Denied access

[Keith T 2]

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/commo...5E23349,00.html

 

The main reason, however, is facilitating the installation of Virgin Blue's planned long haul carrier on the Australia-USA routes, rather than to appease QF as the article appears to imply. DJ's entry into the transpacific route, along with AC, will severely weaken SQ's argument about a lack of competition on that route.

Edited February 19, 2006 by Keith T

[S V Choong 4]

Not surprised by it, really. Thanks for sharing!

 

BUT.....QF still operates quite a few flights out of SIN to Europe.

[Seth K 3]

Is Singaporean Government going to stop QF SIN hub to Europe as a revange .....................................j/k

[Raj 0]

Maybe they singaporean goverment shud stop Qf from using Singapore as hub..lol..Then KUl may see Qantas flying in..

Edited February 20, 2006 by raj

[Keith T 2]

Maybe they singaporean goverment shud stop Qf from using Singapore as hub..lol..Then KUl may see Qantas flying in..

 

As it is, the Singapore government is quite scared that QF and BA are shifting their SEA hub from SIN to BKK when the latter's new airport is up and running.

[S V Choong 4]

I guess the Australian also realised the intense competition in South East Asia (SIN, BKK, KUL). They are taking advantage of this competition and willing to bet that the Singaporean government would not retailiate. Singapore needs to continue to give QF and BA the rights in order to maintain their position as a hub in South East Asia.

 

Perhaps SIN can consider to fly into USA direct from AKL. Haha... highly unlikely!! As the load will not justify it.

[LeeCH 0]

Let me share with you something which one has not thought of on this topic.

 

Yes, it is true and Singapore government will never, never force QF out of SIN as retaliation to denying SQ rights to do the Pacific routes out of SYD and MEL. Mentor Minister has actually mentioned many times before his main aim is to reinforce Singapore as an aviation hub, no other priorities more important than this. Even at SQ's expense although SQ is his personal baby. Which is why he told the pilots that head will break if we try to be funny or refuse to budge during the recent pay cut thing. And yet SQ is the most profitable airline in the world. His reason is that SQ needs to trim down costs to remain competitive, as Tony Fernandez and gang comes to share the profit pie in the region.

 

Some very senior guys were very unhappy about this decision of cuts when profit are still good. I totally agree with Mentor minister on this subject to trim down costs. If you ever read the financial results, the yields are getting lower and lower while operating costs has significantly increased. If we do not trim down costs, the consequences are that a lot of people will lose their jobs and there will be a lot of hungry mouths in a family mouth to feed. And living in Singapore is not easy I tell you. Everything is money, just like in KL.

 

It goes to show that this senior guys are losing the big picture. The reason is that they are going to retire soon and they are here to maximise their paychecks and earn a handsome retirement fund. Unfortunately, we have a lot of junior guys who are not so smart and buy such ideas influenced upon them. They keep on harping about how the company is not reinstating pays to us. I am very sad to see such people around. They did not realise how easily they can lose their job in a tightly regulated Singapore society. Mybe they have been thinking along the lines of growth in the aviation sector and they will gain employment easily elsewhere. My personal opinion is that SQ is still the best carrier in this region to work with. Financially stable and as pilot we get to handle lovely and well maintain big jets. Yes, we are slightly underpaid compared to others, but someone need to knock them on the head and make them realise the harsh working environments out of SIN in places like Middle East and North Asia. Money will never be enough and I think I have said enough.

 

QF's other main argument point is that they did not get enough destinations out of SIN hub. I think the media has forgotten to tell them that this has nothing to do with SQ or Singapore goverment. It is the government of places that they intend to fly to which refuses QF their rights to land there. Totally nothing to do with SQ or the goverment here. I think this time around SQ has been made the scapegoat for other people's fault. In fact the Singapore government in wanting to maximise profit, are the most active in promoting open skies policy (errmm......not on KUL-SIN routes though).

 

You know why Singapore build the casino resort now? Singapore just need to bring in more crowd to the country and boost its own employment rate. Maybe one day you will see a F1 event here along the streets of Orchard Road. I tell you, the Singapore hit movie 'Money No Enough' is very real here.

 

LeeCH

[Izanee 0]

muaaaaaahahahahahahahahah!!!!

 

sorry, couldn't resist. whoever thought that Australia would give SQ rights on their 'golden egg' route must be crazy!!

 

and again.....hahahaha.....take that SQ and your plans for world domination!

 

 

 

[S V Choong 4]

and again.....hahahaha.....take that SQ and your plans for world domination!

 

At least they tried and they have nothing to lose!

[Izanee 0]

sv choong....you're right....at least SQ tried. mh tried many years ago during TR's failed attempts....

we managed to buy and bankrupt cambodia airlines and air maldives...

 

well done MH....

 

 

[Bing Chu 0]

And living in Singapore is not easy I tell you. Everything is money .....

 

..... I tell you, the Singapore hit movie 'Money No Enough' is very real here

The guy is NOT kidding - it is for real !! Although I'm not Singaporean nor do I live there, past encounters have at least taught me the point LeeCH is trying to get across.

 

An excellent post, if I may say so - thank you for sharing the info, bits of it I can only assume should be privy to insiders ? It does bring out the essence of how Singapore has to constantly etch out it's own niche and resulting advantages over it's bigger and immeasurably better endowed neighbours. And it has never been a bigger challenge than now with the much trumpeted globalisation sweeping through.

 

[Keith T 2]

More background info in this article which sheds some light into the politics behind the decision:

 

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/sin...0284069891.html

 

Note though, that this is from The Age, part of the John Fairfax group - a traditionally left wing cabal of often corrupt reporters with undisclosed agendas. My friends and I call them the Socialist Left inhouse journal. Hence explains their critical stance of the Howard government-QF alliance.

 

The Federal Labor Opposition has not indicated a concrete stance on the issue, except the Opposition Leader and his deputy being quoted as saying that lower fares as a result of competition are in the interests of Australian consumers. But of course the Age wouldn't run that as it would make them look like they're supporting free trade, a big no no for lefties.

Edited February 22, 2006 by Keith T

[Sandeep G 1]

QF is a protected baby of Australia... the government looks after their whims and fancies! It's a fact! But QF manages itself well, thus off-setting the criticisms of "goverment spoon-feeding"..

 

DJ flights between USA and Australia will take a while.. they don't have any aircraft! Unless Virgin Atlantic is going to share their aircraft with them?? Who knows..

 

Relationship between Singapore and Australia, well its a bit chaotic at the moment... But! Qantas knows the Singapore will look after them so long as they use SIN as a hub! Relationships between QF and SQ are not so good.. The QF-SQ saga stems from the old saying "Keep your friends close and your enemies even closer". We've all heard the talk of SQ-QF mega alliance and merger in the near future, but then on the same hand, SQ has discontinued its QF ground-handling contracts in Australian airport and sought alternatives in an effort to reduce costs (see LeeCH's post above for an excellent explanation). In an apparent protectionist fashion, the Aust. Govt has denied traffic rights for SQ between AUS and USA...

 

What are some of the likely outcomes of all this?? As LeeCH pointed out, the Singaporean governments main focus is on maintaining the hub status of SIN. Singapore is a service orientated economy and logisitics is a HUGE chunk of their economic pie!! It's important!! Malaysia on the other hand, has its fingers in all sorts of economic pies here, there and everywhere... Only recently have we (Malaysians) realised the nature and profitability of the logisitics business... look at the investments in port and shipping technologies and the immense growth experienced by the shipping industry in Malaysia... the restructuring of MISC is a testimonial of this!! Look at Johor states envisioned plan to become a logisitcs hub and the infrastructure being developed to cater.

 

We in Malaysia have the infrastructural capabilities, but tend to lack somewhat in corporate mentality.. this is our hubris! BUT! I forsee a change with the new PM and a drive towards better corporate management across all sectors of the economy with accountability and transparency being high on the agenda.. no more feeding the mouths of the few self-interested bumi-businessmen created during the 90s.. This is where the restructuring of MAS (to be revealed on Monday) is of value and significance... we will analyse and scrutinise this restructuring with a "fine tooth comb!" It's in the nations interest! Now back to the topic, better management of our logistics operations will lead to a more competitive industry in this region.. i.e. we'll finally give SIN a run for their money!!

 

Malaysia will be able to offer lower operating costs and better services than SIN.. it all pertains to corporate philosophies and management practices. The restructuing of MAS to make MAS a better more efficient carrier than SQ will mean that KUL increases in level of importance against SIN as other airlines will have to compete more directly with MAS... This is where we'll see the growth of KUL as a regional and trans-continental hub!! MAS working closely with MAHB is THE KEY TO SUCCESS! QF will be more attracted to KUL as MAS is not even an alliance member!!! One-world lacks a SEA partner... who knows?!?!?

 

We'll see what is revealed in the coming months, but it is all very exciting and promising!

[S V Choong 4]

31/01/2006: MH-123 KUL-SYD B747-4H6 [9M-MPJ (QRDE) - Labuan] (50K) - CNY

01/02/2006: DJ-421 SYD-PER B737-8FE [VH-VOL (JRGM) - Goldie Coast] (5C) - CNY

05/02/2006: MH-124 PER-KUL B747-4H6 [9M-MPJ (QRDE) - Labuan] (41A) - CNY

 

Offtopic: Sandeep, do you celebrate Chinese New Year too?

[Pieter C. 5]

One-world lacks a SEA partner... who knows?!?!?

 

So does Skyteam....who knows ??? (MH with KLIA or TG with Suvarnabhumi airport)

 

[KC Sim 2]

LeeCH : What an amazing piece you have just posted!!! I personally wish more of us (Singaporeans) were similarly clear about the need for bitter pills, belt tightening and cost control in good times, and not wait till the rising water is near our nostrils before wondering what went wrong.

 

The Government of Australia has protected Qantas since time immemorial . . . resulting in a very weak Qantas in the past. This has successfully kept many European airlines from entering the Australian market, but it has not made Qantas successful on their attempts to fly to more European cities. Amsterdam, Rome, Paris etc came and went like the tide. Is it any wonder Qantas is not finding a receptive European environment when it now wants to fly to more of Europe?

 

Qantas is in a much stronger position now but it is debatable whether it has served the Australian market better, especially between Australia and the US. Consumers will pay more for the patriotism they now endorse - for many, it is a price worth paying. Australia's tourism industry will pay - not with cash but with the loss of potential increased tourism arrivals.

 

There has been suggestions that Australia's decision may have been founded on Singapore's decision to execute the country's latest exports - a drug trafficker. Others have suggested that SIA's termination of ground-handling contracts with Qantas may be the reason. No shortage of reasons for suggesting that retaliation is the key.

 

Retaliation on the part of Singapore? Don't hold your breath because this is not likely to happen. As LeeCH has eloquently pointed out, Singapore's aviation hub status is deemed more important than SIA's profits (SIA will not collapse just because it does not operate transPac routes out of Australia). Qantas in considering moving out of Changi Airport to KLIA and Suvarnabhumi Airport has to contend with the single most important issue - yield. Filling the plane is one of the easiest thing to do. Set the fares low and that will easily happen. But filling a plane and getting a fair fiscal return takes a lot more. Hong Kong is perhaps the only other current stops on the Kangaroo Route that offers a decent yield.

 

The decision taken by the Australian government should open the eyes of Southeast Asians - since most carriers in the region do not yet challenge Qantas, they will find it cosy and warm with the politicians Down Under. The day the likes of MAS, Thai, Garuda etc strengthen (and indeed I share the hope that MAS could emerge stronger after its current leaders are allowed to make and execute the difficult decision two days from today), they too will find the doors slamming in their face. This is not new and we have not seen the last of it.

 

In the meantime, SIA will have to look elsewhere for expansion and growth. In the world of civil aviation, there is often very little civility. Success breeds contempt (among competitors and politicians). I find it laughable that Australian politicians continue to suggest a Qantas/SIA merger - I would be shocked if that even happens. Why would SIA and Singapore want to import higher costs and industrial relations issues into its current stable existence? What is needed is for SIA to ease the A380 and its superior product into the Australian market and give those who support it a good reason to feel their loyalty is justified. I know of two travel agents in Perth who book travellers via SIN to LAX and New York (both EWR nonstop and JFK one-stop) rather than via SYD.

 

But what continues to ring loud and clear is the message contained in LeeCh's post above. "If we do not trim down costs, the consequences are that a lot of people will lose their jobs and there will be a lot of hungry mouths in a family mouth to feed." LeeCH - you are spot on with that and I admire your attitude. At the recent Low Cost Airlines Symposium in Singapore, Jetstar Airways proclaimed that it "recruits for attitude and trains for proficiency". I personally share this line of thinking . . . for no matter how good someone is, if the attitude is rotten, it brings little benefit to this service- and people-oriented industry.

 

I hope that life in SIN isn't all that harsh and there are still many things that one could enjoy without costing an arm and a leg. And hopefully the fact that SIN is right next door to home makes all that is negative that much more bearable (that was the case when I previously worked in Myanmar for 2 years and in Bangkok for 4 years). And should you wish to talk planes, watch planes, photograph planes or make models of planes, there are a whole lot of us who would certainly be more than happy to share that with you. Went to the SIA Engineering stand at AA2006 to look for the models you mentioned were being sold but could not get near enough (lots of souvenir hunters around - even on trade days). It is a pity that not many Malaysian aviation buffs made it to AA2006 - Joule and Gavin seems to be the only two I have met.

 

Enjoyed your posts and the many others on MalaysianWingss!! Great forum and spirit here.

 

KC Sim

Singapore

Edited February 24, 2006 by kc sim