MAS offers sub par uncompetitive products

[jit 0]

Also MH seems to deploy the B772 to destinations that does not need its range - DPS and DAC being the prime example. http://airlineroute.net/2013/03/27/mh-s13update3/ The assignment of the B772 to these destinations seems like MH has a lot of surplus of the type after many of the former B772 stations are replaced by the new A333X.

 

On the book, MH has 17 B772s to serve AMS (daily), FRA (5 weekly), IST (3 weekly), AKL (6 weekly), JED (4 weekly), LAX (3 weekly) and NRT (daily). From these list, IST, JED and NRT will definitely get the new A333X once more frames arrived, leaving the 17 B772 with only AMS, FRA, AKL and LAX to serve.

 

Based on MH's current network, it looks like the 772s are really needed only for AMS and FRA. AKL and LAX can be served with the 333s with a little payload restrictions.

 

So, would it then be a good idea for MH to buy another 2 or 3 A380s for AMS/FRA and convert the remaining 333 options to the 333HGWs for AKL,LAX,JED,IST?

[Josh T 0]

I don't think MAS can justify bringing the A380 to AMS or FRA as there is not enough premium traffic between KUL and those 2 destinations. There is plenty of tourist traffic, so the HGW A333X can manage those.

[flee 5]

I doubt A333HGW will be able to match B772ER performance without payload penalty (for EU ops). A333 was never designed to be an ULH aircraft. I did some numbers crunching based on published fig and could not get a sensible answer. I could be wrong though ......

 

Yes, there will be some balancing act to do with fuel/payload. Also depends on how much belly cargo MH carries on those routes. Airbus has already said that these new HGW A333s will have a 2% better fuel burn due to aero and engine improvements. So it may be easier to make these flights at acceptable CASKs.

[David.W 0]

Although it is quite late for MH to order the 787/A390, do you think it would be idea for some of its long haul routes e.g. KUL - LAX

espically when the 77 are gone, the 333 is the only plane that can replace it?

Edited April 7, 2013 by Tan Hao Ming

[Syukri 0]

Although it is quite late for MH to order the 787/A390, do you think it would be idea for some of its long haul routes e.g. KUL - LAX

espically when the 77 are gone, the 333 is the only plane that can replace it?

 

When 772 is gone, the plane that make most sense (and favourite to Mwingers ) is either 773ER or the new 777-8X/-9X

[KK Lee 5]

When 772 is gone, the plane that make most sense (and favourite to Mwingers ) is either 773ER or the new 777-8X/-9X

 

Historically, MH could neither fill or attract enough high yield pax to make 744 or 772 breakeven on KUL-LAX, much less 77W and why MH could not operate the smaller 787 daily to LAX?

Edited April 7, 2013 by KK Lee

[D Singh 0]

So im going to drag up this old thread that I started, just for fun. I wonder what the MAS apologists that wrote in this thread have to say now.

 

-MAS still offers a crap hard product (with no prospects for improvement as far as I know)

 

-Piss poor route network (which will only continue to shrink)

 

-Little integration with One World (its website can barely sell a codeshare)

 

 

The unfortunate disasters have contributed nothing to this situation. MAS has been run into the ground long before 2014. I view this RM 6 billion "turn around" plan as a joke. That money would be better used as wall paper than given to MAS where it will basically be lighted on fire! Malaysia is not a super wealthy country 6 billion could do a lot more good than being pissed away on this sorry excuse for an airline.

 

MAS is a lost cause they should just let the damn thing die and start from scratch. Or better yet the government should stay the hell out of the aviation business and let some private individual who actually has something between his ears come into the market.

[Adam Lawrence 0]

So im going to drag up this old thread that I started, just for fun. I wonder what the MAS apologists that wrote in this thread have to say now.

 

-MAS still offers a crap hard product (with no prospects for improvement as far as I know)

 

-Piss poor route network (which will only continue to shrink)

 

-Little integration with One World (its website can barely sell a codeshare)

 

 

The unfortunate disasters have contributed nothing to this situation. MAS has been run into the ground long before 2014. I view this RM 6 billion "turn around" plan as a joke. That money would be better used as wall paper than given to MAS where it will basically be lighted on fire! Malaysia is not a super wealthy country 6 billion could do a lot more good than being pissed away on this sorry excuse for an airline.

 

MAS is a lost cause they should just let the damn thing die and start from scratch. Or better yet the government should stay the hell out of the aviation business and let some private individual who actually has something between his ears come into the market.

when was the last time you flew with MAS?? First of all, with the introduction of new aircraft (A380, A330, B738), MAS hard products have improved eventhough they are not fantastic, but they are still so much better than the previous. Second, prior to the 2 tragic incidents, MAS has increased its frequencies to several destinations as well as introducing new routes. And third, there are more codeshares between MAS and its OneWorld partner nowadays. This is 1 of the example: http://www.nst.com.my/node/11258

[BC Tam 2]

..... MAS hard products have improved eventhough they are not fantastic, but they are still so much better than the previous

Problem is, there are alternatives out there that are fantastic (at the very least, perceived to be fantastic) So in effect, MH is at 'catch up' mode instead of being up there fighting for market share in the premium yield segment of the market

 

..... prior to the 2 tragic incidents, MAS has increased its frequencies to several destinations as well as introducing new routes

We will never be the wiser as to whether those additional frequencies and new routes are/were well thought out viable measures (profit generating), or merely attempts at disturbing competitor(s) growth plans

 

..... there are more codeshares between MAS and its OneWorld partner nowadays

'More' - but certainly not as extensively as expected. My understanding is that other OW partners (a certain few anyway) have been able to forge much closer relationships amongst themselves than what MH has been able

[Mike P 0]

'More' - but certainly not as extensively as expected. My understanding is that other OW partners (a certain few anyway) have been able to forge much closer relationships amongst themselves than what MH has been able

 

Like which you mentioned? MH joined OW last year, if you were to compare those airlines that have joined OW much longer than MH, it won't be fair.

Problem is, there are alternatives out there that are fantastic (at the very least, perceived to be fantastic) So in effect, MH is at 'catch up' mode instead of being up there fighting for market share in the premium yield segment of the market

 

MH is a fantastic and respectable airlines that have had won numerous awards, the best or not the best, performance may have been yo yo for the past few years but still, one of the best airlines. Not sure about the market share in the premium yield but rather even not sure if that's the kind of market that MH wanted to pursue vehemently rather than hitting the niche and right market to boost the revenue and profit.

We will never be the wiser as to whether those additional frequencies and new routes are/were well thought out viable measures (profit generating), or merely attempts at disturbing competitor(s) growth plans

 

I guess the only way to know is if the load factor has increased or more flights cancellation ever since the higher frequencies amended, higher frequencies have been amended on some of the important domestic routes such as KCH and BKI, regional routes like BKK, CGK, and definitely the Australian destinations, especially after more new fleets of B738 and A330 joining the family. Else we won't want the new planes coming here and idling and sleeping in KUL tarmac. After all, ain't it a healthy competition after all?

[Adam Lawrence 0]

Problem is, there are alternatives out there that are fantastic (at the very least, perceived to be fantastic) So in effect, MH is at 'catch up' mode instead of being up there fighting for market share in the premium yield segment of the market

 

We will never be the wiser as to whether those additional frequencies and new routes are/were well thought out viable measures (profit generating), or merely attempts at disturbing competitor(s) growth plans

 

'More' - but certainly not as extensively as expected. My understanding is that other OW partners (a certain few anyway) have been able to forge much closer relationships amongst themselves than what MH has been able

You need to consider that i replied to every 3 points listed by D Singh while your argument is more to a comparison between MH and other carriers. Please reread the 3 points listed by D Singh so you wont be out of topic.

[BC Tam 2]

You need to consider that i replied to every 3 points listed by D Singh while your argument is more to a comparison between MH and other carriers. Please reread the 3 points listed by D Singh so you wont be out of topic.

Oh well, if comparison with others is out of topic, I will then have to say MH is the bestest of the best and the only airline I will ever fly with, by default

[Waiping 12]

Equipment wise MH is definitely better now (compared to older MH) and on par (with other airlines), but food quality wise (1 aspect) has probably dropped. This was discussed extensively on the "naked nasi lemak" thread. Are all ML-series B738 reconfigured in sky interior already? Those LCC-ish seats are really terrible compared to the sky interior ones.

[BC Tam 2]

Not sure about the market share in the premium yield but rather even not sure if that's the kind of market that MH wanted to pursue vehemently rather than hitting the niche and right market to boost the revenue and profit

Seem like for few years already no one has any clear vision as to what market MH wants to pursue, 'Five Star Value Carrier' being the high note so far

[Mike P 0]

Equipment wise MH is definitely better now (compared to older MH) and on par (with other airlines), but food quality wise (1 aspect) has probably dropped. This was discussed extensively on the "naked nasi lemak" thread. Are all ML-series B738 reconfigured in sky interior already? Those LCC-ish seats are really terrible compared to the sky interior ones.

 

I think the earlier argument here was MH deploying narrow body aircraft like B738 to the regional routes, even as far as Taipei which requires flying time more than 4 hours.

 

As for the food, the domestic sector is really quite bad nowadays due to cost cutting and could deteriorate further. As for international, I'm not sure. However, I don't think it would be fair if we were to compare the food and drinks offered by MH, especially on the domestic sector, with SQ's and CX's where both these airlines are totally flying international routes.

Edited August 31, 2014 by Mike P

[KK Lee 5]

You need to consider that i replied to every 3 points listed by D Singh while your argument is more to a comparison between MH and other carriers. Please reread the 3 points listed by D Singh so you wont be out of topic.

MH is not a monopoly, is competing with other airlines and self satisfied with own improvement regardless of others is basically syok sendiri. Without the twin incidents, MH was still incurring losses everyday.

 

 

Like which you mentioned? MH joined OW last year, if you were to compare those airlines that have joined OW much longer than MH, it won't be fair.

 

MH is a fantastic and respectable airlines that have had won numerous awards, the best or not the best, performance may have been yo yo for the past few years but still, one of the best airlines. Not sure about the market share in the premium yield but rather even not sure if that's the kind of market that MH wanted to pursue vehemently rather than hitting the niche and right market to boost the revenue and profit.

 

I guess the only way to know is if the load factor has increased or more flights cancellation ever since the higher frequencies amended, higher frequencies have been amended on some of the important domestic routes such as KCH and BKI, regional routes like BKK, CGK, and definitely the Australian destinations, especially after more new fleets of B738 and A330 joining the family. Else we won't want the new planes coming here and idling and sleeping in KUL tarmac. After all, ain't it a healthy competition after all?

Joining OW or any alliance is basically to take advantage of network synergy e.g. codeshare. Believe MH took about 2 years preparation before joining officially. Identified and negotiation for code shares could have done years before officially joined.

 

Numerous awards, best airline? By whom? If there are relevant, MH won't have trimmed so many international destinations.

 

Increased in frequency doesn't necessary mean increased in seat capacity. It is a fact that MH 738 is configured to compete with AK (e.g. seat pitch), by sending 738 to regional (e.g. BKK, HKG, TPE) where competitors are deploying widebody mean MH could only fill the aircraft with subpar yield. Further a number of added frequency is more accounting purpose i.e. number of hours in the air rather than pax demand e.g. red eye flight to CAN, HKG, TPE, etc.

 

If MH is fantastic and respectable won't be losing millions everyday.

 

 

I think the earlier argument here was MH deploying narrow body aircraft like B738 to the regional routes, even as far as Taipei which requires flying time more than 4 hours.

 

As for the food, the domestic sector is really quite bad nowadays due to cost cutting and could deteriorate further. As for international, I'm not sure. However, I don't think it would be fair if we were to compare the food and drinks offered by MH, especially on the domestic sector, with SQ's and CX's where both these airlines are totally flying international routes.

There are so many pictures available on MH food offering on international sectors, not hard to compare.

Edited August 31, 2014 by KK Lee

[Mike P 0]

 

MH is not a monopoly, is competing with other airlines and self satisfied with own improvement regardless of others is basically syok sendiri. Without the twin incidents, MH was still incurring losses everyday.

 

Joining OW or any alliance is basically to take advantage of network synergy e.g. codeshare. Believe MH took about 2 years preparation before joining officially. Identified and negotiation for code shares could have done years before officially joined.

 

Numerous awards, best airline? By whom? If there are relevant, MH won't have trimmed so many international destinations.

 

Increased in frequency doesn't necessary mean increased in seat capacity. It is a fact that MH 738 is configured to compete with AK (e.g. seat pitch), by sending 738 to regional (e.g. BKK, HKG, TPE) where competitors are deploying widebody mean MH could only fill the aircraft with subpar yield. Further a number of added frequency is more accounting purpose i.e. number of hours in the air rather than pax demand e.g. red eye flight to CAN, HKG, TPE, etc.

 

If MH is fantastic and respectable won't be losing millions everyday.

 

There are so many pictures available on MH food offering on international sectors, not hard to compare.

 

 

I'm not sure if MH or any other airlines could have already integrated their flight schedules into the system or discussed and concluded the alliance and codeshare with the respective alliance's members of airlines before officially announcing the joining of alliance. If it's so, MH and QF would have already formed extensive alliance for QF was the one who sponsored MH to join OW.

 

Obvious awards are of course given by Skytrax and for your info, I don't think Skytrax are giving awards to any airlines that could fly to most destinations than any other airlines.

 

More importantly, i think the debate in this thread is about MH's offerings, products and services, not the business strategy where the word of "fantastic" was being quoted or any other positive or negative words we choose to describe on MH here.

Edited August 31, 2014 by Mike P

[Adam Lawrence 0]

 

MH is not a monopoly, is competing with other airlines and self satisfied with own improvement regardless of others is basically syok sendiri. Without the twin incidents, MH was still incurring losses everyday.

 

Joining OW or any alliance is basically to take advantage of network synergy e.g. codeshare. Believe MH took about 2 years preparation before joining officially. Identified and negotiation for code shares could have done years before officially joined.

 

Numerous awards, best airline? By whom? If there are relevant, MH won't have trimmed so many international destinations.

 

Increased in frequency doesn't necessary mean increased in seat capacity. It is a fact that MH 738 is configured to compete with AK (e.g. seat pitch), by sending 738 to regional (e.g. BKK, HKG, TPE) where competitors are deploying widebody mean MH could only fill the aircraft with subpar yield. Further a number of added frequency is more accounting purpose i.e. number of hours in the air rather than pax demand e.g. red eye flight to CAN, HKG, TPE, etc.

 

If MH is fantastic and respectable won't be losing millions everyday.

 

There are so many pictures available on MH food offering on international sectors, not hard to compare.

 

so what??? those are not what listed by D Singh! I replied to the 3 points listed by him.....

Oh well, if comparison with others is out of topic, I will then have to say MH is the bestest of the best and the only airline I will ever fly with, by default

This was the 3 points listed by D Singh:

 

 

-MAS still offers a crap hard product (with no prospects for improvement as far as I know)

-Piss poor route network (which will only continue to shrink)

-Little integration with One World (its website can barely sell a codeshare)

Since when there is a comparison between MAS and other carriers here?? I replied to this post and not the whole thread.....

[Waiping 12]

This is interesting as we cannot talk about offerings, products and services without comparing to others. How would you know you have the best, when you don't compare? Let's set a baseline for comparison. I am thinking GA. Fair? Indonesia is a big country, and GA is a full service carrier with extension domestic and international route.

 

Equipment wise MH A380 vs GA B777. So 1 nil to MH. So shiok, how's that?

[Mike P 0]

This is interesting as we cannot talk about offerings, products and services without comparing to others. How would you know you have the best, when you don't compare? Let's set a baseline for comparison. I am thinking GA. Fair? Indonesia is a big country, and GA is a full service carrier with extension domestic and international route.

 

Equipment wise MH A380 vs GA B777. So 1 nil to MH. So shiok, how's that?

 

Not saying MH is the best, but one of the best. Come on guys, let's get this right. At this juncture, are we are trying to criticise MH or throwing ideas to make it a better airlines?

[KK Lee 5]

 

Not saying MH is the best, but one of the best. Come on guys, let's get this right. At this juncture, are we are trying to criticise MH or throwing ideas to make it a better airlines?

MH (oldco) as its known is supposed to vanish, disappear, die, replace pretty soon, what better airlines?

 

so what??? those are not what listed by D Singh! I replied to the 3 points listed by him.....

This was the 3 points listed by D Singh:

 

 

-MAS still offers a crap hard product (with no prospects for improvement as far as I know)

-Piss poor route network (which will only continue to shrink)

-Little integration with One World (its website can barely sell a codeshare)

Since when there is a comparison between MAS and other carriers here?? I replied to this post and not the whole thread.....

Unless one travel exclusively on MH, it is syok sendiri if not compare with other airlines. However, if one insist to compare with MH past, how far back in history do you like to compare? 1, 3, 5, 10, 20 or 30 years?

 

 

I'm not sure if MH or any other airlines could have already integrated their flight schedules into the system or discussed and concluded the alliance and codeshare with the respective alliance's members of airlines before officially announcing the joining of alliance. If it's so, MH and QF would have already formed extensive alliance for QF was the one who sponsored MH to join OW.

 

Obvious awards are of course given by Skytrax and for your info, I don't think Skytrax are giving awards to any airlines that could fly to most destinations than any other airlines.

 

More importantly, i think the debate in this thread is about MH's offerings, products and services, not the business strategy where the word of "fantastic" was being quoted or any other positive or negative words we choose to describe on MH here.

During transition to join OW officially, there is nothing to stop MH to identify, talk, negotiate with its peers on code share and to be integrated later.

 

Offering, products and services are product of business strategy.

 

 

 

 

MH is a fantastic and respectable airlines that have had won numerous awards, the best or not the best, performance may have been yo yo for the past few years but still, one of the best airlines. Not sure about the market share in the premium yield but rather even not sure if that's the kind of market that MH wanted to pursue vehemently rather than hitting the niche and right market to boost the revenue and profit.

[Mike P 0]

During transition to join OW officially, there is nothing to stop MH to identify, talk, negotiate with its peers on code share and to be integrated later.

 

Offering, products and services are product of business strategy.

 

Interesting. Can you name any airlines have had pre-engaged with the existing members of alliance and once official announcement was made, the codeshare and partnership are immediately kicked in?

[BC Tam 2]

Interesting. Can you name any airlines have had pre-engaged with the existing members of alliance and once official announcement was made, the codeshare and partnership are immediately kicked in?

My DOH-HKG flight was supposed to have been on QR metal

About a month after entry into OW, we were informed we will be switched over to a CX flight instead, our original QR flight seemingly having been scrapped (QR814)

I cannot be certain if the arrangement with fellow OW partner was pre-arranged, but they (QR and CX) do appear to be able to get their partnership up and running very quickly

[BC Tam 2]

-MAS still offers a crap hard product (with no prospects for improvement as far as I know)

 

-Piss poor route network (which will only continue to shrink)

 

-Little integration with One World (its website can barely sell a codeshare)

 

Since when there is a comparison between MAS and other carriers here?? I replied to this post and not the whole thread.....

-MAS still offers a crap hard product (with no prospects for improvement as far as I know) - cannot be, it is the best hard product available (I know no better because I do not compare with others)

 

-Piss poor route network (which will only continue to shrink) - cannot be, it is the best route network possible (I know no better because I do not compare with others)

 

-Little integration with One World (its website can barely sell a codeshare)[\I] - cannot be, it is optimally integrated with fellow alliance partners (I know no better because I do not compare with others)

 

My apologies for having initiated the comparison with other airlines, perhaps I was misled by the word 'uncompetitive' incorporated into the topic title of this thread. Maybe it is possible after all to have a discussion about competitiveness of something without comparison with peers ?!!

 

 

 

After all, ain't it a healthy competition after all?

In the case of MH, no it is not healthy competition

Healthy competition is when you go into a fight knowing you reap the rewards in success and bear the consequences if otherwise

MH has never had to bear consequences of their folly, with sugar daddy ever ready to bail them out invest further

(yes, it is apparent now quite a few employees will have to bear the consequence this time round, but the show goes on)

 

And if you think all those low low fares made available whilst MH goes in flooding the market with extra capacity are a bonus for us consumers, be reminded where the very many billions that have been poured in and is continually being poured in, comes from

Edited August 31, 2014 by BC Tam

[Adam Lawrence 0]

-MAS still offers a crap hard product (with no prospects for improvement as far as I know) - cannot be, it is the best hard product available (I know no better because I do not compare with others)

 

-Piss poor route network (which will only continue to shrink) - cannot be, it is the best route network possible (I know no better because I do not compare with others)

 

-Little integration with One World (its website can barely sell a codeshare)[\I] - cannot be, it is optimally integrated with fellow alliance partners (I know no better because I do not compare with others)

 

My apologies for having initiated the comparison with other airlines, perhaps I was misled by the word 'uncompetitive' incorporated into the topic title of this thread. Maybe it is possible after all to have a discussion about competitiveness of something without comparison with peers ?!!

 

 

 

In the case of MH, no it is not healthy competition

Healthy competition is when you go into a fight knowing you reap the rewards in success and bear the consequences if otherwise

MH has never had to bear consequences of their folly, with sugar daddy ever ready to bail them out invest further

(yes, it is apparent now quite a few employees will have to bear the consequence this time round, but the show goes on)

 

And if you think all those low low fares made available whilst MH goes in flooding the market with extra capacity are a bonus for us consumers, be reminded where the very many billions that have been poured in and is continually being poured in, comes from

your are not being relevant here.... if you read carefully D Singh's post, it was a comparison between old and current MH. Let me take the first point as an example:

-MAS still offers a crap hard product (with no prospects for improvement as far as I know) <----- Is this true?Of course not. With the introduction of new aircrafts, there are some improvements on MAS' hard products. Its that simple... no one talk about whether MAS's new hard products will lead them to profitability, etc, etc... Its not that you are not allowed to make a comparison between MAS and other airlines, but D Singh's post that i replied to didnt talk about that. People talked about apple then suddenly you replied about orange, no matter how correct and precise your fact about orange is, you already wrong.