Jeremiah Wong
-
Content Count
68 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Jeremiah Wong
-
-
Thanks for the info. Some people are still in denial and think they’re doing ok. There’re at least 10 European carriers operate into SIN/BKK/HKG. Vietnam and surrounding countries like Cambodia and Laos are also booming which some refuse to acknowledge. Or Malaysia is happy with hosting Middle East and neighbouring countries only in fear of unhealthy culture being brought in by westerner? Just wondering.Nice figures. Alas, the devil is in the details.
Out of the 25 million, on average 10 to 11 million per annum are made up of Singaporeans.
Visitor numbers from Thailand also seem pretty high in the millions, but a huge part of that number come from our land border crossings in the north.
To a lesser extent, the same can be said for visitor numbers from Indonesia and Brunei in the east.
When you take away these figures, the number of tourists who will come specifically to Malaysia for a holiday is way less than the 25 million figure. Malaysia's actual inbound tourist figures are probably closer to that of the Philippines.
Arrivals from mainland China may look high, but they are appallingly low in comparison with other Southeast countries. A significant chunk of them come to Malaysia only as a tag-on from their trips to Singapore or Thailand. That explains the low presence of Chinese carriers in Malaysia.
And it's not just the Chinese. Intra Asian travel has boomed big time in recent years with rising prosperity all over. Koreans, Indians, Japanese, Thais, us Malaysians, Singaporeans, Hongkongers and Taiwanese are all big outbound tourist contributors within Asia. Malaysia unfortunately, doesn't rank high on many people's wish list. And this from people within our region who know of our existence. Australians - and they are a travel-happy bunch - couldn't care less. Forget Europe or America.
That explains the relative low presence of foreign carriers in Malaysia. That explains our low hotel yields.
So no, tourism is not doing well in Malaysia. Get real.
Isn't it obvious fact that neighbouring countries often make up the largest chunk of visitors to any country in the world?
So you reckon Malaysian and Singaporean made up half of Thailand’s tourist arrival? Even if it does, good on them coz half of that figure is still much higher than our half and hence more revenue for them.
-
I’m interested to know the percentage of Singaporean, Indon and mainland Chinese out of that 25.8m. If they consist more than 70%, I don’t think the tourism board is doing enough to attract others.Off topic, seems to me Malaysia is doing well on the tourism front. So this answers the question to those who say otherwise. The numbers have spoken.
-
Agree on marketing for Malaysia. But Thailand also has this image where tourists are almost free to do whatever (at least in the tourist’s mind) - sex, drugs, alcohol, and also petting tigers and riding elephants.
I wouldn’t say Bali is more interesting than the whole of Malaysia (I assume you refer Malaysia on the whole as “us”). Not even close. Traffic is awful and the island is run by taxi mafias (which does not exist in Malaysia AFAIK). And are you sure there are more backpackers in Laos than in Malaysia (again they cater to a lot of backpackers who want go tubing down a river whilst drunk)? Cambodia well they have a huge temple complex that’s world famous so that’s a bit different (but in terms of tourist arrivals, Cambodia received 6.2MM tourists in 2018 whilst Malaysia received 25.8MM tourists).
3. Kuching is just a mere 1.5 hours flight from KL. About the same as BKK to HKT. You can get one for around RM70-80 if you book far in advance (like 1+ month). Aren’t most tourist destinations in Southeast Asia seasonal? Phuket is low season now. Bangkok is low season after Songkran till around October. Bali’s low season is between November and February. And Terengganu might be restrictive. Perhentian is not.
Langkawi is cool. Not the best beaches around but there are things to do. The Skybridge is cool, so are the mangroves. If it’s nothing special, there wouldn’t be so many Europeans spending their honeymoon, holiday, or living there
KL is meh to some and lovely to some. It really depends on what the person is looking for. SG for example is extremely boring and sterile to me but some of my friends absolutely love it. Sure KL is not as insta friendly as say SG with the skyline and MBS pool but the rooftop bars in KL are really nice. Batu Caves is a major insta spot tho.
My European friends love KL. They think they get a good bargain for their money. Great food, amazing hotels at a fraction that of SG and even BKK. Where else can you stay at a MO, St. Regis, Four Seasons etc. for less than $200 USD a night? But KL is just a city after all. The main attractions of Malaysia IMO are in Sabah and Sarawak.
I still have no idea what Visit Malaysia 2020 is for. It’s not like tourists will see that and go “oh maybe we need to visit Malaysia next year”.
1.Bali is popular whether you like it or not. So many shortcomings but still popular even among the elites. Period.
2. Cambodia and Laos. Purely western tourist and some Chinese. I wonder if the number of arrival in Malaysia is skewed mainly because majority are from Singapore and Jakarta? The Brits will always speak well of Malaysia since it’s commonwealth.
3. Yes you can get a bargain fare to KCH if you book early but if you notice the pax profile they’re 99% Malaysian. If the budget is the same going to say Krabi and KCH, which one will you choose?
4. Phuket has rainy season but always crowded as if it doesn’t bother them.
5. BKK is also good bargain. And it caters to different categories of tourist.
6. Sabah is successful in drawing tourist from China and Korea.
7. SIN is a mega transit hub in Asia. The airport itself is already a destination.
8. Perhentian is nice but getting there is a hassle. I for one prefer direct routing.
Sometimes I wonder what we’re well known of. If we’re shopping haven, so are our neighbours. Food? It’s subjective. Twin tower is just a building.
-
2) That's because of Thailand's image as an exotic and cheap destination (Indonesia and Malaysia is way cheaper than Thailand due to the baht's appreciation). But Thailand also attract a lot of other tourists (esp. sex tourists) to their country.
3) Malaysia has plenty of tourist spots (and more authentic than Thailand). Sabah and Sarawak have plenty of (gorgeous) national parks that are world famous, along with Terengganu/Sabah Islands (I'd prefer Perhentians don't be the next Bali or Phuket), Penang, and Langkawi etc. IMO, Malaysia beaches are way nicer than those in Thailand (the only exception is that Malaysian beach resorts cost an arm and a leg for average facilities). Thailand on the other hand have bigger islands and able to offer better infrastructure on their islands.
Do we really want to have abused elephants so tourists can ride on them or caged tigers so visitors can see them?
You don’t need to abuse elephant. No matter how blessed we’re to have unspoiled beaches etc, if there’s no marketing and promotion it’s not gonna work. We also lack business traveller, unlike Singapore and Bangkok.
2. Way cheaper doesn’t mean interesting. Heck, even Bali is a better choice than us. Sex tourist is nothing to be proud of but there’re more backpackers in Thailand, Cambodia and even Laos.
3. Sabah & Sarawak. Bad location, way too far. Even catching a domestic flight from KUL costs more than some intl flights. There’re some direct flights from BKI but only limited to China and Korea. Insignificant amount of flight to Japan and Australia. Terengganu? Seasonal destination and too restrictive? Langkawi? Nothing special really.
I once saw a tourist asks another tourist how he feels about KL and he said so-so.
-
AirAsia Xs continued losses cast shadow on business model https://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/airasia-xs-continued-losses-cast-shadow-business-model
Maybe time to shift them over to Thailand.
The three biggest advantages Thailand have over us are:
1. Massive population
2. Massive tourism, not just from China and Middle East but all over the world. Scandinavia, US, Europe and even Russia.
3. Massive tourist spots all over Thailand. There are at least 10. KL lacks identity and cultural experience.
-
Or without it, the full service cannot limit the low-cost’s threat?Without MAVCOM, AirAsia could do like what they did back in 2012 when they closed down their European routes & left their passengers to flap in the wind, and not get any penalty from it. Without MAVCOM, AirAsia could hoard all the route rights they want & not use them.
So yes, we bloody need MAVCOM. All it needs is tweaking for optimization purposes.
Tony, stop asking for tongkats!
-
Clearly you haven’t been following the news. It’s known fact that the MAX has design error. Don’t get me started on the MCAS. The FAA was so dysfunctional that they allow Boeing to do whatever they want, literally no choice. Ever since the second crash, the government stepped in and sacked the FAA director and replaced it with a retired Delta pilot. Was the FAA or the government being dysfunctional?Just because it's not operational, doesn't mean it's not safe. That's a fallacy. You do realize that there are bureaucratic hassles that they need to deal with? Considering how dysfunctional the US government is at the moment, I'm not surprised that it's taking them so long.
As for Muilenburg's statement, of course he's going to say that. But that doesn't mean they designed an aircraft that was inherently unsafe to the point that mass hysteria is warranted.
-
If it’s indeed safe it would have been operational by now. If you’ve not already known, Boeing’s ceo said they’re humbled by the crash and will continue to learn from their mistakes.I've read the article and it proves nothing, just that Germans don't allow MAX ferry flights. What does that prove?
The article itself said that the plane made it to Stockholm, so I guess other European countries feel that the MAX is safe enough to at least fly around their airspace.
-
We've come full circle. Previously long haul trips were done on narrowbody jets like the 707 & the DC-8. Now we're back to narrowbody jets on long haul!
Nothing fancy but meanwhile in Boeing and its MAX....
-
Are you hoping that they don’t do well to justify the rest of the low standard airports in the country? Just saying.Senai is operated by another entity besides MAHB. How they're doing?
You'd think being so close to Singapore, it could have been like Newark is to NYC.
-
Interesting. Coz some people mentioned earlier on passenger will be angry with the inconvenience and shoddy facilities.
-
Well, those pro Boeing guys will always downplay this incident.
-
KA is not an LCC.
Not LCC but a stepchild of CX which operates into secondary destinations like KUL.
-
You know they say your attitude determines your altitude. When you keep saying it’s too hard and we’ve done the best we could, it’s impossible, it takes time, effort etc, you’re not gonna achieve anything at the end of day.Easier said than done. Who's going to take over the non-profitable airports? Who's going to pay for it to continue operations?
The credential of those running the airport is also questionable.
It’s no wonder all airports are in sorry state, klia1 included. It’s not run down, just not well maintained and worn out.
-
That shouldn’t be an excuse though. Just saying.Are they though?
Of course when you compare to Changi it's different, but you have to understand that Changi's management only has to focus on Changi. MAHB on the other hand has to focus on KUL and all the other airports bar JHB. All with their own needs which needs to be balanced.
-
It takes two to tango as partners. Problem is, Tony often thinks "Whatever Tony wants, Tony gets,". That's not how partnerships work.
True. But not forgetting they (M@hb) are also very incompetent and sub standard.
-
KCH-SZX tonight 100% passenger load, still wonder why AA gonna suspend this route.
Honestly, there’s no draw in Kuching’s tourism.
-
Well some people would, but not me. I won't fly them even if my brother in law gives me his staff ticket!
Well, I’ve flown all MH/OD/AK. Honestly, I don’t find MH particularly good. Their food is a nightmare and they have many rude staffs also. I really think they should learn from SQ (no offence). I like OD’s legroom. Feel so spacious. But always last minute cancel or merge flight. AK always delays. But they got so many frequencies and options.
-
Many big shots onboard.
-
They’re not too concerned and you shouldn’t either coz people keep flying with them despite being cheated so many times. I’ve seen this too many times myself. People maki nonstop and then fly with them again. Usually those cheap customers make the loudest noise.It may be peanuts, but the publicity will not be good for them, at least in the short term.
People are already commenting about how they force additional charges if you use non-AirAsia/Big branded cards to pay. That may be the next thing that they will get hit with.
-
Rm160K fine for each airline is like peanut to them. However, theyve been known for misleading public since the beginning.
-
To be fair, the 717 is a step-child. It's a McDonnell Douglas aircraft & the reason Boeing didn't go all out in marketing the 717 is because it was a direct competitor to the 737. Meanwhile the 767-400 apparently was designed specifically for the airlines that bought them - Continental & Delta, as a replacement for their DC-10 & L-1011 fleets respectively.
Excellent justification!
-
They are acting like Samsung trying to demonise Apple product. If they want to be the King of the jungle, they should stop that because Airbus isn't a personal consumer product. Even after years of trying, Samsung is still unable to dethrone Apple as the market trend setter. Whether you like it or not, Apple is the market lead and trend setter in the mobile phone sector.
Airbus' statements are often short-sighted and won't hold water through time. Only companies with inferiority complex will make such silly comments by defaming others. I don't see company B defaming company A in similar fashion.
Am I the only one in thinking Company B actually produce better planes than Company A? Company B is the trend setter and their B787 forced company A to come up with the A350. The A330 NEO would have been the A350 if it wasn't due to the protest of Qatar Airways forcing them to come up with a whole new design to match the B787.
I don't hate Airbus, but I do think they produce boring looking planes that doesn't produce any chemistry to cause the heart to excel. A380, A320 and A350.... for example.
Boeing existed since 50s and Airbus started in 80s mate. It counts as an achievement for Airbus to achieve 40% market share and they have never intended to be king (though they were for few years from 2001) coz the EU won’t want to upset US by overtaking them. Remember there’re also a few failures produced by Boeing eg. 717, 767-400 which was unable to compete with A330 at all. Don’t worry, Airbus might be losing market share but they’re not short of blue chip customers like Delta/CX/SQ and so on. If QF went for A350 for their ultra long haul project, it’s gonna boost A350 program further.
-
For the record, they WERE a Boeing operator in the first place. It wasn’t until Boeing failed to offer them good price on the 733 replacement that they went Airbus and the rest is history. Boeing tried to pitch the 787-10 to them so hard but the fact is they’re already a huge and solid Airbus customer. Well, unless the 339 goes terribly wrong, it’s hard to see them order Boeing.The largest A330neo orders are from an airline that was never a big Boeing operator in the first place. Heck the number of 787 deliveries is almost 3x the number of A330neo orders.
It may not kill the A330, but it forced Airbus to invest in updating an antiquated aircraft and diverting resources from other programs.
Airbus A330 Neo - AirAsia X Orders 50 A330-900neo at Farnborough Air Show 2014
in General Aviation
Posted · Report reply
So how does it feel taking the third spot? Proud?