Mulyadir Fitri 0 Report post Posted August 13, 2015 KLIA2 was designed for maximum revenue for operator, MAHB, hence the shopping complex before the terminal. It is far from efficient Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KK Lee 5 Report post Posted August 13, 2015 User = Airasia and pax? Operator = MAHB? Ooops! mean airline and pax. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mohd Suhaimi Fariz 2 Report post Posted August 13, 2015 KLIA2 was designed for maximum revenue for operator, MAHB, hence the shopping complex before the terminal. It is far from efficient The need to keep PSC at manageable levels meant that MAHB have no choice but to maximize more revenues from retail. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flee 5 Report post Posted August 14, 2015 Most importantly why is he holding MAHB responsible for anything extra thay they charge to passengers? Just like the absurd KLIA2 fee that has nothing to do with KLIA or MAHB at the first place. And people buying it. BKI market is a little different from klia2 - more locals fly and they do feel the pinch if bottom line fares go up. Just look at KCH - they are struggling to establish regional flights because not enough locals are flying regionally. Even the KCH-SIN sector cannot sustain more flights/airlines. Most of KCH market is for domestic destinations. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dr Chuo Hock Tieng 0 Report post Posted August 14, 2015 (edited) BKI market is a little different from klia2 - more locals fly and they do feel the pinch if bottom line fares go up. Just look at KCH - they are struggling to establish regional flights because not enough locals are flying regionally. Even the KCH-SIN sector cannot sustain more flights/airlines. Most of KCH market is for domestic destinations. i have to disagree. KCH MFM were boom but cut off for unknown reason. I heard many taitai here complaint since ak launch KCH MFM, many husbands took business trip to China too frequently and also influx of china ladies in town Edited August 14, 2015 by Dr Chuo Hock Tieng Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Waiping 12 Report post Posted August 14, 2015 (edited) i have to disagree. KCH MFM were boom but cut off for unknown reason. I heard many taitai here complaint since ak launch KCH MFM, many husbands took business trip to China too frequently and also influx of china ladies in town Same case with BKI - BKK a decade ago. BKI market is a little different from klia2 - more locals fly and they do feel the pinch if bottom line fares go up. Just look at KCH - they are struggling to establish regional flights because not enough locals are flying regionally. Even the KCH-SIN sector cannot sustain more flights/airlines. Most of KCH market is for domestic destinations. Not really I think. We do have considerable international connection to SZX, CAN, MNL, HKG, TPE, NRT, PER, PVG etc. Easily the third airport in Malaysia with more connections after KUL and PEN? Ok let's play it this way. 1. AK to remain at T2 until such a time they are willing to accept MAHB term and move to T1, provided there is still slots available. 2. Relook into questionable regulations that deter foreign airlines to come to BKI i.e. cannot pick up local passengers, curfew etc. Lobby for TransAsia, Uni Air, China Eastern and China Southern to return to BKI as charter or scheduled flights. 3. Lobby for OD to add frequency to BKI from KUL or other locations, maybe even consider domestic Sabah flights. T2 is slowly running out of parking slot as can be seen a few years back when the PM came for the Malaysia Day celebration. Roads leading into and out of T2 were all horrendously jammed up and there is just enough parking for everyone on the tarmac - the PM, Transmile 72F, Gading Sari 73F and AK. MAHB is offering AK the slots at T1 but at the same time should also lobby for other airlines to come to BKI and use T1. The ultimate goal should be to bring in more passengers. Having said that, isn't moving to a proper passenger terminal more cost effective than basically tear down the old T2 and rebuilt another one, or relocating a school? Edited August 14, 2015 by Waiping Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flee 5 Report post Posted August 14, 2015 From a shareholder point of view, I would probably prefer that they focus on getting the best return on capital. If BKI cannot provide it, then they should allocate capital elsewhere. I think that is what they are doing right now. They do not want to invest more money in BKI because there are no further expansion plans for T1 or T2. So if they invest in equipment for the move to T1, then use it for 3 or 4 years before they have to move to something else again? As it is, they have been shortchanged at klia2 - so better be careful. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Alif A. F. 0 Report post Posted August 15, 2015 More arrivals at KKIA Terminal 2 than 1 Major points: - Sabah Association of Tour and Travel Agents (SATTA) will be the middle-man to determine real issue behind MAHB-AirAsia tussle at BKI and resolve the matter. - SATTA claims that AirAsia had proposed for construction of new LCC Terminal at a site adjacent to Terminal 1 on a 40 acre land. Full news at: http://www.theborneopost.com/2015/08/16/more-arrivals-at-kkia-terminal-2-than-1/#ixzz3ivEd0Obg Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dr Chuo Hock Tieng 0 Report post Posted August 16, 2015 Why not ask ak moved to t1 and mh,od etc move to t2? Case closed. Hihi Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eddy Liew 0 Report post Posted August 16, 2015 More arrivals at KKIA Terminal 2 than 1 Major points: - Sabah Association of Tour and Travel Agents (SATTA) will be the middle-man to determine real issue behind MAHB-AirAsia tussle at BKI and resolve the matter. - SATTA claims that AirAsia had proposed for construction of new LCC Terminal at a site adjacent to Terminal 1 on a 40 acre land. Full news at: http://www.theborneopost.com/2015/08/16/more-arrivals-at-kkia-terminal-2-than-1/#ixzz3ivEd0Obg Let's give them a couple of years for it to resolve... assuming they do meet. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mohd Suhaimi Fariz 2 Report post Posted August 17, 2015 As it is, they have been shortchanged at klia2 - so better be careful. I disagree that they have been shortchanged at klia2. More a case of them not being able to adapt quickly to klia2. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Alif A. F. 0 Report post Posted September 10, 2015 SATTA hopes AirAsia Bhd agrees to relocate at KKIA T1 – SATTA chairman 10th September, 2015 By PAUL MU Paul@newsabahtimes.com.my KOTA KINABALU: Sabah Association of Tour and Travel Agents (SATTA) hopes that AirAsia Bhd will agree to relocate its operations at Terminal 2 of the Kota Kinabalu International Airport (KKIA) to Terminal 1. Association chairman, Dato’ Seri Winston Liaw (pic) said with the proposal to build a new terminal on a 40-acre land next to Terminal 1 within the next five years, the inconvenience cited by the low-budget airlines for refusing to allocate, would only be temporary. According to Winston, the proposal was mentioned during a meeting of the Malaysia Airports Holdings Bhd (MAHB) with AirAsia Bhd in the presence of the Ministry of Transport. It was held to find a solution to resolve the relocation issue. “I was informed that during the meeting, the relevant authorities had laid out their future plans which included a proposal to build a new terminal on a 40-acre land next to Terminal 1 within the next five years,” said Winston at his office here yesterday. “The inconvenience will only be temporary while waiting for the proposed new terminal to be built. Furthermore, the facilities in Terminal 2 are already outdated and any delay in moving out will only infuriate the passengers,” he added. More at: http://www.newsabahtimes.com.my/nstweb/fullstory/91154 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mohd Firdaus Bolong 0 Report post Posted September 10, 2015 Now where exactly is this "40 acre" land in relation to the current main terminal? And why the need for another new terminal when the existing one is only about 7yrs old? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BC Tam 2 Report post Posted September 10, 2015 Whoopee ! Yet another shopping mall for KK Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BC Tam 2 Report post Posted September 11, 2015 Quoting from our local 'Daily Express' this morning Malaysia Airports Sdn Bhd (MASB) Senior Manager Sunif Naiman said ...... "I am unaware of the proposed building of T3 on the 40-acre of land...but there is a plan to develop the concerned land to increase capacity at the parking apron at T1 following the development of the aviation industry at KKIA," Sunif said. Well, what have we here ?! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eddy Liew 0 Report post Posted September 16, 2015 (edited) More drama... PM urges AK to move to KKIA T1 immediately after officially opening KKIA T1 today. We know what will be AK's response... source: http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Nation/2015/09/16/Najib-airasia-move-KKIA/ Edited September 16, 2015 by Eddy Liew Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mulyadir Fitri 0 Report post Posted September 16, 2015 Now where exactly is this "40 acre" land in relation to the current main terminal? And why the need for another new terminal when the existing one is only about 7yrs old? From MAHB's Twitter account Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Alif A. F. 0 Report post Posted September 17, 2015 (edited) I thought only RM700mil alone was spent on T1, and the rest went into stretching & improving the runway (news reports said RM1.7bil was spent upgrading T1). AirAsia, please move to T1 lah. Edited September 17, 2015 by Alif A. F. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mushrif A 3 Report post Posted September 17, 2015 Is that 1952 photo of the mobile stairs accurate? Kite logo already there in the 1950s? looks like the logo of 1970s mas. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dr Chuo Hock Tieng 0 Report post Posted September 17, 2015 Why hv to build terminal? Back to the olden days at subang. Use feeder bus and plane parked at remote bay may be more sustainable? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Radzi 2 Report post Posted September 18, 2015 T2 is exclusively AK and gangs. T1 is mixed. Hold on to T2 so pax cannot use other airlines for connections. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flee 5 Report post Posted September 18, 2015 What connections do pax make when they go to BKI? Not sure what kind of volume of pax is involved. If I have to make a connection and it is not available at T2, I will probably: Use an airline that has a connection at T1 Self connect from T2 to T1 Use road transport Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Waiping 12 Report post Posted September 18, 2015 (edited) Actually shuttle service available for T1 - T2 transfer, although it cost a whooping RM5. Perhaps we look at route not served by AK from BKI but by other airlines. I can think of BKI - NRT, BKI - PVG, BKI - BWN. Connection from TWU/SDK maybe. Why not just close down pax handling at T2? Edited September 18, 2015 by Waiping Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flee 5 Report post Posted September 18, 2015 Lets see if they will do that and if AK will call MAHB's bluff.... AK should just pass on the additional cost of airport tax and operations - if business slows down because of that, they can go back to MAHB and tell them to help. If they refuse, AK should just reduce the flights to cut losses. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Alif A. F. 0 Report post Posted September 18, 2015 Moving to T1: Pros 1) More check-in counters. 2) More gates to park aircrafts. 3) More connection opportunities for pax (more airlines to choose from under one single terminal). 4) Shops and dining (but expensive lah that Jesselton Kopitiam, RM30++ for Char Kuey Teow?!!) are more interesting than T2 (relative to secondary airports in the country). 5) More spacious for walkabout. Cons 1) Higher PSC (from the viewpoint of AirAsia) - personally, I am not fussy about it, with that kind of far better facility in Sabah. 2) Have to compete with other airlines for overnight parking slots. 3) AirAsia may expand operations faster than terminal can cope (probably think that airport management slow to expand terminal) I could be wrong though for above assumptions... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
