Why is MAS not in an alliance?

[Dodi6 0]

I'm not sure if the topic's been discussed before.

 

I heard they're considering joining skyteam, but what are the factors they take into consideration when choosing which alliance to join? Skyteam seem like an alliance of second division airlines when compared to Star and Oneworld to me. Am I wrong?

[Edwin Lau 0]

I'm not sure if the topic's been discussed before.

 

I heard they're considering joining skyteam, but what are the factors they take into consideration when choosing which alliance to join? Skyteam seem like an alliance of second division airlines when compared to Star and Oneworld to me. Am I wrong?

I think they can thrive better if they join star alliance... am I right?

[Pieter C. 5]

Skyteam seem like an alliance of second division airlines when compared to Star and Oneworld to me. Am I wrong?

 

Definitely wrong here

 

What do you mean with 2nd division ???

 

[Cornelis Boersma 0]

as Thai & Singapore are both in StarAlliance already, I think its no option for MAS to join Star! And as MAS is already code-sharing a lot with KLM I think I see them joining Skyteam someday.

[Andrew Ong 1]

MAS is thinking about joining SkyTeam:

 

Malaysia Airlines - the airline reached an agreement with Air France-KLM to upgrade their code-sharing agreement into an alliance in 2006. No timeframe has been given for MAS joining the alliance, but the company's restructuring plan puts this no later than 2007-2008.

[Keith T 2]

The chief reason presently is MH's poor finances. Until the airline sorts itself out, it is unlikely to bring much value to any alliances or the airline itself. Joining an alliance costs money - lots required to align ur systems with the rest of the alliance and to retrain ur staff to offer alliance products. MH would also have to deal with an increased liability due to Enrich members earning miles on more carriers, paying other carriers for miles earned on MH, paying other carriers for MH elite FFers accessing their lounges etc etc etc. This would be offset by other carrier FFPs paying MH for award seats etc of course but it is far easier to work out these things if your finances are healthy.

 

Also, there'd be a degree of apprehension on the part of the alliance in forging extensive codeshare links with an airline that's in the red. These codeshare links and other interline arrangements would be far more extensive than what exist presently. Hopefully the turnaround plan is successful and the profit reports sustain themselves. In short - lots of factors to balance out.

 

MH's vast SE Asian network is extremely valuable to oneworld or ST who both have a very weak presence in that area. It was only a couple of years ago that the alliances (BA/QF come to mind) were actively courting MH.

 

But with CX being a founding member of oneworld, and the new additions of JL on Sunday and KA later in the year, I'd say there's more room for MH in ST.

Edited March 28, 2007 by Keith T

[KK Lee 5]

When airline alliances were forming in the 1990’s, MH was invited to join but turned them down because the management at that time believe they can conquer the world single handed, didn’t want to comply to alliance requirement or share MH’s network with other airlines. Hence, they cited ‘lost of identity’ as the reason not to join any alliance. Japan airline (JAL) is another example they gave that airline can do well without joining an alliance.

 

It remained to be seen whether MH will actually join ST as they have yet to take concrete step toward that direction.

 

[Keith T 2]

Japan airline (JAL) is another example they gave that airline can do well without joining an alliance.

 

And in fact JL embarked on oneworld membership when it decided that it could do with some extra revenue.

[Seth K 3]

MH should join ST, as MH will be the only one out two airlines of ST in Asia. MH sure can pickup pax at HKG and NRT from NW and CO onward to India, Asia and Australia. I dunno what they're reviewing at ST headquaters, but they dun want to miss MH....

[Guest Fendy]

but what are the factors they take into consideration when choosing which alliance to join?

wether the alliance wants them in or not.

[Dodi6 0]

The chief reason presently is MH's poor finances. Until the airline sorts itself out, it is unlikely to bring much value to any alliances or the airline itself. Joining an alliance costs money - lots required to align ur systems with the rest of the alliance and to retrain ur staff to offer alliance products. MH would also have to deal with an increased liability due to Enrich members earning miles on more carriers, paying other carriers for miles earned on MH, paying other carriers for MH elite FFers accessing their lounges etc etc etc. This would be offset by other carrier FFPs paying MH for award seats etc of course but it is far easier to work out these things if your finances are healthy.

 

Also, there'd be a degree of apprehension on the part of the alliance in forging extensive codeshare links with an airline that's in the red. These codeshare links and other interline arrangements would be far more extensive than what exist presently. Hopefully the turnaround plan is successful and the profit reports sustain themselves. In short - lots of factors to balance out.

 

MH's vast SE Asian network is extremely valuable to oneworld or ST who both have a very weak presence in that area. It was only a couple of years ago that the alliances (BA/QF come to mind) were actively courting MH.

 

But with CX being a founding member of oneworld, and the new additions of JL on Sunday and KA later in the year, I'd say there's more room for MH in ST.

 

 

Thanks, this is very useful.

[Keno Omar 0]

Skyteam seem like an alliance of second division airlines when compared to Star and Oneworld to me. Am I wrong?

Let's get some facts out first... here's a list of 5 star and 4 star airlines (including affiliate airlines) based on Skytrax ranking. Go figure! For its high standard of service MAS deserves to be in the same league as SQ and CX but let's face it, the only realistic alliance for MAS to be in right now is with SkyTeam.

 

Star Alliance

SQ 5*

TG 4*

NZ 4*

NH 4*

OZ 4*

LH 4*

LX 4*

OS 4*

SA 4*

 

Oneworld

CX 5*

BA 4*

QF 4*

JL 4*

KJ 4*

YW 4*

KA 4* (soon)

 

Skyteam

AF 4*

KE 4*

Edited March 28, 2007 by Keno Omar

[Keith T 2]

Sorry for going OT....

 

A 4* product, by Skytrax's own definition, has to be of a "consistently" "good" standard. Thus I wouldn't consider TG, OS, AF, LH Y and C, or JL 4 stars by any stretch of the imagination. Skytrax's methodology is flawed in the sense that it only measures an airline by its 'best in class' standards instead of assessing a product as a whole. For eg, I'd consider TG and LH 3.5 stars at best - there's a vast difference between their old and new seats in C and yet both appear on premium long haul routes. At least LH is good at keeping the same plane for a certain route, but with TG you only know when you get on to the plane. Another eg - service on JL varies greatly, according to what they consider their prized routes and the level of competition on a given route. So you get excellent service on routes like LHR and JFK, so so service on LAX, and downright awful service to regional destinations like HKG and lower yield cities like those in eastern europe. And I'm sure you've all read my rants about how inconsistent TG service is.

 

And for the record...a lot of the airlines listed as 3* ought to be significantly downgraded.

 

Best way to rank an airline? Experience it for yourself is my advice.

Edited March 28, 2007 by Keith T