Jump to content
MalaysianWings - Malaysia's Premier Aviation Portal
Sign in to follow this  
Dr Frasier

British Airways Returns to Jakarta

Recommended Posts

BA11/12 flight times are changing to accommodate a tag-on at Singapore.

 

Rumour and logistically - Jakarta seems the most likely contender as the new flight times mirror the previous BA33/34 flights that used to operate via KUL.

 

Sadly...KL still not on the cards and who would have thought BA would serve Indonesia and not Malaysia - inconceivable not so long ago!! I could get political (in the current climate) but will refrain... The damage to UK-Malaysia business ties are clearly visible...

Edited by Dr Frasier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We sure could use additional services from other airlines, but calling BA's decision to not operate KUL as 'damaging' to MY-UK business ties would be rather exaggerated. Also as mentioned MH operates double daily flights to LHR so the segment is pretty much well covered.

Edited by Y. J. Foo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We sure could use additional services from other airlines, but calling BA's decision to not operate KUL as 'damaging' to MY-UK business ties would be rather exaggerated. Also as mentioned MH operates double daily flights to LHR so the segment is pretty much well covered.

You've misread my original post.. Its because of the 'poor UK-Malaysia trade ties' that makes it less attractive for BA to return to KUL..

 

If British businesses saw Malaysia as a better country to invest in - you'd probably see those Speedbirds back on the tarmac at KUL as its main agenda is to serve the business customer - rather than the VFR or student markets.

 

As a shareholder of IAG, this has been cited as one of the main reasons for not returning to Malaysia.. Transparency has to improve and with companies like BP as one of the many large account holders at BA for example - when we see BP stations back on the streets of Malaysia for example - the sooner it would be that BA sees KUL a viable route. It is a bit of a shame when once, KUL was a main station for BOAC/BA...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a shareholder of IAG, this has been cited as one of the main reasons for not returning to Malaysia.. Transparency has to improve and with companies like BP as one of the many large account holders at BA for example - when we see BP stations back on the streets of Malaysia for example - the sooner it would be that BA sees KUL a viable route. It is a bit of a shame when once, KUL was a main station for BOAC/BA...

Speaking of transparency , I would like to know the real truth with the oil spill catastrophe in the USA gulf and the after effects ....or is it still going thro some inquiry , levinson or the like ,

BP stations were never that good anyway and hopefully the Russians will see the back of BP too.

 

As for BA , who cares if they return to KL or not , no matter how wonderful their F or C class is , I wouldn't fly BA unless I really have to anyway ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As for BA , who cares if they return to KL or not , no matter how wonderful their F or C class is , I wouldn't fly BA unless I really have to anyway ...

Well obviously many still care... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well obviously many still care... ;)

 

I do ;) - Would save me a HEAP of trouble if they came back here and had a tag on to somewhere close by....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well obviously many still care... ;)

According to the thread starter and shareholder of the company that owns BA , Malaysia is not a good enough country to invest in according to their values and terms - thought such neo colonial arrogance and the days of piracy are over -( think opium - which is being ...refined into something stronger and "exported" back to the UK.)

 

Why does BA still fly to South Africa or wherever the Anglo American mining company operates in , where the plunder of the mines still continue , or for that matter why they continue to fly to the USA or even to exist as a company , in a post Lehman world , beats me . The hypocrisy is deafening .

 

Such a small sacrifice , and in my case not at all , to not bother with BA , than succumb to such patronizing attitude , so be it . Sometimes we need to see the bigger picture.

Edited by amanairways

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst i accept your view - i find it frightfully narrow-minded rather than 'seeing the bigger picture' in my view...

 

I fail to see British investments in China or Indonesia as a form of neo-colonialism where BA (along with this trade) is concentrating on expanding into (to return to the topic). I do feel it is a shame that Malaysia is not seen in the same light (as these other economies).

 

As an airline that focuses on Business travel, BA aims to operate to support business traffic - it has nothing to do with 'neo-colonial arrogance' but just good business sense in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've misread my original post.. Its because of the 'poor UK-Malaysia trade ties' that makes it less attractive for BA to return to KUL..

If British businesses saw Malaysia as a better country to invest in - you'd probably see those Speedbirds back on the tarmac at KUL as its main agenda is to serve the business customer - rather than the VFR or student markets.

As a shareholder of IAG, this has been cited as one of the main reasons for not returning to Malaysia.. Transparency has to improve and with companies like BP as one of the many large account holders at BA for example - when we see BP stations back on the streets of Malaysia for example - the sooner it would be that BA sees KUL a viable route. It is a bit of a shame when once, KUL was a main station for BOAC/BA...

Seriously?? You're citing BP? They have exited many of their businesses in the region! Sold their Singapore and Malaysian downstream business many years ago. They have exited more countries now trying to pay for their incompetence in the gulf of Mexico, so it's a good thing that they aren't operating in a big way in Malaysia. Anyway, even in the financial industry, RBS also exited, sold their whole asia-pac business to Malaysian Bank CIMB, all thanks to the widening european banking crisis, being bailed out by the british tax payer I believe. Its fair to say British dominance in industries, trade and commerce is not as important as what it used to be. With barely a pulse for GDP growth, 0.3% in Q1 this year, and 18+ months of broadly flat growth or recessions. Malaysian investments in the UK probably is more important these days, BatterSea redevelopment, LOTUS cars, Caterham, Genting Casinos etc by Malaysian conglomerates and companies, chances are these guys would fly Malaysia Airlines than BA.

 

As nice as seeing BA back, it's not going to happen. But not because of BP... Or Poor of British Malaysia trade ties, in fact trade ties are great, unfortunately trade ties are overwhelmingly in favor of Malaysia, rather than Britain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After what happened on 5/5/2013, who wants to come back to Malaysia?

 

Melodramatic much?

 

Anyways, BA is still in discussion with MH regarding future plans for KUL - so who knows, maybe BA will return sooner or later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The world is flat, MNC invest where there is money to be made, withdraw or absent where growth is limited.

 

Most corporate use home based airline for travelling and London is a major financial center in the world, implying London base companies are seeking business opportunity else where.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst i accept your view - i find it frightfully narrow-minded rather than 'seeing the bigger picture' in my view...

I fail to see British investments in China or Indonesia as a form of neo-colonialism where BA (along with this trade) is concentrating on expanding into (to return to the topic). I do feel it is a shame that Malaysia is not seen in the same light (as these other economies).

As an airline that focuses on Business travel, BA aims to operate to support business traffic - it has nothing to do with 'neo-colonial arrogance' but just good business sense in my opinion.

Lets be clear here , so I shall be brutally, as frightful as it may sound , honest without mincing words lest there's doubts .

When I say neo colonial arrogant mindset , I am referring to the thread starter s mindset in putting forward that view. And when I refer to seeing a bigger picture , I was urging others who don't agree.

Not forms of investments, nor my views .

I am also saying lets not have double standards and hypocrisy when companies invest , anywhere.

 

The west and their "expatriates" with their begging bowls in hand ought to respect the very country they come to offer their " expertise " and not lay terms and conditions .And also ought not to expect to be paid more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every employee whether foreign or local tried to ask for better pay, terms and conditions before they start work, those who secured better are skill that needed.


Cost of employing expats (e.g. pilot) and foreign workers is more expensive than equivalent locals. Companies employ expats and foreign workers because locals could not fulfill the shortage.

Edited by KK Lee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cost of employing expats (e.g. pilot) and foreign workers is more expensive than equivalent locals. Companies employ expats and foreign workers because locals could not fulfill the shortage.

 

Foreign workers more expensive than locals ? Not necessary happens all the time, at least in Malaysia :)

Edited by Kee Hooi Yen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Foreign workers more expensive than locals ? Not necessary happens all the time, at least in Malaysia :)

 

After foreign workers are paid minimum wages and adding levy, insurance, medical check up, "greasing for work permits", housing, etc, foreign workers is no longer cheap. One can expect more MNC factories that depend on foreign workers to relocate.

Edited by KK Lee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If BA were to return to KUL, I'd see them doing nonstop instead of a SIN stopover. With MH in OW, there is no way BA can compete with MH's twice daily A380 service with a daily one-stop service via SIN.

 

Just my 2 cents -- OW premium fliers will fly MH simply because (hypothetically speaking, if BA were to resume flights to KUL via SIN):

1) It's nonstop

2) Offer 2 flights a day

3) Passengers earn miles/points as they'd do on a BA flight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If BA were to return to KUL, I'd see them doing nonstop instead of a SIN stopover. With MH in OW, there is no way BA can compete with MH's twice daily A380 service with a daily one-stop service via SIN.

 

Just my 2 cents -- OW premium fliers will fly MH simply because (hypothetically speaking, if BA were to resume flights to KUL via SIN):

1) It's nonstop

2) Offer 2 flights a day

3) Passengers earn miles/points as they'd do on a BA flight.

 

Given stronger economy growth in Indonesia and Vietnam, it is more likely that BA will serve CGK and SGN before KUL. On LHR-KUL, BA could codeshare with MH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, as much as I'd like to see BA in KUL, it is entirely for diversity purpose and to have options to travel. Unfortunately, I don't think we need BA or QF here given that we have an excellent product by various airlines operating into KUL, which is worth the transits or stopovers or even the price. So if BA does not return to KUL physically, it is ok afterall. Too bad for them for ditching us in favour of QF's SIN hub only to be slapped with a divorce at the end :acute:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only flew BA 33/34 once in the 1980s - the load wasn't that great. I could have the whole row of seats in the very nice Lockheed Tristar.

 

BA will need to invest a lot of brand building dollars if it wants to have a meaningful operation here. I think that just operating KUL-LHR will not be viable. It needs to do the kangaroo route too. For BA, its a choice between KUL and SIN for SE Asia. So, if they do come to KUL, it will be at the expense of SIN.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If BA were to return to KUL, I'd see them doing nonstop instead of a SIN stopover. With MH in OW, there is no way BA can compete with MH's twice daily A380 service with a daily one-stop service via SIN.

 

Just my 2 cents -- OW premium fliers will fly MH simply because (hypothetically speaking, if BA were to resume flights to KUL via SIN):

1) It's nonstop

2) Offer 2 flights a day

3) Passengers earn miles/points as they'd do on a BA flight.

Not true.. BA executive club earn fewer points on MH.

RJ flights earn most tier points and we hope QR flights will also see similar tier point awards.

 

Lets be clear here , so I shall be brutally, as frightful as it may sound , honest without mincing words lest there's doubts .

When I say neo colonial arrogant mindset , I am referring to the thread starter s mindset in putting forward that view. And when I refer to seeing a bigger picture , I was urging others who don't agree.

Not forms of investments, nor my views .

I am also saying lets not have double standards and hypocrisy when companies invest , anywhere.

The west and their "expatriates" with their begging bowls in hand ought to respect the very country they come to offer their " expertise " and not lay terms and conditions .And also ought not to expect to be paid more.

To be fair - i hadnt intended to put forward this view that you had clearly read into.

Anyway - I will let sleeping dogs lie.

I wonder if your view of AF's return and Total's, Peugeot's, Renault's expansion in Malaysia is seen in the same light...

Edited by Dr Frasier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...