Keno Omar

Could MAS really support a daily service to FCO considering an earlier relevation that most/all European destinations all made loss? Skyteam connections aside, MAS also need a significant proportion of O&D traffic with the right proportion of premium passengers to make these extra flights to Italy work. This arrangement is probably to the benefit of AZ to take advantage of MAS connections to Australia (recall it wasn't long ago that AZ had a service Down Under). On the other hand, I'm still quite sceptical on the benefits that MAS can gain from AZ in their territory, I would have thought KLM ought to be adequate. Personally I sense that Italy seems a bit too "alien" for travelling Malaysian public for flight connections who are usually familiar with LHR, FRA and AMS (all of which are "English-friendly" airports).

Fukuoka doesn't seem to be able to do well, it was fairly recently that the route was re-instated but now getting a cut yet again.

The Palestinian issue is something that muslims the world over holds dear in their hearts. A friendly advice to those who seem unfamiliar with malaysian/muslim sensitivities, never sound as though you are on Israeli's side. Multicultural Malaysia maintains its peace all these while for a reason - there are certain extremely sensitive things that are not meant to be expressed openly. Peace to all

At first it seems hard to believe that a key route between major Star Alliance hubs like AKL-SIN could not make money let alone a 'backwater' city like KUL. Anyhow, in this global alliance era it makes sense for any non-profitable route to be operated by an alliance partner airline. In the case of AKL-SIN, SQ clearly has an advantage in operating this route because the connection opportunities they offer from their SIN hub compared to NZ's feed in AKL. Imagine reading a headline someday... QF to suspend SIN

I would recommend the executive coach between SIN & KUL : http://www.aeroline.com.my/ http://www.airebus.net/

I don't have much sympathy for TF for the so-called unfair competition but what I'm disappointed most is how MAS is still trying to get bigger and bigger slice of domestic service when they have been losing money on it all these while. Let AK handle the domestic "flying bas ekspres" around Malaysia, and MAS should stick to their 5-star international service which they do best. In the current situation, MAS can't reallty have it both ways.

I recall when the route rationalization plan was first made to public, MAS would only serve 4 domestic routes i.e. KUL-BKI/KCH/PEN/LGK for these being the routes with most international connections from KUL. Whether or not these routes were profitable, remains questionable. MAS wants to shed its loss-making operations among them being the domestic sectors and hence operating these 19 routes really does sound pretty excessive considering the original objective of the route rationalization plan. I believe it all boils down to federal & state government interventions. Every state government wants to maintain a MAS service to KUL as if this is a social/national obligation that MAS has to serve. At the same time, they criticize MAS heavily whenever the company posts huge losses; money politics and mismanagement aside, operating loss-making domestic routes isn't really helping either. MAS wishing to take over JHB-KCH and BKI-MYY sounds nothing short of state government pressure; now they also want KUL-IPH back??? In my opinion AK/MH cooperation as a full interlining partnership is not going to happen anytime soon. Heck, AK doesn't even have interlining arrangement between their own flights as most if not all LCC operate as a point-to-point service which eliminates the extra costs of baggage handling.

Flights to Manila (CRK) from BKI have been around for over a year now. Service commenced 5 Apr 2005. AK should try venturing into Mindanao (Zamboanga & Davao) to capture the labour traffic considering a large proportion of Filipinos working/living in Sabah are from that region.

I recalled flying KUL-JED early this year for work. It was shortly after hajj season was over, so that was the least busy period for hajj, umrah and overall traffic at JED. MH used A333 for that flight rather than the regular 744 and even then it was only around 20% full. One Arab lady sitting near me was constantly complaining to the F/As why doesn't MAS use the big aircraft with TVs she flew on from Jeddah a week earlier. I would've much preferred that MAS does the same (9 hours without PTV is a bit too much to ask from me) but at least I understood the basic economics of flight operations EK777 versus MH333... not a fair match!

...which begs the question the logic of having the LCCT at the first place. If MAS were to transfer a huge chunk of its domestic operation to AK, shouldn't the empty gates at domestic MTB be more than suffice for AK? There we have a state-of-the-art MTB but mostly empty, while passengers at the LCCT are stuffed into a hangar-style crapshack. My wish: transfer back AK domestic to MTB, international flights can remain in LCCT. This would ease connectivity between AK domestic and MH international services; AK international services are meant to be point-to-point travel, so they could manage on their own at the LCCT. Even at non-peak times, the LCCT seems already jam packed, what would it be like when all those A320 actually arrive?

The supersaver fare may look cheap(ish) but wait till you add the tax + yada yada. Flight to PER is quoted as RM850 but the tax etc is another nearly RM800 more. Similarly last week SQ had an offer at RM800, but the tax etc is another RM850. For my flight to KIX last year, the tax etc was only RM153; now it's RM592. The extra charge to LHR is now also around RM800, i recall last year I only paid around RM250+. Harga barang naik... gaji tak naik...

Good point, that probably explains the lack of transatantic codeshares among Asia Pacific carriers. I could think of one example for SQ, they now codeshare with AC from LHR after they ceased to operate into YYZ; and to MCO in cooperation with VS. Despite the cost issue, I believe MAS/KLM could work something out to make the trans-Atlantic cooperation works similar to MAS/KLM cooperation to Australia. MAS could pick key cities in North America namely EWR/JFK, ORD and YYZ to begin with an take it from there for further codeshare expansion. European shorthaul codeshares do not have as much restrictions compared to trans-Atlantic, so MAS should make full use of their cooperation with KLM to serve other key and secondary european cities. MAS's resources should be channelled to the markets that they do best rather than blindly continue operating loss-making routes. I'm wondering how Air France sees all these present/future cooperation between KLM & MAS...

One positive thing that has came out from the recent turnaround plan was that MAS management has begun to admit some of their true weaknesses and to stop following SQ's model regardless of its suitability for MAS/KUL own market. Most if not all of MAS european routes are loss-making and yet they used to fly to 9 european cities before MAN & VIE was recently suspended. KUL is not this region's hub and thus could not support such point-to-point model like SIN/SQ; by comparison even mighty CX only flies to 5 cities with regional connections are made via LHR through BA codeshare. With MAS progressively axing their european cities over the next few years leaving only LHR, AMS, CDG and FRA, the remaining european destinations would be served via codeshare agreement with a global alliance partner which MAS is planning to join soon. There's no prize for guessing the answer would be Skyteam with KLM being the key partner (i would be extremely surprised if MAS goes a different path). By then, cities that are no longer served by MAS namely MAN, VIE ZRH, FCO and ARN, would most likely be served as a codeshare agreement with KLM via AMS. Such agreement would certainly not be limited to the key cities, with possibilities of extending it to other major/regional destinations such as MUC, MXP, GVA, MAD, PRG etc. MAS has been for many years now been codesharing on KLM to CPH, OSL, GOT and ARN; why MAS kept on flying at a loss to other european cities at a loss when KLM codeshare would be a wiser business decision to make is beyond me. I guess in BolehLand, it's all about beating SQ at all cost. It would probably be very likely to see Bmi codeshare via LHR to 7 regional UK/Eire cities be terminated in favour of KLM cooperation. When it comes to connection, many regional UK passengers would rather avoid transiting via LHR and would prefer doing so in continental europe. Plus, KLM has an advantage of having a larger network of UK cities that the locally-based Bmi; KLM also flies to Birmingham, Newcastle, Cardiff, Bristol, Southampton & Humberside which are all not served by Bmi. Now moving on to transatlantic routes. People kept wondering why SQ could support 3x daily to LAX while MH only has 5x a week; similarly the 2x daily to JFK/EWR on SQ while MH remains stagnant at 3x a week. KUL & SIN has a different market and connecting opportunies, the fact that we both sit on the exact geographical doesn't mean squat. Looking at the online schedule at KLM.com, I can't help notice that the connecting timeslots between KUL & North America are pretty ideal even at the moment (we're not talking about SkyTeam era yet). I for one has never been a supporter of MAS's service to EWR, they could barely support a pathetic 3x a week, at first via DXB but they chickened out when EK commence their own service, then switching to ARN which already has direct competition with both SK and CO (both of which have daily service, plus ARN itself as a destination is also highly questionable). And yet for "national pride" or whatever they call it, EWR route remains (hopefully not for long now). Let's face it, MH would never be anywhere near SQ's level in North America; MH tried to expand in Europe and failed, unless we're dealing with regional services to China, India or even I dare say Australia then MH may have some chance. Trans-atlantic cooperation with KLM seems to be a no-brainer to me, with great connection opportunities to most key cities in North America. In my opinion it beats having MH's own service to EWR (with stopover in ARN or wherever), then connecting to Skyteam partner CO to the final destination. With KLM arrangement, it's a one-stop connection to JFK, EWR, BOS, IAD, ORD, DTW (NW), MSP (NW), MEM (NW), ATL, IAH, MIA, YYZ and YUL, most of which are already ideally timed for connection to KUL. Even with MAS joining Skyteam, it would be very hard pressed to see DL or CO serving KUL; and NW's possible resumption would not necessary be a great addition to MAS operation anyway. For the West Coast, MAS route to LAX should stay as the only direct link between Malaysia & USA, plus I doubt the govt would allow MAS to axe it anyway. With the relatively short distance to the west coast compared to the other side, the difference in connecting time on KE/DL/NW service versus a direct MH service doesn't seem to be that convenient. With that said, MH service to LAX should not be seen just as a welfare case to link Malaysia to USA but should also be turned profitable. MH's transpacific 747s now are mostly filled with TPE-bound cheap tickets where competition is fierce. I'm not sure if MAS would do better if the flight is rerouted back to NRT (if slot permits) or a different aircaft and/or configuration, so I welcome others' comment on this. Personally I'd say forget about MH expanding to SFO or ORD, or even keeping the route to EWR. MAS really should venture much further into KLM codeshare (+ Skyteam in general) and stick to the market that performs best rather than simply copying SQ's model.

He probably referred to Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar al Bukhary (of Al Bukhary Foundation); despite being a multimillionnaire he prefers to maintain a simple life.

Oops i need to start wearing glasses

I can't understand the logic as to why would Kuwait Airways would want to use the LCC crapshack?? I would have thought LCCT would be better suited for other regional airlines for quick turnround but surely not KU with their very well-off passengers.

Similar to AK's services to Indonesia, they're cashing on the labour traffic. My flights to SUB & SOC were almost 90% Indonesian labour.

My dad and I was upgraded to business a couple of years ago (KUL-LHR) because we were among the last persons to board the plane. The staff thought that it was too inconvenient (or too slow) for us to look for our seats, so we were offered the nearest seats to the embarkation door - i.e. business. My dad is one of those people who are quite obsessed with punctuality. Now he knows it pays to take it easy (waaaaay easy) next time

Personally I often find EK & SQ fare are quite steep compared to MH. During my last trip, the cheapest fare quoted to me by the travel agent was with GF, but that would involve 3 stops at BKK, AUH & BAH, twice changing aircraft. If you want something different, I highly recommend EK's 777 but not so much of their 330. Dubai is a great stopover city but with the desert summer approaching, you'd better off waiting later in the year to fully enjoy it.

AK may not serve alcohol, but those skimpy red skirts aren't particularly "halal" to wear either haha

You may wish to consider a LCC for the connecting flight to Gothenburg but the downside is you have to collect the luggage and re-check in on the final leg because LCCs don't do interlining. Cheapest flights between KUL & Europe are often to LHR, also to AMS & FRA. from London Stansted on Ryanair from Amsterdam on FlyMe from Frankfurt on SAS Snowflake from Frankfurt/Hahn on Ryanair more here... http://www.whichbudget.com/en/cheapflights.php?to=GOT http://www.whichbudget.com/en/cheapflights.php?to=GSE When visiting Europe, I often get the cheapest deal for LHR so I always use it as my base. For my last trip last november, I flew LGW-BFS, BFS-BRS, BRS-MAD, MAD-GVA & GVA-LGW. On average I paid GBP25 or around RM160 per leg, so that's cheaper than MH's Y full-fare KUL-AOR. LCC's are a godsent!

This is such a typical melayu mentality, everything must be spoonfed by the government. MAS has been pampered by the government long enough, it's time to stop being a crybaby and start fighting with the big boys of industry players. Kalau macam ni sampai bila pun bangsa takkan maju la...

Does Boeing take duit Monopoly?

All I can say is, padan muka! (serve you right!)

Only JAL (daily) & SriLankan have traffic rights. I believe Air India & Qatar also had the rights when they served SIN via KUL.