Jump to content
MalaysianWings - Malaysia's Premier Aviation Portal

Chris Tan

Gold Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral


About Chris Tan

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It's way too early to speculate on the future of MH's TYO service. At the moment we don't even know what their intention is with the HND slots. They're not anywhere near full schedule yet. Plenty of frames to go around.
  2. In the public domain now. https://www.malaysiaairlines.com/us/en/news-article/2022/malaysia-airlines-expands-network-new-direct-flight-doha.html Surprised they're going daily right away, when they're nowhere near restoring their international network. Other than being a QR feeder I can't imagine the rationale for this route.
  3. Strange. I have a friend in Seattle who hasn't seen any adverts for Europe, yet it seems to be chock full of Americans. Maybe it's a Sabah thing.
  4. I can imagine the experts bashing MH in the not-so-distant future for its short sighted fleet renewal plans -- why didn't MH take advantage of lower rates to renew their fleet, the average age in 2021 was almost 9 years old, why wait till 2025, SQ/CX/VN/TG/GA/everyone else already have shiny new planes, how can they serve so many destinations with only 6 A350s, etc etc. Anyway, I hope they'll keep the experts fully informed of their decision making. The experts are the ones who'll determine the direction of our beloved MH.
  5. Sounds more like a termination than seasonal suspension.... https://www.executivetraveller.com/news/ba-halts-sydney-bangkok-flights-to-oct-2021-axes-kuala-lumpur
  6. Can't have your cake and eat it too. Some people want lower fares and taxes while getting higher levels of service and profit. Their proposed solution to the inevitable loss-making reality is simply to stop bailouts and start a new airline. 🤷‍♂️ I also wonder just how big of a drop this would be in the grand scheme of things. There are still many journeys that aren't viable by land. Meanwhile FY/OD turboprop services aren't catered to price-sensitive travellers to begin with. What long-term planning and investment? The Malaysian story is one of hindsight, greed and myopic decisions. There's hardly a grand project that gets by without being mired in scandal or political meddling. The truth is we have a very long way to go before flight shame becomes a thing. Until we have a prosperous, functioning society, you won't find too many Malaysians worrying about how to offset their carbon footprint.
  7. This is a real loss to *A. It was one of the better carriers, with a pretty decent FFP. I selfishly hope it doesn't go through...
  8. I'm sure KUL will revert to CX. There's too much traffic for UO. PEN might be a toss-up but there's a reasonable chance CX will return. There's decent cargo demand and passenger traffic. Perhaps a mixture of the two with narrowbodies? Regardless, probably a long way off before PEN is even restarted.
  9. Until 2015 or so, Enrich offered terrific value. KUL-LHR in Business was only 46.5k, for instance. Availability was rarely an issue as it booked into revenue fare buckets - which in itself came with its own 'perks' . Family of 4 to London and back in J over the Christmas peak? No problem. It was one analogy of how a dysfunctional MH offered great opportunities if you knew where to look. Then the bean counters decided to ruin the fun.
  10. Nothing to lose except for several billion dollars and no hope of profitability for the first half a decade or so at the very least, you mean? And going by how this country works, the new carrier would inevitably succumb to the shackles of government interference. Then we'd be back to square one. I'd rather the devil we know. This is not some Silicon Valley startup in which you take the plunge with a dream and a prayer, and dust yourself off if (or rather, when) it fails and move on with life. There's so much more at stake in starting a new national carrier.
  11. The optics are, of course, awful. Bailouts, layoffs, unrelenting government meddling, directionless management, etc. But would Malaysia really be better off without MH? I'd argue not. While it is unfortunate to have had billions poured into the airline, this is one dysfunctional project that does indirectly benefit Malaysians. Not everyone, I grant you, but the travelling public -- including the demographics of this forum -- can choose to avail themselves to the fruits of MH's misery. In normal times, the value was tough to beat. Want Malaysia to be connected to the world? You'll need a national carrier for that. EK/QR aren't going to fill the void left behind by a defunct MH. Low airport taxes and landing fees aren't going to make the likes of LH/AF/LX/UA/QF/NZ fly here. D7 can't connect Malaysia to the world with their here-today-gone-tomorrow approach to its network. Our tourism market already trails behind neighbouring countries. Slashing international routes leaves potential travellers with one less incentive to visit. FY jet doesn't have the reputation or connections to be a true international carrier. Shut down MH and AK/D7 would have no reason to be competitive. Then Malaysians would truly be worse off - higher fares with budget service. But what about the billions that would be saved from future MH bailouts? Surely the funds will be put to some altruistic project for the benefit of the nation, right? Get real. This is Malaysia. In all likelihood the funds will disappear into some shady project from which you and I will not benefit.
  12. Yes, I hear SQ's profits are through the roof now that they're delivering Dom Perignon to one's doorstep. MH would be foolish not to jump in with a satay delivery service....
  • Create New...