Chris Tan

I am sure THIS would have enticed airlines like LH/LX/OS/UA/AA/DL/QF/NZ to start serving KUL.

Funny. Airports like LHR and SYD have even more restrictive operating hours and airlines are still tripping over each other to get slots. There are flights departing and arriving KUL throughout the day. Maybe he is disappointed there are no direct TWU/KBR/AOR-LAX/SFO/NYC flights.

If you think the ME3 are truly for-profit businesses then I've got a bridge to sell you.

Could EK/EY/QR be like today if they were not owned and heavily subsidised by oil-rich governments that are awash with cash?

Do you honestly think airlines decide where to fly based on the number of USB ports an airport has? Or how high they rank on some ranking by an organisation that is taken seriously by precisely zero serious travellers? The "preferred" airport (whatever that means) is where the money is. BKK and SIN aren't busier or more "preferred" because they have nicer toilets, but because they have bigger markets. BKK can have a chowshed terminal and it'd still be well ahead of KUL in terms of passenger numbers. You mean give in to LCC demands to build yet another crappy LCCT to minimise costs? Want to stop the "excuses" and make a change? You can always play your part by flying more often to make our aviation market that much bigger.

LHR is no benchmark to follow. Unless, of course, you like astronomical taxes and terrible value. And let's not delude ourselves into thinking KLIA can be a "premier" airport. It never was and is unlikely to be one anytime soon. The unfortunate fact remains - KUL doesn't have the traffic, yields and resources to compete with SIN. Unless the government is going to tax the living daylight out of each and every traveller (something which you yourself are an opponent of), we can stop dreaming about having the world's largest man-made waterfall in the region's "premier" aviation hub. What some people are forgetting is Jewel Changi is also intended to be a destination for Singaporeans. How many people live within a reasonable radius of KLIA to actually consider going there just for fun? Sure, certain things can be improved without breaking the bank, like toilets and managing efficiency, but if we're going to turn the fantasies of some into reality, are we ready to pay the price?

On sub-1hr hops, are they taking away the pack of peanuts since there are no meals to begin with? What a CF this is turning out to be...

https://youtu.be/FDDr_CAwaeM

Well, some people here wanted MH to become profitable one way or another.....

1) Place a gigantic teddy bear in the middle of the MTB 2) Convert the little patch of rainforest in the centre of the Satellite into a massive waterfall 3) Upholster the benches with Nappa leather 4) Turn the roof of the Satellite into a huge hibiscus garden to showcase our national pride. 5) Replace that wretched aerotrain system with a maglev rail line. 6) Quadruple the PSC so we can beat Singapore in taxes, too. Any other ideas?

Yes. Standard oneworld rules apply. No surprises here. Yes you can. Nobody will judge if you choose to do so.

You should forward your concerns to Boeing and industry leaders. These CEOs need to know the truth!

Interesting analysis. Have you read the final report?

Would forsaking a narrowbody replacement for an opportunistic new widebody order be a more ideal situation?

Excellent. I think I'll have the soup, mezze and dessert shortly after takeoff, have a browse through the IFE selection, then a fruit plate to refresh myself after a minute's nap.

One wonders if dine-on-demand is available on PEN-LGK

I just hope they don't emulate the airport taxes and charges of our neighbour down south

Maybe they can afford to renew their subscription if they increase the PSC

If that area is akin to the Pearl River Delta or the SF Bay Area, fine. Otherwise, the new airport will be nothing more than a gigantic white elephant that serves little more than the wishes of those who dream of a Malaysian EK/QR/SQ.

In politics there are no permanent friends. I think the past few years demonstrated that quite well in Malaysia.

On the contrary, it certainly sounds like some people expect a far greater service level at low prices. In fact, you seem to be quite fond of QR/EK because they offer SQ-level service while being "competitively priced". True, many Malaysians couldn't care less about the aircraft type they're on, but within the confines of MalaysianWings it certainly seems like narrowbodies attract a great deal of hate, especially on longer sectors. Like Skytrax? :D

MH charges AK/D7 prices: uncompetitive, lousy, sloppy MH charges SQ prices: uncompetitive, expensive, lousy You'll find that blocking portions of seats from online selection is an industry-wide practice. Closer to home: on cheaper fares TG only lets you pick a seat at the very back, while CX doesn't even let you select seats at all unless you're a OW elite.

As pointed out above, some people value time and convenience more than money. Have you seen the number of daily flights the ME3 have to/from places like SIN and BKK? Clearly, a lot of people fly to those cities via DXB/DOH/AUH. SQ and TG must therefore be uncompetitive, not well received or irrelevant. That's strange. One moment EK and QR are on par with SQ, the next they're rather ordinary: Did MH promise flat beds in Y and fail to deliver?

QF is not ditching SIN for MH/KUL.

Do you honestly think air travel is a binary choice between LCCs and luxury carriers like SQ/EK/QR? If that's the case then subpar FSCs like BA, LH, UA, AA, CA, MU, QF etc might as well shut down already. Connecting traffic might help fill planes, but it's the high yield O&D traffic that rake in the dough. As Craig pointed out, business travellers in a rush aren't going to make a detour to SIN/DXB/DOH if there's a reasonably comfortable direct option. It's also ironic that those calling for MH to be shut down for the sake of Malaysians are also happy to see Malaysians give their business to foreign competitors.