MAS New 15 A330-300X + 4 A330-200 Freighter

[flee 5]

When MH introduce A380 in 2012, MH would have lost market shares for over 3 years. Unless MH is very innovative and competitive, it will be an uphill battle for MH to recapture market share.

I would question that. Even enthusiasts want to try different airlines. Sometimes you just can't book a seat on the day of your choice, so you have to go on alternative airlines. Even Tony Fernandes has to fly SQ to London because he cannot get a ticket on his own airline! Asian airlines tend to have quite full flights these days.

 

As I have said earlier, people tend to choose based of cost and frequency first and foremost. By the time MH receives its first A380 in August 2011, A380s will be more commonplace and the competition levels out. As the saying goes, "its not what you have but what you do with it that is more important".

 

Do read that a.net thread about A330 economics. The B787 is not as superior as some people think they are...

Edited January 12, 2010 by flee

[Kenneth T 0]

I don't think the A330s is a more superior aircraft than the B787s. By looking at the new features like larger window, better humidity and etc, A330s is far lacked behind. What I can say is B787s will not be an old junk in 10 years time but A330s is likely the case. Let's not forget that, there are currently 3 variants on the B787s of which only one variant if which we had seen.

[flee 5]

Quotes from A.Net thread above:

 

The A333 has a CASM that matches the 77W. With the increased weight, the only 787 that will beat the A333 in CASM will be late build 789's. Even then, the margin will not be much. This will not be like the 727 where the new aircraft were opperating with far lower costs. Instead, we see long missions that will go to the 787, but for many other missions the A330, in particular the A333, will have a cost advantage.

 

The A332 will fade with time once the 789 is optimized. But the 788 is not a direct competitor and we're talking circa 2015+ delivery times.

 

The other nice thing about the A333 range (c. 4000 miles, 8-9 hours) is that also co-incides with the time that you DON'T need full-flat separate crew rest. To have a 12 hour aircraft (A340-300, B787-800/900, you lose a few seats and add weight if you want to make use of that range, making them less competitive on the sub 4000 mile routes. Unless you remove the crew rest, in which case the aircraft can't use the range it has got...

 

Primarily because airlines, in my opinion, make a purchasing decision based on the net present value of that purchase. With the wait for 787's being SO long, it may well be that the NPV of acquiring and operating an A330 which is obtainable in 2 years time beats the NPV of commiting to an aircraft that is not obtainable for 7 years.

An airline can make a LOT of money with an A330 in 5 years.

Might even be enough to have paid for the aircraft, if they're lucky.

 

An airline opting for an A333 now is a safe choice. If the range is enough, like all Europe - East Coast routes, there is no other relatively small aircraft that is as efficient, the 77W is about the same and only 748 and A380 are more efficient, but much bigger. The 789 will have difficulties to match the A333 in this role. If you need larger range, no doubt...

 

And it remains to be seen if the 787, compared to the A332, will be able to produce better profits given its lower pay load.

 

So the decision for the A330 vs. 787 may be the safer option - you risk less and maybe profit less. Ordering 787s still is more of a gamble than A330s.

 

If you have A330 slots really far down the decade, it is also obvious that neither the type is

fixed by now, nor can we expect it to be not improved, nor should the replacement of the second digit "3" by a "5" be too difficult and cost more than a few phone calls and a few million.

----------

 

I don't think the A330s is a more superior aircraft than the B787s. By looking at the new features like larger window, better humidity and etc, A330s is far lacked behind. What I can say is B787s will not be an old junk in 10 years time but A330s is likely the case. Let's not forget that, there are currently 3 variants on the B787s of which only one variant if which we had seen.

Permit me quote from the thread again!

IMHO this is unlikely to happen to A330s any time soon because:

1. Some leading airlines (SQ, VS, MH, etc.) are still receiving or about to receive new-build A330s.

2. Good potential for P2F conversion and re-sale as many airlines are currently flying less efficient/capable aircrafts.

3. A330 can hold its own against the 787 in some mission profile, plus all the infrastructure/crew considerations.

A330 is the "safe" choice at the moment, and will remain so until more is known about the 787 and confidence can be built up on its production. It is not coincidental that it was the best-selling widebody in 2009 by a long shot.

Edited January 12, 2010 by flee

[Kenneth T 0]

Few years ago, MH was not financially healthy. There's alot to consider ie crew training, maintenance equipments. Why spend extra when you already have the basic needs for the type of aircraft? Yes I must agree the 787's and the 350's are awesome in all aspect. Aircraft are not cars. They spend millions buying them, so of course we could expect airlines to max their life span. With proper maintenance it shouldn't be a problem. Like I said earlier and I'll say again, most passengers don't care what aircraft as long as it has IFE, comfy seats, good service. Business pax go onboard and they sleep, most will have their makan at the golden lounge. Just my 2 cents...

 

Let's blame noone but the management itself, a very corrupted people who misused theirs' power for theirs' own benefit. Till today, the prevous charman Dato Tajuddin manage to run away like that without any further justice from the Malaysian Law. The shame doesn't just ended like that, before it was handed to Dato Idris Jalal, they found that corrupted practice existed and the company is paying a high price for a bottle of mineral water. Today, we are more concern on issue like global warming and etc, I don't see A330s is more enviromentally friendly than the B787s in this sense. Maintenance wise is likely to be higher in the next 10-15 years if fewer airlines are operating A330s by then. Spare parts may be difficult to source in by then. Management always sees what is immediate than in longer terms.

 

Quotes from A.Net thread above:

 

Let's not forget that SQ has ordered the the B787s and the A330s is only a temporary measures to cater for the needs for the next few years or so. SQ is renowned for being one of the youngest fleet in the world. I don't think this applies to MH.

 

 

 

 

 

 

----------

 

 

Permit me quote from the thread again!

[KK Lee 5]

56 airlines that ordered 787 and 24 airlines that ordered A350 made the wrong decision? MH is the only exception?

 

[Kenneth T 0]

MH's ticket is always more expensive than some of the world's tip top airlines with the associated higher cost. I don't see any reasons that MH's financial result is always not satisfactory as compare to SQ, EK, CX and etc. Let's not forget that, MH has a lower staff cost as compare to premium airlines like SQ , CX and etc. Having a A330s for the next 10-15 years or so will certainly not do any long term advantage to MH.

[KK Lee 5]

Here is an interesting thread going on in A.Net: Is Buying A330 In 2009 Like Buying A 727 In 1981?

 

Comparing A330 with 787 is inappropriate as both in different class like comparing 757/767 with 777. Believe A330 should be compare with A350/777.

 

[Cheng Long 0]

MH's ticket is always more expensive than some of the world's tip top airlines with the associated higher cost. I don't see any reasons that MH's financial result is always not satisfactory as compare to SQ, EK, CX and etc. Let's not forget that, MH has a lower staff cost as compare to premium airlines like SQ , CX and etc. Having a A330s for the next 10-15 years or so will certainly not do any long term advantage to MH.

 

Actually I find MAS to be reasonably cheap. Each time I travel, I compare them with SQ, and each time they are cheaper by quite a significant margin.

[jani 0]

Do you guys think there is a chance MH orders the 77W in the near future?

[Mohd Azizul Ramli 2]

Do you guys think there is a chance MH orders the 77W in the near future?

I doubt it. The B77Ws are being used by most airlines nowadays to replace the B744s. MH has already being scheduled to receive 6 A380s beginning August 2011 for this purpose.

 

Even if MH wants to equip the B77Ws with a spacious 3 class layout like 9W's B77Ws (312 seats; 8P, 30J, 274Y), I still think it will be too big to replace MH's current B772s. And the re-introduction of the First Class back into the B777s? I don't think so. MH would have lease the 9W's B77Ws if they want to test its viability of this type of aircraft in its fleet.

 

MH clearly needs a long range medium capacity aircraft (something that can carry a maximum of 300 passengers) to replace its B772s, and there are no aircrafts that fit this purpose perfectly other than the A350s and B787s.

 

But if MH does purchase the B77Ws, then I think something is really wrong with their fleet renewal management team.

[Kenneth T 0]

Actually I find MAS to be reasonably cheap. Each time I travel, I compare them with SQ, and each time they are cheaper by quite a significant margin.

 

I believe the the low and basic fares are only a cosmetic pricing in order to attract attention. This is especially true, for instance a return ticket on a full Y fares from BKI-KUL-BKI and vice versa cost more than RM1,300. The full fares are always more expensive than the region's premium airlines.

[Wilson Kook 0]

Since many of us are keen on comparing MH to "premier" airlines like CX, then lets.

The A333 remains a major workhorse for CX, and they've even placed orders for 8 more.

We don't see them making hasty decisions in ordering the A380/A350/B787.

So are we to label them as "inefficient" and "back of the pack" as well? It takes more than aircraft renewal to become a successful airline. There's also management, in-flight and "out-of-flight" service.

I've said this before, and I wouldn't mind saying it again.

I'm pretty confident that people at MAS know what they're doing. That's the reason they're hired in the first place.

If buying 50 A350s and B787s is such an easy task, and no proper planning is involved, any Tom, Dick and Harry from MWings can be CEO of MAS, don't you agree? What are we gonna do with 50 brand new birds if we order them for the sake of catching up with regional competitors? Fly them to Siem Reap and Yangon 10 times daily?

Some of you may disagree with me, but I think we need to have a little more faith in MAS.

 

[Kenneth T 0]

Im sorry to say that CX does not has a fleet renewal of more than 15 years, let's get the fact right. MH is a premier airline, so can't be comparing that to low cost airline for sure.

Edited January 13, 2010 by Kenneth T

[nastar 0]

I've said this before, and I wouldn't mind saying it again.

I'm pretty confident that people at MAS know what they're doing. That's the reason they're hired in the first place.

If buying 50 A350s and B787s is such an easy task, and no proper planning is involved, any Tom, Dick and Harry from MWings can be CEO of MAS, don't you agree? What are we gonna do with 50 brand new birds if we order them for the sake of catching up with regional competitors? Fly them to Siem Reap and Yangon 10 times daily?

Some of you may disagree with me, but I think we need to have a little more faith in MAS.

 

 

IMHO, I am fully agree with the Mr Wilson. Being part of the planning team of ME airlines based in KUL, the recent decision from MH to order A333X is the best suit with their "immediate" requirement, ie MTOW, IFE, "smarties seat" and etc.

We knew that since 1997, MH always made very late decision on the flight/product renewal vs other carriers and obviously we knew that there are too much of "interference" on the decision making. Now, we only can hope that MH will not repeating the same mistake by allowing the interference in making decision. However, we also knew that MH is a GLC and being a GLC (not all) will definitely get involve with these nonsense of interference, gomen minded.. and bla bla bla (tutup mulut)

To compare, the top3 ME/GCC carriers are operating A330 (200 or 300) and they are doing very well with this aircraft. More over, this bird will stay for at least another 5 years despite of having 77W, 77L or even 787 and 350 in their fleet list.. The only different with MH is that they have operated the higher MTOW version quite sometime while MH is just about to order..

[V Wong 0]

From end-user point of view, I am selfish. I want a safe, timely and comfortable ride (read : no narrow pitched ala LCC leather seat aka leased 737-800 seat, no eye-blinding Smarties seat), reasonably palatable and healthy food (read : no carbo and fat laden snackbox food) and IFE (read : no blank-staring-into-seatback thinking of what could have been...)

 

Sounds familiar? Then it is time to renew fleet, no matter which aircraft, even if it is only a box to transport me from A to B. Alas, even with fleet renewal, the in-flight product may not be enhanced for the sake of cost cutting.

Edited January 13, 2010 by V Wong

[BC Tam 2]

Now, we only can hope that MH will not repeating the same mistake by allowing the interference in making decision. However, we also knew that MH is a GLC and being a GLC (not all) will definitely get involve with these nonsense of interference, gomen minded.. and bla bla bla (tutup mulut)

The upside to that is there will be a sugar daddy to run up to for pocket money when things get financially uncomfortable - it's been a tried and tested formula over the years

MH's existence is quite assured so long as there is still loose change in said sugar daddy's pocket

Not so sure lah when the petro-money or other sources of easy money dry up (as they will eventually) ......

[Kenneth T 0]

The upside to that is there will be a sugar daddy to run up to for pocket money when things get financially uncomfortable - it's been a tried and tested formula over the years

MH's existence is quite assured so long as there is still loose change in said sugar daddy's pocket

Not so sure lah when the petro-money or other sources of easy money dry up (as they will eventually) ......

 

I can't agreed more. Besides that, the management is lack or proper long term fleet planning, for instance i don't see why they are giving away the early delivery slots on the A380s, though the aircraft has been delayed for more than 2 years when it's finally delivered to MH. No doubt, new aircraft such as the technologically advanced B787s and A350s may not be available yet at the present moment but any delay again will allow MH to get compensation or discounts on any future purchase on either AIRBUS or BOEING aircraft.

[flee 5]

Comparing A330 with 787 is inappropriate as both in different class like comparing 757/767 with 777. Believe A330 should be compare with A350/777.

If that is what you say, then why are you and some others blasting MH for not ordering the B787 to replace their A330's?

 

i don't see why they are giving away the early delivery slots on the A380s, though the aircraft has been delayed for more than 2 years when it's finally delivered to MH.

MH did not give away any delivery slots. All the delays are from Airbus' side. Last year, they only delivered 10 A380s - that should explain why Airbus requested another 6 month delay for the MH A380 deliveries. They are having tremendous problems ramping up production. As far as I know, only SQ and Emirates have requested for delivery delays.

 

I'm pretty confident that people at MAS know what they're doing. That's the reason they're hired in the first place.

If buying 50 A350s and B787s is such an easy task, and no proper planning is involved, any Tom, Dick and Harry from MWings can be CEO of MAS, don't you agree? What are we gonna do with 50 brand new birds if we order them for the sake of catching up with regional competitors? Fly them to Siem Reap and Yangon 10 times daily?

Well summarised! Some of us think running an airline is a piece of cake and they can make better decisions!

 

The MH management have the all the numbers about their business while we here are merely speculating only about fuel burn! So how come we know much more about fleet renewal than the MH management?

[C.Foo 3]

What are you talking you should say 330 plus 340 because you cannot compare the any 330 with the 777lr or 777w

 

 

Comparing A330 with 787 is inappropriate as both in different class like comparing 757/767 with 777. Believe A330 should be compare with A350/777.

 

[Ignatius 4]

Thread temperature.. = 60deg C.

Thread stability.. = Getting OT

Thread outcome.. = Keyboard warriors 5th generation

Thread summary.. = Airline managers/ceo/director wannabe show off ground

Edited January 13, 2010 by Ignatius

[Mohd Azizul Ramli 2]

MH did not give away any delivery slots. All the delays are from Airbus' side. Last year, they only delivered 10 A380s - that should explain why Airbus requested another 6 month delay for the MH A380 deliveries. They are having tremendous problems ramping up production. As far as I know, only SQ and Emirates have requested for delivery delays.

 

The MH management have the all the numbers about their business while we here are merely speculating only about fuel burn! So how come we know much more about fleet renewal than the MH management?

I am quite certain that MH did requested for a delay in the delivery of the A380s (remember those time where there were so many negotiations between MH and Airbus before MH finally inked the agreement?) before the production problem at the ramp occured, resulting in a further delay (that is from January 2011 to August 2011). If not, parts of MSN018 which have been built won't be given to MSN045 (SQ's 10th A380 9V-SKJ).

 

At least we are all aware that MH is very slow in their fleet renewal program and even until now, the whole fleet renewal program is still incomplete as no plan is in place for the current B772s, which are MH's workhorse for the long haul routes. And for all we know, MH does not operate like SQ (a stellar business entity). This purchase of 15 A333s is a result from the lack of planning previously. Logically one would think, if SQ (an airline which has never reported a single loss since its inception) ordered the A350s and B787s and even AirAsia X has ordered 15 A350s, why does it is so hard for MH to do the same? Just copy those successful airlines' strategy! [Not that MH has to pay upfront for it anyway (and there's always the sugar daddy for bail-up if necessary). If MH is so concern about cost, isn't copying whatever AirAsia did is the right thing to do? AirAsia is the airline with the lowest operational cost per unit in the world!]

 

Spoken to a prominent A.Netter the other day and he said, 'The whole thing is as if MH is not serious about flying at all.'

 

Iggy, shedap you! LOL!

Edited January 13, 2010 by Mohd Azizul Ramli

[flee 5]

I agree, MH is only looking at stuff that have reached "emergency" status! They cannot possible postpone the A330 fleet renewal order any more. It is fortunate that Airbus had some delivery slots for 2011 available for them! I think that for the B772 renewal they have already started by buying the newest aircraft from PNB. They now have to decide on what mix of A380/B772/B787/A350 they need. Lets hope that they will make more orders this year and not wait till those old planes fall apart!

[Ignatius 4]

Thread temperature.. = 60deg C.

Thread stability.. = Getting OT

Thread outcome.. = Keyboard warriors 5th generation

Thread summary.. = Airline managers/ceo/director wannabe show off ground

Thread Hostility.. = 101% (who Shedap me) kekekeke

 

RUnnnnnn..!!!

[Isaac 0]

Im sorry to say that CX does not has a fleet renewal of more than 15 years, let's get the fact right. MH is a premier airline, so can't be comparing that to low cost airline for sure.

CX is not a low cost airline. I believe CX is currently a more "premier" airline compared to MH

 

Anyway, too much has been expected from MAS over the years but only to be let down over and over again. Some of us have officially given up on them It's like the parents knowing their kid is no Harvard material, so they have finally accepted the fact and think it'd be good enough if their kid can at least attend just any local community college

[KK Lee 5]

If that is what you say, then why are you and some others blasting MH for not ordering the B787 to replace their A330's?

 

It is proven high yield place frequency and schedule as the top criteria when choosing which airline to fly.

 

On many of MH intercontinental routes (e.g. FRA, LAX, EWR, etc), 772 is too big for daily service. On some regional routes, MH demand is bigger than 734 but couldn’t sustain A333 e.g. MLE, MNL, HAN, BKK, SGN, DPS, etc.

 

If MH order 788, MH could support daily service to FRA and secure higher yield, and capture more market share on regional routes.

 

After A33E, MH will need to replace 772. A33E couldn’t substitute 772 to EUR and USA, MH will has no choice but to order A350 or 77W.

 

It is safe to say; in 2016, MH will remain like now, unable to offer daily service to many destinations like FRA, unable to compete with SQ, EK, EY and has low yield on most routes.