'KLIA East @ Labu’

[Naim 6]

Jan 20, 2009

AirAsia airport in limbo

 

KLIA operator's main shareholder trying to get govt to review go-ahead

By Leslie Lopez, SOUTH-EAST ASIA CORRESPONDENT

 

 

KUALA LUMPUR: - The controversy over a plan by budget airline AirAsia to build its own airport is exposing a major problem that ails corporate Malaysia - how the dominance of state-controlled agencies often stifles entrepreneurship.

 

The wrangling also highlights the government's inability to rein in poor- performing public enterprises and pursue policies to maximise the use of resources, economists and bankers say.

 

Unless the government moves quickly to resolve the public feuding between state-controlled airport operator Malaysia Airports Bhd (MAB) and AirAsia, it could undermine the country's tourism sector.

 

'Especially in these times of crisis, the issue is how well does the country maximise its resources. Building a new airport to resolve this squabble isn't the solution,' said a CEO of a local stockbroking firm.

 

AirAsia, one of Malaysia's more successful private entities, says the current low-cost terminal located near the Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA) in Sepang would not be able to cope with passenger and fleet growth by 2013.

 

AirAsia's aggressive chief executive Tony Fernandes predicts that the airline will handle 60 million passengers in four years' time and have a fleet of 184 aircraft.

 

He also says that MAB's plans to expand its facilities in KLIA will not be completed in time.

 

Since it would not have any say in the new facilities that MAB intends to build, AirAsia fears that landing and other charges could rise. It thus announced a plan to build its own airport to keep expenses low.

 

Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi's Cabinet had given AirAsia the green light for this new airport at Labu in Negeri Sembilan, roughly 8km away from KLIA. But that is just part of the story.

 

AirAsia had tried to negotiate a better deal with MAB, but why the latter did not try hard enough to keep its major customer happy remains a mystery. There are suggestions that the problem may be with MAB's main shareholder, government investment fund Khazanah Holdings. AirAsia's rapid growth has partly come at the expense of national carrier Malaysia Airlines, in which Khazanah holds a majority interest.

 

In recent weeks, Khazanah officials have lobbied senior Finance Ministry officials to get the government to review its decision on the Negeri Sembilan airport.

 

But this has received mixed reactions.

 

While proponents of Khazanah say that it is merely protecting its investments in MAB and Malaysia Airlines, others believe the investment agency is crowding out private enterprise. Khazanah dominates the national economy with controlling stakes in dozens of companies, such as transportation, medical services, finance, property and utilities.

 

Economists have long argued that this domination has led to inefficiency in policymaking, which is often skewed in favour of government-linked entities.

 

The turf war aside, there are strong arguments against a new airport. Detractors of the proposal say the KLIA was purpose- built to allow for another three satellite terminals. A new airport would also mean additional expenditure for transport infrastructure and duplication of resources.

 

What Datuk Seri Abdullah's administration ought to do is to play the role of referee effectively, analysts say.

 

If the government is of the view that a new airport would be a waste of resources, it should get MAB to negotiate with AirAsia, even if it means giving the latter wide autonomy to operate within KLIA. Under such an arrangement, the government would be able to protect its investment in the airport operator and at the same time allow AirAsia to grow profitably.

 

ljlopez@sph.com.sg

 

http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNew...ory_328386.html

 

[Mohd Azizul Ramli 2]

WAIT A MINUTE! I just noticed the above article is a COMMENT on YB Wee Choo Keong blog. So it is not written by the YB himself. Aiyaa, so embarass of me. But I still think someone from MW is behind this write-up. Did you write it yourself Azizul? Since you are the one linking it to MW? But you don't live in London. So Izanee?

No lah. It's not us. Both Izanee and I are still in our 20s. I just post the comment here because of its weight.

 

Whoever the writer was, he surely has established a very neutral stand over the matter and furthermore, offering some promising solutions, which will benefit all the parties involved - something that should have came out from our beloved limping government but unfortunately...

[Ryan Soh 3]

Jan 20, 2009

AirAsia airport in limbo

Sigh... MAHB is very "backwards" in their modus operandi. Tak malu ke? It is bad enough they have a BKK and SIN sandwiching them, do they really want to make matters worse? I am REALLY itching to see MAHB's response to this fiasco because so far we have only heard them say "no", "can't" and "won't".

[Waiping 12]

Just my 2 cents.

 

How come all of a sudden Sime Darby is involved in 2 high profile projects namely the IJN and LCC@Labu? At a time when major companies are bracing for the effects of the financial crunch this particular company seems to have all the money in the world to buy a specialist hospital and an airport. On the other hand I think AK is in desperate position to get more money to finance their expansion plans and new planes. This deal probably put certain percentage of AK's share into SD's control.

 

Instead of Labu, they should name it Tony International Airport. Code will be WmTF.

 

Another good one there, bro!

[Izanee 0]

hahahaha WmTF is just brilliant.

 

I really am speechless....not just because the KLIA masterplan is ignored but that the Cabinet readily approved Uncle Tony's pet project. Have they forgotten the reason AK was not allowed to stay in Subang? I hope this doesn't work out. THe other thing I am angry about is that they even considered to sell off IJN. Wow.....Sime Darby must have thought they were gonna laugh all the way to the bank.

 

[Fitri Shukri 0]

hahahaha WmTF is just brilliant.

 

I really am speechless....not just because the KLIA masterplan is ignored but that the Cabinet readily approved Uncle Tony's pet project. Have they forgotten the reason AK was not allowed to stay in Subang? I hope this doesn't work out. THe other thing I am angry about is that they even considered to sell off IJN. Wow.....Sime Darby must have thought they were gonna laugh all the way to the bank.

 

Sime Darby have some serious PR exercise that needs to be done. Good thing I didn't continue with the Sime Darby scholarship in my student days. However, I pity some of my friends 'stuck' for years with SD due to scholarship bonding.

Edited January 20, 2009 by Fitri Shukri

[mokhzani 0]

Instead of Labu, they should name it Tony International Airport. Code will be WmTF.

 

Might as well the code be "WTFd"

[kandiah k 0]

I think the LabuLabi Airport is just a silly idea because KLIA is totally under utilised and for the benefit of the country's aviation industry, if there is any at all !! On the other hand I agree with how AK does not get the support from MAHB on their expansion plans !!!

 

So MAS, MAHB and AK have to sit and face each other and deal with their issues while maintaining our little aviation pride that we have !!

[BC Tam 2]

Well, finally a response from MAHB apparently

(Cut and pasted from here

 

 

Press Statement by Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad

 

Kuala Lumpur, 5 January 2009

 

In recent weeks, Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad (MAHB) has noted numerous comments made with regard to the current Low Cost Carrier Terminal (LCCT) at KLIA. It has always been MAHB's view that issues are best resolved through proper consultation rather than through the media. However, MAHB feels that a need has arisen whereby we are duty-bound to clarify the statements that have continually been made in the media.

 

MAHB wishes to categorically state that we fully support the development of low fare travel in Malaysia and recognise the role that AirAsia has played in this development.

 

THE LOW COST CARRIER TERMINAL

 

When AirAsia moved to KLIA in mid 2002, its operations expanded and therefore needed more space at the Main Terminal for check-in counters as well as additional departure gates. Over and above this, AirAsia's business model did not require the use of aerobridges, and the available baggage and check-in systems. Also, AirAsia needed to have power-in power-out apron operations. As long as AirAsia remained at KLIA's Main Terminal its growth would have been hindered.

 

To enable AirAsia to grow and achieve greater operational efficiency, the best solution was to provide them with a separate facility to meet their operational requirements. Therefore, it was decided that a separate temporary facility be built for low cost airlines. Several sites were identified for this purpose. The present site was chosen because an apron was already in place and the land was already prepared for development, thus allowing for the LCCT to be built quickly and accommodate AirAsia's growth. It was completed within nine months with a capacity for 10 million passengers and 30 aircraft parking bays. It also had a provision for expansion of up to 15 million passengers.

 

The design of the terminal was based on AirAsia's requirements to cater for their business model which included no aerobridges, no bussing facilities, dedicated check-in counters, and dedicated baggage system. Although MAHB had a different view as this would be inefficient use of the facilities, we accommodated these requests.

 

In discussions held for the design of the LCCT in 2003, AirAsia had projected that it would hit 10 million passengers by the year 2012. Three important events since then, however have altered this projection. Firstly, AirAsia managed to secure more international rights than originally expected. Secondly, the routes rationalisation exercise provided AirAsia more domestic routes. And thirdly, AirAsia expanded its business model to include wide-body aircrafts for long-haul operations, which was not in their original plan when the terminal was first designed. Based on AirAsia's business model, the terminal and apron were designed for narrow-bodied aircraft fleet only. Nevertheless, MAHB recognised the variation to their business model and accommodated to these changes.

 

In fact, as the use of wide bodied aircrafts at this terminal would cause congestion, MAHB had suggested that AirAsia should use the Main Terminal for its wide bodied, long-haul operations. However, as this was not suitable for AirAsia as they wanted to have a quick transfer for their passengers, MAHB acceded to AirAsia's request to also operate wide-body aircrafts from the LCCT.

 

To further enhance passenger comfort, MAHB also incurred additional costs in constructing covered walkways for passengers, a food garden and expanded its vehicle parking bays.

 

In order to accommodate AirAsia's accelerated growth of over 10 million passengers this year, expansions to the temporary terminal for 15 million passengers have been brought forward three years ahead of schedule for completion in early 2009 at a cost of over RM170 million. This would double the terminal's international passenger capacity.

 

With the recent opening of the newly expanded international arrival hall and the soon to be completed international departure hall and public concourse, it is expected that the terminal congestion will ease. To further alleviate the congestion, MAHB has appealed to AirAsia to open up more check in counters per flight as there are many available at the LCCT. MAHB has also urged AirAsia to provide additional ground handling staff for arrival baggage as there are now six carousels at the arrival hall instead of two previously.

 

CHARGES AND INCENTIVES

 

MAHB wishes to clarify that the level of aeronautical charges are approved by the Government authorities. Charges paid by airlines at Malaysia's airports are already low and discounted against those charged by neighbouring competing airports. This is acknowledged by the aviation industry. This provides a low cost operating opportunity for home-based airlines as well as foreign airlines operating to Malaysia. Any increases or decreases in these charges are within the purview of the Government authorities and MAHB fully respects this. It needs to be emphasised that the landing and parking charges in Malaysia have not been increased for the last 27 years. Therefore, the issue of high aeronautical charges does not arise.

 

Some airports do provide discounts on those charges as incentives to airlines. MAHB already has an incentive programme for foreign airlines in place to encourage them to operate to Malaysia. This programme is applicable even to AirAsia Thailand and AirAsia Indonesia as they are foreign registered entities.

 

To facilitate AirAsia's move from Subang Airport to KLIA in 2002, AirAsia was given a waiver of all aeronautical charges (excluding Passenger Service Charge (PSC)) paid by AirAsia for their flights over and above what the airline was paying at Subang Airport. This waiver was for a period of five years (2002-2007) and was applicable not only at KLIA but also at all other airports in Malaysia that AirAsia may operate to. This waiver was for both domestic and international flights, which includes landing, parking, aerobridge and check-in counter charges. AirAsia also enjoyed special rental rates for office space at all airports.

 

AirAsia had requested for an extension of this programme. Although MAHB was unable to agree to this request, MAHB did indicate to AirAsia that a new incentive scheme was being formulated which will provide waivers for landing charges and incentives for growth. This scheme would also be extended to all other airlines. This scheme however, was dependent upon the outcome of the financial restructuring to be approved by the Government. With the approval announcement recently made on 23 December 2008, this scheme will be announced soon.

 

AirAsia had also requested for reduction in aeronautical charges at LCCT compared to the Main Terminal at KLIA. As aeronautical charges at both LCCT and the Main Terminal are regulated by the government authorities, this is a matter for the government authorities to decide. The government had already reduced the PSC at LCCT, in KLIA and in Kota Kinabalu by approximately half of that of the Main Terminal at these two airports.

 

NATIONAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN (NAMP) STUDY

 

Malaysia Airports, with the support of Ministry of Transport and Ministry of Finance, initiated the development of the National Airport Master Plan study in July 2007. This study is to set the direction for the future development of airports and aviation infrastructure in the country. The formulation of this master plan involved all relevant government agencies, MAHB, Malaysia Airlines, AirAsia as well as representatives of foreign airlines. This master plan can be used as a basis for the orderly construction and development of all airports including permanent LCCTs in Malaysia.

 

The study, which has just recently been completed, took into account the development of low fare travel in Malaysia. The study, after considering several locations, has identified a location of the permanent LCCT at KLIA. The new LCCT location was selected as it would provide excellent connectivity for both landside and airside transfers for passengers as well as baggage.

 

The existing ERL would be extended for an additional 1.5 kilometres to connect the new LCCT to the existing Main Terminal. The LCCT would be built via a multi-modular design, with each module being able to handle 15 million passengers. The first phase of the permanent LCCT's development would encompass two modules and a parking apron capable of accommodating at least 60 aircrafts of various sizes and configurations. The design of the airport terminal will focus on passenger comfort as well as operational efficiency for the LCC.

 

The new terminal would be seamlessly integrated into KLIA's current infrastructure via ERL immediately and via AeroTrain when the second satellite building is constructed. Pending Government's approval, the first phase of this project could be ready by the end of 2011 and could be built at reasonable cost due to the availability of existing infrastructure.

 

When the need arises, in line with KLIA's Masterplan, a third runway can be built parallel to the second runway as aircraft movements and passenger traffic increases. This would offer efficient and quick turnaround for LCCs as there would then be two runways that would be of equal distance from the new permanent LCCT and its Parking apron.

 

Thanks to the Government's approved restructuring plan, MAHB is now in a position to partake the project with its own funds. Self-funding from its own cash reserves is not new to MAHB. Over the last 15 years, MAHB has spent over RM1 billion from its own cash reserves for the building and upgrading of airports such as KLIA for A380 readiness, development of apron and a cargo complex in Penang, and the development of new terminal buildings in Alor Setar, Langkawi, and Kota Bharu just to name a few.

 

As we have successfully done in the past, MAHB continues to cross-subsidise several loss-making domestic airports and rural services airports.

 

This proposal for the new LCCT to be completed in three years' time will provide excellent connectivity with construction at reasonable cost and can be self-funded by MAHB. The synergy between the legacy carriers and LCCs under one roof would pave the concept of a "new generation" airport hub in the region.

[Sandeep G 1]

I'm glad that the delay in response by MAHB on this issue has been answered with a well versed and well articulated argument and defence of its position.

 

They should be commended for their rebuttal, and it should open the eyes of the rakyat and AirAsia a little more.

 

What i'm sure all of us would NOT like to see now is a school-yard style argument between MAHB and AirAsia. It will just further delay the project and need for a new LCCT.

[kandiah k 0]

Some answers from our DPM on the much talked about issue !!

 

 

http://www.thesundaily.com/article.cfm?id=29542

 

 

 

[Izanee 0]

This is my letter to NST and The star. Hope it gets published by one of them.

 

Dear Sir,

 

I think Tony Fernandez is getting too carried away with his highly

successful business venture, Air Asia. Tony, in his quest to build a

new airport in Labu, tries to convince the rakyat that KL is like

London. Yes, London has five airports but they serve around 150

million passengers per year. KL only serves 26 million passengers a

year and its simply uneconomical and unjustifiable to divide that

meagre traffic into 3 airports. In the past few years, it seems that

Tony has put pressure on MAHB and the Government, and literally

managed to get away with murder. Because of him, traffic in KL had to

be split between KLIA and Subang in the initial years. The low traffic

volumes combined with the economic crisis made KLIA extremely

unexciting to foreign carriers resulting in major carriers such as

British Airways, Qantas, All Nippon Airways and Northwest to shy away.

The Government did well in making a firm stand that all jet operations

had to be consolidated in KLIA, which was built to make KL an

important aviation hub to rival Bangkok and Changi. And with Air

Asia's growth, KLIA has grown in strength with passenger figures

touching 26.9 million last year (compared with 35 million for Changi

and 40 million for Bangkok).

Tony has accused MAHB of providing low quality facilities in the

current LCCT and given his reasons for building a whole new airport in

Labu. MAHB has finally awoken from their slumber and released their

informative and well thought out press statement against the silly

idea.

 

There are many reasons why Labu airport should not be built. First and

foremost, KLIA's chances of becoming a hub will be reduced to ashes.

Lee Kuan Yew has stated in the past that he would rather have SIA

become bankrupt than lose Changi's status as an international air hub.

SIA rose up to the challenges posed by the open competition and now

hold their own against 80 of the world's major airlines that serve

Singapore. Why can't we do the same for KLIA after spending RM9

billion on it? Why does every town and city need to have an airport?

KL is not that big that it needs 3 airports serving it. Then there's

Melaka airport nearby and Ipoh to the North. I pray the Government

does not forget the reason KLIA was built and the fact that it was

supposed to eventually serve 100 million passengers per annum.

 

The second reason is building another airport and runway 8.6 km from

KLIA's two runways. This will cause problems for approaching and

departing aircraft from both airports with potential safety

implications for all passengers and people living under the flight

paths. Will there be another control tower? Sime Darby and Tony claim

that the government will not have to spend a single sen as it is a PFI

project. However, who will pay for DCA, Immigration, Police and

Fire/rescue personnel to be stationed at the airport?

 

MAHB has spent a total RM170 million to build an extension for the

LCCT. According to the plans, another satellite terminal was planned

to be built once traffic hit 25 million per year. Why can't that be

built as an LCCT instead? MAHB are willing to develop that and they

state that it can be completed by 2011. Tony complains that he will

not have space for all his aircraft in KLIA. That is utter rubbish.

There are plenty of stands in the airport aprons for him to park his

planes. Why can't he use the underutilised Main Terminal building in

the interim while the second satellite building is being constructed?

I am sure MAHB would be willing to compromise in order to keep their

largest tenant on site.

 

Tony's reasoning that the new airport in Labu is for the rakyat is

also unbelievable. Air Asia will and always be a private enterprise

and it is there for profits. Although ticket prices are listed as dirt

cheap, with all the added surcharges the prices become relatively

expensive. If a new terminal is built and Air Asia suffers a slump due

to the current economic crisis, what guarantees will Tony give for not

imposing charges on using air conditioning, using bins or seats in the

new airport? Looking at the airport plans he published, I can't see

any aerobridges at all. Passengers will still have to walk in the heat

or rain to their aircraft just like the current LCCT.

 

I hope that the rakyat and the Government will not be fooled by the

latest promises and pleas by Tony. He already has been allowed into

Singapore way before the ASEAN open skies agreement take effect

resulting in our original national carrier MAS losing passengers and

revenue before they were ready to do so. All the efforts by Idris Jala

to turn around MAS will be to no avail.

This latest quest is nothing more than a money making enterprise from

Tony and Sime Darby. This comes very quickly after Sime Darby's plan

to take over IJN was quickly overturned by the Government. I hope that

for the sake of aviation in this country that Tony, MAS and MAHB as

well as the Ministry of Transport can work together to resolve their

problems and make KL the hub of choice in Asia. We already have the

facilities, now we just need the software for it to work.

[Naim 6]

This is my letter to NST and The star. Hope it gets published by one of them.

 

Dear Sir,

 

I think Tony Fernandez is getting too carried away with his highly

...

 

Interesting story, but lack of perspective from a regular AK user like me (and many, many others) who have benefited immensely from the low airfares offered by AK.

 

[Izanee 0]

Thanks for the feedback Dr. Naim.....cos of my usual last min plans it is very difficult for me to benefit from the low airfares!

[Naim 6]

Thanks for the feedback Dr. Naim.....cos of my usual last min plans it is very difficult for me to benefit from the low airfares!

 

Hehehe ... almost every month I (+ family) use AK and I see thousands of ppl at LCCT eager for a piece of the action. So I wonder, what do these ppl really think of the raging Labu controversy? After all, it's the customers that matter most to AK. I mean, do consumers like me really care who owns/runs the airport, whether KLIA will be a key hub, whether TF is 'greedy', whether MAB is a sloth, whether SD is an ogre, or whatever. What we see is RM1150 KUL/LON return, RM113 KUL/BKK return, RM260 KUL/SGN return, etc, and as long as AK can sustain those price levels, we are gonna keep using AK.

 

So bottom line is, if Labu goes ahead, will it hit our wallets? Just a simple query from us simple folks.

 

 

Edited January 24, 2009 by Naim

[Sharil Abdul Rahman 0]

Hehehe ... almost every month I (+ family) use AK and I see thousands of ppl at LCCT eager for a piece of the action. So I wonder, what do these ppl really think of the raging Labu controversy? After all, it's the customers that matter most to AK. I mean, do consumers like me really care who owns/runs the airport, whether KLIA will be a key hub, whether TF is 'greedy', whether MAB is a sloth, whether SD is an ogre, or whatever. What we see is RM1150 KUL/LON return, RM113 KUL/BKK return, RM260 KUL/SGN return, etc, and as long as AK can sustain those price levels, we are gonna keep using AK.

 

So bottom line is, if Labu goes ahead, will it hit our wallets? Just a simple query from us simple folks.

 

That is the main question - will it hit our wallets?

 

While right now it is at a very nice pricing level - what is stopping air asia to charge more when the operate Labu?

Sure they say it can reduce cost - but maintainance charges are the small things that adds up to the big price - as they say, devil are in the details.

They can always charge you more by including "admin cost". Who to say?

 

I am not doubting the success of Air Asia and the chance that it has given to have more folks fly.

But at what cost? As much as KLIA is the 'white elephant', it is still the pride of our country.

 

Also, i dont want AA to be eaten by Sime Darby. It has enough arms in its huge body already.

 

[KK Lee 5]

Khazanah is a shareholder in Malaysia Airport Holdings Berhad and would naturally be opposed to any move by Air Asia to move away from KLIA and operate its own LCCT.

 

But government officials felt that Azman should have made known his objections about the LCCT project to the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and Second Finance Minister privately, given that all three members of the Cabinet are also members of the Khazanah Nasional board of directors.

 

They charge that Azman has access to the top decision makers in government and he could have made persuasive arguments to the PM, DPM or anybody else in Cabinet.

 

Was there a need to exert pressure on government by going public, they wondered.

 

Supporters of Azman, Khazanah Nasional and MAHB say that he had little choice but to go public given the firestorm of protests the new LCCT project provoked. Staying silent as the biggest shareholder of MAHB was not an option.

 

Also, they point out that Air Asia had many powerful supporters in government in its corner and Azman’s statement helped to shift the balance of power a bit, at least in the public arena.

 

Or, at least, it set the stage for more public debate on this project, which has an impact beyond Air Asia, Khazanah and MAHB.

 

The Edge which has been critical of the plan to build a new LCCT away from KLIA, noted in its editorial this week that Khazanah Nasional has a vested interest in making sure that KLIA East does not happen, not only because it is the substantial shareholder of MAHB but also a controlling shareholder of Malaysia Airlines.

 

“The idea of an aggressive Air Asia, now Air Asia X with full control of its own airport must worry Khazanah, MAHB and MAS… Here is a case of a tenant (Air Asia) that wants to get out of its tenancy because its landlord (MAHB) has a close relative (MAS) who competes in the same business and thus would not make things easy for it. But will it be allowed to?

 

“And what’s wrong with the idea of a privately-owned managed LCCT competing with MAHB? Isn’t it true that competition leads to improved services and lower cost for customers?, ‘’ said the Edge.

 

The impasse over KLIA East is likely to be settled this Friday with odds on the government reversing an earlier decision to allow Air Asia to finance and build its own LCCT.

 

It will be a victory of sorts for Azman and may vindicate his tactic of going public with his opposition to the airport project.

 

More from;

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/index.p...rnment-see-red-

 

May be Khazanah should divest from either or both MAHB or/and MAS to avoid conflict of interest.

 

Edited January 25, 2009 by KK Lee

[Mohd Azizul Ramli 2]

Or Khazanah should hold some stakes in AirAsia too, so the entity will react for the benefit of all parties involved; MAHB, MH and AirAsia. Should the approval of the proposed Labu airport is overturned, it will be another case of 'flip flop' in our current Premier's administration. But at least, this flip flop incident will be something favourable, just like the flip flop incident of IJN.

[kandiah k 0]

I agree with you Izanee with your letter, although it may seem like a direct hit at AK, it serves the purpose of dealing with the main issue here of why is there a need to build the Labulabi Airport when KLIA is terribly under used and has so much more potential to grow and room for expansion is in abundance. For someone like you and me who cares for KUL becoming a hub and working towards it, AK/KJ and all those who have vested interests in the Labulabi airport should seriously look into the relevance of another airport within an 8km distance. It simply looks like KLIA will go donw the drains if the Labulabi airport is built at all.

 

On the other hand, Naim, I agree with you that as regular passengers on AK, who refuse to pay the impossible prices for a 40minute flight on MH, it does not matter where and who and what and etc. All that matters to us is the cheap offers and how it helps us to move about within our little budget we have. However, I must say that AK charges a lot despite the low fares it offers, but its still much cheaper than MH but compatible to FY. Each time I fly with AK from the LCCT, it is a mess at the check-in areas and many have noticed that there are only 2 counters opened for a flight of 180pax. Other counters are closed but no one can question that. In the UK, Ryanair and Easyjet have many counters for a flight similar to that. What does TF have to say about that ?

 

Also, the very ridiculous reason given by some party that the ERL was built way too high and that the land and soil of the planned phases of KLIA isnt suitable for airport expansions is utter rubbish. If Japan can build airports in the middle of the sea, anything is possible on our land. The spirit of Malaysia Boleh has to be instilled here, where it is heavily needed !!!

 

Overall, I still feel for the sake of KUL and its little pride it has, the Labulabi airport should be rejected by all means and in the meantime, AK, MAHB, MAS, Minstry of Transport and recently the Ministry of Finance too should sit and work things out before a silly and rash decision is made at the expense of one of our national pride.

[Jessnor Arif 1]

Hmm what can't I understand is that although Khazanah has substantial share in the mention company, why can't they simply express the absurdity of KLIA Labu without their interests being questioned.

 

When we said KLIA Labu is absurd. Do we have any shares in the mentioned company?..at least I don't.

When we said KLIA Labu is absurd. Do we intent to bring down AK? Hardly...

 

Touch a little bit on AK & MH fight. I seems to me some Malaysian do think... It's OK for MH to die but not AK.. AK shouldn't fight with MH but all moves by AK seems to me intended to attacks MH. Why? And if MH retaliated why AK always whine?

 

I do think this shouldnt be an issue if the LCCT run by AK is to be built somewhere else. The main issue here is the proximity to KLIA. That is the absurdity of this KLIA Labu.

 

 

[Azri M. 0]

I do think this shouldnt be an issue if the LCCT run by AK is to be built somewhere else. The main issue here is the proximity to KLIA. That is the absurdity of this KLIA Labu.

I agree with you. A solution maybe the MAHB gives a land to AirAsia to build and manage the LCCT terminal (preferably the KLIA-WEST), but then the runway/control tower and other infrastructures are shared. The LCCT should not be AirAsia exclusive, but open to any other LCCs to allow competition. So while KLIA won't lose its no of passengers, AirAsia would not lose efficiency as they build it the way they want it. So it's a win-win solution. The only thing is whether MAHB would allow an operation by other than them/AirAsia willing to work with MAHB on this. We shall see as the event unfold.

 

I really hope the new LCCT not being built by MAHB because they are not doing very good at it (ie. current LCCT).

[Phil M. 0]

Sigh... MAHB is very "backwards" in their modus operandi. Tak malu ke? It is bad enough they have a BKK and SIN sandwiching them, do they really want to make matters worse? I am REALLY itching to see MAHB's response to this fiasco because so far we have only heard them say "no", "can't" and "won't".

I 1000% agree with u ryan and not only tak malu but buta hati ,They cant even solve the taxi problem till today yet alone build a sure money making venture!Who knows by the the time they do build the permeanant LCCT terminal Alamak air asia no longer in business ha ha

[KK Lee 5]

I 1000% agree with u ryan and not only tak malu but buta hati ,They cant even solve the taxi problem till today yet alone build a sure money making venture!Who knows by the the time they do build the permeanant LCCT terminal Alamak air asia no longer in business ha ha

 

 

More likely, whether AK will base most of its fleet at KUL or not?

 

Unlike real estate, minibus is transportable, can be base in any country. With economy downturn, LCC business will survive better than legacy airlines. If LCCT issue is not resolve soon, it won’t be a surprise, neighbouring countries will offer LCCT to AK. Then like brain drain, the country and rakyat will be loser.

 

[Mohd Azizul Ramli 2]

Is Singapore willing to host AirAsia?

[Izanee 0]

if Uncle Tony relocates AK to another country......then we know he is truly a NON-RAKYAT man....whatever he says