Jump to content
MalaysianWings - Malaysia's Premier Aviation Portal
Pieter C.

Skyteam news

Recommended Posts

Are you serious? Do we really want to compare VN and MH here..? :blink:

 

Yeah, Skyteam prefered VN because their food portion is slightly bigger..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I'd take it that the 2 short paragraphs Bloomberg news that flee posted earlier is just something that MH done to tell the public that the airline is now ready for a new round of negotiation with SkyTeam, the same phase of event that the past management first went through in 2006, 4 years ago.

 

 

Skyteam need MH just as much as MH needs them. So why should MH just bend over backwards? MH are in a good position to demand whatever they want as long as it is reasonable enough.

I disagree that SkyTeam needs MH. It has been proven by the appoinment of VN and soon GA. SkyTeam can easily court Royal Brunei, Philippine Airlines, Lao Airlines, Bangkok Airways et al to join its bandwagon. The longer MH wait, the more unrelevant MH to SkyTeam because the other airlines can simply offer the connection in South East Asia and Australia that SkyTeam is lacking. Some of the airline, like VN for example may not have the same good network that MH has now but surely in the future they will. VN got appointed during the phase the airline is growing. The airline has 70 aircrafts on order including 4 A380s, 12 A359s and 17 B789s. Surely these aircrafts will be deployed to MH's strong fortresses in Australia and Europe in the nearest future and therefore will further cloud MH's relevance to SkyTeam.

 

 

Believe MH has been knocking on ST’s door for a number of years, before VN is admitted to ST and yet VN is chosen over MH.

 

It was the attitude that MH is one of the best airline in the world, need not bend backward to meet partners interior standard and MH should joint at preferential terms that MH didn’t join any Alliance in the 90’s.

Yes, since 2006. It is really weird that the negotiations went dead end after 4 years and new airlines which were approached/courted much later got appointed much earlier.

 

 

Why couldn't MH follow EK footsteps?

LOL! Are you kidding me? Last year MH got MYR 500 million profit vs EK's USD 1 billion profit; MH has 37 narrowbody aircrafts vs none for EK; MH has 39 widebody aircrafts vs EK's 143 widebodies; MH has 6 A380s on orders vs EK's 90; MH has 57 international destinations vs EK's 97, MH insists on a Malay/Bumiputra MD/CEO vs EK's well regarded industry's best Caucasian top honchos. It's almost a walkover in every single aspect. But as always, it is not harmful to dream LOL.

 

 

You don't think MH want to be in an alliance now? Let's be realistic and not so ever pessimistic. We don't know what kind of crazy deal Skyteam are proposing to MH. If it is not worth it for MH to accept the terms, then they shouldn't accept the terms, it is as simple as that.

And that is the problem. We can discuss our hearts out but we don't know what exactly that is holding MH from the elusive appoinment. If I could recalled some of the information from the 2006 news article, MH was turned down mainly because of its financial problem (at that time). I also read something about SkyTeam demanded MH to concentrate their European routes to only SkyTeam hubs (CDG, AMS, FCO), which MH has done during the BTPs axing (when VIE, ZRH and ARN were dropped) but it could also mean that SkyTeam is suggesting MH to drop FRA and even LHR, which is impossible, as both destinations are key destinations in MH's network. LHR is like the mother of all destination for MH.

 

As much as we want to believe that MH is a victim of AF's prefential treatment here, we should never disregard the fact that SkyTeam is a global alliance, a reputable organisation which has to follow a certain high degree code of conduct. I seriously think what AF offers to MH, VN, GA and CI are the same terms. But the other airlines are fine with it, but not MH unfortunately, due to reasons only knew to our flag carrier. We can only speculate.

 

 

To be honest,I really love to see MH to enter oneworld rather than skyteam.Oneworld consists of well-known legacy carriers such as American,BA,Qantas....Infact,there is still no south east asian airlines that enter oneworld.Would love to see MH to be the first.

Although there is no South East Asian based carrier in OneWorld, our region has been well covered by CX. I am so sure potong kepala CX will vote againts MH's entry.

 

But the key point with OneWorld is that, MH had turned down their offer in the past. Unless MH's current management can really thicken up their faces so thick to kinda menjilat ludah sendiri, then I don't see there's any way MH would be in OneWorld. MH has been turned down by SkyTeam since the last 4 years, and during that 4 years time period, MH does not make any attempt to apply for a OneWorld membership. Plus with OneWorld, MH does not really contribute much to the alliance's network as CX and QF have covered pretty much what MH can offer. I don't think OneWorld is so desperate to add Mulu, Long Banga, Long Lellang, Bario, Sibu, Tawau, Kota Bharu et al into its network.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed with everything you said, Azizul. Your explanation that Skyteam may have asked MH to drop destinations like LHR or FRA really makes sense. If that were true, then you have to think again, is it worth it for MH?

 

Be reminded that GA and VN do NOT fly to LHR.

 

 

Also agree with you saying MH and OW don't really fit. CX pretty much covers this region and together with BA and QF, MH being there sort of takes away the star power of MH if you ask me. For Skyteam, MH can be a key player and one that the brand could really exploit.

 

Sidenote, I was on a DL flight LAX-CVG (Cincinnati), and the IFE (not AVOD) kept showing Skyteam advertisements. They showed Skyteam airlines and destinations. Can you imagine if some random American flying this route suddenly being exposed to MH and Malaysian tourist destinations? What a big boost to our country if that can be realized :(

 

I hope and pray everyday, that's all we can do! :rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am quite certain that the alliances don't force a potential member to drop certain existing destinations ... and MH was certainly not asked to drop Frankfurt and London. You will certainly see Garuda - which will certainly become a Skyteam member - actually adding these two destinations in the coming year or two.

 

For a long time, MH was sticking to the same song as JAL - we do not need an alliance as our bilateral codeshare and interline agreements with many airlines served our purpose. JAL realised all too late - after ANA was seen milking Star Alliance - and hastily jumped on the oneworld bandwagon. When it declared bankruptcy and sought protection from creditors last year, it also tried to jump ship to Skyteam and actually announced its decision to join it. It eventually back-pedalled on this decision and returned to oneworld - one can imagine either the penalties that oneworld threatened to levy on JAL or the promise of huge capital injection (and AA has gone on record to confirm its willingness to do this) into JAL's fast-emptying coffers.

 

MH left it far too late to join any alliance and I continue to hold the opinion that Garuda's entry into Skyteam (backed by KLM's CEO Peter Hartmann who previously stood firmly alongside MH) slammed the Skyteam door on MH. I also have personal doubt about MH's entry into oneworld - the latter's Anglo-centric corporate culture will be a challenge for MH and as someone rightly pointed out, CX would not be too welcoming MH with a lion dance performance.

 

There has been suggestions previously in other discussion forums that a new alliance might be in the offing - I don't think so. Remember Qualiflyer by airlines such as Swiss, Sabena etc etc etc - the only common denominator among the member airlines of Qualiflyer is the fact that they all have red ink on their annual profit/loss accounts. Some called Qualiflyer an "alliance of losers" and one can only speculate on the wisdom of a team of losers coming together to become winners. Emirates now has sufficient critical mass not to be part of an alliance and its entry into any alliance is now probably frowned upon by some airlines within each alliance. MH does not have that critical mass.

 

MH's long wished for entry into Skyteam will not be enhanced because of a new management team or a new leader. It's got a lot more to do with the fundamentals in its network, its fast-aging medium and long haul fleet, its flagging image etc.

 

KC Sim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MH's long wished for entry into Skyteam will not be enhanced because of a new management team or a new leader

I believe therein lies a fundamental cause for concern with foreign partners - each and every time a new head honcho takes up task, company takes on new directions, some brilliant, some disastrous

And there have been a few change of head honchos at MH over the last decade or two :)

 

Having said that, change is not at all bad, quite necessary for innovations in fact

But accountability, that is the stuff that good partnerships are founded upon

And the usual "... that was previous management's doing, we now don't agree with it, let us start anew" line of thought is not the most impressive act of accountability :)

Edited by BC Tam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the idea of dropping LHR and FRA may not be the case if Kenya Airways is still operating into LHR due to historical reasons but it may well be one of the reasons for AF, pride perhaps :rolleyes: I still think MH may be a victim due to the high demands of the lower end AF. Pitty if thats true.

 

I think MH and KUL have lost almost all the carrots that were dangled to them sadly due to the arrogance and pride of certain quarters. I suppose gaining and loosing some is only common in business deals. The mentality of our folks here are more on "what's In It For Me ONLY coz I Dont Care What You Get" so at the end, its all profits that they want but the hardwork is not really put in. As a result, we lost the hub to Changi and how better can it get if we do not continue to loose the battle, always, always, thanks to our mentality.

 

I think AK and D7 may well start an alliance with some other budget airlines well before MH joining any.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The mentality of our folks here are more on "what's In It For Me ONLY coz I Dont Care What You Get" so at the end, its all profits that they want but the hardwork is not really put in.

 

I think AK and D7 may well start an alliance with some other budget airlines well before MH joining any.

Which reminded me of a recent development where MH and QF planned merger (which was done rather secretly) was doomed after years of negotiation due to the Malaysian government's disagreement over the percentage of shareholding of the merged entity (of course Malaysia wants to control everything although QF is probably superior in market value than MH). Should the merger proceed, MH may have a second chance with OneWorld.

 

There have been a lot of talks of the 4th global alliance which comprises of (mainly) Virgin airlines controlled by Sir Richard Branson. Since he also own 20% of D7, I also think D7 may get rope into an alliance of sort earlier than MH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so I asked Tengku Azmil on Twitter whether or not Skyteam disallowed them from flying to LHR, he said "it's the first time he's heard that" :D

 

He did not elaborate what exactly is the problem though, even after I had asked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess this time next year, we will still be talking about the same thing. MH will still not be part of any alliances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so I asked Tengku Azmil on Twitter whether or not Skyteam disallowed them from flying to LHR, he said "it's the first time he's heard that" :D

 

He did not elaborate what exactly is the problem though, even after I had asked.

Were you seriously expecting some meaningful insight from a CEO on a subject as sensitive as airline alliances, over the course of a few tweets ?! :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were you seriously expecting some meaningful insight from a CEO on a subject as sensitive as airline alliances, over the course of a few tweets ?! :blink:

 

If you follow him you would realize he answers a lot of questions so forgive me if the fact that I tried to ask bothers you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not skip the alliance stage altogether and amalgate into the IAG instead :pardon: :lol:

 

6 September 2010 Last updated at 10:01 GMT

BA boss Willie Walsh reveals takeover ambition

British Airways and Iberia have drawn up a shortlist of up to 12 airlines which they hope to buy or merge with once their own tie-up has been completed.

 

BA boss Willie Walsh did not name any of the airlines potentially involved.

 

However they are reported to include carriers in emerging markets such as India or China.

 

He made the comments in Mumbai while unveiling a code-sharing deal with India's Kingfisher Airlines.

 

'Focus'

 

Mr Walsh is keen to bring airlines together under the umbrella of the newly-created International Airlines Group (IAG) - formed by BA and Iberia.

 

"We have had a number of meetings where we have looked at airlines around the world and identified those that would be attractive to us," he said.

 

But he added the shortlist, whittled down from 40 carriers, was to give "focus" and that all 12 would not be pursued.

 

"We have not had any discussions with any airlines. There is nothing going on at the moment.

 

"We want to create a platform for like-minded airlines - those who believe that consolidation is part of the answer for the industry."

 

Mr Walsh is reportedly keen to achieve full mergers or acquisitions rather than taking minority investments in other airlines.

 

In 2008 BA failed in an attempt to merge with Australian flag carrier Qantas.

 

Sackings

 

.....

 

from the BBC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No way - Malaysian govt. always want to retain control of MH. So IAG is out of the question!

 

IAG is a good lead and rumour for analysts and gomen to beat up MH stock price though.

 

:drinks:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it finally dawns on me (stupid boy) why MH found it difficult to join alliances! lol ...

however, now that they want to join one, nobody wants them

 

it finally dawns on me (stupid boy) why MH found it difficult to join alliances! lol ...

however, now that they want to join one, nobody wants them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And now, CI will be joining ST as well, after GA. ST are trying to gain market share in Asia, as it is the place where air travel growth will be at it's greatest. But with CI, GA and VN in the fold, it looks even less likely that MH can join. We'll have to wait and see. I still think it's to their advantage as an alliance to have MH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And now, CI will be joining ST as well, after GA. ST are trying to gain market share in Asia, as it is the place where air travel growth will be at it's greatest. But with CI, GA and VN in the fold, it looks even less likely that MH can join. We'll have to wait and see. I still think it's to their advantage as an alliance to have MH.

 

ST don’t gain from VN, GA or CI?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With CI and MU expected to join ST next year,that means ST Asian members will be 5.I wonder,when FM and MU to merge,will the FM brand cease to exist or to stay just like AF-KLM?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taipei-based China Airlines confirmed Friday it has agreed to join SkyTeam, with a formal announcement expected Tuesday. CI would become the first Taiwanese carrier to join a global airline alliance.

 

An industry source familiar with the airline's thinking noted that SkyTeam membership will help CI strengthen its weak European network. Taipei-based Eva Airways also reportedly is evaluating its options regarding joining a global alliance.

 

CI's membership would add to SkyTeam's growing presence in Asia. China Eastern Airlines signed a letter of intent to join the alliance in April and Vietnam Airlines formally joined in June.

 

CEA is expected to gain formal membership in the first half of next year, which will make it the second mainland Chinese carrier to join SkyTeam. China Southern Airlines gained membership in late 2007.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...