Some thoughts on KUL-SIN

[Robert 0]

For the past 4.5 yrs I’ve been a regular commuter between KL and Singapore and I’d like to share some of my observations and thoughts with you.

 

When the shuttle was operating I was a fan of the system although I was keen for the LCC's to be allowed to fly in the interests of competition. When the LCC’s started there were some great fares especially if you took a flight mid week in the middle of the day. Around 18 months ago my job changed which meant that I was back to working Mon-Fri (late shift) in SG with the inevitable need to fly at the weekend & early Monday.

 

In the days of the shuttle I used to fly with SQ or MAS and would pick up an F ticket if things were getting a little full for only a little more extra.

 

SQ/MI

Now that MI have taken most of the route I’m sad to see the SQ ticket office close at KUL in the last 6 months. The staff were great and used to be very accommodating as well as keeping us regulars updated. There is now a basic facility to only provide limited services .

 

Back around July MI changed the fare rules which meant that the discounted tickets must be issued at least 2 or 3 days prior to travel else the fare was RM711 one way and the same time C fare went to approx RM725 to almost 1K. My observations backed by the staff was that it didn’t go down too well and people voted with their feet. After 1-2 months the cheaper Y fares were back for MI but the C fares remained at almost 1K.

 

I also used to take the SQ flight around 10:30 ex KUL when it ran but the prices seemed to fluctuate a lot prior to the it being switched to MI. From talking to friends I believe that the remaining SQ flight is not that well loaded.

 

I’m not sure how the MI booking engine works but I’ve noted that when flights are busy or full if you look 6-28 hrs before the flight its often available or the cheaper fare shows up eg super saver instead of fully flex. I would say that around 7/10 times I’ve pulled it off getting a ticket a short notice without paying the full fare.

 

MAS

I find them far too expensive unless you book a long way in advance and the online booking doesn’t allow you to book at short notice. I used to book a flexi ticket in advance and have to call them to change it which saved RM50  but was hassle and the sometimes I’d get the same member of staff I’d spoken to a few mins before when asking to check the price and as well as not charge the booking fee.

 

I’ve no idea what the loads are like although many companies still use MAS for business travel. I also have noted that MAS didn’t really increase the C class fare when MI/SQ made the changes.

 

Tiger

I’ve had some really cheap fares but during peak times a one way fare is approaching the price of a MAS ticket at around RM500. I have almost stopped using them after so many flights were cancelled which cost me $$$ in MAS/MI tickets. In addition they have cut back their schedule and fly some very strange time due to equipment and pilot shortages.

 

Jetstar

Fairly consistent and quite pricy which a very limited schedule. Fares are always $$$ at peak times and the flights are pretty full.

 

AK

AK have really increased their schedule and despite not being a big fan of LCC’s they are winning me over. A recent change which I like is the ability to book flights upto 4 hrs before you fly although the web/self serve check in cant be used. This brings their booking engine in line with MI/SQ and I believe Jetstar and Tiger although I’ve not tested a late booking with them for some time

 

Now the contentious point I have with AK is the general pricing which is usually more then MI once the extra have been added.

 

Firefly

I like the option of flying from SZB but any upside in the shorter distance to the airport is pretty much lost with the longer flight time. To me there are two major downsides to FY which are the fares are high and the cabin is rather cramped.

 

Others

I used to use JAL when they operated and almost always could get a ticket at the airport for around RM250-300 one way with the nose cam showing the landing being quite enjoyable.

 

Final Thoughts

I’m currently between jobs and for the past few months for cost reasons I usually take the bus (let me know if you want any thoughts on them??). This has got me wondering are we still being ripped off on the KUL-SIN route? Sure there are some cheap tickets but I find far less these days and in general it’s just hype and you have to book a long way in advance.

 

More often than not I find the tickets at short notice ex KUL to CGK are cheaper then KUL-SIN with a similar story with SIN-CGK being cheaper then SIN-KUL. I guess that AK are pretty happy and that the yields are pretty good.

 

In general I really miss the shuttle and flexibility it offered especially with the LCC fares being pretty high at peak times. The flights are generally very full at weekend periods and now that SQ and MAS are not flying large aircraft I wonder how much extra capacity there really is?

 

I wonder what changes there will be in the next 12 months? – word is that SQ will pull out. Is capacity likely to increase? Will Tiger or Jetstar increase their schedule to give AK a run for their money?

[Josh T 0]

Thought-provoking indeed. Thank you for pointing out that introducing LCCs on a route does not necessarily mean it's always better or cheaper. It is sad to see SQ gradually pulling out of the KUL-SIN route. MH can't really do that, as they don't have an equivalent to MI yet, and they have the option of using smaller aircraft, which SQ don't. There was a reason why the KUL-SIN service was called a "shuttle" service. It provided flexibility for business/corporate passengers. With LCC's plying the route now, the FSCs have to play by those "rules" yet, at the same time, maintain some level of resemblence to being a FSC. MH and SQ really are stuck between a rock and a hard place in this siutation.

[dean hizudy 0]

really SQ is going to pulling out from the KUL-SIN route? Anyone here has flown this route with them recently? How about the load?Was it full or empty? I think MAHB wont let SQ to pulling out from KUL and they must will do something to prevent that from happen....

[JuliusWong 0]

really SQ is going to pulling out from the KUL-SIN route? Anyone here has flown this route with them recently? How about the load?Was it full or empty? I think MAHB wont let SQ to pulling out from KUL and they must will do something to prevent that from happen....

 

I've been on one recently, SQ106/SQ107. To be honest, both ways had less than 50 pax..at most 60 maybe. J class was half filled for outbound, inbound was filled to the brim as it was the last flight for the day for SQ SIN-KUL flight. B772ER and A333. This is not sustainable for SQ for long run.

[BC Tam 2]

MH can't really do that, as they don't have an equivalent to MI yet

Not yet, but they will very shortly, and if you believe what is being said currently, it will be a stronger weapon than MI

Think Firefly !

[Naim 6]

In the good old days, SQ used B744 in the evenings to mop up standby pax at Changi. I always got that one.

[Mohd Suhaimi Fariz 2]

Nice analysis Robert. And I'd love to hear your thoughts on bus travel, especially in comparison with flying to SIN.

Edited December 29, 2010 by Mohd Suhaimi Fariz

[Izanee 0]

Naim, I remember the good ol' days when I could see the SQ 747-300 parked at the stand in Subang's T2! The 1800 flight was always upgraded as u say.

 

I recently flew on the SIN-KUL-SIN route ... inbound on MI and outbound on SQ 772.

The MI flight was full - lots of codeshare pax from AI.

 

SQ 772 was maybe around 70-80% full - also lots of indians transiting in Changi.

 

I will be very disappointed if SQ stop operating this route. Then we will be the only ASEAN capital w/o SQ service.

We certainly do not want to lose SQ. Clearly, SQ is more keen on Jakarta - they are, after all, the preferred carrier there. MH should have concentrated on getting transit passengers from Jakarta especially when GA was in trouble. Now that GA is on the rise again, MH will definitely struggle to get more pax with their aging 734s.

 

if we look at AK - as Robert says - they are there just for the money. They don't care if KUL becomes a hub ... they would rather have their own airport for their own selfish needs!

 

Plus, booking tickets on LCCs are expensive as well - unless u book way in advance.

 

Firefly seems to be a good option - flying from Subang to Changi directly. Prices are not too bad on them.

[KK Lee 5]

In airline business, LCC fare is almost always lower than legacy, hence top most price is set by legacy airline. If LCC able to charge expensive fare means legacy airline is charging even higher fare.

 

If SQ/MI and MH pool their resources together to offer ‘shuttle service’, believe they will able to capture large proportion of ‘last minute’ and walk-in booking.

 

Curious why legacy airline permit LCC to make exorbitant profit on this route?

Edited December 29, 2010 by KK Lee

[flee 5]

I am not sure if LCCs are making huge profits. In all probability they are just setting fares so that the total revenue from the flight will enable a 65-70% load (break even point).

 

They are just capitalising on last minute travellers to cover the losses and low margins of the zero and low fare travellers. In other words, those who are not able to make their travel plans early are helping to pay for those who can.

 

Profits should not be a dirty word. LCCs need to service their loans and leases, and also to give a reasonable return on investment to shareholders. They cannot afford to make losses as there will be no bailouts from the taxpayers.

 

If SQ/MI and MH pool their resources together to offer ‘shuttle service’, believe they will able to capture large proportion of ‘last minute’ and walk-in booking.

Although it may sound like a good idea, the costs of operating the shuttle are extremely high. So unless fares are high, it will not be profitable. The market landscape has changed significantly. FY and AK can offer tickets at about RM 100-150 return if you book a few months in advance or during their promos.

 

I do not think SQ will pull out of KUL - they need to operate a feeder service for their connecting international flights. They just need to schedule their B772/A333 flights carefully so that they feed pax into their international flights. I guess 4 flights daily over an 18 hour period is sufficient for that kind of service, coupled to the MI services. What they lose on this short sector will be regained on the long haul sectors.

[Waiping 12]

Seems like more not necessary means more in this case.

[Riza 0]

As for those residing in M'sia,

 

Before LCC introduction, the KUL-SIN duopoly by MH & SQ fits for connecting passengers whenever SQ fares are cheaper than MH for a sector or just for any aviation buff who knows the service difference between the 2 carriers. I myself took numerous SQ to MNL w both leg with 772/773 complete with PTV as compared to 734/333 of MH. Dunno how many percent is there for point-to-point service KUL-SIN-KUL. This leg is also popular for service that is of a lesser or limited option ex-KUL, example, where else? KUL - OZ la.

 

With the introduction of middle-east carrier with their vast network & competitive price to Europe/North America/Middle East sure does siphon some passenger from transitting down south to the likes of AUH-DXB-MCT-BAH-DOH-KWI. This further reduce feeder service down south with the exception of maybe limited number of R-class passengers which doesn't being offered by any other airline so far.

 

Since jetfuel is cheaper in SIN & competition is big with 102 airlines calling there with vast network thus pressing fares down, some traveller might LCC (verb) to SIN & use full service carrier ex-SIN. Thus, LCC is used as means to go to transit @ SIN. Shall fares ex-KUL are cheaper with more connectivity & options, the traffic might flow in the opposite direction.

 

Thus, as we sit in a 8 or 9 abreast seat to SIN or KUL, we sure can assume that some are transitting to their final destination with SQ, or in a 6 abreast, it might be a commute between the cities or getting there to connect to other flights ex-SIN.

 

Till we know the percentage of the categories, we can't see what is happening.

 

my 2 cent.

[KK Lee 5]

Before LCC introduction, the KUL-SIN duopoly by MH & SQ fits for connecting passengers whenever SQ fares are cheaper than MH for a sector or just for any aviation buff who knows the service difference between the 2 carriers. I myself took numerous SQ to MNL w both leg with 772/773 complete with PTV as compared to 734/333 of MH.

 

The KUL/MNL fare was about RM1,800 and RM1,300 for MH and SQ respectively.

 

Since jetfuel is cheaper in SIN & competition is big with 102 airlines calling there with vast network thus pressing fares down, some traveller might LCC (verb) to SIN & use full service carrier ex-SIN. Thus, LCC is used as means to go to transit @ SIN.

 

During a promotion, EK SIN/BNE return was SGD500. After adding KUL/SIN on LCC, total fare KUL/SIN/BNE was still less than half of MH KUL/BNE.

 

[dean hizudy 0]

i do not know whether Malaysian Ministry of Transportation will approve Berjaya Air's proposal for the SZB-SIN route...

[Dr Frasier 0]

Over the years - as a regular LHR-KL 'commuter' - I have had to switch to using FRA or BKK as a stopover flying either with LH or TG in order to bank mileage with Star Alliance.

 

SQ has increasingly made it more difficult for Star Alliance passengers to connect at SIN for KUL as more flights have gradually moved over to MI on the SIN-KL leg (as Silkair is not part of Star) so in effect - to earn maximum mileage or to redeem mileage - you can only travel on SQ metal up to KL making the transit stop at Changi somewhat inconvenient as depending on the itinerary - the wait at Changi can sometimes be up to 6-8hrs.

 

SQ's loss really (in my opinion) - I don't miss flying them and have found LH's Business Class fares very competitive with an excellent inflight product. TG service however is somewhat hit-and-miss.

[Cheng Long 0]

With liberalization, you gain some and you lose some. In this case, people get cheaper fare but FSC seems to get squeezed out. So those business class passengers somewhat lose out. Guess more people like cheap fare. Not a lot of businessmen I suppose. Once the gov allows high speed train to Singapore, things will change again.

[Jason Y. 0]

Clearly I am not complaining. I been a frequency flyer of Singapore - KL route myself only after LCC was allow in. Before LCC can ply this route, the price was ridiculous...I rather take a bus there. However once AirAsia, Tiger Airways, Jetstar ply this route...Students like me which are able to plan their trip way in advance get the benefit of it. $28-$40 one way to KL by plane...Price that was once not possible without LCC.

 

For Business customers, perhaps they do lose out but for budget traveler like me, it a great news. Anyway, I just flew SilkAir yesterday, for the first time I flew a non-LCC airline to KL...and what do I get for around $100 more...a cup of orange juice and a better leg room for 40mins which is totally not worth it for me. So to me, I support liberation of routes cause it clearly benefit consumer like me.

[Josh T 0]

These things were bound to happen to short sectors when the LCCs were allowed to fly that route. I'm in a similar situation. I'm currently working in the Sunshine Coast (in Australia). Qantas, which is my preferred airline for business travel, used to fly between SYD and MCY but only JQ and DJ fly this route now. DJ, unfortunately, don't have very convenient flight schedules for business travellers, so I'm mostly stuck with flying JQ whilst I'm working there. <_>

[flee 5]

Perhaps legacy carriers should operate business class only aircraft (like SQ's A345 and BA's A318) for this sector and forget about Y class pax. MH and SQ can leave the Y class operations to FY and MI respectively. They can then focus on a premium product using regional jets.

[Waiping 12]

Perhaps legacy carriers should operate business class only aircraft (like SQ's A345 and BA's A318) for this sector and forget about Y class pax. MH and SQ can leave the Y class operations to FY and MI respectively. They can then focus on a premium product using regional jets.

 

Something like ANA Business Jet?

[H Azmal 0]

Final Thoughts

I’m currently between jobs and for the past few months for cost reasons I usually take the bus (let me know if you want any thoughts on them??).

A little OT: If you're feeling adventurous and got time to spare, you might want to consider the railways. Services into Tanjong Pagar will be terminated come July next year. Three services from KL Sentral into Singapore Tanjong Pagar daily (9AM, 2PM, 11PM).

[flee 5]

Something like ANA Business Jet?

Yes!

 

MH does not even need to buy new aircraft. They can take the old B734s, completely refit it with a luxury executive cabin with around 30+ seats and you have a business jet!

[Josh T 0]

Yes!

 

MH does not even need to buy new aircraft. They can take the old B734s, completely refit it with a luxury executive cabin with around 30+ seats and you have a business jet!

At least the high yield from business class fares will make it profitable even with an older plane that is more expensive to run.

[flee 5]

At least the high yield from business class fares will make it profitable even with an older plane that is more expensive to run.

KUL-SIN is such a short flight that the fuel burn penalty on a B734 is not significant enough for a high yield route. Besides, the aircraft are fully paid for, so the only "acquisition" cost would be the cost of reconfiguring it to an all business class cabin.

[leon t 0]

so far AK seems to be the best value and also mainloy its frequency at 9 daily flights between KUL-SIN and punctuality is good as i travel at least 4 sectors a month or more - usually its 90% ontime and 50% ahead of schedule. Its A320s are newer n interiors are in better condition although cleaniless maybe compromised - then 3K and TR. SQ only operates 2 of its ownmetal daily whilst the rest are on the smaller MI A320s - andMH still uses its ageing 734s with some delays at times. Tiger is the worst for cancellations n delays n 3K is bad for its delays too - but these 2 have only 2 or 3 daily flights which is not good.