flee 5 Report post Posted June 25, 2014 I hope they install new seats since the new seats are thinner. But this will incur higher cost. New seats will need a longer payback period, not 3 to 6 months. MAS will probably rip out the old seats from the two aircraft that they are planning to retire and install them in the remaining fleet. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JuliusWong 0 Report post Posted June 25, 2014 Assuming that the seats on those two which had retired and two to be retired will be ripped out to put in other 12 B777s, look possible to be done. However, it is no brainer to refurbish an aircraft due to retire. Might as well dun upgrade at all. This actually brings us to another topic, I understand when A380 arrived, it came with the then-new inferior F, J and Y class as those seats were ordered in advance in anticipation that the big momma would be delievered on time. But history proves otherwise. However what I do not understand is those on A330 which was ordered much later. Should MH knows the shortcomings all the new-J and Y class seats and rework on it before delivery? I remember LH, SQ, AF took delivery of their newer jets with different seats as they progressively rolled out new products.......new one comes with new seats, older one to be refurbished, much more cost saving. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mohd Azizul Ramli 2 Report post Posted June 25, 2014 Will this be applied fleetwide (all remaining 772s)? Which 2 772s that will leave the fleet? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mohd Suhaimi Fariz 2 Report post Posted June 25, 2014 Rip the seats off the A380, install it on the 777 and have new seats for the Dugong. (Wishful thinking...) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Josh T 0 Report post Posted June 25, 2014 If they are still planning to get rid of all the 772s in 3 years, what are they going to use to fly to FRA, AMS and AKL? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flee 5 Report post Posted June 26, 2014 If they are still planning to get rid of all the 772s in 3 years, what are they going to use to fly to FRA, AMS and AKL? Are they going to suspend these routes? If not, the logical answer would be for MH to order the 242t A333s for these (over 10 hours flight time) long haul routes. B77W is another option but it might be too big. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Johan Z 0 Report post Posted June 26, 2014 I wonder if there would be some 2nd hand 77W available in the market. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KK Lee 5 Report post Posted June 26, 2014 Doubt additional seats will help MH to be profitable or compete with ME3. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flee 5 Report post Posted June 26, 2014 Doubt additional seats will help MH to be profitable or compete with ME3. It will reduce CASK - so this will narrow the difference between CASK and RASK, thereby improving yields for flights performed on the B772. Scoot has increased the seat count for their B772s and it looks like MH is now run very much like an LCC. The only thing that is not LCCish is those long term, high price crony supply contracts.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KK Lee 5 Report post Posted June 26, 2014 It will reduce CASK - so this will narrow the difference between CASK and RASK, thereby improving yields for flights performed on the B772. Scoot has increased the seat count for their B772s and it looks like MH is now run very much like an LCC. The only thing that is not LCCish is those long term, high price crony supply contracts.... No doubt, higher density will reduce cask but rask will likely reduce also. Given mh track record, overhead cost is more likely to increase at a faster pace to nullify the initial cask reduction. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mohd Suhaimi Fariz 2 Report post Posted June 26, 2014 I wonder if there would be some 2nd hand 77W available in the market. I believe AI is looking to discard their 77W and they can't seem to find a buyer yet. No doubt, higher density will reduce cask but rask will likely reduce also. Given mh track record, overhead cost is more likely to increase at a faster pace to nullify the initial cask reduction. Don't think overheads will rise too much because this would be a capacity increase without a frequency increase. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KJ Lim 0 Report post Posted June 26, 2014 If MAS goes 10 abreast or reduce their seat pitch I'm afraid they are forgetting the main core of their product. 5 Star Airline. They would just be another 3 star airline. I remember MAS once won the award for best economy class with their 34" pitch seats. A shame really Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BC Tam 2 Report post Posted June 26, 2014 .....they are forgetting the main core of their product. 5 Star Airline. They would just be another 3 star airline.Maybe someone finally came to realization the 5* tag has not brought on the desired additional yields hoped for ? A shame reallyGood summary of MH ! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chris Tan 0 Report post Posted June 26, 2014 If MAS goes 10 abreast or reduce their seat pitch I'm afraid they are forgetting the main core of their product. 5 Star Airline. They would just be another 3 star airline. I remember MAS once won the award for best economy class with their 34" pitch seats. A shame really The 5* rating has always been meaningless. MH's Y hard product might be good but they're not any better than their competitors when it comes to IFE, catering (which is abysmal at best) and service (IMO it's only the premium classes which have the more enthusiastic FAs). The only saving grace is the really competitive pricing that's comparable to the LCCs after adding all the frills. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flee 5 Report post Posted June 26, 2014 (edited) Maybe someone finally came to realization the 5* tag has not brought on the desired additional yields hoped for ? Good summary of MH ! Yes, no one cares too much about the Skytrax ratings. MH has decided that dollars and cents is more important than 5 Skytrax stars. Edited June 26, 2014 by flee Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Johan Z 0 Report post Posted June 26, 2014 With ME3 using dense configuration, it's hard for MH to keep 34" just to make some people happy. MH hasn't won best economy class for awhile now, although 777 is still at 34". So, why bother keeping it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KK Lee 5 Report post Posted June 26, 2014 With ME3 using dense configuration, it's hard for MH to keep 34" just to make some people happy. MH hasn't won best economy class for awhile now, although 777 is still at 34". So, why bother keeping it? Qr 77w is 9 abreast. Without product differentiation, mh could only compete in price. Mh overhead is not known to be low, it will be even more difficult to breakeven. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kee Hooi Yen 0 Report post Posted June 26, 2014 General public don't care about seat pitch and seat width, especially for Y pax. What they care is the price, schedule, IFE, meal and maybe service. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flee 5 Report post Posted June 26, 2014 General public don't care about seat pitch and seat width, especially for Y pax. What they care is the price, schedule, IFE, meal and maybe service. I think the 30" pitch on MH B738s is proof that it does not affect demand. Load factors are still over 80%. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
S V Choong 4 Report post Posted June 26, 2014 I hope they upgrade their livery too and instead of repainting in the old livery! Why would AI want to get rid of the 77W? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KJ Lim 0 Report post Posted June 26, 2014 You are talking long haul on the 777. If I'm sitting for 2-3 hours, it's acceptable. But I'll definitely avoid MAS with 30" pitch for 12 hour flights. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Johan Z 0 Report post Posted June 26, 2014 Qr 77w is 9 abreast. Without product differentiation, mh could only compete in price. Mh overhead is not known to be low, it will be even more difficult to breakeven. Dense configuration doesn't always mean 10-abreast. Some QR 77W only have 24 business class, with the total capacity of 380 pax. EY highest seat count on 77W is 412 (28/384). By having 10-abreast, EY can have fully flat beds for Business. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kee Hooi Yen 0 Report post Posted June 26, 2014 You are talking long haul on the 777. If I'm sitting for 2-3 hours, it's acceptable. But I'll definitely avoid MAS with 30" pitch for 12 hour flights. Yes, definately you and me will avoid that. But for the vast majority of the pax, I believe the reduction in seat pitch for 2-3" (from the current 34") won't be known to them. They don't even know or aware they are "enjoying" the generous 34" seat pitch right now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KJ Lim 0 Report post Posted June 27, 2014 I'm sure that lots of people chose MAS because of the 34" pitch Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flee 5 Report post Posted June 27, 2014 (edited) I think reducing it to 32" will only affect people who are taller than 180 cm. MH's current high load factor is largely a result of its low fare, high aircraft utilisation policy. Before its current LCC like practice, its load factor was below 70%. I am not sure if the generous seat pitch on their aircraft played a significant role on its load factor. But for the vast majority of the pax, I believe the reduction in seat pitch for 2-3" (from the current 34") won't be known to them. They don't even know or aware they are "enjoying" the generous 34" seat pitch right now. Yes, most people also don't care if they are in an A333 or B772 - they are not even aware that these are different aircraft types. E.g. MH now serves KUL-TPE with B738 aircraft. Load factors are still high. Edited June 27, 2014 by flee Share this post Link to post Share on other sites