Fairul 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2006 (edited) Philippine Airlines to stop Riyadh, Kuala Lumpur flights PHILIPPINE Airlines (PAL) will stop flying to unprofitable routes like Riyadh and Kuala Lumpur this quarter, and instead increase flights to the United States, its president Jaime Bautista said. The flag carrier also plans to revive flights to India. Bautista said PAL would cease serving its last Middle East route in March because of intense competition with Middle East carriers. Meanwhile, passenger volume to Kuala Lumpur, where PAL flies three times weekly, had fallen with the entry of Malaysia's low-cost carrier Air Asia. PAL will stop servicing that route on February 15. "We were trying to maintain Riyadh to give our overseas Filipino workers the seats but since the Middle Eastern carriers have been serving the route well, then we can suspend operations," Bautista said. The US route remains the most profitable overseas destination for PAL, and the carrier plans to beef up its flights to either San Francisco or Los Angeles, said Bautista. He said the Airbus 340 used in Riyadh flights might be utilized to increase its frequencies to the US. Launching flights between Cebu and Los Angeles is also under study. PAL may start flying to Mumbai this year or early 2007, Bautista said. It used to service that route until 1954. Edited January 10, 2006 by fairul Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Walter Sim 1 Report post Posted January 10, 2006 Hah? unprofitable, i wonder how would MH be doing then. Sad news for the spotter. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Fendy Report post Posted January 10, 2006 thank you air aisa, we lose another carrier Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hisham Albakri 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2006 (edited) thank you air aisa, we lose another carrier 24325[/snapback] Why blame AK Fendy? It makes economic sense if you ask me! I totally agree with Walter in questioning MH's profitability vis-a-vis their flights to the Philippines ... just let AK take care of that route and MH should concentrate on more profitable routes such as the UK, Oz and China (am I correct?) ... my 2 sen la Edited January 10, 2006 by Hisham Albakri Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Walter Sim 1 Report post Posted January 10, 2006 AK does not operate to Manila Ninoy Aquino, but to another smaller airport which is quite far from Manila City. I tihnkt he MH flight would cater more for the businessmans who is travelling there rather than the AirAsia for the Philipino workers. I'm curius to know about the load though.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Izanee 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2006 once AK starts flights to BWN....guess which airline will stop flying to KUL??? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Walter Sim 1 Report post Posted January 10, 2006 Royal Brunei! AK sure are giant killers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Seth K 3 Report post Posted January 10, 2006 Wow, PAL really kill some airline......this is not healthy Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sing Yew 1 Report post Posted January 10, 2006 (edited) Wow, PAL really kill some airline......this is not healthy 24379[/snapback] And just how will PAL be killing some airlines ? I think you meant AK. Edited January 10, 2006 by Sing Yew Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
H Azmal 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2006 Again? IIRC PAL stopped flying into KUL once right when KUL operations shifted to WMKK. Then it came back after a few years, and now going again? Hmmm.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Seth K 3 Report post Posted January 10, 2006 And just how will PAL be killing some airlines ? I think you meant AK. 24380[/snapback] Yup let me rephrase that AK really kill some airline, this is not healthy Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Imran K. 0 Report post Posted January 11, 2006 Yup let me rephrase that AK really kill some airline, this is not healthy 24382[/snapback] AK didnt enter the market with the sole purpose of killing any airline..the bare fact is...that AK is much more profitable and successful at what they do than PAL is...so how can you say that it is not healthy? For Example...prior to AK being a major competitor to MAS' domestic routes...i doubt MAS had all their "50% off" promotions and all this...thus...a healthy competition took place and it proved to be beneficial to Air Asia...and consumers in general. I would really like to hear why you say this isnt healthy.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sing Yew 1 Report post Posted January 11, 2006 AK didnt enter the market with the sole purpose of killing any airline..the bare fact is...that AK is much more profitable and successful at what they do than PAL is...so how can you say that it is not healthy? For Example...prior to AK being a major competitor to MAS' domestic routes...i doubt MAS had all their "50% off" promotions and all this...thus...a healthy competition took place and it proved to be beneficial to Air Asia...and consumers in general. I would really like to hear why you say this isnt healthy.... 24409[/snapback] Agreed. Healthy competition would definitely be good to the travelling public. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sandeep G 1 Report post Posted January 12, 2006 hey guys, few days never read the forum But i think maybe it's not such a bad thing after all... We need foreign carriers at KLIA, but more importantly, we need a Solid MAS providing a good route network with high frequencies before other airlines start competing with us Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
