KK Lee

AI channeled pax to MH for many years, MH didn't pay AI and end up, MH owed AI a few ten millions USD. MH LHR slot was pay in lieu of debts owed.

Sky marshal should deter theft onboard. PRC airlines have at least one sky marshal onboard.

On my recent flight, a guy changed seats a few times and took out different hand luggage from overhead compartment. According to stewardess, theft onboard aircraft occurred regularly and until pax complaints of loss, they could only issue caution.

Unlikely to sustain.

Many public transport solutions is available and possible but MAHB lack the will and don't want SZB to be more convenience than KUL.

MNC may not be interested but there is no shortage of professionals from PRC and EU could be employed under contract.

If orang asli is muslim, they are classified as malay.

Does it mean MAS specifically exclude them previously? CZ home base is literally next to HKG, CX unlikely to agree.

Ideally KUL and SZB should be operate by different companies else there would be bias/priority against/over another.

Looks like KUL-SBW route is saturated.

SZB lack connection or transit, is better suited for regional jets operation, operating A320/738 from SZB is unlikely to be profitable.

With almost non connection/transit at SZB; MH, OD and AK should be looking at regional jets to optimize yield. operating A320 or 738 from SZB would be at best breakeven and more likely losing $. LCY has a bigger market, beside aircraft restriction, most operate regional jets. Introducing additional aircraft may incur additional training, type rating, etc but if the business unit is profitable is way better than operating losses. BA, AF, LH, KL, etc operate many aircraft types for reasons. MAS has been advocating few aircraft type to minimize training, type rating, etc and ignoring yield optimization, is placing the cart in front of horses. MAS failure and record speak of itself. Previous gomen banned pax jet operation at SZB to protect KUL. Like NEP, protection drag market growth and it is wise to let market forces to decide. LCY is popular among business travelers but has little impact on LHR. KUL is badly managed, no matter how much protection is given will remain badly manage.

Most of those appointed to mas senior management and BOD have little exposure outside GLC or gomen service and aviation business outside the country, couldn't comprehend what customers need, competitors offering, market development and trend. MYS domestic routes is limited and saturated, MAG is unlikely to sustain on domestic routes alone in the long term; international routes is the only growth opportunity. Where and how mas could growth is another long article.

As a regular pax on CZ and MU between KUL and PRC, strapping in narrow body for 5+ hours is bearable provided leg room is not tight, proper meal and alcoholic drinks is served and meet expectation. MH tend to over promise and under deliver, hence, often don't meet pax expectation. MH did but didn't understand what pax need. Hence, like most glc failed miserably.

Most if not all guests at 5 star hotel e.g Shangri-la unlikely to use all the facilities. But 5 star hotel need all these facilities to charge 5 star rate. To cater for exactly what all guests would use is minimizing e.g business hotel in Japan with no facilities. For reason why those could afford and have choice, unlikely to choose mas. If local population or domestic routes is a restriction on airlines; sq, cx, ek, qr, ey, etc wouldn't be around. Failure always find excuses. Due to mas track record, shareholders and bod don't have, dare not have plans beyond 5 years horizon and senior management are on contract. During the management tenure, often milk customers for their existence.