MAS Joins oneworld!

[Johan Z 0]

BA LOOKS TO DEEPEN TIES WITH QANTAS IN ASIA

 

By Stephen Jones on 29 June 20110 comments

British Airways will look to work with long term partner Qantas as both airlines turn their focus on Asia to expand.

 

The airlines, which have a joint business agreement between Australia and the UK where they cooperate on pricing and scheduling, could extend that relationship further to incorporate more hubs in Asia.

 

News of the closer collaboration emerged following the acceptance into the Oneworld alliance of Malaysia Airlines.

 

Speaking to the Australian Financial Review, BA head of Asia Pacific, Jamie Cassidy, said it was exploring ways it could extend it relationship in Asia with Qantas.

 

“We’re talking about how we can work together in the region with Qantas, feeding passengers from Australia to Europe,” he was quoted as saying.

 

Kuala Lumpur was among the hubs the airlines could exploit, particularly in light of MAL’s entry into Oneworld.

 

Cassidy told the AFR that BA’s links with Qantas “have never been stronger” adding that both carriers are committed to growing in Asia Pacific either organically or through acquisition.

 

Expanding through alliances has become the preferred strategy of airline boardrooms as the financial risk is shared.

[Mike P 0]

KUL is definitely getting the potential. I could foresee BA and QF could gradually shift to KUL soon from SIN.

[Raymund Yeoh 1]

If PEN-Sin v.v route can have mroe frequency by One World...would be great...only MH fly this route once daily whereas MI plies this route 4X daily.....dont see why MH cannot increase the frequency here

 

Much better will be if CX can get 5th freedom of rights to ply this route PEN-SIN-HKG v.v

[flee 5]

With MH, BA and QF all operating A380 with RR Trent engines, I am sure that they could also be thinking of having MH's MRO facilities upgraded to handle these whalejets. SZB would surely yield the biggest cost savings.

[Pieter C. 5]

KUL is definitely getting the potential. I could foresee BA and QF could gradually shift to KUL soon from SIN.

 

Never say never, but not within 10 years IMHO; unless, SIN becomes a solely *A hub and KUL becomes a OW one...besides SIN has far more/better connection-possibilities, which QF/BA won't give up on right now...

[filipeseda 0]

I doubt BA and QF will make KUL their thriving hub, after all they've said it themselves. As an airline SIN is more attractive, given that S'pore is a financial hub unlike KL. A good example is AMN, where a large chunk of traffic is RJ traffic, even though AMN can compete with DXB geographically or another example is HEL, which does not see as much connectivity as the usual suspects, LHR, AMS, FRA, etc. QF is likely to cut routes although it may find that SIN is already saturated and use the DL strategy of finding under-served markets, and instead utilise KUL as its hub, but I highly doubt that, given that it will posses direct competition from MH operating the same kangaroo routes, and that's not a good thing if you're allianced.

The more likely carrier is BA, which I believe can introduce KUL-DPS tags or KUL-CGK tags at the time being. Apart from that perhaps AY, with a tag through the sub-continent, that might make sense.

[Mike P 0]

I suppose BA won't make that statement if the practice is totally infeasible. Only time will prove then.

[filipeseda 0]

I suppose BA won't make that statement if the practice is totally infeasible. Only time will prove then.

 

 

Haha, 2020, then they might make KUL a hub.

[S V Choong 4]

Never say never, but not within 10 years IMHO; unless, SIN becomes a solely *A hub and KUL becomes a OW one...besides SIN has far more/better connection-possibilities, which QF/BA won't give up on right now...

Pieter is right. We got to look at the business perspective as well I suppose. SIN is the most important business hub in South East Asia nd it is also a developed economy, it will be difficult for KUL to displace SIN easily. One can be happy for KUL and MH entering the one world alliance, but suppose we need to look at other side of things too.

Edited June 29, 2011 by S V Choong

[Waiping 12]

Pieter is right. We got to look at the business perspective as well I suppose. SIN is the most important business hub in South East Asia nd it is also a developed economy, it will be difficult for KUL to displace SIN easily. One can be happy for KUL and MH entering the one world alliance, but suppose we need to look at other side of things too.

 

Yup, the first thing that comes to mind about a developed country is not on the amount of air traffic. That will come later when all other elements are fulfilled.

[filipeseda 0]

a developed economy

 

Having a developed economy is an advantage, but it is not always the main catalyst for airport traffic. Look at BKK?

[JuliusWong 0]

Virgin Australia divorced Malaysia Airlines: http://www.bt.com.bn/business-asia/2011/06/29/virgin-australia-drops-mas-courts-sia

 

Virgin loses potential partner to Qantas: http://www.theage.com.au/business/virgin-loses-potential-partner-to-qantas-20110606-1fohe.html

[Mohd Suhaimi Fariz 2]

Virgin Australia divorced Malaysia Airlines: http://www.bt.com.bn/business-asia/2011/06/29/virgin-australia-drops-mas-courts-sia

 

Virgin loses potential partner to Qantas: http://www.theage.com.au/business/virgin-loses-potential-partner-to-qantas-20110606-1fohe.html

 

Isn't this old news? They announced the partnership with SQ not a day after MH announced it's joining OW.

[JuliusWong 0]

Isn't this old news? They announced the partnership with SQ not a day after MH announced it's joining OW.

 

When the agreement between VA with SQ was announced, it was unsure that VA would or would not end its reciprocal FFP with MH. It was made formally known to the public few days back that VA will ends its relationship with MH.

[filipeseda 0]

When the agreement between VA with SQ was announced, it was unsure that VA would or would not end its reciprocal FFP with MH. It was made formally known to the public few days back that VA will ends its relationship with MH

 

It's not as if MHs relationship with VA was that closely knit in the first place, apart from slapping codeshares.

[JuliusWong 0]

It's not as if MHs relationship with VA was that closely knit in the first place, apart from slapping codeshares.

hahas!! agree....the only plus is mileage accrual.

[filipeseda 0]

Haha,

 

It's lunchtime, and another one of my useless threads. Anyways, with all the buzz about Oneworld and MH, I was thinking, yes congrats to MAS for joining OW and it's the most sensible since Skyteam now has GA...etc. just want to get some stuff off my chest over the whole thing.

 

1) By 2012 Skyteam will have two SEA carriers, VN, which has a strong Indo-China network and of course, GA, which has huge a potential given that Indonesia is booming. Essentially, Skyteam has solidified its SEA standing. Then you have MH and OW, which of course will open new destinations in M'sia, but really nothing much beyond that regionally, apart from better connectivity within the region. Don't forget, CGK has the potential to be a Kangaroo route hub as well but the only catch is that there's no Skyteam Oceania partner.

 

2) Oneworld has no players in the PRC, another gaping whole, apart from CX and Dragonair which provide much of the PRC destinations. The only Chinese carriers that have not been allianced are Xiamen Airlines or Sichuan Airlines, and oh god, that's about it.

 

3) Mexicana is bust, so Central America isn't covered, but that's not so much of an issue as AA can provide good links from MIA and DFW

 

4) Africa, absolutely zilch. Right now, I can only think of a handful of carriers that might qualify. RAM, which can provide N. African destinations thru CMN and maybe TAAG Angolan if they improve and expand their network, that can provide sub-saharan links, then again these carriers are fairly underpar and I don't see this happening in the near future.

 

So, it's not to say that OW is a weak alliance, it has room to improve, but it should be adequate enough for MH if MH ceases the opportunity. Think about it, right now, if I'm a passeneger from Australia and as usual I'm a QF FFP and I need to get to ATH, MUC, FCO or MAN, and the likes, all of which have considerable demand from Australia, and given that QF only flies to FRA and LHR, my trip takes 3 connections, once through SIN or BKK or HKG, then again through BAs hub in LHR or AYs in HEL. This is versus using Star Alliance, and of course now with the whole VA/SQ thing, it's a simple two step connection. Once in SIN or of course BKK, that's it. So, MH could really compete with the whole VA/SQ thing. I mean MH/QF, that would work. MH needs to expand its network in Europe to essentially where it's missing, and I'm sure it would be competitive. And, it can strengthen regional routes to, like introducing services to Indo-China, Chiang Mai & Vientiane for example, or services in Indon like Pekan or Palembang, which are only served by AK. Might work?? C'mon MH, you never know until you try it.

[S V Choong 4]

Having a developed economy is an advantage, but it is not always the main catalyst for airport traffic. Look at BKK?

Business passengers have much more bucks to burn to start with, compared with leisure seeking passengers.

 

BKK is a different case, Thailand relies a lot on tourism, I read what people liked about Thailand is their unique culture and their tourism is pretty developed and established.

 

We can almost apply the scenario up at East Asia, where KUL is akin to Guangzhou and Singapore akin to Hong Kong. Now that Guangzhou's Baiyun airport has been relocated to a much larger plot of land with a new terminal building. On the other hand, China Southern being the world's 5th biggest airline in terms of passenger carried and also the largest airline in Asia in terms of fleet size and passenger carried and a member of Skyteam. It didn't displace Hong Kong though. Instead they each focused on their own interest and cater for different market. Hong Kong is the gateway of China and a place where the East meets the West. HK has still managed to remain as competitive as ever by attracting a lot of business people from across the globe. HK still has more international traffic than Guangzhou.

 

Singapore is the same in this regard, any international company venturing into South East Asia is most likely to set up their office in Singapore than anywhere else in South East Asia. This will mean Singapore will still be getting all the premium traffic. Singaporean has the highest income per capita in South East Asia, which means they have more disposable in come to burn compared with Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand and so forth. This will mean airline will be able to fetch better returns from passengers. This also means travelling is more affordable for Singaporeans than their South East Asian counterparts.

 

Bangkok on the other hand is the gateway to Indo-China as well. If I am thinking of flying to Nepal from Australia, Bangkok will come to the mind first.

 

Again, I think if we look at Australian situation. Sydney gets all the premium traffic from across the globe, as it is the business capital of Australia, and it is where a lot of the corporate set up their offices and headquarters. Melbourne on the other hand is known as the cultural capital, while Brisbane and Gold Coast is the leisure capital. At the end, neither Melbourne nor Brisbane can unseat Sydney easily for obvious reasons.

 

KUL is neither a business hub as well developed as Singapore nor a tourist's paradise, with a unique culture, like Thailand. A lot of work will be needed to make KUL more attractive, certainly with MH joining one world alone is insufficient.

 

2) Oneworld has no players in the PRC, another gaping whole, apart from CX and Dragonair which provide much of the PRC destinations. The only Chinese carriers that have not been allianced are Xiamen Airlines or Sichuan Airlines, and oh god, that's about it.

No, you still have Shenzhen Airlines, Hainan Airlines group (a 5-star airline) . Shanghai Airlines is leaving Star Alliance for Skyteam soon. Shanghai Airlines is now a subsidiary of China Eastern Airlines, which is also a Skyteam member.

Edited June 30, 2011 by S V Choong

[Mike P 0]

QANTAS since 01JUL11 has launched codeshare service with JetStar Asia on the latter’s Singapore – Ho Chi Minh, Singapore – Kuala Lumpur and Singapore – Penang route.

 

http://airlineroute.net/2011/07/13/sp-13jul11/

[jackch747 0]

QANTAS since 01JUL11 has launched codeshare service with JetStar Asia on the latter’s Singapore – Ho Chi Minh, Singapore – Kuala Lumpur and Singapore – Penang route.

 

http://airlineroute.net/2011/07/13/sp-13jul11/

 

"Between 2015 and 2017, THAI will no longer operates Airbus A300, Airbus A340, Boeing 737-400 and ATR72 aircraft. Retrofit on Airbus A340 fleet is canceled with the decision of phasing out this type."

 

When will MH take such action?

[dean hizudy 0]

 

 

 

No, you still have Shenzhen Airlines, Hainan Airlines group (a 5-star airline) . Shanghai Airlines is leaving Star Alliance for Skyteam soon. Shanghai Airlines is now a subsidiary of China Eastern Airlines, which is also a Skyteam member.

Shenzhen Airlines is joining Star Alliance in late 2012

[filipeseda 0]

We can almost apply the scenario up at East Asia, where KUL is akin to Guangzhou and Singapore akin to Hong Kong. Now that Guangzhou's Baiyun airport has been relocated to a much larger plot of land with a new terminal building. On the other hand, China Southern being the world's 5th biggest airline in terms of passenger carried and also the largest airline in Asia in terms of fleet size and passenger carried and a member of Skyteam. It didn't displace Hong Kong though. Instead they each focused on their own interest and cater for different market. Hong Kong is the gateway of China and a place where the East meets the West. HK has still managed to remain as competitive as ever by attracting a lot of business people from across the globe. HK still has more international traffic than Guangzhou.

 

 

I don't think it is rather appropriate to compare HKG and CAN with SIN and KUL, for several reasons:

 

1) CAN simply survives off domestic travel which makes its pax. numbers. M'sian airports or airlines for that matter, simply cannot rely on M'sian domestic travel due to the size of the M'sia itself. It does not have 1.3 billion people or 300 million people for that matter, neither is it geographically sustainable.

 

2) China Southern again relies primarily on domestic travel. It can always shut down its international operations and rely completely on the domestic market.

 

3) I agree with you that the two airports should find their own niches. A more appropriate scenario is that in Europe where you have three giants all less than 90 mins away from each other- LHR, CDG & AMS. All of them are hubs for pretty much the same routes- transatlantic or intra-Europe and perhaps routes to Africa. The thing that keeps these guys going is the sheer size of the markets that they serve and the diverse range of destinations they serve. Of course, these cities are naturally global, and they spring to mind quite easily. KUL needs to do the same, it needs to find new markets while strengthen its stand on the Kangaroo route and intra-SEA flights, which it looses out to to her two competitors up north and down south. MH should see itself now as part of a global network since it is part of OW. It needs to find new markets and grow them and at the same time be more competitive to its rivals, which it just doesn't seem to want to do. Lastly, of course makign KUL into a global city or improving M'sia tourism product is a HUGE advantage, but again, whether that materialises under UMNO remains to be seen.

[BC Tam 2]

1) CAN simply survives off domestic travel which makes its pax. numbers .....

2) China Southern again relies primarily on domestic travel. It can always shut down its international operations and rely completely on the domestic market.

Your observations above smack somewhat of the jaguh kampung mentality

Which China herself had embraced at some point in her history, to disastrous consequences by most accounts

Hope they have learnt sufficiently not to repeat misfortune

[alberttky 0]

PETALING JAYA: As the search for a new Malaysia Airlines (MAS) chief executive officer is under way, the current officers-in-charge are swiftly re-considering many of the key decisions put in place by its previous management.

 

According to analysts, MAS management indicated during the analysts conference call on the airline's second quarter results that a review of its oneworld alliance was on the cards, the airline would also trim capacity for domestic and Asean routes, and it did not rule out the possibility of a voluntary separation scheme. The conference call was hosted by MAS executive director Mohammed Rashdan Yusof and chief financial officer Mohd Azha Abdul Jalil.

 

MAS had announced in June that it would start flying as part of the oneworld alliance from late next year, a decision executed by former managing director Tengku Datuk Seri Azmil Zahruddin. However, aviation analysts were told on Tuesday that the current MAS management was re-evaluating the decision, and that opting for membership with another alliance, SkyTeam, would serve the airline better as there would be no route overlap.

 

Management indicated that SkyTeam was a better alliance for MAS as this would allow it to embark on new routes without having to compete with other alliance members such as Qantas Airways, Cathay Pacific and British Airways (BA), OSK Research said in its report.

 

A decision on whether to join the oneworld alliance or otherwise would be made in a month or two.

 

However, Maybank Investment Bank Research said it had differing views with MAS management's take on the alliance tie-up.

 

“Firstly, there are plenty of route overlap on SkyTeam as Garuda, Vietnam Airways and Air France-KLM are SkyTeam members and all serve KL. On the other hand, none of the oneworld alliance members serves KL, which means MAS is in an excellent position to benefit,” the research house said in a report.

 

Hong Leong Investment Bank Research said MAS was reviewing its oneworld alliance option due to overlapping Kangaroo (Australian) routes with the existing members, namely BA and Qantas. It added that another concern would be the impact on MAS when Qantas launches its new premium airline based in South-East Asia.

 

Meanwhile, CIMB Research said it was neutral on the choice of alliance as there would be some benefits of membership from either alliance, in the form of greater connectivity for passengers and sharing of lounge facilities.

 

“However, the key benefit of joining oneworld is Qantas' active exploration of a one-stop flight from Australia to continental Europe via KL International Airport on MAS aircraft. This could help MAS narrow the losses on its continental flights,” it said.

 

OSK Research said that management also pointed to more capacity cuts, notably for Asean and domestic routes.

 

“Management is doing this aggressively and has cancelled as many as 385 domestic flights in August and plans to cancel 63 more, realising a projected savings of RM9.8mil and available seat km reduction of 7% and 10% for Asean and domestic respectively. All non-profitable short routes will be terminated,” it said.

 

CIMB Research said MAS was expected to review its long-haul routes with a view of perhaps cutting super long-haul sectors like Buenos Aires, Argentina.

 

“However, with so many long-haul routes already cut during the tenure of Datuk Seri Idris Jala and Tengku Azmil, for instance to New York via Stockholm, Manchester, Zurich, Vienna, etc, additional route options for MAS to trim are becoming limited,” it added.

 

Analysts also said there was no plan to cut staff numbers as yet but it had not been ruled out. MAS is hoping to re-deploy excess staff to its regional full-service routes served by Sapphire, but CIMB Research said staff cuts would still be necessary.

 

There was also some ambiguity over the airline's decision to take delivery of its impending six A380 aircraft.

 

While CIMB Research said MAS' management confirmed it would take delivery of five planes next year and one in 2013 as previously agreed with Airbus, two other aviation analysts told StarBiz that there was some ambiguity over the matter.

 

“They confirmed that they will take on the two to three aircraft currently being built in Toulouse. But there is still some uncertainty over the remaining aircraft,” said a local bank-backed analyst.

 

But the MAS management did say the A380 planes to come in next year would be used for flights to Australia and London and that the seat configuration would likely be changed to incorporate more business-class seats.

 

http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2011/8/26/business/9372016&sec=business

[BC Tam 2]

PETALING JAYA: As the search for a new Malaysia Airlines (MAS) chief executive officer is under way, the current officers-in-charge are swiftly re-considering many of the key decisions put in place by its previous management

This trait by Malaysian managers (not exclusive to MAS mind you) of erasing predecessors' undertakings is getting way embarassing ......

 

 

However, aviation analysts were told on Tuesday that the current MAS management was re-evaluating the decision, and that opting for membership with another alliance, SkyTeam, would serve the airline better as there would be no route overlap

Oh yeah, and Skyteam will be welcoming you with wide open arms into their bosom no doubt

For an entity that is financially ruined already, that sure is one arrogant assumption

If route overlap is such a big issue, why even consider terminating EZE ?