MAS Privatisation

[flee 5]

I'm glad this could happen:

 

"It is believed that Firefly will be in charge of MAS’ domestic and regional (Asean) network by reviving its jet operations while maintaining its turboprop operations."

Firefly is already a well-known brand. I just don't see a point having another name, unless it's MAS regional or something similar.

Firefly should take the role that Silkair currently occupies - as a regional full service carrier. The only difference is that it operates turboprops as well. MASwings should also come in as Firefly's subsidiary but can be allowed to operate as an east Malaysian rural services airline. It should link up with Firefly at the east Malaysian hubs.

 

That leaves MAS International. This airline, like SQ/D7, should only operate wide body aircraft.and fly the major trunk routes. Initially, it should consolidate the parts of the network that is suffering from poor loads due to overcapacity. This will help to reduce losses. Later on, after it has returned to profit and have appropriate aircraft, it can expand its route network.

MAS International should also link up with Firefly at its major hubs to feed off each others' passengers. This is very much what SQ and MI (and Airasia and Airasia X) is doing.

[Mr.Bandit 0]

Cant disagree no more. Indeeed, those regional B738 could be distributed to their subsidiaries Firefly, focusing in West Pen. Malaysia and Maswings for East. Both can acts as feeder for MAS. Set up bases outside KUL could strengthening the network as Asean open sky policy will be implementing in coming next year.

[Khalil Abd Halim 0]

slightly off topic..but i noticed from my recent flight to SIN that they have started to display travel prayer right after the end of the safety video, albeit more like a flash and without any recitation..a new SOP perhaps?

[Mohd Azizul Ramli 2]

About MH wanting to start a foreign JV, it did actually. Remember Firefly Indonesia based in MES? It didn't take off though, regulatory hurdles.

[Mike P 0]

Only if MH could partner with QF earlier....

[Johan Z 0]

From the limited information that was in media, the JV would benefit QF more than MH. Some of MH's new A330 would have been transferred to RedOne/RedQ, whatever name they came out with.

[KK Lee 5]

From the limited information that was in media, the JV would benefit QF more than MH. Some of MH's new A330 would have been transferred to RedOne/RedQ, whatever name they came out with.

In almost all business jv, it is not possible to benefit all parties equally. As long as everyone gain individually and collectively is a good jv. Personally, prefer to have $5 in my pocket than $100 on the floor.

 

If qf jv took place, mh could have serve more European cities and frequency with better yield.

[flee 5]

From the limited information that was in media, the JV would benefit QF more than MH. Some of MH's new A330 would have been transferred to RedOne/RedQ, whatever name they came out with.

JVs are not about who benefits more. It is about being better off than if there was no JV. If the new A330s are put into the JV, the JV will have to pay the leasing costs and not MH.

 

So who benefits more in the EK/QF JV? I don't think QF is thinking about whether they or EK are benefiting more. As long as it puts QF in a better position than before the JV, it is good enough for the bottom line.

If Airasia thinks about who benefits more, why are they accepting minority stakes in their foreign JVs?

[Johan Z 0]

MH was not really quick in replacing their fleet. Their A330 were ordered to replace the old fleet, MH might see it will not benefit them at that moment.

 

So who benefits more in the EK/QF JV? I don't think QF is thinking about whether they or EK are benefiting more. As long as it puts QF in a better position than before the JV, it is good enough for the bottom line.

 

Last time I checked, QF international is still not profitable and drastic cost-cuttings are still going on.

The bottom line,it is up to the individual carrier. Domestically, QF lost their traditional customers to Virgin.

In almost all business jv, it is not possible to benefit all parties equally. As long as everyone gain individually and collectively is a good jv. Personally, prefer to have $5 in my pocket than $100 on the floor.

If qf jv took place, mh could have serve more European cities and frequency with better yield.

If I was correct, the JV would only concentrate on intra-Asian routes. EK-QF JV would have happened regardless, owing to EK massive EU network.

[Alif A. F. 0]

Tough times for virtually everyone:

 

http://www.thestar.com.my/Business/Business-News/2014/08/12/Employees-told-to-brace-themselves-for-complete-overhaul-of-airline/

 

"According to some union representatives, the new template could likely involve the setting up of a new holding company, renegotiations of all contracts and an airline without unionised staff."

[flee 5]

Last time I checked, QF international is still not profitable and drastic cost-cuttings are still going on.

What would QF's losses be if there was no JV?

[BC Tam 2]

Dr Mahathir says Khazanah can’t turn around MAS
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/dr-mahathir-says-khazanah-cant-turn-around-mas

[Johan Z 0]

He should be a fortune teller

 

What would QF's losses be if there was no JV?

 

With MH, they could have twenty JVs, but if they have their own internal parasites, they would always lose money.

[kandiah k 0]

I believe Dr M has some facts about the figures and some details on the food catering and etc. Oh well

[flee 5]

Dr Mahathir says Khazanah can’t turn around MAS

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/dr-mahathir-says-khazanah-cant-turn-around-mas

Although the CarTun can be largely credited for messing up MAS via his blue eyed boy (TR), he has made good points.

[KK Lee 5]

MH was not really quick in replacing their fleet. Their A330 were ordered to replace the old fleet, MH might see it will not benefit them at that moment.

 

 

Last time I checked, QF international is still not profitable and drastic cost-cuttings are still going on.

The bottom line,it is up to the individual carrier. Domestically, QF lost their traditional customers to Virgin.

If I was correct, the JV would only concentrate on intra-Asian routes. EK-QF JV would have happened regardless, owing to EK massive EU network.

 

Assumed MH/QF jv is limited on intra-Asian routes, more load and higher yield for MH, what is there for MH to lose even if the aircraft is painted red Q? With enough feed from QF, there is nothing to stop MH to expand its European network.

 

Due to custom to privilege position at home, few glc could venture overseas or jv with foreign partners successfully.

[leon t 0]

doubt there would be a QF/MH jv - as QF itself is finding it difficult to stay in the black itself and facing domestic competition as a result of loss of protection by the government. And on the international front QF have already joined alliance with Emirates and QF itself is not flying to as many cities as it used to.

For MAS, this time around I do agree with Dr M that Khazanah will not be able to turn it around as it have been "trying" to do that for the past 12 years even with 70% stake and now with 100%, it will still not able to do anything and MAS will be costing the govt very very dearly for the future. Its no point to put in good money into bad. MAS already is deep in rm11 billion of doubt and Khazanah too faces a few billion in govt backed loans to MAS.

Just imagine the total debt of MH/Khazanah of easily abote rm16 billion so far - imagine how much good it would have done with this billions - to pay for the tolls and fuel and food subsidies for the people instead of just yearly bailing out MAS.

[Mohd Azizul Ramli 2]

Tough times for virtually everyone:

 

http://www.thestar.com.my/Business/Business-News/2014/08/12/Employees-told-to-brace-themselves-for-complete-overhaul-of-airline/

 

"According to some union representatives, the new template could likely involve the setting up of a new holding company, renegotiations of all contracts and an airline without unionised staff."

 

Would this be more in line with present day ideal set up for an airline? AK is prosperous without any unions.

 

I always think that union is something of the past, something very 1960s and 1970s, something very palm oil estate. Even palm oil estate workers union is irrelevant nowadays.

 

Has any action of the unions contribute positively to your life? Hell no - London tube strikes in my case.

 

I think everyone should be grateful and bersyukur that there would be no more unions.

 

And if these union reps are not satisfied, just resign along with the saying, kalau tak suka keluar dari company ni.

[Mohd Azizul Ramli 2]

From The Star article:

 

For instance, the workforce in Firefly, which is a sister company of MAS, is not unionised.

 

 

If they can prosper, why can't MAS?

 

 

“We were told that there was no effort for a wholesome restructuring, perhaps because it had lacked the political will then, or there were too many obstacles, or those in charge had feared undertaking an indepth restructuring for fear of unravelling things that were not meant to be revealed. So, the airline has suffered to this date,” said an official.

 

 

So the hanky panky within MAS is acknowledge by its own staff. Shouldn't this statement be used for AG audit and BPR investigation? Is there such a thing as things that were not meant to be revealed for a public listed company?

 

 

A union official said that the chairman did not really answer questions on whether the current collective agreements with the unions would be honoured.

 

 

If the new template is going to be ununionised, isn't whatever collective agreements in the past would be irrelevant?

 

 

But some divisions within MAS were already preparing for the workforce to be cut by between 20% and 25% and had started to prepare their staff to start looking for jobs elsewhere, said an employee.

 

 

This is a very noble thing to do. I happen to experience something similar in 2008 (failure of a construction project hence we all need to be laid off). I am so appreciative of my ex boss' gesture for the heads up of the disaster approaching.

 

 

“The staff are already demoralised and fear has set in. There seems to be a sense of insecurity. But more troubling is the methodology MAS will use to decide on the layoffs. Will an independent body be appointed or will it be done unilaterally?

 

 

Based on my own experience in the point above, if you are qualified and competitive, there should be nothing to be feared of because you would be snatched by a better employer in a snap (as what happened to me). Those who fear are the typical type (you know, tea at 10, lunch for 2 hours, Facebook at work all the time) hence serve them right.

 

However, since it has been revealed in previous news articles that MAS is still very old style in doing staff culling i.e. based on seniority rather than performance driven, I hope Khazanah will address it accordingly, although I doubt any high caliber Oxbridge class talents would stay in the company after what has happened since 2006.

 

If what happened in the government sector can be used as an example, it is more cost efficient to get rid of the old staff since some of them don't even know how to use Microsoft Excel (shocking!). The era of a typewriter has ended and so as the folks who are still trapped in it. They all should opt for early retirement. My mother was a government staff and the gap in technological skill is addressed as one of the main reason why she chose to retire at 55 although she can opt for I think 58. She's not technophobic but she realized that she just couldn't keep up with her colleagues of the same age her son.

 

MY PERSONAL COMMENT ON THE STAFF ABOVE IS MORE INCLINED TOWARDS THE MANAGEMENT STAFF IN THE OFFICE. NOT FLIGHT CREW, TECHNICAL CREW AND CABIN CREW.

[Arthur Van Straten 0]

Wow, what we have here is no longer a storm in a cup of water.

 

First Dr. M. saying why khazanah would be successful when they go from 70 percent to hundred percent ownership. Dr, M. is not popular anymore in certain quarters and yes, his time has passed, but, he has a point here. Not to forget though that during his time substantial mismanagement affairs have occurred.

 

But stating that Khazanah ‘s efforts are nonsensical when you have allowed multibillion losses in the past and with full ownership this should not happen again is indeed wishful thinking at best. Factual ignorance at worst, and there i concur.

 

Then there is the chairman giving a pep talk, which did not go down very well. Should that board not better resign in complete? They were there when things went wrong.

 

And then hiding behind, quote, We were told that there was no effort for a wholesome restructuring, perhaps because it had lacked the political will then, or there were too many obstacles, or those in charge had feared undertaking an in-depth restructuring for fear of unravelling things that were not meant to be revealed. So, the airline has suffered to this date,” said an official. Unquote.

 

So, in conclusion, it was nobody’s fault, the ringgit went down, the oil price went up, the middle East competition was severe, and , by no fault and having two disasters in a short time we are in dire straits right now.

 

If that is the attitude of the rebooters and the restructurers than unfortunately Dr. M. will be right this time. And the misconception that an airline can only prosper without unions can be transferred to the ignorant dream department. Look around in the world and see airlines who prosper wilst having a well-functioning union.

 

I have stated above, a few postings earlier, that by trying to confuse an entire nation into a false sense of constructive realism will fail miserably. Confucius says.

Maybe i should call it a day as well.

 

Cheers

Art

[Johan Z 0]

MALAYSIA AIRLINES PLANS TO LAY OFF 15%-20% OF ITS PLUMP WORKFORCE

 

http://www.bursamarketplace.com/index.php?ch=ch_content&pg=pg_cont_news&ac=11642

[Lock SH 0]

I believe Dr M has some facts about the figures and some details on the food catering and etc. Oh well

Was not the contract approved when he was the PM?

Was not MAS given to TR when he was in power?

Was not all lobsided contract given when he was running the country?

Was not the era of MAS downfall happened during his term?

 

Those were a few examples. Talk is cheap ....

[flee 5]

Airasia CEO Dismisses Talks Possibility Of Taking Up Stakes In MAHB, MAS

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 14 (Bernama) -- AirAsia Group Chief Executive Officer Tan Sri Tony Fernandes Thursday dismissed rumours of him possibly taking up stakes in Malaysia Airports Holdings Bhd (MAHB) and Malaysia Airlines.

"I want to make my life more simple. That is why I have given up Formula One (F1) and I only have football.

"I do not want to own airports and I do not want to own other airlines. I just want AirAsia," he told reporters in Kuala Lumpur after the launch of AirAsia's low-cost courier service, Redbox.

Fernandes, who also owns the Queens Park Rangers Football Club, announced last month that he had sold the Caterham F1 team to a consortium of Swiss and Arab businessmen.

Meanwhile, Fernandes said he hoped to work with MAHB to develop new routes to improve passenger traffic into the country.

He was optimistic that the AirAsia-MAHB relationship would improve given that there had been more communication between the two parties.

[Mohd Azizul Ramli 2]

Khazanah need to act FAST. https://twitter.com/BUSINESSricardo/status/500146494326845440/photo/1

 

[Suzanne Goh 0]

It's not all bad news. Granted some not so good loads

 

Some examples of loads on flights i'm on next week:

MH408/20th - 4/37

MH409/20th - 7/60

MH20/22nd - 6/64/435

 

Then again, TG isn't doing fantastic either TG420/19th - 16/144 (cap 42/263)

 

Some other examples - my little brother is on MH146/20th - 12/37 (so yes, it's pretty bad ex australia)

Edited August 17, 2014 by Suzanne Goh