Jump to content
MalaysianWings - Malaysia's Premier Aviation Portal
Mohd Suhaimi Fariz

MAS Privatisation

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, JuliusWong said:

But there is no A350-1000s lying around for MH to pick up. CX are bringing back their to service, replacing B77Ws. QR got their melodrama with Airbus sorted out. All their A35K have returned to service. We are left with few HNA's and SAS's A359. Even those LH is most probably in negotiation to lease them. “The Lufthansa Group is currently in advanced negotiations for further long-haul aircraft that may be available at short notice. We cannot provide any further information beyond this at the present time,” said a Lufthansa spokesperson in a statement to AeroTime. (Source)

The supply chain issue will mean the previous generation aircraft will soldier on longer than its planned retirement or those aircraft will be cannibalised to keep current fleet flying. Two 6-years old B787-8 are now heading to scrappers, owing to parts shortage in the market. 

Well, it depends on how desperate an airline is to procure the aircraft - lessors may have unplaced A359 slots that can be converted to A35K. Anyway, that is academic now as everything is still in hush hush discussions.

A333 parts should be OK due to the large numbers of aircraft in service as well as an expanding freighter fleet. Support should still be there in 20 years, just like support for A300s is still available. However I am not sure about the situation with PW engines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, JuliusWong said:

Of course, the same broken record overplayed since 1997. Bailout RM26 billion, hasilnya ke laut. Sekarang privatised, x nampak dah balance sheet. If not, we taxpayers will have stroke every year. better use the money build more schools and hospitals. At least those are for rakyat welfare. 

You think we'll get a new hospital or school or MRT line if the government were to cut MH loose? Surely this isn't your first day in Malaysia... :)

Malaysians are a funny bunch. They demand government intervention when airfares are high, but then oppose bailouts when MH inexplicably loses money. And they'd rather let MH go under to give AK a virtual monopoly 🤷‍♂️

9 hours ago, flee said:

I don't hold much hope for new seats for the A330Neos because we keep seeing new products that are less comfortable than old ones. The new products are meant to improve profitability for the airlines, less important is pax comfort!

The current J is objectively an upgrade from the slanted seats we had on the 772/333, but already out of fashion. If the 339s didn't come with direct aisle access, it would be a huge disappointment.

Edited by Chris Tan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, JuliusWong said:

There were/are actually some keen demand from Australia for a direct flight to Kuala Lumpur, however the load varies from season to season, hence QF Group decided to drop the direct flight and route the passengers instead via 3K and deployed their assets elsewhere where they could earn more. Outside of non-KUL route, QF had hard time to justify airframes for the route, they could simply route the passengers via numerous partnerships thru HKG and SIN back then. Now you have Batik Air and AirAsia X, two homegrown LCCs (which were huge pre-covid era) and provide far greater connectivity options, the market is simply not there for QF/JQ to send their B787/A330 when they are currently very short of widebody aircraft. Yield would be horrible as well. 

Simply put, comparative low yield and lack of business traffic versus SIN and HKG.

There was and still is keen demand from Australia. Otherwise Malaysia would not be maxing out their seat capacity to/from Australia. 36,500 seats each week isn't exactly a small market. Do you think MNL, BKK, and maybe CGK is higher yield than KUL? QF serves all 3 (CGK might be a bit different in relation to AU since they are AU's neighbors with lots of immigrant traffic as well).

21 hours ago, JuliusWong said:

Of course, the same broken record overplayed since 1997. Bailout RM26 billion, hasilnya ke laut. Sekarang privatised, x nampak dah balance sheet. If not, we taxpayers will have stroke every year. better use the money build more schools and hospitals. At least those are for rakyat welfare. 

You know, a famous former finance minister once went on a journey to count beans on every single project in the country. You remember where that led us to? Less accessible stations for the Putrajaya line, lack of an underground paid connection between Kelana (busiest transit line in Malaysia) and Putrajaya line at Ampang Park station, halving of LRT3 station size (reduced from 6 car to 3 car train), and the reduced frequencies of LRT 3 line (halving the number of trains ordered). Have you seen any new schools or hospitals built that costs billions from the money saved? Or was it allegedly embezzled by another administration?

10 hours ago, Chris Tan said:

You think we'll get a new hospital or school or MRT line if the government were to cut MH loose? Surely this isn't your first day in Malaysia... :)

Malaysians are a funny bunch. They demand government intervention when airfares are high, but then oppose bailouts when MH inexplicably loses money. And they'd rather let MH go under to give AK a virtual monopoly 🤷‍♂️

Malaysians are an entitled bunch. I don't know how people complain about expensive public transportation in Malaysia when My50 is available. My50 costs less than one way ticket to KLIA on the KLIA express but you get to travel anywhere in KL for RM50 a month. Even the single fare (tap in - tap out) is still one of the cheapest in the world. RM2-5 for a train ticket? Unbelievably cheap. In fact, I think our monthly pass is too cheap that they can't even cover most of their costs (hence the lack of maintenance and frequent breakdowns). For the record, Singapore subsidizes about SGD$2 billion go their public transportation every year. I am curious how much Malaysia subsidizes their public transportation.

Maybe we need MH to adopt KTM's pricing policy. No dynamic pricing and it's the same price whether it's the first or last ticket sold or if it's during a long holiday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Chris Tan said:

You think we'll get a new hospital or school or MRT line if the government were to cut MH loose? Surely this isn't your first day in Malaysia... :)

Malaysians are a funny bunch. They demand government intervention when airfares are high, but then oppose bailouts when MH inexplicably loses money. And they'd rather let MH go under to give AK a virtual monopoly 🤷‍♂️

The current J is objectively an upgrade from the slanted seats we had on the 772/333, but already out of fashion. If the 339s didn't come with direct aisle access, it would be a huge disappointment.

Yes, it doesn't translate like that - cost savings usually mean something else. Perhaps it is lower govt. borrowing or saving some subsidy or other. But it does not usually result in more hospitals and schools.

Malaysians are also a funny bunch when criticising people who bring up issues on the cost of living - we always compare about how much it costs but seldom look at the other side of the equation, i.e. what is the income of the people who have to bear those costs. Bosses/employers only look at squeezing employee's salaries and wages. That is why we still have the low pay in this country and why the capable and talented Malaysians are easily tempted by job offers from abroad. So in some ways, the moaning is the result of stunted income growth.

Well, MH is not a premium airline and it does not need to pretend to be one. J only needs to be competitive without being extravagant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just tried the new J class and Y class seats to and fro BKI respectively.

I know there are comments here that don't favour - but tbh - I really found them quite good. More space and better comfort in the lower back area. Direct comparison with EY Seats on SIN-KUL vv sectors. Old seats are crammed and feel claustrophobic. 

New seats in EY could still definitely have used an adjustable head rest though - that I will agree. 

I'm 6ft 2 btw. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Chris Tan said:

f the 339s didn't come with direct aisle access, it would be a huge disappointment.

Not just that,privacy door and 4K monitor is a must.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, flee said:

Malaysians are also a funny bunch when criticising people who bring up issues on the cost of living - we always compare about how much it costs but seldom look at the other side of the equation, i.e. what is the income of the people who have to bear those costs. Bosses/employers only look at squeezing employee's salaries and wages. That is why we still have the low pay in this country and why the capable and talented Malaysians are easily tempted by job offers from abroad. So in some ways, the moaning is the result of stunted income growth.

Well, MH is not a premium airline and it does not need to pretend to be one. J only needs to be competitive without being extravagant.

The same reason why I don't bother to replying some commenters' cause they think MH should fly as many destinations as possible and have inflight product as grand as EK, QR or SQ. I don't think they have woken up from their sleep and smell the coffee. 😜

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Craig said:

There was and still is keen demand from Australia. Otherwise Malaysia would not be maxing out their seat capacity to/from Australia. 36,500 seats each week isn't exactly a small market. Do you think MNL, BKK, and maybe CGK is higher yield than KUL? QF serves all 3 (CGK might be a bit different in relation to AU since they are AU's neighbors with lots of immigrant traffic as well).

You know, a famous former finance minister once went on a journey to count beans on every single project in the country. You remember where that led us to? Less accessible stations for the Putrajaya line, lack of an underground paid connection between Kelana (busiest transit line in Malaysia) and Putrajaya line at Ampang Park station, halving of LRT3 station size (reduced from 6 car to 3 car train), and the reduced frequencies of LRT 3 line (halving the number of trains ordered). Have you seen any new schools or hospitals built that costs billions from the money saved? Or was it allegedly embezzled by another administration?

Malaysians are an entitled bunch. I don't know how people complain about expensive public transportation in Malaysia when My50 is available. My50 costs less than one way ticket to KLIA on the KLIA express but you get to travel anywhere in KL for RM50 a month. Even the single fare (tap in - tap out) is still one of the cheapest in the world. RM2-5 for a train ticket? Unbelievably cheap. In fact, I think our monthly pass is too cheap that they can't even cover most of their costs (hence the lack of maintenance and frequent breakdowns). For the record, Singapore subsidizes about SGD$2 billion go their public transportation every year. I am curious how much Malaysia subsidizes their public transportation.

Maybe we need MH to adopt KTM's pricing policy. No dynamic pricing and it's the same price whether it's the first or last ticket sold or if it's during a long holiday.

Domestic flights used to be like this and people complained that tickets were too expensive.

When Air Asia started the system was forced to change because MH lost a lot of business and the subsidies were costing too much.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Robert said:

Domestic flights used to be like this and people complained that tickets were too expensive.

When Air Asia started the system was forced to change because MH lost a lot of business and the subsidies were costing too much.

I think that post-pandemic, all the airlines are weakened. We now have three major airlines and one up and coming one. I think that in the next year or two, there will be some interesting developments. At the end of the day, we might end up with two majors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, flee said:

Yes, it doesn't translate like that - cost savings usually mean something else. Perhaps it is lower govt. borrowing or saving some subsidy or other. But it does not usually result in more hospitals and schools.

Malaysians are also a funny bunch when criticising people who bring up issues on the cost of living - we always compare about how much it costs but seldom look at the other side of the equation, i.e. what is the income of the people who have to bear those costs. Bosses/employers only look at squeezing employee's salaries and wages. That is why we still have the low pay in this country and why the capable and talented Malaysians are easily tempted by job offers from abroad. So in some ways, the moaning is the result of stunted income growth.

Well, MH is not a premium airline and it does not need to pretend to be one. J only needs to be competitive without being extravagant.

As you mention, there's always another side to this never-ending argument about purchasing power in Malaysia. But this is, after all, an MH topic, so do you think it's justifiable for people to demand government intervention (read: subsidies) when airfares are perceived to be expensive? I'm all for cheap airfares, but then again, I'm probably in the minority in accepting a less-than-profitable MH.

My point is, one way or another, Malaysians will be paying the price. It just seems rather unfair to expect MH to run like a for-profit business while offering cheap fares over festive periods. I can appreciate the spirit of having a financially independent national carrier as much as I like seeing my family over the holidays, but we can't have it both ways :)

I don't agree with the point of MH not being a premium airline. Premium doesn't necessarily mean extravagant. Regardless of how you slice it, the big money still lies at the front of the cabin, and they'd be silly to alienate that market. Believe it or not, there are people who'd be willing to pay for a remotely tolerable flight. Trouble with MH's J (and "F") product these days is that it's not remotely competitive, and hasn't been for a while.

8 hours ago, JuliusWong said:

The same reason why I don't bother to replying some commenters' cause they think MH should fly as many destinations as possible and have inflight product as grand as EK, QR or SQ. I don't think they have woken up from their sleep and smell the coffee. 😜

Which commenters are you referring to?

FYI - EK's product is for the most part pretty dismal, with the exception of F. Give it a try and you'll appreciate the power of style over substance. I personally don't think MH should be following EK's lead in doing things. 2-3-2 angled flat in J on the majority of your widebody fleet? No thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Chris Tan said:

As you mention, there's always another side to this never-ending argument about purchasing power in Malaysia. But this is, after all, an MH topic, so do you think it's justifiable for people to demand government intervention (read: subsidies) when airfares are perceived to be expensive? I'm all for cheap airfares, but then again, I'm probably in the minority in accepting a less-than-profitable MH.

My point is, one way or another, Malaysians will be paying the price. It just seems rather unfair to expect MH to run like a for-profit business while offering cheap fares over festive periods. I can appreciate the spirit of having a financially independent national carrier as much as I like seeing my family over the holidays, but we can't have it both ways :)

I don't agree with the point of MH not being a premium airline. Premium doesn't necessarily mean extravagant. Regardless of how you slice it, the big money still lies at the front of the cabin, and they'd be silly to alienate that market. Believe it or not, there are people who'd be willing to pay for a remotely tolerable flight. Trouble with MH's J (and "F") product these days is that it's not remotely competitive, and hasn't been for a while.

On a broader point, I am not an advocate of government protection and permanent subsidies - subsidies distort markets and it is unfair competition. Government protection for fledgeling companies is OK but there should be a time limit for this protection. Temporary subsidies are OK to cushion shocks but permanent subsidies and government protection will result in rather uncompetitive entities remaining in business. Generally, tongkats are not good for the country.

IIRC, MH used to be a listed company in Bursa Malaysia - by doing that, it signals that it is a for profit business. It failed miserably and was then delisted.

If MH declares itself to be a premium airline, most customers will have certain expectations. I am not sure that MH is able to fulfil those expectations for the time being.

I think with MH, there are so many low hanging fruits for it to harvest but those involved are not too bothered with doing it. Its existence is not threatened and its staff largely behave like civil servants. Lately Khazanah are beginning to sign less blank cheques for it. The management and staff need to be aware that the airline must be properly run - there was considerable pushback on this by them when expatriate CEOs were appointed.

In many ways, MH is like Proton - it is a spoilt brat of a GLC that is still protected. I doubt that MH can change much if it is still structurally as it is. Khazanah is no longer promising multi billion cash injections as it now sees the light. Perhaps, we need a Malaysian version of ITA - MH needs to be closed down and a new airline should rise from its ashes with a dynamic and  forward looking management.

Finally we need to remember that MH (together with SQ) began its recent history (in Oct 1972) relatively well. It only lost its sense of direction in the 1990s when government politicians began to seriously "take an interest" in it. So I think it would take political will to turn it into a successful premium airline again.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, flee said:

I think with MH, there are so many low hanging fruits for it to harvest but those involved are not too bothered with doing it. Its existence is not threatened and its staff largely behave like civil servants. Lately Khazanah are beginning to sign less blank cheques for it. The management and staff need to be aware that the airline must be properly run - there was considerable pushback on this by them when expatriate CEOs were appointed.
 

Most of the parasitic staffs and management have already left except for the select few that do not have any managerial power than before. In the old days you cant even call out any bosses on townhall meetings it will result in termination. Nowadays after Mueler came in so on its a near monthly occurrence there's more transparency now. With Izham you can actually voice out operational issues directly. The main issue now is retaining valuable staffs. Foreign Competitors with strong gov backing are fishing experienced staffs like lolipops in Asean.

MAG on the otherhand while has begun to flow cash positive have to decide whether to fix staff salary back to near competitive levels to prevent exodus or to use it for long term product renewal and procurement. Khazanah funds are not allowed for any of those stated above sadly. The recent bonus announcement barely quells the staffs issue. You can give 6months bonus etc it will still lose out to what other countries are paying, the Malaysian basic standards is  just too low. Even America is preventing valuable tech crew outflow to middle east in 2022 by hiking most of the tech crews pay as part of the usd 25bil gov baillout post pandemic.

CAM and aagb, mag, od HR's idea of mass hiring freshies is not a long term solution. Having 90% of new staffs with 0 hours and only 10% experienced is gonna spell out potential safety risks. Not to forget the cancellation and retiming headaches this will bring for at least 2.5years to stabilize the workforce.  

Edited by jahur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, HR also needs to be run on a competitive and commercial basis. That is why MAG really needs a comprehensive structural review and restructuring.

Aviation is a global business and there is global competition. The Malaysian government, regulatory bodies and those companies involved in the business should know that!

Edited by flee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jahur said:

CAM and aagb, mag, od HR's idea of mass hiring freshies is not a long term solution. Having 90% of new staffs with 0 hours and only 10% experienced is gonna spell out potential safety risks. Not to forget the cancellation and retiming headaches this will bring for at least 2.5years to stabilize the workforce.  

Unfortunately, it also happens in other sectors in the country as well. Seems like we are somewhat insulated from trends, risks or opportunities that hinder us from doing proper planning (or lack of planning skills at all).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/11/2023 at 1:37 PM, flee said:

Well, MH is not a premium airline and it does not need to pretend to be one. J only needs to be competitive without being extravagant.

I think the term is "full service carrier" instead of a premium carrier. There are only a handful of premium carriers left. Premium carrier is probably a term coined by marketing agencies. From what was posted earlier, it seems like MH wants to make a return to Europe in the medium term and if MH's new J seats can't compete with the likes of new BA/LH J  seats(those aren't premium carriers either), then it's not competitive and you'd have to lower your price point for the product. The only selling point would be the only nonstop service between Malaysia and UK/DE/FR etc.

On 4/11/2023 at 4:04 PM, Robert said:

Domestic flights used to be like this and people complained that tickets were too expensive.

When Air Asia started the system was forced to change because MH lost a lot of business and the subsidies were costing too much.

Well it's Malaysia. We love everything free and subsidized 😬 but yes I remember those tickets. Y or YN. YN is for "night tourists" and it's only for flights departing after 6PM IIRC. Those are the only options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Craig said:

I think the term is "full service carrier" instead of a premium carrier. There are only a handful of premium carriers left. Premium carrier is probably a term coined by marketing agencies. From what was posted earlier, it seems like MH wants to make a return to Europe in the medium term and if MH's new J seats can't compete with the likes of new BA/LH J  seats(those aren't premium carriers either), then it's not competitive and you'd have to lower your price point for the product. The only selling point would be the only nonstop service between Malaysia and UK/DE/FR etc.

Well it's Malaysia. We love everything free and subsidized 😬 but yes I remember those tickets. Y or YN. YN is for "night tourists" and it's only for flights departing after 6PM IIRC. Those are the only options.

I think that currently, many European carriers are closer to being LCCs that premium airlines! So MAG's bar is not very high!

Yes, those YN flights used to be operated between midnight and 6 am. I suppose they are cheaper because it helps to increase aircraft utilisation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/12/2023 at 12:00 PM, flee said:

On a broader point, I am not an advocate of government protection and permanent subsidies - subsidies distort markets and it is unfair competition. Government protection for fledgeling companies is OK but there should be a time limit for this protection. Temporary subsidies are OK to cushion shocks but permanent subsidies and government protection will result in rather uncompetitive entities remaining in business. Generally, tongkats are not good for the country.

IIRC, MH used to be a listed company in Bursa Malaysia - by doing that, it signals that it is a for profit business. It failed miserably and was then delisted.

If MH declares itself to be a premium airline, most customers will have certain expectations. I am not sure that MH is able to fulfil those expectations for the time being.

I think with MH, there are so many low hanging fruits for it to harvest but those involved are not too bothered with doing it. Its existence is not threatened and its staff largely behave like civil servants. Lately Khazanah are beginning to sign less blank cheques for it. The management and staff need to be aware that the airline must be properly run - there was considerable pushback on this by them when expatriate CEOs were appointed.

In many ways, MH is like Proton - it is a spoilt brat of a GLC that is still protected. I doubt that MH can change much if it is still structurally as it is. Khazanah is no longer promising multi billion cash injections as it now sees the light. Perhaps, we need a Malaysian version of ITA - MH needs to be closed down and a new airline should rise from its ashes with a dynamic and  forward looking management.

Finally we need to remember that MH (together with SQ) began its recent history (in Oct 1972) relatively well. It only lost its sense of direction in the 1990s when government politicians began to seriously "take an interest" in it. So I think it would take political will to turn it into a successful premium airline again.

 

Mr 019 liked to use the term "in national interest" to justify non commercial rational.

 

13 hours ago, Craig said:

I think the term is "full service carrier" instead of a premium carrier. There are only a handful of premium carriers left. Premium carrier is probably a term coined by marketing agencies. From what was posted earlier, it seems like MH wants to make a return to Europe in the medium term and if MH's new J seats can't compete with the likes of new BA/LH J  seats(those aren't premium carriers either), then it's not competitive and you'd have to lower your price point for the product. The only selling point would be the only nonstop service between Malaysia and UK/DE/FR etc.

Well it's Malaysia. We love everything free and subsidized 😬 but yes I remember those tickets. Y or YN. YN is for "night tourists" and it's only for flights departing after 6PM IIRC. Those are the only options.

If mh service level is similar to ba/lh, it could only compete on price i.e poor yield; almost certain to loss money.

 

57 minutes ago, flee said:

I think that currently, many European carriers are closer to being LCCs that premium airlines! So MAG's bar is not very high!

Yes, those YN flights used to be operated between midnight and 6 am. I suppose they are cheaper because it helps to increase aircraft utilisation.

My late dad used to take discounted YN flights from SZB.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, flee said:

I think that currently, many European carriers are closer to being LCCs that premium airlines! So MAG's bar is not very high!

I think most of the world's carriers are heading that way? QF newly refurbished 737-800s share the same capacity (also dark; without IFE) as MH's refurbished 737-800s. Seems like every carrier is racing to the bottom and consumers are OK with that as long as they cheaper air tickets.

9 hours ago, KK Lee said:

If mh service level is similar to ba/lh, it could only compete on price i.e poor yield; almost certain to loss money.

Well MH service is way better than BA/LH for sure but I am not sure if that'll make up for Nescafe Gold Blend. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Craig said:

Seems like every carrier is racing to the bottom and consumers are OK with that as long as they cheaper air tickets.

Trend is to slap a few rows of premium economy reminiscing the early 2000s comfort days in pitch. But asking consumers to pay near 75% business class rate while business class has gone up higher. There's even the inform to not have meals option now and soon to be mandatory carbon taxes to help some imaginary animals and trees while business leaders and investors are jet setting on Gulfstreams around europe with even higher carbon wastage buying dirty carbon vehicles every year like candy and advocating go green affordable lower carbon flying lol. So yea technically most of what aviation is today and tomorrow does not sound sane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jahur said:

... soon to be mandatory carbon taxes to help some imaginary animals and trees while business leaders and investors are jet setting on Gulfstreams around europe with even higher carbon wastage buying dirty carbon vehicles every year like candy and advocating go green affordable lower carbon flying lol. So yea technically most of what aviation is today and tomorrow does not sound sane.

Well environmentalists failed to move heavy industry to greener technologies. They are now targetting aviation hard and ICAO and IATA are buckling to their propaganda.

Even if all aviation were to cease today, it will only save 2.5% of total carbon emissions. As you rightly pointed out, there are so many other measures the heavy polluters could take but are not doing so. Aviation is a high profile industry and to score a victory here is good publicity for environmentalists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/7/2023 at 1:33 AM, jahur said:

Max 8 entry confirmed for July, August, October, November. 4 units total for 2023. No news on cabin. Downscale from original 7units planned for 2023 due to Boeing production.

Is MH affected by the announced Boeing's 7M8 delayed deliveries or is it too early to tell?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Craig said:

Is MH affected by the announced Boeing's 7M8 delayed deliveries or is it too early to tell?

Believe its already affected. Cause early this year or as of last year plans are to take 7 units starting from mid may 2023. Now its scaled to just 4 units and entry july 2023.

Edited by jahur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, jahur said:

Believe its already affected. Cause early this year or as of last year plans are to take 7 units starting from mid may 2023. Now its scaled to just 4 units and entry july 2023.

Whats mind boggling is that smaller airlines who ordered max much later have got their aircraft. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Pall said:

Whats mind boggling is that smaller airlines who ordered max much later have got their aircraft. 

I am not sure - MAG usually make announcements about orders that are MoUs, not firm orders. They take a long time to firm up the order. Does anyone know if the MoU for the A339s have been firmed up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...