the case from seconary European cities to Australia. This is one place where i would give credit to the ME3.
 
sealand
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 9:32 am

Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Thu Aug 06, 2015 4:58 am

Quoting HKG212 (Reply 107):
The T2 fiasco has nothing to do with the planning for airport operations; it was built as a landside shopping mall, clearly a commercial mistake which the Airport Authority has come to regret (do you hear that, Project Jewel?....). Immigration staffing levels, indeed very poor sometimes, again has nothing to do with airport planning.

If HKIA T2 is not planned for airport operations, why did AAHK build check-in counters there? HKIA T2 has 0 gates and pax who check-in at HKIA T2 must take the internal train to the gates at T1. Is that what you call excellent planning? You are contradicting yourself there.

Though Changi Airport is split into multiple terminals, each individual Terminal has facilities of its own and departing/arrival pax do not need to take the skytrain to get to their gates (except for T3 internal since T3 is very long). Only transfer/transit pax may need to switch terminals depending on their next flight. More importantly, the skytrain ride are all less than a 5 minutes ride away.

For Project Jewel, there is a false general impression that SIN government if funding it. The answer is NO. Not a single cent from public funds is used to build Project Jewel. SIN government is only co-funding the capital investments for T5 and the third runway. Project Jewel is funded by Capitaland and Changi Airport Group and is actually a way for Changi Airport Group to achieve more revenue through non-aeronautical means. If you refer to audited accounts of CAG which are all published, Changi Airport has never incurred a loss and their profits over the past few years have even surpassed that of SQ (in fact, they made S$895m and generated more than S$1.2b in Free Cash Flow). CAG had also publicly stated that most of these profits are generated from their non-aeronautical sector. As competition between South-East Asian hubs become more intense, CAG will need to offer competitive airport rates to attract airlines. Hence, they recognise the need to improve their non-aeronautical revenues to compensate for this. Moreover, Changi Airport is less than 30mins away from all Singapore's Eastern catchment area. Access to the airport is cheap and Project Jewel will be a good way for SIN families to spend a day at the airport (and spend money).

In addition, some posters are saying that Changi Airport was split into so many terminals due to poor planning. You need to look at the 1970s master planning for Changi Airport before you say this. Changi Airport Terminal 1 was built way back in late 1970s and Terminal 1 was built based on traffic data during that period. It would be an absolute waste of public spending if a mega terminal was built back then. Hence, SIN built up the airport in phases with potential to expand operations in future with new terminals built adjacent to Terminal 1. If this isn't good planning I do not know what is. Don't forget Singapore is a tiny nation. It will be a huge waste of public money if T1 was built in 1970s, then in 2000s, demolish T1 and build a new mega Terminal at the existing location or build a new airport at a separate location (HKIA or BKK). Hence, the current split Terminal in a single location is based on years of planning. If you look at BKK which was built in late 1990s, they had hit full capacity and had to resort to opening DMK to accomodate LCC growth. SIN just don't have the luxury of land to explore this kind of option.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20610
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Thu Aug 06, 2015 5:05 am

This is sad. It implies hard product and gauge out of line with what they need.

This does explain the A330s replacing the 77E.

Quoting Planeflyer (Reply 7):

It is quite a pickle between CX and EK. I wonder how much the QF/EK partnership has bitten into SQ's revenue.

Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 9):

I don't understand SQ's position in *A.

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 108):
And i forgot to mention one unparalleled thing that EK specifically (and QR,EY perhaps) has brought to the table; opening up secondary cities in Europe and India that previously would have required a stop at another hub or sometimes 2 hubs as was the case from seconary European cities to Australia. This is one place where i would give credit to the ME3.

Eliminating "bridge hubbing" (connections with more than one hub) are just not customer friendly. The ME3 have the advantage of the 'short leg' to Europe vs. SQ and thus EK pioneered opening up secondary markets in all directions around their hub.

Ironic as EK modeled itself after SQ. They just offered the lowest cost product that customers were happy to pay for.


Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13350
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:03 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 110):
I don't understand SQ's position in *A.

I'm not sure even SQ understands their position in Star.  

Same for TG, at least from a N.Am perspective.

Neither ever really leveraged the full extent of what their star relationship could've provided, even when they were flying ULH with those ridiculous A345s and likely losing their shirts in doing so.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
HKG212
Posts: 137
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 1:50 pm

Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:13 am

Quoting sealand (Reply 109):
pax who check-in at HKIA T2 must take the internal train to the gates at T1.

More than half of the passengers in T1 have to take the train too, and that number is set to grow when the Midfield Concourse opens and with the future Third Runway Concourse. Walk-to gates will be a rarity, which is the reality of mega-airports. So, that in itself is not a planning error.

Quoting sealand (Reply 109):
each individual Terminal has facilities of its own and departing/arrival pax do not need to take the skytrain to get to their gates (except for T3 internal since T3 is very long).

Duplication of facilities is not a sign of good planning; quite to the contrary. As I said, I'm not denying Changi is user-friendly -- just that a price was and is paid for it.

Quoting sealand (Reply 109):
If you refer to audited accounts of CAG which are all published, Changi Airport has never incurred a loss

CAG was formed in 2009. I find it perfectly plausible that they have been profitable, since they have been enjoying legacy capital investment made by CAAS, i.e. the Singaporean government.

Quoting sealand (Reply 109):
Access to the airport is cheap and Project Jewel will be a good way for SIN families to spend a day at the airport (and spend money).

That may well be the case. A similar argument was made when T2 was built at HKG. But I agree that Singapore is different in this respect; locals do go to the airport to hang out.

Quoting sealand (Reply 109):
It would be an absolute waste of public spending if a mega terminal was built back then. Hence, SIN built up the airport in phases with potential to expand operations in future with new terminals built adjacent to Terminal 1.

I readily concede that building T1 in the late 1970s was the right move; further, mega-terminals didn't even exist then, and the master plan Changi adopted was hardly unusual for the period, as the examples I cited earlier demonstrate. I'm not indicting the original planners -- just noting that Changi is hardly a marvel of good planning. It offers excellent customer service by virtue of a lot of duplication and at the cost of operational inefficiency.

Future planning mistakes, unfortunately, cannot be pinned on 1970s ignorance. Building a full-service mega-terminal, given the traffic trends at Changi, strikes me as pure hubris.
 
User avatar
Coal
Posts: 2591
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2006 11:14 am

Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:25 am

Quoting HKG212 (Reply 107):
Yes. It's called a master plan. Unfortunately they used the template of LAX, DFW, CDG etc., which is not efficient for hub operations and a disaster for retail (every shop has to be duplicated multiple times).

What do you call the construction site to the SW of the main terminal building?

Quoting HKG212 (Reply 112):
Walk-to gates will be a rarity, which is the reality of mega-airports. So, that in itself is not a planning error.

Ah, so you are aware of it I see. Ah, the reality of mega airports. I didn't know this. Silly me, so ignorant! Luckily most of SIN still has the benefit of walk-to gates.

Don't get me wrong. I love HKG. I particularly love the fact that even without living in HK I can use the biometric gates (through the HKIA frequent visitor program), which was an absolute time saver since I could use biometric gates at both ends when I was commuting SIN - HKG over a couple of years.

Btw, those long immigration lines are poor airport planning. There is no single airport in the world that gives you the arrival efficiency of SIN. I guess it does help to have 3 distinct terminals, unlike the mega terminal at HKG which makes immigration and baggage claim on par with some of the worst airports in the US.

Quoting sealand (Reply 109):
Project Jewel is funded by Capitaland and Changi Airport Group and is actually a way for Changi Airport Group to achieve more revenue through non-aeronautical means.

  

Bingo.

Rgds
Coal
Nxt Flts: SQ SIN-KIX | HD UKB-CTS | NH CTS-NRT | SQ NRT-SIN | AK SIN-DPS-SIN
 
BrianDromey
Posts: 2797
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:23 am

Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:37 am

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 20):
Bottom line is...1 airline successful, profitable & growing aggressively out of the ME3 region, well ok, that is possible. 2 airlines?..well maybe, but i would start scratching my head. But 3? Well that is too much to believe. It is like saying UA,DL & AA all hubbing out of DFW; being successful, profitable and growing + adding routes and planes out of there as though there is no end in sight for the expansion.

Their geographic location is their USP. The ME3 can offer one-stop flights from secondary European cities to secondary Asian and Australasian cities. One -stop to 300+ locations from your local airport is a huge draw. Why fly GLA-LHR-SIN-SYD when you can fly GLA-DXB-SYD for the same, or similar fare?
 
sealand
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 9:32 am

Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:55 am

Quoting HKG212 (Reply 112):
More than half of the passengers in T1 have to take the train too, and that number is set to grow when the Midfield Concourse opens and with the future Third Runway Concourse. Walk-to gates will be a rarity, which is the reality of mega-airports. So, that in itself is not a planning error.
Quoting HKG212 (Reply 112):
Duplication of facilities is not a sign of good planning; quite to the contrary. As I said, I'm not denying Changi is user-friendly -- just that a price was and is paid for it.

You are saying that HKIA T2 is in itself not a planning error, but in the next line, you said Changi's duplication of facilities is not a sign of good planning. HKIA T2 has it's own check-in counters and immigration facilities. Isn't that in itself a duplication of facilities which you had said "is not a sign of good planning".

I'm not saying that HKIA is not a good airport. HKIA can be considered to be one of the top airports of the world. However, you are contradicting yourself when you say something about SIN and another about HKG when both are not that dissimilar.

Quoting HKG212 (Reply 112):
CAG was formed in 2009. I find it perfectly plausible that they have been profitable, since they have been enjoying legacy capital investment made by CAAS, i.e. the Singaporean government.

And CAAS and CAG had to pay SIN government yearly in dividends, which is very similar to AAHK's operating model.
 
AirNiugini
Posts: 277
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 9:41 am

Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Thu Aug 06, 2015 8:36 am

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 111):
I'm not sure even SQ understands their position in Star.

        

I think SQ could really bring something special to One World....   

Quoting BrianDromey (Reply 114):
Their geographic location is their USP. The ME3 can offer one-stop flights from secondary European cities to secondary Asian and Australasian cities. One -stop to 300+ locations from your local airport is a huge draw. Why fly GLA-LHR-SIN-SYD when you can fly GLA-DXB-SYD for the same, or similar fare?

      - It is golden! Who would have thought 10 years ago, that I could fly from BNE to BUD or NCE with one stop in just under 24 hours! It is great for the consumer!

But seriously... With the ME3 taking advantage of their geographical location, Chinese Carriers growing like wildfire, a leaner and meaner Qantas, and huge LCC penetration into SIN - SQ are facing a war on all fronts. Singapore is probably the most difficult market for an airline to call home, and they are still profitable. I think it is a marvelous achievement!

[Edited 2015-08-06 01:37:33]
Its time to fly!
 
HKG212
Posts: 137
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 1:50 pm

Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Thu Aug 06, 2015 9:04 am

Quoting Coal (Reply 113):
Btw, those long immigration lines are poor airport planning.

Again, they are not. They are poor staffing on the part of Immigration Department, something AAHK has been complaining about for years.

Quoting sealand (Reply 115):
HKIA T2 has it's own check-in counters and immigration facilities. Isn't that in itself a duplication of facilities which you had said "is not a sign of good planning".

T2 has proven to be a planning mistake, although it was part of a bigger vision which was never realized, and which arguably was a planning mistake in itself. Anyway, I am far from a groupie of AAHK; the only points I want to make about HKIA are (1) Terminal 1 is a marvel of balanced efficiency, capacity, and level of service; and (2) future planning at HKIA has been subject to a rigorous (and for some controversial) planning and cost/benefit analysis, something which was completely missing when CAG announced the plans for Changi East and T5.

Quoting sealand (Reply 115):
And CAAS and CAG had to pay SIN government yearly in dividends, which is very similar to AAHK's operating model.

Indeed it is, but while I don't have enough information, it stands to reason that an airport which has to operate and maintain 3 large terminals, with all the duplications, will offer a worse ROI compared to an airport which handles far more traffic with much less space, and which invests more prudently in expansion.
 
User avatar
Coal
Posts: 2591
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2006 11:14 am

Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Thu Aug 06, 2015 11:56 am

Quoting HKG212 (Reply 117):
Again, they are not. They are poor staffing on the part of Immigration Department, something AAHK has been complaining about for years.

Even at full staffing levels you can easily be there for 1.5hrs waiting in line. I wonder why. Oh right. Because it is all one big mega terminal.

If only they had smaller, distinct terminals. Where have I seen that...

Rgds
Coal
Nxt Flts: SQ SIN-KIX | HD UKB-CTS | NH CTS-NRT | SQ NRT-SIN | AK SIN-DPS-SIN
 
MaverickM11
Topic Author
Posts: 18256
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Thu Aug 06, 2015 1:16 pm

Quoting HKG212 (Reply 107):
Unlike Hong Kong (not to mention real accountable democracies), the Singaporean government did not have to present the public with a business case, or otherwise defend such lavish spending. Or did I miss something?

  That's a really under-appreciated luxury that some airlines have, and most do not

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 108):
And i forgot to mention one unparalleled thing that EK specifically (and QR,EY perhaps) has brought to the table; opening up secondary cities in Europe and India that previously would have required a stop at another hub or sometimes 2 hubs as was the case from seconary European cities to Australia.

SQ could do the same, but it would require smaller aircraft since it doesn't have the traffic volume to the South and East that the ME3 do. MI does that now, but two carriers is sub-optimal compared to one.
I don't take responsibility at all
 
travelin man
Posts: 3239
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 10:04 am

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Thu Aug 06, 2015 2:35 pm

I wonder why SQ has not entered into any joint ventures like many of their other competitors have. QF, NH, JL, the U.S. and Euro carriers all seem to have these types of financial arrangements.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10905
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Thu Aug 06, 2015 3:15 pm

Quoting AirNiugini (Reply 110):
I think SQ could really bring something special to One World....

I'm sure they would love to be in the same alliance with QF(/EK) and CX...  

Serious question- does SQ really have a close relationship with anyone? I always get the impression that they are a little arrogant and see themselves better than all the other airlines and above partnering with someone else (other than standard codeshares and interlines).
 
Hywel
Posts: 705
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:51 pm

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Thu Aug 06, 2015 3:22 pm

I was able to book AMS-SIN-KUL for 270 euros one-way recently. They can't be making money if they're selling seats that cheap.
 
airbazar
Posts: 10202
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Thu Aug 06, 2015 6:54 pm

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 92):

That's now 306 J seats NYC-HKG, all of which appear to be doing just fine-- vs 100 to SIN that ultimately failed.

You're really not comparing the distance between HKG-NYC and SIN-NYC, are you?

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 92):
Indeed, do that... and you'll see that DXB-LAX is essentially the same length as a route like SIN-SFO,

But 2 hours longer in the opposite direction due to the very strong head winds in the Pacific compared to the polar route that is DXB-LAX. LAX-SIN was an 18.5 hour flight. SFO would be 30 mins shorter. The only aircraft that can do that is the 77L. I doubt that even SEA-SIN would work with the 77W. There's no way a 77W can fly for 17 hours with a profitable load. EK's 77W's to LAX/SFO suffer(ed) a payload restriction.

Quoting dank (Reply 95):
It's not distance by itself, it's flight time

  

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 96):
Their passenger traffic is down YOY and Q1 revenue has been down 3 years in a row.

     
In 2014/15 RPk's are down .9% against a drop in capacity of .4%. So negligible but you are correct on that. Profits are up and at the end of the day that's all that matters. Passengers are slightly up YOY, 18,737 vs. 18,628 the previous year. 2012/13 they transported 18,210. So miniscule groth for the past 3 years but growth nonetheless.
https://www.singaporeair.com/pdf/Investor-Relations/Financial-Results/News-Release/nr-q4fy1415.pdf

Here's another link that shows that SQ passenger numbers have grown every year since 2009. Scroll down to the table titled "Annual passenger numbers (in millions) for SIA Group carriers: 2008 to 2014"
http://centreforaviation.com/analysi...the-farm-on-premium-economy-208677

So despite of all the talk about the ME3 and CX taking SQ's business, they have actually managed to have passenger growth every year for the past 6 years. Surely they must be cooking the books 
Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 96):
SQ doesn't have to compete with QR/EK???

They do on some level but people make it sound like they have to compete for every passenger. They don't have 100+ A380's to fill like EK or a sugar daddy like QR   They pick and chose the higher yield passengers which is why their yields are up despite declining revenues.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13350
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Thu Aug 06, 2015 8:22 pm

Quoting AirNiugini (Reply 110):
I think SQ could really bring something special to One World.

...like immeasurable discord?

Quoting polot (Reply 115):
I always get the impression that they are a little arrogant and see themselves better than all the other airlines and above partnering with someone else

  

Quoting airbazar (Reply 117):
You're really not comparing the distance between HKG-NYC and SIN-NYC, are you?

Distance has nothing to do with the comparison as presented. At the end of the day, whether we're comparing nonstop seats or O&D, SIN is nowhere near the market to NYC or N.America as is HKG. Then combine that with its essentially useless location as a hub from this side of the world....

Quoting airbazar (Reply 117):
EK's 77W's to LAX/SFO suffer(ed) a payload restriction.

And yet apparently were optimal to flying a fully loaded 77L.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
MaverickM11
Topic Author
Posts: 18256
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Thu Aug 06, 2015 8:44 pm

Quoting airbazar (Reply 117):
Here's another link that shows that SQ passenger numbers have grown every year since 2009. Scroll down to the table titled "Annual passenger numbers (in millions) for SIA Group carriers: 2008 to 2014"

Right...the group. The LCCs are picking up the slack at mainline...and a large part of the future for the group...
http://centreforaviation.com/analysi...coot--tigerair-improvements-237749

Quoting airbazar (Reply 117):
So despite of all the talk about the ME3 and CX taking SQ's business, they have actually managed to have passenger growth every year for the past 6 years

...in the same article it shows how mainline yield has been down for four years in a row. It's getting hot(ter) down there.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 117):
Surely they must be cooking the books 

No one is suggesting that 
Quoting airbazar (Reply 117):
They pick and chose the higher yield passengers which is why their yields are up despite declining revenues.

I think that's a luxury that does not exist, as the market tells the airline what it can take, and not the reverse.
I don't take responsibility at all
 
User avatar
WROORD
Posts: 747
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 5:36 pm

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Fri Aug 07, 2015 1:07 am

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 23):
BTW the SIA CEO stated that they need the A350s because the current long haul fleet is not efficient enough to support expansion. As new long haul routes are opened with 777s, it can be deducted that they see a problem with the efficiency of the 777s.

Are you kidding. B777 is the best thing out there....we do not really know what he meant, do we?
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20610
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Fri Aug 07, 2015 11:30 am

Quoting AirNiugini (Reply 110):
I think SQ could really bring something special to One World....  

I would have agreed before the EK/QF partnership. Now that partnership is providing value that can only be matched by a close in hub (QR). In my opinion, SQ just needs to play nicer within the alliance. Whichever one they wish to join.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 117):
So despite of all the talk about the ME3 and CX taking SQ's business, they have actually managed to have passenger growth every year for the past 6 years. Surely they must be cooking the books 

As noted:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 119):
...in the same article it shows how mainline yield has been down for four years in a row. It's getting hot(ter) down there.

I suspect that in this business climate customers are not willing to pay more for the better product in the quantities SQ needs (hence depressing yield). The art of managing an airline is finding out what customers will pay for.


Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
MaverickM11
Topic Author
Posts: 18256
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Fri Aug 07, 2015 12:31 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 121):
I suspect that in this business climate customers are not willing to pay more for the better product in the quantities SQ needs (hence depressing yield). The art of managing an airline is finding out what customers will pay for.

I don't think passengers do in general, but more importantly, SQ has several competitors with similarly high quality service in all cabins, whether it's EK, QR, CX, or others, and they're both better positioned geographically and cheaper.
I don't take responsibility at all
 
dank
Posts: 935
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 11:35 am

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Fri Aug 07, 2015 5:03 pm

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 122):

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 121):
I suspect that in this business climate customers are not willing to pay more for the better product in the quantities SQ needs (hence depressing yield). The art of managing an airline is finding out what customers will pay for.

I don't think passengers do in general, but more importantly, SQ has several competitors with similarly high quality service in all cabins, whether it's EK, QR, CX, or others, and they're both better positioned geographically and cheaper.

Yes, but my experience with SQ in SFO is that they are actually cheaper than CX. I was also favorably impressed by JL's new business class offering. And new timings for the SFO flight make onward connections to other parts of Asia much easier.
 
airbazar
Posts: 10202
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Fri Aug 07, 2015 5:41 pm

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 118):

Distance has nothing to do with the comparison as presented.

Well in that case there's no point in even arguing about if you think that 18-20 hour routes can be operated profitable with low yielding vacationers.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 119):
Right...the group

No not the group, Singapore Airlines. Did you even open that link?
Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 119):

...in the same article it shows how mainline yield has been down for four years in a row. It's getting hot(ter) down there.

Really, where?

Is it perhaps this link that says "Singapore Airlines Group has reported improved profits for the quarter and year ending 31-Mar-2015 (FY2015) driven by a recovery in yields." followed by "The SGD409 million operating profit represents the highest annual profit since FY2011."?
http://centreforaviation.com/analysi...ctivity-strategies-emerging-224825

Stop making stuff up please. Yields are up, profits are up, passenger numbers are up. Only people who aren't reading the facts can't see it.
 
MaverickM11
Topic Author
Posts: 18256
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Fri Aug 07, 2015 6:15 pm

Quoting airbazar (Reply 124):
Really, where?

"SIA first quarter mainline yields have now dropped for four consecutive years" in big letters
http://centreforaviation.com/analysi...coot--tigerair-improvements-237749

Quoting airbazar (Reply 124):
Stop making stuff up please. Yields are up, profits are up, passenger numbers are up. Only people who aren't reading the facts can't see it.

Mainline yield, passengers, ASKs, and RPKs are all down in Q1 15-16. Profit is indeed up.
I don't take responsibility at all
 
User avatar
IslandRob
Posts: 623
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 2:04 am

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Fri Aug 07, 2015 6:40 pm

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 125):
"SIA first quarter mainline yields have now dropped for four consecutive years" in big letters

And an excerpt under that heading in the article:
"SIA first quarter mainline yields have now dropped for four consecutive years. While the drop has been gradual the total decline has been more than 10%. The steady and consistent decline also indicates there has been a structural change in the marketplace which will likely impact SIA’s profitability over the long-term, particularly if fuel prices increase again."

-ir
If you wrote me off, I'd understand it
'Cause I've been on some other planet
So come pick me up, I've landed
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13350
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Fri Aug 07, 2015 7:15 pm

Quoting airbazar (Reply 124):
Well in that case there's no point in even arguing about if you think that 18-20 hour routes can be operated profitable with low yielding vacationers.

Which ALSO has nothing to do with the original comparison in context... so exactly what are you even trying to get at?
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Fri Aug 07, 2015 10:32 pm

Quoting AirNiugini (Reply 110):
Singapore is probably the most difficult market for an airline to call home, and they are still profitable. I think it is a marvelous achievement!

It's big help that SIN is one of the world's major financial centers with a lot of high-yield premium O&D traffic.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13350
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Fri Aug 07, 2015 11:08 pm

Quoting AirNiugini (Reply 110):
Singapore is probably the most difficult market for an airline to call home

Perhaps, though SYD/JNB could probably give that a run for its money any day.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
SIA747Megatop
Posts: 413
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2012 4:36 am

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Sat Aug 08, 2015 6:36 am

Quoting polot (Reply 115):
Serious question- does SQ really have a close relationship with anyone?

They have a JV with NZ and have expanded codeshare agreements with OZ, BR and TK in the last 3 years, all of whom compete with SQ to SIN. The airline also has a long standing codeshare agreement with NH and a stake in VA.

The CEO has said on several occasions that SIA need to build more partnerships due to the competitive nature of their operating environment.

[Edited 2015-08-07 23:39:03]



[Edited 2015-08-07 23:43:28]
I found the edit signature button
 
rutankrd
Posts: 3025
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2003 6:08 am

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Sat Aug 08, 2015 10:17 am

Can't be bothered reading this thread however suggest that Malaysian bank has a biased agenda

Just don't believe Singapore has made consistent losses for half a decade
 
dank
Posts: 935
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 11:35 am

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Sat Aug 08, 2015 5:34 pm

Quoting SIA747Megatop (Reply 130):
Quoting polot (Reply 115):
Serious question- does SQ really have a close relationship with anyone?

They have a JV with NZ and have expanded codeshare agreements with OZ, BR and TK in the last 3 years, all of whom compete with SQ to SIN. The airline also has a long standing codeshare agreement with NH and a stake in VA.

The CEO has said on several occasions that SIA need to build more partnerships due to the competitive nature of their operating environment.

I think when people talk about SQ, particularly those in the US, they really are complaining that SQ and UA have essentially zero relationship.
 
User avatar
yellowtail
Posts: 3938
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 3:46 am

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:33 pm

Quoting SATexan (Reply 41):
This statement reinforces the half empty IAH-SIN flights I have taken a few times..

it might not be as bad as you think if down below is full with cargo.
When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
 
Planesmart
Posts: 2891
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 3:18 am

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Sat Aug 08, 2015 10:26 pm

My brother and his family visited NZ last month, flying SQ (in Y), largely on the recommendation of older family members who no longer fly anywhere. On the Singapore Christchurch leg, three of their four IFE screens didn't work. They were given SGD25 each as compensation. I gather their next long distance trip won't be on SQ.
 
airpearl
Posts: 859
Joined: Tue May 01, 2001 7:42 pm

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Sun Aug 09, 2015 3:39 am

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 131):
Can't be bothered reading this thread however suggest that Malaysian bank has a biased agenda

Analyst reports don't work that way. If what you say were true, it would be a rather silly thing for Maybank to do as it is one of the largest foreign banks operating in Singapore, and its research arm is effectively Singapore-based. I also presume you haven't read some of Mohsin's reports on MH.

[Edited 2015-08-08 20:39:49]
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9411
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Sun Aug 09, 2015 8:18 am

Quoting airpearl (Reply 135):
Quoting rutankrd (Reply 131):
Can't be bothered reading this thread however suggest that Malaysian bank has a biased agenda

Analyst reports don't work that way. If what you say were true, it would be a rather silly thing for Maybank to do as it is one of the largest foreign banks operating in Singapore, and its research arm is effectively Singapore-based. I also presume you haven't read some of Mohsin's reports on MH.

If you read Maybanks "analysis" and check it against the data like the financial reports from SQ, than nothing is left but assuming that Maybank has not only a bias, but an agenda.
MH is a basked case, but SQ is not.
 
rutankrd
Posts: 3025
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2003 6:08 am

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Sun Aug 09, 2015 8:58 am

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 136):
If you read Maybanks "analysis" and check it against the data like the financial reports from SQ, than nothing is left but assuming that Maybank has not only a bias, but an agenda.
MH is a basked case, but SQ is not.

Agreed !
 
SIA747Megatop
Posts: 413
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2012 4:36 am

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Sun Aug 09, 2015 9:01 am

Quoting airpearl (Reply 135):
Analyst reports don't work that way

Maybank has a stake in AirAsia. A quick Google search also shows Maybank's research/analysis on AirAsia is consistently favourable, interesting.

[Edited 2015-08-09 02:06:25]
I found the edit signature button
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13350
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

Sun Aug 09, 2015 9:13 am

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 136):
MH is a basked case, but SQ is not.

SQ isn't a "basket case," but it's not a juggernaut either.

It's got some serious problems...

  • Most notably: ultra-strong competition from the ME3+CX, all of whom have far more optimal hub locations than SQ does.

  • DXB and HKG are already the two busiest international gateways in Asia, have strong traffic flows in every direction, no real longterm weaknesses, and are only going to get stronger at what they do-- likely at the cost of SIN.

  • SQ has no j/v support to Europe, the Americas, Africa, and throughout most of Asia, to help counteract the above, and it's not from lack of available suitors.

  • Add to all that, the fact that VN@SGN and GA@CGK are coming into their own. They likely won't be heavy-hitters in the global market any time soon, but they're gaining much of their local regions' traffic, thus those markets now have little reason to rely on other airlines as de-facto home carriers, instead forcing the likes of SQ/CX/etc to compete---- and on price/schedule, not "service."

    SQ@SIN seems a bit behind the curve in reacting. I'm not sure chasing pie-in-skie 19hr flights is going to do much of anything to solve the issues with the above.
  • I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
     
    mjoelnir
    Posts: 9411
    Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

    RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

    Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:16 pm

    Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 139):
    It's got some serious problems...

    Says Maybank, because they have an agenda. Have you checked the annual reports?

    Does anybody posting here does check their information before posting?

    Profits at SQ are up not down. Responsible for the profits of the SQ group is mainly SQ itself and that they do by flying long haul.
     
    User avatar
    Polot
    Posts: 10905
    Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

    RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

    Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:20 pm

    Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 140):

    Then why has SQ's focus been almost entirely on Silkair/Tigerair/Scoot recently?

    I agree that SQ is not a basket case, but pretending that SQ is perfect with absolutely no issues or problems to worry about is a dangerous line of thinking.
     
    MaverickM11
    Topic Author
    Posts: 18256
    Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

    RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

    Sun Aug 09, 2015 2:22 pm

    Quoting rutankrd (Reply 131):
    Can't be bothered reading this thread however suggest that Malaysian bank has a biased agenda

    Compelling argument 
    Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 140):
    Says Maybank, because they have an agenda.

    What would that agenda be? Singapore bad Malaysia good, but please try our Maybank Krisflyer Amex!

    Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 140):
    Does anybody posting here does check their information before posting?

    You should take your own advice. Although you make a strong argument by misreading and repeating "lies!" and "agenda!", I have yet to see you propose any data that shows longhaul drives SQ's profits.

    Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 140):
    Profits at SQ are up not down. Responsible for the profits of the SQ group is mainly SQ itself and that they do by flying long haul.

    Source? 60% of their seats are less than 3000 miles, 80% less than 4000 miles

    Quoting SIA747Megatop (Reply 138):
    A quick Google search also shows Maybank's research/analysis on AirAsia is consistently favourable, interesting.

    Air Asia is also consistently growing revenue and traffic and has enormous upside, Air Asia X aside...

    [Edited 2015-08-09 07:49:17]
    I don't take responsibility at all
     
    User avatar
    LAX772LR
    Posts: 13350
    Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

    RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

    Sun Aug 09, 2015 4:12 pm

    Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 140):
    Have you checked the annual reports?

    1) as pointed out above, there's nothing in their financials that directly and specifically contradicts the nature of the analysis presented here-- so again, what's this agenda that you accuse (but don't substantiate)?

    2) spot check on today's financials doesn't do a thing to thwart the growing/impending issues I pointed out above:
  • strong and strengthening competitors with far better hub locations,
  • lack of JVs in any direction other than south,
  • and previously weak carriers in large demographic regions becoming better at what they do.

    Each of the above are only going to get worse as time goes on, and thus far SQ group's default response seems to be "let's create an Nth airline-within-an-airline!"
  • I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
     
    mjoelnir
    Posts: 9411
    Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

    RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

    Sun Aug 09, 2015 8:00 pm

    Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 142):
    You should take your own advice. Although you make a strong argument by misreading and repeating "lies!" and "agenda!", I have yet to see you propose any data that shows longhaul drives SQ's profits.

    Very easy. What does SQ do? They are mainly doing long haul and make a profit. Start thinking a little bit. And the information is there as I have stated several times. Read the annual reports of SQ.

    And if Maybank is stating that the long haul is loss making at SQ since 2009, how does SQ earn money and make profit all those years as they are definitely doing.
     
    MaverickM11
    Topic Author
    Posts: 18256
    Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

    RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

    Sun Aug 09, 2015 8:30 pm

    Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 144):
    Very easy. What does SQ do? They are mainly doing long haul and make a profit. Start thinking a little bit. And the information is there as I have stated several times. Read the annual reports of SQ.

    So in short, you have nothing to support your argument

    Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 144):
    And if Maybank is stating that the long haul is loss making at SQ since 2009, how does SQ earn money and make profit all those years as they are definitely doing.
    Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 142):
    60% of their seats are less than 3000 miles, 80% less than 4000 miles

    Wanna take another crack it that?

    [Edited 2015-08-09 13:32:33]
    I don't take responsibility at all
     
    mjoelnir
    Posts: 9411
    Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

    RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

    Sun Aug 09, 2015 8:40 pm

    Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 145):
    So in short, you have nothing to support your argument

    Did you read the annual report of SQ? Does SQ, the long haul airline make a profit?

    And were does the profit of SQ come from if long haul is loss making, selling sweets?

    Do you really want to say the annual report of a company is not an argument?

    Do you accept facts?

    [Edited 2015-08-09 13:42:10]
     
    User avatar
    RyanairGuru
    Posts: 8472
    Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

    RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

    Sun Aug 09, 2015 8:51 pm

    Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 146):

    I mostly disagree with what Maverick is insinuating in this thread, but right now you art shooting yourself in the foot. It has been pointed out to you three times that 80% of SQ's ASMs are under 4000mi, ie short haul and regional.

    What hasn't been made clear is whether or not the likes of Australia and Japan are being counted as longhaul, but they probably are not. If they were then SQ has serious problems, but if not it is indeed possible that they are losing money on five token routes to Europe and some pointless tags to the USA but still driving profits on their Asia-Pacific network.
    Worked Hard, Flew Right
     
    User avatar
    Coal
    Posts: 2591
    Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2006 11:14 am

    RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

    Sun Aug 09, 2015 9:56 pm

    Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 139):
    Add to all that, the fact that VN@SGN and GA@CGK are coming into their own. They likely won't be heavy-hitters in the global market any time soon, but they're gaining much of their local regions' traffic, thus those markets now have little reason to rely on other airlines as de-facto home carriers, instead forcing the likes of SQ/CX/etc to compete---- and on price/schedule, not "service."

    This comment, particularly about GA / Indonesia, just reveals you as an armchair analyst that has absolutely no clue about the Indonesian market.

    Rgds
    Coal
    Nxt Flts: SQ SIN-KIX | HD UKB-CTS | NH CTS-NRT | SQ NRT-SIN | AK SIN-DPS-SIN
     
    User avatar
    LAX772LR
    Posts: 13350
    Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

    RE: Maybank: 'SQ Longhaul Loss Making Since FY09'

    Mon Aug 10, 2015 1:23 am

    Quoting Coal (Reply 148):
    This comment, particularly about GA / Indonesia, just reveals you as an armchair analyst

    What, do you want a cookie or something?  

    ...just like 99% of the people on this site, I've made no claim nor insinuation whatsoever to any accreditation in aviation analysis, so not sure what your point (assuming of course that you have one) is in that comment.

    That said; with consecutive profits from 2007-2013 and annual growth rates ranging from 10-15% throughout that time frame, I'll stand by what I said about GA/Indonesia as a point example, thanks.
    I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil

    Popular Searches On Airliners.net

    Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

    Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

    Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

    Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

    Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

    Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

    Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

    Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

    Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

    Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

    Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

    Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

    Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

    Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

    Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos