Thursday, October 25, 2007

Who really wins when Malaysia Airlines loses?

AIR ASIA WINS, FOR NOW. The Cabinet has agreed to let Air Asia fly to Singapore but Tony Fernandes' victory may cost us dearly. Our national carrier Malaysia Airlines will be the biggest loser, of course. Air travelers can expect cheaper fares, perhaps.

But the real winner, ladies and gentlemen, is ...



The Republic of Singapore.

Really.

The (Malaysian) Cabinet's decision to let Air Asia fly Singapore ["Air Asia can now fly to Singapore", Bernama] nmeans that Tiger Airways, the Best Budget Carrier of 2006, will get a go at the lucrative market as well. Tiger and Air Asia will fight it out.

While some say Singapore's national carrier SIA will also lose out (the lucrative KL-Singapore sector, which is one of the busiest routes in Asia, has been dominated by SIA and Malaysia Airlines for years), it must be remembered that SIA and Tiger Airways complement each other.

SIA has a 49 per cent share in Tiger.

Malaysia Airlines has none in - and no love lost with - with Air Asia. Malaysia Airlines has been seen by Air Asia as a competitor, at times, and an obstacle, at other times.

So, if Singapore is the winner, what will that make Malaysia?


48 comments:

koolgeek said...

That's what you'll get when a government (who is supposed to govern the countries) tries to run businesses.

drMpower said...

so, its very obvious everyone get their slice (s). Except MAS.

this is very predictable. because people these days, concern more of their pocket rather than the nation's. because their pockets need to be filled up. Malaysia got money, can bail out and pay up everything.

some people say, Tony gets what Tony wants. Good for him, because he knows what he wants. but at what cost? of course when he wants the route, someone gotta give it to him. and someone else has to be the sacrification lamb. poor jala.

I thought last time i read somewhere, Tony wanted to be the next Branson. even he now an a bit part actor in Han Issac's new film. Maybe Tony can try to jump from tall buildings as few weeks ago, Branson did that also somewhere- I - dont- remember-also.

yes. we can be everything we want. we can fly to the moon and back thousand times. we can build KLCC, PGCC, KEdahCC..whatever. but we have to ask ourselve first - are those things beneficial to our people? some may say I am living in a dreamland, but the effect of our actions now, will only be seen in the future - it may happen in the next year, next 5 years, and even 20 years from now.

would we wanted to be remember as the bunch of losers that sold the nation (interest)? I bet we dont that to happen.

few months ago, the black Musa once told us to give away the previledge rights to ensure progessiveness. pooddaahh... u named ur boy latinos, then u want to preach us about Malays and progressiveness?

(why Musa? well, he got all the credits for all the things he has nothing to do with. I am sure he can take that as well..LOL)

Malaysia Boleh.

Anonymous said...

Dear Rocky's Bru,

Some time in our history some people will be called "pengkhianat negara". We allowed low cost airlines to fly to all our major airports from Changi while Singapore can only offer one airport.

Malaysians will now fly direct to Changi from all our airports for all their international connections.

What will happen to MAS and KLIA, both GLCs? How can KLIA be a hub airport? Their share prices will come down and Air Asia share prices will go up. GLCs are owned by all of us.

Whose business interests are we looking after? They don't allow us to build new causeway but we allowed so much access to our airspace.

We pride outselves by sending an angkasawan to space while Singapore turn our airspace into their economic interest.

This country is slowly being destroyed. Sorry, I am so emotionally upset this morning.

Anonymous said...

Know what Rock?
They are just lousy in maths! only know how many space-tourist for space and build mega projects but when things failed, they bail it with tax payers' money.

Anonymous said...

I don't agree with your
nationalistic slant on this.

Yes, Singapore wins. But in globalization, the one who is running the better show -- in this instance better airport services and hub functions, better flights, integrated transportation, the pull of the city for both tourism and business -- wins.

Yes MAS and SIA have benefitted under the tempurung, but do you want continue to shield these two to the detriment of everyone else: to the people who have to pay higher prices, the economic distortion, etc.? We have the same arguments with Proton.

At the end of the day -- you got to evaluate if the liberalization is fair on both parties. How can it be that AirAsia can fly to Singapore but Tiger Air cannot fly to KL if it is a open-sky policy at question? To argue that Tiger Air is being owned by Sg Airlines is diverting to another separate issue. On another note - what's stopping FireFly from offering flights to Singapore?

Some also say that Tony is getting very chummy and amazingly gets what he wants, including sacred cows. In this case - i'll say good for him - because he's crying out for more competitiveness instead of MAS (and other rent-seeking shrills) who wants less of it and wants everything on a silver platter. In fact - have anything Tony asked for smacks of protectionism - like exclusive contracts, etc.? More power to him, I say!

MAS have created this situation and lost out for lack of competitiveness. It's time to bite the bullet and open up this sector, and hope that MAS et. el. can pull up their socks and compete competently after this.

Anonymous said...

SIGH.
And buried somewhere in our morning papers today is the fact that WE are paying RM292.52mil as compensation to contractors for the bridge that was cancelled.
Sigh. Pay out RM292.52mil and nothing to show for it.
Sigh.
Not too long ago there was a newspaper headline screaming "Almost RM10b in OUR pockets". I checked mine: Nada,rien, zilch.
Sigh.
From: Everyman

Anonymous said...

I think even if we did't open up the route, MAS was losing anyway. Instead of holding on to the ball loose all the way, why not let go and allow Air Asia into the field to play?

Anonymous said...

"Who really wins when Malaysia Airlines loses?"

The one really wins is the consumers.

In this world, if you cannot compete, just close shop.

Lipreader said...

The mere mention of Singapore is enough to send most Malaysians hysterical. Is it because we lack confidence or know for a fact we are no match for our Southern neighbour? Rocky, I'm ashamed of you. You are no better than Kadir Jasin. We might as well bomb the Causeway and the Second Link to sever all ties with that so-called red dot if Singapore scares us so much.

Anonymous said...

Somehow Tony getting all the brickbats!!!???
If MAS was well managed and planned out from throughout its journey till today, it will instead be worrying about Singapore Airlines instead of AirAsia.Sadly this was not to be.
The idea of AirAsia is something quite independent and happenin with the times globally as in budget airlines.We Malaysians are damn lucky that it took of here in Malaysia for the region and not elsewhere but yet Tony is gettin the brickbats. I would say it isjust this mentality which will keep the country down. Just look at India, its airspace and airline industry has revamped to go along with the times. India itself has emerged as a economic superpower.We just dont get it but want to be forever pampered.
Grissoms.

Anonymous said...

compare to all those hp6s in the bodowi cabinet, those singaporean possess highly instinctive business acumen and foresight.

but then again what could one expect... when one hire monkeys one will get peanuts work in return.

and don't we feel like morons to hired all these monkeys in the first place.

BigDogDotCom said...

Rocky,

I agree with you. Malaysia Airlines deserved better. Shame on Chan Kong Choy, Minister-in-charge of AirAsia, for making decisions that is leading to Malaysia Airlines' slow death.

gaban sakti said...

you know who the real winner is? the consumers. i am sick of high prices of flights. serve malaysia right if they aren't competitive. i want cheap flights, and i'm sure everyone else too.

flying back to msia on mas from london, it can reach £700-800 in june july august. baik aku fly emirates £400 stopover kat dubai

i want to be patriotic and fly MAS, but if dah pokai, and MAS pun charge the sky, then serve them right if they lose out.

Anonymous said...

Why must the government is so concern over the welfare of AIRASIA at the expense of MAS, our national career???

For a start why must the government using tax payers monies to buy low cost Terminal for AirAsia used? Further teh LCCT was built in an extremely fast pace.

Is Khairy and/or Kali involved with Tony Fernadez? Can someone help on the above. Thank you.

Anonymous said...

Anon 233am

Ofcourse they are. Attend any high social event and they will be sitting at the same table. Two of them bought land together in Bali ( i am not saying they should not) gave one of them a present of an expensive watch after the rationalisation excercise and should I say more? You are also missing a Kamal or a Zaki from the list of "usual suspects"

AY said...

Does it matter?

Why bother with which country wins when it comes to this? As long as the biggest winner are the passengers, I'm all for it.

That route has an obscene price discrimination mechanism attached to it, much akin to the rent-seeking activities that we see in our wonderful nation.

Granted it's a derailment for MAS's turnaround plans, but let's face it, "They'll survive."

caravanserai said...

Air Asia dances in the air
The BN government winks at it
The next episode the new kid gets
A new route to fly

Twice weekly from KL to Singapore
MAS open its mouth to shout
Air Asia flies into profits
Idris Jala scratches his head

The BN government shuffling papers
Let cronies businesses flow
It is the way the business done
Get more taxes everyone doesn’t sweat

In a way it is true
On company profits
The tax collects
But when the government sells
the people’s rights
Now it isn’t about tax
It is about robbing the people
Giving it to budget air line

Idris Jala can’t sleep
His Firefly can’t match in the sky
Has the BN government forgotten?
MAS has its own budget air line

Air Asia wins
Now there is cheaper flight
Firefly where are you?
Clipped your wings
MAS open mouth to tell
But put down by the noises
Of the Angkasawan
Walking tall
Losing the people’s rights

Anonymous said...

Well said anon 4.00pm.

The operative word is fair competition. AND there cant be no fair competition without true open policies macroscopically.!

Like so many things in bolehland we always try to look at things with - bangsa, agama dan negara WITHIN our spurious confinement, microscopically.

Thus OUR dismay records in ALL fronts - politically, religiously, economically & worst racially in the last 30+ yrs!

AND we STILL dont learn! More so when the so called intellectuals made comments as if they're still being living under the tempurung!

We already has a sleepy head as a PM & yet are we having zombies as the conscience of the nation - for the true intellectuals are REALLY that body?

When are they going to be awaken? For crying out loud, this is a flat-land epoch. All the man-made distinctions are not going to stop the on-slaughtered of the borderless competitions. Countries are getting more irrelevant - more so in business!

The initial phase of this economic tsunami can very ugly & we should be prepared to face this challenge head-on so that our economic/culture/religious penalties can be minimized for our future generations!

We need to learn from these competitions in order to toughen our future generation with our hard earned experiences.

Instead what we heard are PROTECTONISTISM in disguised. Hello - where are the long term plan for the future? Dont tell me about the Never Ending Policy - ok!

OR are we as a country REALLY F@#KED via all those protective policies for the so called weak majority claimed to be bullied by the historical colonialists for 400+ yrs?

We're so intoxicated by this NEP drug that EVERYTHING we work MUST have this particular favour! Yet without realising the outside world dont care an iota about it!

Are we really doomed as a nation because ALL of us are only interested in short-term comfort, thus churn out lots of lots of spineless intellectuals irregardless of the quality of the base?

Some one once said that you can see the downfalls of an entity, be it country, business, religion or anything, by the quality of its individual basic component.

Lusate ton naen tonton!

You're bringing down destruction upon yourselves!

You Bodohs said...

This blog has so many stupid commentators. No surprise because malaysian are generally misguided and stupid.
Because of your stupid TDM (TOON dr mahathiran)a mamak who masquerade as a bumi to get all the benefits, you bodohs became misguidedly (if there is such a word) nationalistic.
The objective of free trade or free air is to benefit consumers as competition leads to lower price and more innovation and hence progress. However, here you are, with all this bodohs talking about bodohland GLC (MAS, KLIA) losing out and hence all you bodohs losing. The most stupid guy here is the blog owber because this is what he imply with the title of this posting

Anonymous said...

I hope that he will instruct the company that make about 3800 families waiting for almost 6 years to complete a housing project and buyers to move into their houses.

This is an abondend project since it started in 2000. Anybody know where Bandar Alam Perdana is? Search the web!!!

Who is the developer? What listed company behind that?

Finally who is behind that?

But, dear Saudara Rocky, it is OK kalau you tak nak letak pun, tapi kalau letak boleh lah buka mata mereka yang mengambil kesempatan terhadap rakyat yang dah bayar ratusan ribu, tapi tak dapat rumah mereka. Walaupun, pembeli dah kerugian banyak tiap tiap bulan bayar interest dan prinsipal dalam RM1000+ tiap bulan tapi rumah tak dapat dan pemaju pula nampak sangat tak nak rugi tapi dok pikir pasal nak untung lagi walau mereka ni dah perah dan cekik lehir rakyat.

Dah penat dah jumpa ahli politik, tapi semua macam tak nak tolong jer.

Saya masih menunggu rumah teres 2 tingkat saya dan sekarang masih menyewa di negeri Selangor yang telah membangun ini.

Hai, Hadahri....Hadhari!!!

A Voice said...

Proves how inexperienced and novice our Tingkat 4 people at advising the PM?

For bankers, the principal repayment is important for without it, it becomes a total lost. They worry also the interest income that is directly translated into profit.

What good is boosting of openness, merit, competitiveness, and whatever perceived goodness from the "principals" we believe without which we will not generate "profitability" but we end up forgoing on the interest or "profit" itself?

This what I have been saying all along, which many seemed lost in their fascination with business mgmt philosphies and novelty of Airasia, without realising the grand design that only stupidity and arrogance would have been left unnoticed.

Straight forward bodoh by Tingkat 4 and supporter of Airasia.

takbodoh said...

I agree fully with you guys. It is not about protecting Mas or rapping AA. It is about level playing field.

We wanna open the sector, fine. But we have not resolved issues, that's not fine.

Issue 1: AA vs Mas -- The bad blood
The question is, has the government been fair with Mas when it decides to build Low Cost Terminals (yes, they are multimillion ringgit airports) exclusively for AA and Tony Fernandez? Airport charges have to be absorbed by Malaysia Airports, why the crony treatment? Is it because some people are behind TF (and I dont mean Richard Brenson).

Issue 2: Singapore vs Malaysia
If it's about international competition, let's be ready. Singapore is good so we have to be better. Malaysia BOLEH! We have done it before, when we created Port Tanjung Pelepas, Keppel Harbour was sinking (the AAB administration decided to scuttle PTP's progress by, among other things, killing the "Crooked bridge" project).
SIA and Tiger will mow both AA and Mas to the ground in no time. As Rocky's pointed out, they are ONE (and united), while Mas and AA will be fighting, bickering and quarelling -- both claiming to be underdogs.

We'll lose, mates. And if you can't beat Singapore on your own turf, let's forget about everything else.

And youbodohs, you live up to your name! keep it up.

Anonymous said...

Bro,

I would like you and readers to read this report.

UK-Singapore open skies opens new markets

By Sim Kok Chwee ( TTG Asia )

SINGAPORE — The signing of an open skies agreement between the UK and Singapore last week is a landmark deal pushing UK aviation authorities into uncharted territory, and signifying a new era of air services between and beyond the countries.

It is only the second such agreement for Singapore, but has huge implications for the island nation.

The pact removes any cap on services between both countries and beyond to any cities in the world, allows for aircraft to be based in each other’s airports and includes cabotage rights for Singapore’s carriers to operate on domestic sectors within the UK.

A Singapore Airlines (SIA) spokesman called it “one of the most progressive air services agreements struck across the world in many years”.
World Express Group managing director, Mr Tan Chee Chye, told TTG Asia: “What a brilliant coup, what an exciting development! This should add S$5 (US$3) to the value of Singapore Airlines’ shares.”

The National Association of Travel Agents Singapore president, Mr Robert Khoo, said: “This is very beneficial.

“Seats on the Singapore-London and Europe sectors are very scarce and this will hopefully bring relief.”

Beyond the initial euphoria, there are tremendous potential opportunities knocking on the doors of airlines in both countries. The timing was impeccable, coming just a fortnight ahead of the delivery of the first Airbus 380 to SIA.

The 471-seat giant is primarily destined for service on the kangaroo route linking the UK and Australia through SIA’s home base.

Singapore’s pursuit of transatlantic rights beyond London has been a long-drawn affair going back a decade or two.

Its applications have always been sidelined by ongoing negotiations between the UK and US authorities under the Bermuda Agreement.

Under the new open skies agreement, which comes into effect at the end of March 2008, SIA will be able to operate liberally between the UK and anywhere in the world including any cities in the US.

North Atlantic routes have for the most part been the exclusive domain of US and UK carriers. Among the few third-country carriers permitted on these routes are Air India and Pakistan International Airlines.

Of particular interest is the right to fly domestically within the UK granted to Singapore’s carriers. Singapore has no domestic network to offer to UK carriers in return.

Mr Khoo said: “Hopefully, this will ignite interest among Singaporeans to travel beyond London and Manchester. If SIA takes up these rights to operate domestic services in the UK, secondary cities will be reachable with minimal add-on fares.”

Mr Tan sees potential for the reverse flow of travellers, noting that “business and leisure travel to Asia has been growing and this could spur more travellers from all over the UK to travel to Singapore and the rest of Asia”.

One burning question is “How soon can SIA take advantage of these rights”?

Mr Tan said: “While others are still grappling with the implications of this very liberal agreement, SIA should take full and immediate advantage of it. Priority should go to launching domestic sectors in the UK to feed into its longhaul flights from London and Manchester to Singapore and beyond.”

Mr Khoo was anxious to see the airline’s first moves and said: “Hopefully, SIA can use the potential sooner rather than later.”
SIA’s stand is clear. It is interested in capacity injections only when the market can support them and the scarcity of slots at Heathrow Airport is another stumbling block.

The latter will be resolved when capacity at Heathrow Airport is increased in the future.

Mr Tan also called on British carriers to similarly work to tap into the opportunities offered by this agreement. They should reposition some of their fleet to Singapore to operate to regional destinations in Asia, he said.

SIA has a 49 per cent stake in Virgin Atlantic Airways and one of the benefits has been the codeshare opportunities across the North Atlantic.

With this open skies agreement, SIA no longer faces any obstacles in realising its long-cherished dream of offering its own branded and famed inflight service across the North Atlantic.

There have been recent reports that SIA is looking at the possibility of relinquishing its share in Virgin Atlantic.

Mr Tan said: “So far, SIA has never been too successful in its joint ventures with other carriers – Swissair, Delta Airlines, Air New Zealand come to mind. Hopefully, it can do a better job with China Eastern Airlines. It might be a good time for SIA to sell off the 49 per cent in Virgin Atlantic to benefit its shareholders.”

While many see increased competition between carriers from both countries, Mr Tan saw the opportunity to co-operate. “Even as SIA and British Airways (which has a commercial agreement with Qantas) may not be able to enter into a commercial agreement on joint services on the kangaroo route, so as to not to run foul of anti-competition laws, there is still the possibility for both airlines’ frequent flyer programmes to co-operate and allow for cross-earning and redemption of frequent flyer miles.”

This would certainly make both carriers more attractive than the many South-east Asian and Middle Eastern carriers plying the same kangaroo route.

In enthusiastically welcoming this agreement, the SIA spokesman said: “This is a real step forward for the airline industry.

“The UK – previously one of the more restrictive regulators of air services – has seen the very real benefits of opening markets to full competition.”

The agreement is guaranteed to gain the attention of many other governments and airlines.

While horse-trading must certainly have taken place, it is ultimately a win-win situation for both countries and their carriers.

Mr Tan said he hoped other governments would examine their aviation policies and consider modelling their open skies agreement after what Singapore’s transport minister, Mr Raymond Lim, labelled a “trailblazing agreement”.

The SIA spokesman summed it up for the tourism industry: “This agreement should serve as a template for a badly needed structural reform of the archaic air services agreement system.”

Anonymous said...

you guys seem to be confusing two issues here. you are looking at strictly from a business perspective. to that i say who cares? let the good business thrive and the bad ones die. simple as that.

the main point is people can know get MORE VALUE for their hard earned money. if you chose to take your money and prop up a government controlled has been for nationalistic pride go ahead. let the market choose and let the common man save some money.

after all (and this is for all you business experts out there) more money saved means more money they can spend on other things.

and for all you business nationalists (sorry dont have a better word) i don't hear you crying nationalism when tenaga or syabas wants to raise it's tariffs.

in the west your arguments are called straw men because they have no relation the the real issue. the real issue is open skies means more people can fly cheaper. period.

jayinasia

Anonymous said...

Singapore seems to be the winner in everything done or not done, inside or outside, iniated or not iniated by Malaysia. How paranoid have you people become. If I may say so, in years to come Singapore will no longer be the worry, but Vietnam and the likes to the north are going to pass you by if you persist in such mentality.

sean-the-man said...

I'm sorry if I don't seem nationalistic or patriotic enough. But as a Malaysian, I want Malaysians to have good products. I don't care who made the product. It doesn't matter who profits from selling the product, because as long as it is good value for money, it's a good product for Malaysian consumers.

All this rubbish about Malaysia losing... rubbish! I think if we didn't start all the bad 'national' projects like the inefficient GLCs, MASs or Protons which can survive only by squeezing blood from the Malaysian public or sending tourists to space... Malaysia would be winning right from the start.

Anonymous said...

AirAsia is heaven sent to Malaysians and all other budget travellers worldwide.
MAS has had all these many years to turnaround but is still coming around.
Now the future is here but the past wants time to catch the future.
Actually its the consumers we are concerned about,who SHOULDNT lose.
The GLC is just that, a GLC.
The country's image is still on and happenin with the presence of AirAsia.
Imagine if that is not the case.
Then ya, the NEGATIVES would be 100%

Anonymous said...

Hi takbodoh,

Re: Issue 1: AA vs Mas -- The bad blood

Are you sure Malaysia Airports are not collecting any revenue from AA over the use of their terminals? And is it true that other airlines are barred from the LCCT?

Otherwise, I think you may fail to appreciate that airports operations are also a BUSINESS. Heathrow airport operator was bought over by a Spanish company because they saw it as a viable BUSINESS from where they can make PROFIT. They get a fee for every plane that lands.

So if Malaysia Airports see it as a viable business to build and lease the LCCT to AirAsia .. what is it you say again ... that this is a crony handout? It is MA's strategy not to 'devalue' KLIA main terminal costs by offering cheap to AirAsia so it was opted to build a separate terminal. I fail to see the logic unless you can present me the evidence why the deal is so favourable to AirAsia.

drsaravananr said...

I'm actually wondering why this topic of who wins came up in the first place. We are always talking about fair elections, return the judiciary to the rakyat, freedom of the press, freedom of speech, freedom for bloggers, etc and are willing to go all out to even organise and attend rallies for the rights of the rakyat.
Now when we have been given the option to travel cheaper (which directly benfits the rakyat), everyone decides to be all patriotic about it. This singapore-KL air route issue would have come to a similar end in 2009 whether we like it or not...starting off one year earlier is not that of an issue actually. I for one feel that the ones who really won are the rakyat (Other than Tony Fernandez).
So, how many of us who are complaining is going to fly to Singapore by MAS and not Airasia when the service starts?
Think about it.
Cheers

Anonymous said...

Protectionism is never a good thing. It means you are not good enough to compete. And it destroys your competitiveness. This move is a step in the right direction for Malaysia, because it will help us grow up and also make us more world-class. That is the mentality that will help us achieve Vision 2020, not simply building white elephants.

Anonymous said...

I think Rocky is being prejudice in his reporting on this news item as he do not like tony associate like Datuk Kalimullah and friends.

We, malaysian rejoice as we will get cheap fare to singapore.

BrightEyes said...

Who wins??

-Tony & AirAiseh: Pretty obvious, no?

-Malaysian & Kiasuland consumers (ie: we the people): Cheaper option to fly down to Sing/KL & back

-Firefly air: Now they ALSO can tap into the Singaporean market. MAS should look into expanding this airline for shorthaul trips...

Blackie said...

Goodlah.

All those Malaysians who work in Singapore and save their money there can save more.

Good also for a government who does not back down from globalisation. After all, all 28 million of us has Oxbridge degrees so we would't have any problem making it ANYWHERE in the world.

Pak Loo said...

Cant believe you, you guys still read this column?

Anonymous said...

Just give MAS to Tony and Kali ..and return back my money invested in MAS all this while ( as a taxpayer) in cash!

HJG

Anonymous said...

rocky, ur an idiot....the fact that mas hasnt got its act together is the real issue....

they have to start cutting down the workforce massively.....

get more efficient, and ultimately, they need to have open skies....

protectionism is the malaysian way of doing business....and its already leaving the country in the slipstream of other nations in the region....

Anonymous said...

Anon 9.22 pm,

Great quotes from you:
"Protectionism is the malaysian way of doing business."

We all know that the one enjoying "protectionism" is NOT Malaysian Airlines but Tony Fernandez's Air Asia!
Ever since Tony Fernandez took in Pak Lelah's good friend Kalimulalah Hasan as business partner, things have been working out wonderfully for him.

Do your maths, Anon and don't call Rocky idiot when you are clearly the bodoh one!

Hantu Laut said...

Most Malaysians bloggers are generally sanctimonious and histrionic .They are anti-establishment and will always have negative perception of the government.Naturally, they attract the same kind of people to their blogs,many,are just too smart for their own good.

I think MAS deserved what it gets.In the past, even under complete monopolistic control of the domestic sector they lost money.When they gave up the domestic routes in Sabah and Sarawak to Air Asia, it was a complete sham.They gave the non-profitable routes and kept the lucrative ones.Today, you still can see MAS flying in parallel with Air Asia on the following sector: KL-KK,KK-Skan,KK-Tawau,KK-Kuching
,KK-Miri and many more.These are sectors they claimed to have lost money,due to government fare control in the past.

If your believe in free enterprise and globalisation, than what Badawi did was right.Only competition can bring the fare down.

Why should the government protect MAS at the expense of the travelling public and the Malaysian taxpayers.

If Air Asia can grow from a one aircraft airline to what it is today what does it say about MAS management all this while.

MAS has one of the highest fare in this region.They show profit the past few years not because of efficient management but more out of assets stripping.Those profits were extraordinary income from sales of assets.The picture would be different the next few years.

I have no sympathy for this airline,it deserves to die, and believe me, it will lose money again.

Many airlines had closed down.It's survival of the fittest, if you can't compete than you have no business to be in that business.

Many national and private airlines had been closed down due to mounting losses, MAS should not be an exception.Pan Am, Swissair,Sabena and many others have gone into liquidation for the same reason.

The only reason MAS is still around is due to false pride and a government who doesn't care how taxpayers money are being used.

Anonymous said...

Great quotes from Anon 1:10am:

"We all know that the one enjoying "protectionism" is NOT Malaysian Airlines but Tony Fernandez's Air Asia!"

Can you please look up the definition of "protectionism" and then explain carefully to us in what way is AirAsia enjoying "protectionism"?

Anonymous said...

ok..i retract my comments about rocky....he's not an idiot i guess....:)...but the guy who wrote about airasia being protected is definitely a dumb ass.....he really takes the cake....

but in the case of hantu laut...i applaud his candor in this matter....this has also been my personal opinion.....its time for mas to close shop....

then perhaps ...'the pheonix can rise from the ashes...' :)

rcumalot said...

i must say, the article posted by anon..from ttg asia was mind-blowing..at least for me...SIA for world dominance....well, if u cant beat em, might as well join em......hey maybe its time for malaysia to join singapore la....:)

Anonymous said...

It true that there are many airlines previously out there BUT NOWHERE IN SIGHT TODAY.
WHY?
Because of fair competition worldwide that eventually made them nonprofitable venture anymore.
But throughout this all fares came down to the benfit of consumers.
We dont need people here who are overly loyal and having a false sense of patriotism or nationalism.Who knows maybe even Firefly may be the national carrier oneday if it proves to be fruitful.

Anonymous said...

People, Leave TONY Alone..... Arguably, Tony is MORE than your average entreprenuer....he has done so much good for the people, he saw an opportunity, he seized it and is on the way to becoming a great international brand name, him, personally, he knows show business....he is the BEST marketeer/ accountant / promoter ,/ strategist / and believe me you all, watch him go, he is going to be VERY VERY VERY BIG internationally & GLOBALLY......

Sophie said...

can everyone fly kl-singapore?

time will tell -- http://sophiesworld-sophiesworld.blogspot.com/2007/10/can-everyone-fly-kl-singapore.html

skilgannon1066 said...

Salaam, Pak Rocky

While I usually agree with your opinions, I think that you got it all wrong in this particular case.

First up, bear in mind that the rot in MAS set in long before AirAsia appeared on the horizon.

If you delve back into the history of MAS and Spore Airlines (SIA) and how they were formed out of the then Malaysia-Spore Airlines (MSA, remember?), and see how these 2 airlines charted their respective fortunes, you have to wonder at how MAS squandered its opportunities time and again.

So, where SIA has been going from strength to strength, MAS has been plagued by bad management and has been lurching from crisis to crisis.

Tell me, Pak Rocky, has anyone who has contributed to the decline of MAS ever been called to account?

Lee Kuan Yew has been absolutely firm that SIA, from day one, has to pay it's way without any govt subsidies, even though it's majority-owned by the Spore govt. And it has shown in SIA being consistently profitable year after year, apart from a blip some years back - a blip from which it recovered.

And LKY has made it a strategic imperative for Spore that Changi Airport has to be the premier air hub in the region. In fact, he has gone on record to say that Changi's air hub status (and it's contribution to Spore's economy) is more important than the fate of SIA.

Ask yourself, Pak, how is it that SIA has been able to regularly upgrade it's fleet with the latest aircraft (Airbus A380s and A350 XWBs and Boeing B777-300 ERs and B787 Dreamliners) that are either on order or already part of it's operations?

And how is it that Changi has consistently been better run and better managed than KLIA?

A strong airline contributes to a strong air hub (SIA-Changi). A weak airline does little to grow an air hub (MAS-KLIA).

At least, Tony Fernandes and AirAsia are attempting to redress the situation somewhat by trying to make KLIA a regional hub for low-cost carriers, thereby generating the passenger volumes that could attract more foreign airlines to operate services to KLIA.

Where is the corresponding vision from MAS?

And where is the corresponding vision from KLIA?

Anonymous said...

Spare a thought for 'Thai' Air Asia - that baby slipped out of the country just before Mr T. Sad.

http://airasiaannus.blogspot.com/2007/10/it-looks-like-malaysia-and-singapore.html

I've got to agree with - I believe - the majority of posters that a level playing field is healthy and just serves to improve service.

Traditionally it was said that nothing kills a bad product [brand] faster than good advertising.

I'd contend that AA is going to need to lift its game. Word of mouth has always been more powerful - credible - than advertising.Times have changed and with Web 2.0, and word of mouth is now on steroids.

It's a living thing. And like most creatures on steroids, it's angry, it's growing breasts ... and it can be a real bitch, if you'll pardon my language.Peeved passengers in isolation are perhaps mildly irritating to a brand like AA ...

Angry and organised communities, legions too long ignored are an entirely different proposition.

I don't want to hear, "It's a cut-price carrier. You get what you pay for." If Airline B gives me more - even if it is simply managing my perceptions - I'm leaving on THAT jet plane. When people start to vote with their wallets & purses in their droves, it can only be a win-win for the best airline and the consumer.

Fly Air Asia? Not Me.

Rich

http://airasiaannus.blogspot.com/

ahiruDin aTTan said...

Skillgannon, everybody!

I am not pro-Malaysia Airlines or anti-Singapore, please bear that in mind. I have nothing again Tony Fernandes, too.

In fact, I was one of the earliest to throw my support for TF. When he was just starting out and people were pushing him to a corner (he was not even allowed to put up AA banners at the terminal, etc), the Malay Mail was up in arms to speak for the underdog.

Today, the tables are turned. I remain friends with Tony Fernandes (well, he still responds to my sms, at least) even after his partnership with that Kalimullah Masheerul Hassan (who is suing me because I called him a liar). AA is no longer the underdog.

My main concern is one -- that we (I mean the Malaysian entities AA and Mas) are not united in facing the competition from Singapore (SIA and Tiger Airways). We all know how good Singapore is. Tony has been trying to fly Singapore for years (via Senai) and they have shut him out. But we open up to Singapore so easily, without making sure that we are fully prepared?

Now (after I made this posting) Firefly wants to fly Singapore via Subang, the old airport. Firefly is Mas' subsidiary. I am all for it. Obviously, in opening up competition, the Transport Minsiter did not think of this.

I await his next move.

rcumalot said...

skillgannon is 100 per cent on the money....the hub is more important than the line...

the lack of vision is the key....