Cathay Pacific Quits Kuala Lumpur; Cathay Dragon (Dragonair) to Take Over from March 2017

[jani 0]

 

In fact if it wasn't for GST we'd be worse off.

Spot on

[Chris Tan 0]

 

Yes, you are right... but the point some are trying to make with regards to inferior hard product is that on some flights, with careful selection, it is possible to get a 33E or 33K config with CX. That won't be possible with KA, unless as a matter of rotation they're planning to send the 3 class 33R with cirrus which they sell as F, and opening up those seats for pax as J.

I don't see what's the fuss over the Cirrus J. The regional seat has everything you can possibly ask for, such as tray tables that fold out from the seat ahead, 30 degree recline, middle seats on the 777s jumbos, tiny magazine storage, and zero privacy between seats!

[KK Lee 5]

It's the drastic drop in oil prices that's weighing down on the economy. All the malarkey about corruption is just a sideshow.

 

In fact if it wasn't for GST we'd be worse off.

Without gst, at current petronas dividend payment, the gomen is almost certain need to borrow to pay for opex. The question is whether the gomen or taxpayers could spend these $ more efficiently and benefit the aggregate economy more.

[Walter Sim 1]

I don't see what's the fuss over the Cirrus J. The regional seat has everything you can possibly ask for, such as tray tables that fold out from the seat ahead, 30 degree recline, middle seats on the 777s jumbos, tiny magazine storage, and zero privacy between seats!

2-3-2 for J 😑😑

Edited August 12, 2016 by Walter Sim

[flee 5]

OT:

 

It's the drastic drop in oil prices that's weighing down on the economy. All the malarkey about corruption is just a sideshow.

In fact if it wasn't for GST we'd be worse off.

A country's economy can only tolerate a certain level of inefficiency (corruption). If that level goes too high, the economy will choke.

 

Our wonderful government asked the people to tighten their belts and eat kangkung instead of imported food. However, it did not practice what it preached - government spending kept getting inflated instead of being cut.

 

Also, the government did not manage oil revenues wisely the past few decades. Instead of investing in the future, it spent it on frivolous things. Now that oil prices have collapsed, it has nothing in reserve for the rainy days.

 

GST should be used for development, not just increased opex of the government. If the government is not going to exercise financial discipline, GST rates will need to increase. The people/taxpayers will suffer once more. Also do note that GST is a kind of double taxation - people spend their taxed income on taxed goods and services.

MH themselves might replicate this if they decide with Firefly Jet at klia2.

 

So in the end, short haul travel all over will drop in quality

Yes, MAG does need more tools to compete and an improved version of Firefly jet operating out of klia2/LCCT2 will be definitely something that will help it to compete better.

 

I don't think short haul travel has dropped in quality - we have some fantastic airlines serving our short haul routes at fares that are much lower than in the 1980s. Safety has not been compromised. More people can afford to fly. More people can travel between Peninsular Malaysia and East Malaysia. So, all in all, the travel industry has become bigger and better.

[Suzanne Goh 0]

I don't see what's the fuss over the Cirrus J. The regional seat has everything you can possibly ask for, such as tray tables that fold out from the seat ahead, 30 degree recline, middle seats on the 777s jumbos, tiny magazine storage, and zero privacy between seats!

My dream seat then. I take it back. Viva regional premium economy !

[Najib Ramli 0]

 

GST should be used for development, not just increased opex of the government. If the government is not going to exercise financial discipline, GST rates will need to increase. The people/taxpayers will suffer once more. Also do note that GST is a kind of double taxation - people spend their taxed income on taxed goods and services.

Yes, MAG does need more tools to compete and an improved version of Firefly jet operating out of klia2/LCCT2 will be definitely something that will help it to compete better.

 

I don't think short haul travel has dropped in quality - we have some fantastic airlines serving our short haul routes at fares that are much lower than in the 1980s. Safety has not been compromised. More people can afford to fly. More people can travel between Peninsular Malaysia and East Malaysia. So, all in all, the travel industry has become bigger and better.

 

OT:

 

agree that GST is kind of double taxation but it is a consumption based tax, thus in theory a fair kind of tax considering that there's so many "creative" way to understate your income to avoid/pay less income tax..

 

then again, considering the kind of fiscal regime where I am now where max tax rate =52%, VAT = 6%/21% (essential/non essential) and the fact that the money you saved for pension only buys you an annuity pension plan which is taxed and only get after 67, current tax regime in Malaysia is not too bad

 

 

My dream seat then. I take it back. Viva regional premium economy !

 

at least still flying first/business class ... i've to swap flying with train completely even for a 4hr+ journey these days

[JuliusWong 0]

Actually, we are yet to know which configuration KA will deploy to KUL, and which five A330 CX will transfer to KA. They are currently five different A330 configuration according to respective website:

 

CX:

33K: 0F, 39J, 21W, 191Y= 251

33E: 0F, 39J, 0W, 223Y= 262

33P: 0F, 24J, 0W, 293Y= 317 (With new regional J)

 

KA:

33R: 8F, 42J, , 230Y= 280

33C: 0F, 42J, , 265Y= 307

[Waiping 12]

Is CX shifting their aircraft to other destination more lucrative than KUL?

[Mohd Azizul Ramli 2]

Per my spies in HKG, just a selection of excerp from the long chat:

 

KUL may be the first of several cities moving from CX to KA.

 

KUL's selection is due to all of CX's competitors on the route are essentially LCC or LCC-like (i.e. MH).

 

CX is very bottom line driven. Especially if KUL is bleeding. The lack of Chinese visitors for a while hasn't helped.

 

It is easier to use one carrier especially on staffing.

 

KA is in oneworld, whereas MI isn't in Star.

 

The yields are not that great and the traffic volume isn't anywhere as attractive as BKK or SIN. Compare the fares ex BKK and KUL and almost certainly ex BKK will be more expensive, which speaks volumes of the ex KUL yields.

 

To cut it very short: bottom line has been the focus of the management.

[JuliusWong 0]

Is CX shifting their aircraft to other destination more lucrative than KUL?

They are replacing five B777-200A with EK B777-300A, stood down A343 and B744 and receiving more A359 as replacement. Unless they are retiring age-old A333 I don't really see where CX will shuffle their fleet to tbh.

[flee 5]

Yes, 5 Airbus A333s will be leaving the CX fleet and will be transferred to KA.

[Craig 0]

I don't contribute that much to CX's bottom line, but I do fly TPAC with CX about 8-10 times a year (20-30 times if I include my family) in premium cabin. My CX fare rule is quite flexible - I can't exceed MPM by a certain percentage but I can route any way I want on a OW carrier to/from HKG. I prefer not to fly PEY after a 16 hour flight from LAX, so come March 2017, CX 723/722 will not be part of my itinerary since CX 723/722 is mostly operated with 33K or 33E.

 

I'd rather fly KUL-BKK-HKG-US since BKK/SIN/CGK sees 77H on a semi-regular basis (especially BKK).

 

 

Inferior hard product- the cirrus J seat is nominally sold as "First" and the regional PEY J seat is sold as "business"

 

 

Ditto

 

Japanese airlines should jump on this and steal all transpacific pax ex-KUL from the CX group

CX is still one of the preferred TPAC carriers ex-KUL. Japanese carriers have a maximum of 2 flights a day to US/Canada and it's all in the same departure bank. Between NH and JL, only NH is timed for TPAC flights. With CX, there are multiple departure banks from both ends. I could have chosen JL to LAX but I rarely do so due to inconvenient schedule.

 

In many ways, ANA has already begun the process - its schedule is optimised for transpacific connections. And now they also operate into HND.

ANA's reinstated NRT-KUL flights were timed for TPAC flights from the get go. HND flights on the other hand is not timed for any TPAC flights.

 

For Y class, the food quality n quantity for KA is way better than CX.

CX is not famous for its food, even in premium (F/J) cabins they are average at best. I fly them for their hard product.

 

Lol why ? What is so wrong with Dragonair ? Why is almost everyone here views KA as the inferior carrier in Cathay Pacific Group ?

Because KA is 100% PEY seats whilst CX has 1-3 flights a day with flat beds to HKG.

 

Also, since KA operates a lot of HKG-China routes, I won't be surprised if the on-time performance for its KUL flights, especially with the current CX 791/729 schedule, will suffer.

Edited August 12, 2016 by Craig

[Isaac 0]

Actually, we are yet to know which configuration KA will deploy to KUL, and which five A330 CX will transfer to KA. They are currently five different A330 configuration according to respective website:

 

CX:

33K: 0F, 39J, 21W, 191Y= 251

33E: 0F, 39J, 0W, 223Y= 262

 

All 33K and 333E original configuration was 39J, 28W, Y175 except a few newly delivered A330-300X. CX decided 28 seats in Premium Economy on the 333 was too much for the Middle-East and Australia. So they reduced the seats in W on more than 10x 333 that mainly serve Australia from 28 to 21 and completely canceled all Premium Economy Class service to the Middle-East and removed all W seats from the remaining A330-300X.

 

 

KA:

33R: 8F, 42J, , 230Y= 280

 

This configuration is deployed almost exclusively to Beijing and Shanghai only.

 

 

33P: 0F, 24J, 0W, 293Y= 317 (With new regional J)

 

KA:

33C: 0F, 42J, , 265Y= 307

33P is the version that will be transferred to KA. It wasn't the first time CX is doing this.

 

CX 33P was originally configured with 42J, 267Y which is identical to KA 33P.

 

 

Per my spies in HKG, just a selection of excerp from the long chat:

 

Agreed with what your spies told you. CX has plenty of promotions from KUL year-round that sell a return ticket to Japan or South Korea for less than 1.2k per person. The promotion price is exactly the same as it was more than a year ago when MYR was worth a lot more. The promotion ticket is also always priced about RM500 less than ex-BKI, which probably suggests the 777 or even the 333 are too much an aircraft for KUL. With 4 daily flights that certainly don't help with yield too. KA also reduced BKI service from daily to just 5x weekly flights since March this year and still no sign the other two red-eye flights are coming back for the coming peak holidays in December. This means things aren't as rosy too for KA at BKI.

 

 

Because KA is 100% PEY seats whilst CX has 1-3 flights a day with flat beds to HKG.

 

Which other FSC is flying PEY seats on the 333 in 2-2-2 layout with 47" seat pitch ? Pardon me but aren't you guys being over dramatic already ?

 

 

Also, since KA operates a lot of HKG-China routes, I won't be surprised if the on-time performance for its KUL flights, especially with the current CX 791/729 schedule, will suffer.

KA has been operating HKG-BKI since like forever. Most of the delays were typhoon related. Like its bigger sister CX, they know how things work in China and they are very well-prepared. They often have more than 2 spare aircraft for contingency like this.

 

In fact just a year or two ago when about ten 333 from the Cathay Pacific group were grounded because they missed some paperworks, only a few flights were canceled systemwide. With ten 333 suddenly out of service yet flights were minimally impacted, this showed the Cathay Pacific Group had more than enough spare planes to counter things like this.

Edited August 12, 2016 by Isaac

[Craig 0]

Which other FSC is flying PEY seats on the 333 in 2-2-2 layout with 47" seat pitch ? Pardon me but aren't you guys being over dramatic already ?

 

My mistake. Glorified PEY then

 

KA has been operating HKG-BKI since like forever. Most of the delays were typhoon related. Like its bigger sister CX, they know how things work in China and they are very well-prepared. They often have more than 2 spare aircraft for contingency like this.

 

 

KA 65 (15:55 departure ex-HKG) and KA 61 (08:00 departure ex-HKG) on-time performance was 67% and 92% respectively for the last 2 months.

[Isaac 0]

KA 65 (15:55 departure ex-HKG) and KA 61 (08:00 departure ex-HKG) on-time performance was 67% and 92% respectively for the last 2 months.

HKG has been hit by typhoons a couple of times since the start of summer two months ago. And i have been on KA65 many times during non-summer, most of the delays were not due to late arrival of aircraft but rather ATC delay.

[Chris Tan 0]

 

Which other FSC is flying PEY seats on the 333 in 2-2-2 layout with 47" seat pitch ? Pardon me but aren't you guys being over dramatic already ?

 

Pardon me but an airline like CX shouldn't be having such a subpar seat, even if it's meant for regional flights. 30 degree recline and zero privacy between seats just do not cut it. Mind you, they're on the vast majority of the red-eye hops around East Asia, making them even more unacceptable.

 

Ask any regular CX traveler what he/she thinks of the seat and nothing good will be said, other than being half a step up from the ancient recliners.

 

Over dramatic? I don't think so.

 

My mistake. Glorified PEY then

 

At least the PEY product doesn't pretend to be something it isn't!

[Isaac 0]

Pardon me but an airline like CX shouldn't be having such a subpar seat, even if it's meant for regional flights. 30 degree recline and zero privacy between seats just do not cut it. Mind you, they're on the vast majority of the red-eye hops around East Asia, making them even more unacceptable.

 

I've been on the red-eye from HKG to ICN 4 times. Though not so privileged like some and I was in steerage. Saw them took away hot meal and replaced it with a cold snack box. Those red-eye hops around East Asia are 2-4 hours. So you are saying you need a true lie-flat bed on a 2-4 hours flight just to get a shut eye ? You can't be serious right ?

 

 

At least the PEY product doesn't pretend to be something it isn't!

It is a respectable regional Business Class seat. There is no FSC having a PEY on the 333 with 6-abreast layout featuring a generous 47" seat pitch. Recaro itself is marketing the seat as a regional Business Class seat. Edited August 13, 2016 by Isaac

[S V Choong 4]

HKG has been hit by typhoons a couple of times since the start of summer two months ago. And i have been on KA65 many times during non-summer, most of the delays were not due to late arrival of aircraft but rather ATC delay.

 

Couple of times sounded a bit serious. Although there were 2-3 typhoons so far this year, the direct hit for HK was only once this year (2016) at the time of writing. It occured on last Tuesday 2/8/16 and Typhoon signal no.8 was hoisted and causing the cancellation of some flights particularly in the morning.

 

There are 2-3 typhoons brewing at this stage at the Pacific Ocean. Not sure if they are heading across to HK at all. Typically, 2-3 typhoons hits HK every year, but many do not cause major damage and hardly go over Signal 8.

[Roy Chin 0]

Somehow I don't see any of the so called "low cost" in Dragonair...

They still offer baggage, meal, IFE, nevertheless professional cabin crew...

What matters most by how I observed is people tend to be so particular to branding, although KA is also a sister airline...

But when CX annouced the plan, people might just questioned: har? KA? Why KA? Why KA? Why KA?

Just because they were so used to CX's product therefore they will doubt on KA being the "lower class" version of CX...

We need to hear more opinion frm paxes who travelled on KA from the other two international airports in Msia...

[Mike P 0]

I would believe the SIN/BKK - KUL route would be handed over by SQ to MI and TG to WE respectively if they have the right equipment to deploy the route, namely wide body aircraft.

[JuliusWong 0]

All 33K and 333E original configuration was 39J, 28W, Y175 except a few newly delivered A330-300X. CX decided 28 seats in Premium Economy on the 333 was too much for the Middle-East and Australia. So they reduced the seats in W on more than 10x 333 that mainly serve Australia from 28 to 21 and completely canceled all Premium Economy Class service to the Middle-East and removed all W seats from the remaining A330-300X.

 

This configuration is deployed almost exclusively to Beijing and Shanghai only.

 

33P is the version that will be transferred to KA. It wasn't the first time CX is doing this.

 

CX 33P was originally configured with 42J, 267Y which is identical to KA 33P.

Thank you Isaac for pointing teach. Glad to learn something new every day.

 

On Roy Chin's comment, I agree with him. KA was never a "cheaper airline" or "low cost" in CX Group since CX bought over KA. I don't blame others for thinking so though because if we look back at KA's history, KA has never reached its desired peak.

 

KA was established as full fare carrier in 1985 as a competitor to CX. It competed with CX on many regional routes and also had a focus on charter flight into China which was CX's weakest point. CX fought vigorously with KA for flight rights and HK government was not keen to help KA either. Being smaller compared to CX, KA was thus forced into flying secondary, less popular route. Due to this KA mainly concentrated on routes to China. Since then, KA was known "the other HK airline" with less reach. However the China route proved very profitable for KA. CX wanted to gain a foothold but could not do so. Long story short, in early 1990s CX bought into KA however not majority owner. Both airlines still operates separately and plans were made to fly to Seoul, Sydney, and the US in 2005. However, things took a twist in 2005, when CX, CITIC and CNAC formally became the majority owners due to share realignment among the shareholders. All expansion were cancelled and KA was 'relegated' to secondary routes. To date, KA product and service is better if not much better than CX, the parent. Given that the new J class and and other cost principles are carried over from CX, I can see somewhere in future, the difference will be blurred. The cost base for operation is slightly lower maybe at par with CX, thus KA is not cheaper alternative to CX.

 

It differs from MI-SQ relationship since MI is a leisure-driven airline. May of SQ abandoned route was due to leisure heavy (some has J class demands but not sustainable to deploy widebody) thus passed on to MI. TG-WE story is again different was the latter is a confused puppy.

Edited August 15, 2016 by JuliusWong

[Suzanne Goh 0]

Somehow I don't see any of the so called "low cost" in Dragonair...

 

 

It's not about the low costness. There are little touches - that CX does, that KA doesn't. They lack the polish and flair of CX.

 

That said, of course, KA is no LCC, but I've not seen anyone here say it is.

 

Low Cost? No.

Lower Quality? Yes.

 

I do an average of 35-40 CX/KA legs a year, and comparing only the shorthauls (as KA doesn't do longhaul, so the comparison would be unfair) - the difference to me is quite marked. YMMV.

[geoff.leo 0]

There's no escaping the fact that this just speaks volumes of KUL (and Malaysia as a whole) being well and truly moving down the aviation value chain.

 

Among all the major Asian capital cities, KUL already has the least representation of the major Asian flag carriers. Lets not even get to the European and US flag carriers. That KUL can't even support a sustainable operation from Cathay (it's Hong Kong for crying out loud, not some obscure city unknown to Malaysians) is a disappointment.

 

That there's minimal differences in service for regional flights between Dragon and Cathay and that they're still maintaining a "strong" presence at a group level in the KUL market is perhaps missing the point.

 

It's about profile, something KUL was already struggling with with major carriers.

 

On the other hand though, KUL has had no problems attracting carriers from Central Asia, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Bangladesh and even North Korea's Air Koryo. I am all for diversity of airlines. But one can't help but feel that's a sad consolation for KUL (even in this area, Bangkok does much much better).

[Chris Tan 0]

 

It's not about the low costness. There are little touches - that CX does, that KA doesn't. They lack the polish and flair of CX.

 

That said, of course, KA is no LCC, but I've not seen anyone here say it is.

 

Low Cost? No.

Lower Quality? Yes.

 

I do an average of 35-40 CX/KA legs a year, and comparing only the shorthauls (as KA doesn't do longhaul, so the comparison would be unfair) - the difference to me is quite marked. YMMV.

Disagree that KA is inferior. What other FSC has a 32" pitch 2-4-2 Y product on their A330? Edited August 15, 2016 by Chris Tan