Fernandes: All We Ask For Is Two Flights A Day To Singapore

[Isaac 0]

A lot of my friends do not want to stop at KL simply because its too expensive to fly there and therefore prefer stopping over at Bangkok instead. KL is partly losing because of this duopoly.

I don't think that is the reason why most people do not use KUL as a transfer point. The ridiculously expensive air fare between KUL/SIN never stops people from using the SIN hub or SQ service. Besides, SQ do not charge the regular KUL/SIN return fare if you are flying them to other destination via their hub at SIN (same with MAS) unless you are buying two seperate tickets.

Edited October 16, 2007 by Isaac

[BC Tam 2]

..... somebody should quote TF statement a few years back when he said that he does't need SIN-KUL route and show it to him, .....

The chap probably doesn't "need" the route, but it sure would be nice to have, perhaps even just to irritate MH and the other Datuk

Anyway, that was uttered years ago and in the business world, nothing remains static (old story, worth repeating !)

[Nizam 0]

It doesn't matter what the motives are, as long as the consumers are the clear winners. The SIN-KUL route is ridiculously expensive. A lot of my friends do not want to stop at KL simply because its too expensive to fly there and therefore prefer stopping over at Bangkok instead. KL is partly losing because of this duopoly. Some people always think that KLIA will be losing out if this route is open up, but overlook the fact that it may benefit KLIA as well as more people can get to KL easier.

 

Enough already... bring out the competition! Go AK, TR, 3R, or any others... Let the fares drop....

 

 

I dont think so ..

 

This is not ok for me who always traveling last minute ..

[Azri M. 0]

I don't think that is the reason why most people do not use KUL as a transfer point. The ridiculously expensive air fare between KUL/SIN never stops people from using the SIN hub or SQ service. Besides, SQ do not charge the regular KUL/SIN return fare if you are flying them to other destination via their hub at SIN (same with MAS) unless you are buying two seperate tickets.

 

I dont mean making KUL as a transfer point, but rather a visiting place. Let's say, if a friend of mine from India who is flying to Melbourne with SQ decides to have a long transit time in Singapore (say 2 weeks). Then he decides to visit some other place during his stay. He will find flying to KUL will be less attractive because it is more expensive (even though it is only 40 min ride), as compared to flying to Bangkok (2 hr). That is bad for KUL.

 

Same things happen for those flying to SIN transiting with a different airline (ie. Qantas), when booking a tix to other ASEAN countries, will view flying to KUL rather costly.

 

Another friend of mine told me, he would rather go back home to Surabaya when flying from SIN rather than flying to KUL as SIN-Surabaya is cheaper than SIN-KUL!

 

This is also partly why I have many singaporean friends who have never been to KL, and many KLites who never been to SIN (including me)!

 

Thats why I prefer the routes be open up. More visitors mean more airlines coming to KL as well.

 

My 2 cents.

[M. Sofian H. 0]

LATEST INFO: MAHB increase the Airport Tax in MTB for 6 month starting jul 06 until jan 08.... jahanamla MAS..

[Rozhan 0]

LATEST INFO: MAHB increase the Airport Tax in MTB for 6 month starting jul 06 until jan 08.... jahanamla MAS..

 

Don't quite understand. You mean Jul 07, and only for 6 months? MAB dah pokai, papa kedana dah ke? Ha ha!

 

(MAB in financial difficulties?)

[N Azman 0]

Possibly to cover additional costs to add security personnel after the whole stowaway fiasco. Only for 6 months. Until after the storm has calmed.....

[dsim 0]

changi is better (and more passenger friendly) than klia...

[Sri Ramani K. 0]

China May Open Military Airports To AirAsia

 

18 Oct 2007 01:36 PM

Reuters - 18 Oct 2007

 

China's civil aviation regulator has asked the military to let low-cost airlines use secondary airports across the country, even as it is holding back foreign budget carriers that hope to fly to China.

 

In an effort to boost economic growth, the government will also spend one billion yuan ($NZ181.6 million) a year to subsidise regional airports and airlines flying to smaller cities, top regulator Yang Yuanyuan told Reuters in an interview on Wednesday.

 

Despite soaring demand, the development of low-cost airlines in China has been hampered by a lack of the secondary airports, ticket price controls and high import taxes for aircraft and parts. In the United States and Europe, by contrast, budget carriers make heavy use of their networks of secondary airports.

 

"At the moment, it's one city one airport, and that's the main airport, which are big and have very full schedules. But we are devoted to developing low-cost airlines," Yang said on the sidelines of a Communist Party Congress.

 

"Beijing has a few military airports surrounding it. We are having talks with the military, so perhaps we can open some up and they can be joint civil-military airports. Guangzhou also has some military airports nearby. We're also talking about opening up some of those," he added.

 

"The terminal facilities and service will be simpler. Although if airlines fly there, transport (to downtown) will not be as good as at large airports. So prices will be lower. I think low-cost airlines have a great future in China," said Yang, 41.

 

"I really appreciate what the boss of Malaysia's AirAsia has as his slogan: 'Now everyone can fly'. This is great. This is my dream," added Yang, who is also a pilot.

 

China has a handful of companies that are trying to make money with a budget business model, to varying degrees of success. But none of them approaches the scale of Ireland's Ryanair or US-based Southwest Airlines.

 

Last year the regulator fined China's low-cost Spring Airlines for selling tickets for US13 cents in a promotion, saying they broke national pricing rules.

 

Still, the government is being cautious in response to fears that China's main state-run carriers, such as Air China Ltd and China Eastern, would lose out should foreign budget airlines open too many routes to China.

 

Malaysia's AirAsia already flies to a few cities in southern China, but its long-haul offshoot AirAsia X has identified cities in eastern and northern China to serve once it gets off the ground.

 

"If I encourage this, our airlines will curse me. But we're willing to open the door slightly for them, to see how it goes," said Yang.

 

"If we open the door too wide, there'll be too much impact on our airlines, and that's not good."

 

"If they are willing to fly to secondary cities, that's fine. It's a good thing," he added.

 

The government has invested billions of dollars upgrading old airports and building new ones, but many lose money and either have few flights or none at all as they are in remote, economically backward areas.

 

To help alleviate this situation, regional airports will get 600 million yuan annually to improve their finances, and airlines 300 million to fly to these cities, Yang said.

 

"They give as much of an economic boost as do highways," he added, referring to smaller airports.

 

Yang said he was not too worried about them losing money, even as he added it was important to build airports rationally and not purely as "image projects".

 

"I think airports are public facilities. They are not there to make money," he said. "Of course I want more airports and not fewer. But we can't blindly build them. It's a waste."