London - KL link

[V Wong 0]

MAS Chairman Proposes London Upgrade Its Link With KL

October 26, 2007 19:49 PM

 

 

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 26 (Bernama) -- Malaysia Airlines (MAS) chairman, Datuk Dr Munir Majid, has proposed that the UK, and more specifically London, upgrade its links with Malaysia and see it as a significant enough influence in the sphere of international diplomacy.

 

He said there was a tremendous amount of goodwill in Malaysia-British relations, especially in this 50th year of Malaysia's independence, but both nations should not be lulled into a false sense of sentimentality and instead should face the fact that practical considerations drove political, economic, business and other links between the two countries.

 

He said this when delivering a keynote address on "Malaysia-UK Relations: Looking Back, Looking Forward" at a commemorative conference on 50 years of Malaysia-British Partnership in London yesterday.

 

"For example, British Airways (BA) terminated flights to KL effective March 26, 2001 after almost 50 years of that service, based on their own business plan and commercial considerations.

 

"To take another instance, on Oct 3 this year, the UK signed a landmark Open Skies Agreement with Singapore, which takes effect in March 2008, giving their respective airlines unlimited access to national and regional destinations beyond point of arrival," he said.

 

"For Malaysia, therefore, in the aviation sector, what are the prospects of BA coming back, and of a similarly liberal open skies agreement, say recognising KL International Airport as a transit point to other parts of the country and region for the leisure market, and Heathrow for Britain and Europe?," he said.

 

Munir pointed out that these were the kinds of matters that should be wrestled with as both nations moved forward and the highly-competitive aviation industry was a good test of seeing how the fount of goodwill could be translated into tangible cooperation.

 

-- BERNAMA

 

 

[Izanee 0]

 

you cannot keep on protecting MH to the detriment of KUL as a traffic hub. latest example is DEL-KUL flights - MH kicked up a big fuss when Air india xpress and air sahara wanted to fly to KUL.

SIN has open skies agreement with many many countries - enabling unlimited flights to and fro SIN and beyond.

we have jack all.

the reasons are two -

1. No one wants to fly here when they have multiple flights to BKK/SIN. therefore, we can't get more connectivity - and because we don't have connectivity, no one wants to fly here. its a vicious cycle. look at all the african airlines - KUL has cheaper landing fees and a relatively big market - but ethiopian, air seychelles, air madagascar, air austral, kenya airways all chose BKK. MAHB has been targetting airlines we have lost (such as BA, NW, AF) to win them back. However, also chose shitty airlines like kyrgyztan, kazakhstan and riau airlines which have all folded since operating to KUL.

The goverment has done a good job in getting more middle eastern tourists here - but they should also target Britain, Germany, Netherlands, France, Russia, Scandinavia - Thailand has been getting the lion's share of tourists from these countries. And they're only next door!!! Why is Malaysia so invisible to these European countries??

The garmen keeps saying that we are getting loads of tourists from India/China - most of them arrive VIA SIN. why?? if they want to visit malaysia - they can fly straight in. and visit SIN as a side trip. CA, CZ, MU have multiple daily flights with widebodies to SIN - but to KUL, they are struggling with 757s, 320s,319s.

EK keeps harping on that KUL is a 'hub' - not when you fly 9 times a week. SIN gets almost 3x daily. BKK twice daily, even CGK gets 10/weekly.

 

2. the government is protecting MH. its time to get rid of the big baby and let them live their own lives. Idris Jala thought he could fool us all by increasing prices and cutting services UNDER the government's protection. Let's see how he runs when all ties are cut and MH is exposed with its pants arounds its ankles. the competition out there is better and will kill them off unless they buck up and stop playing games.

 

 

 

[Ivan L. 0]

Singapore has long mentioned that they will determined to be a hub, even if it cost them Singapore Airlines. Malaysian government unfortunately hasnt seen the big picture yet, they don't understand that competition increase efficiency. Dubai has also followed Singapore's idea. Dubai will run out of oil very soon, that is why they are building tourism and hub infrastructures at an exponential rate. At the moment oil only counts 6% of their GDP and it will decrease every year, before the oil runs out in 2016.

 

Malaysia probably will not learn their lesson until all their resources is gone. When it's all gone, they will start to realised that they can't rely on Petronas anymore and their hub is also not up to scratch, which means even tourism cant be their cash cow.

Edited October 27, 2007 by Ivan L.

[Izanee 0]

you're right ivan ... Dubai has overtook KUL in terms of pax/annum 2 years ago. Emirates is growing and growing. Initially i was sceptical when they wanted 43 A380s - looking at their hub now in Dubai - I am not surprised anymore. Because of this growth - more and more airlines are flying in to benefit from the increased connectivity.

jebel world central - the new airport - is supposed to handle 120million/year. hmmm...

i wonder?

 

KUL will be the LOW COST CAPITAL (or AIR ASIA CAPITAL) of South East Asia. Unless the capitalise on this VMY2007, MAHB and KLIA will just be another wannabe

[KK Lee 5]

 

BA’s yield and load to KUL was poor, BA regional connection is well established at HKG, SIN and BKK, doubt BA will have direct service to KUL from LHR or LGW. At most, BA may extend BKK service to KUL like LH.

 

[Izanee 0]

load to KUL was fine - it was the yield. Most of the passengers were students and we pretty much filled the economy seats. i remember that you can get open tickets for RM2400. MH was RM3500 at that time.

KUL was linked to PER and CGK in the past - not really high yielding destinations at all.

 

KUL was important at that time and BA tried various things including a six weekly 777 terminator flight to KUL - that was the longest 777 flight in the world at that time. Didn't work out for them - the financial crisis was also a big factor in their decision to pull out. QF - who had a huge hub in SIN also decided to pull out from KL and forced their partner and shareholder BA to pull out. They never gave KUL a chance and only flew 3 weekly KUL-SIN-SYD 763 flights and once weekly KUL-PER 763 flights.

 

Another stupid reason was the government's decision to do split ops - SUbang and KLIA - which reduced KUL's pax figures to 13 million/year (down from 18 million/yr in Subang).

Together - these two reasons made it easier for BA, LH, NH and others to pull out.

 

That's why jet ops were then transfered back to KLIA - and the expedited the ERL link (which was delayed initially as it was too expensive).

 

the government has been pretty indecisive and its not helping KUL get anywhere fast. lots of stupid schoolboy mistakes.

Edited October 27, 2007 by Izanee

[Keith T 2]

The economic crisis was a big factor for sure.

 

The other reason yields were so low was that MH had tried to boost its own loads by massively discounting and trying to undercut everyone else. Thus, ex-KUL yields as a whole were dragged down a fair bit.

 

Today BA serves KUL by codesharing on CX from HKG, as does AA. From this end, both BA and QF interline with SQ and MH (and JL I believe) via SIN to offer fares to KUL. I used such a ticket to KUL back in Sept.

 

Here's QF's submission (dated August 2006) to a parliamentary inquiry on relations with Malaysia if anyone's interested - details the reasons why they've never flown the mainline brand into KUL since the last decade:

http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/jfad.../subs/sub10.pdf Interesting to note that without actually flying there, QF/BA collectively has an 8% market share of the KUL sector (via SIN).

Edited October 27, 2007 by Keith T

[Izanee 0]

very interesting report! never knew they are still carefully studying the market.

there's always hope.

 

what if the costs are brought down on the KUL-SIN route? what will happen then?

will QF or Jetstar increase flights to australia via sin?

 

 

[Hardeep P. 0]

 

Why cant QF fly direct to Sydney or Melbourne instead of stopping over in Singapore?

Why cant they fly to Brisbane or Perth from KL?

Why cant it use their extra services for the kangaroo route flying London-Kuala Lumpur-Melbourne or Sydney like they do at Bangkok, Singapore and now Hong Kong?

[Keith T 2]

Why cant QF fly direct to Sydney or Melbourne instead of stopping over in Singapore? Why cant they fly to Brisbane or Perth from KL?Why cant it use their extra services for the kangaroo route flying London-Kuala Lumpur-Melbourne or Sydney like they do at Bangkok, Singapore and now Hong Kong?

They are flying direct now - just not with the mainline brand. As KUL is primarily a leisure market (as MH itself has conceded in its BTP), a mainline service into KUL will never work due to the higher costs involved and thus lower yields. I think by flying via SIN, QF was trying to use its SIN hub to get traffic from its other flights into SIN to sustain the KUL flights. But obviously it didn't work, according to the report. As to why they fly via BKK/SIN/HKG instead of KUL - same reason above; simply not enough O/D or connecting traffic up at the pointy end into KUL. Why would they fly into KUL when it's more profitable to go via these other cities? BKK and HKG are huge leisure and business destinations; SIN attracts lots of business traffic. You'd be comforted to know JQi is considering KUL (amongst a few other candidates) as a hub for its flights to Europe.

very interesting report! never knew they are still carefully studying the market. there's always hope. what if the costs are brought down on the KUL-SIN route? what will happen then?will QF or Jetstar increase flights to australia via sin?

I don't think it was merely the high costs of KUL-SIN that was the problem. If there was such a demand for KUL they;d have flown direct to KUL instead of going via SIN. They do have plans to increase SYD-KUL on JQi though, as that route is doing quite well apparently. JQi is aimed at the leisure market and involves much lower costs which makes it perfect for a route like KUL which is dominated by leisure traffic. Edited October 28, 2007 by Keith T

[Ivan L. 0]

Unfortunately, KUL do not attracts business markets as much as HKG and SIN do. Most of the passengers travelling to KUL are either students or tourists, who normally fly economy class. Economy class passengers contributes to the bottom line of the airlines revenue, sustaining the day to day operations. However, without business or first class passengers, airlines won't be able to make much profit, if any at all. This is why KUL is not attractive destinations for many airlines.

 

KUL reminds me of AMS, where they don't have much premium passengers in comparison to their neighbors like LHR, FRA, or CDG. Maybe MH should learn to model their operations like KL (without KL infamous service, of course). KL filled their planes with large number of economy class passengers, smaller business class cabins, and high aircrafts utilisation rates.

[Keith T 2]

Maybe MH should learn to model their operations like KL (without KL infamous service, of course). KL filled their planes with large number of economy class passengers, smaller business class cabins, and high aircrafts utilisation rates.

 

I think they said that was the way they were going in their turnaround plan.

 

[Pieter C. 5]

KUL reminds me of AMS, where they don't have much premium passengers in comparison to their neighbors like LHR, FRA, or CDG. Maybe MH should learn to model their operations like KL (without KL infamous service, of course). KL filled their planes with large number of economy class passengers, smaller business class cabins, and high aircrafts utilisation rates.

 

Business-Class loads on both MH and KL (ex AMS) are > 90%, so lots of premium class passengers, apparently. However, KL abolished First-Class altogether, and MH First-Class loads are

MH should abolish their F-class, upgrade their C-class service (to reach almost the F-class) and increase utilization of their long-haul fleet (that's what KL did a few years ago, and it's paying off )

 

[KK Lee 5]

 

After 62 years, economics force BA to take flight from Harare

 

Jan Raath in Harare

 

British Airways flew out of Harare international airport yesterday, ending 62 years of service. The London-bound BA152 left with 200 passengers aboard the Boeing 777 without any acknowledgement of the occasion. The captain of the incoming flight from London had remarked over the intercom at how sad he felt not to be able to fly in and out of Harare any more.

 

Last month BA, the last foreign long-haul airline left in Zimbabwe, announced that it was ending its Harare service because it had been making “a considerable loss” that it could no longer sustain. The airline’s passenger numbers began to shrink in 2000 when President Mugabe launched his violent dispossession of white farmers.

 

“BA’s withdrawal is a major blow to what’s left of tourism,” said a tour company operator requesting anonymity. “Air Zimbabwe [the state-owned airline] cannot make up the numbers that BA was carrying. That means people will have to fly here via South Africa or one of the other neighbouring countries, and having to make multiple stopovers is a severe deterrent to travellers.”

 

In 1999 Harare airport was crowded with the emblems of 18 foreign airlines with Lufthansa, Air France and TAP Portugal also linking directly to Europe. BA was flying four consistently packed Boeing 747 jumbo jets to Harare four times a week.

 

In 2001 the service was cut to three weekly flights, in Boeing 777s, which carry half the passenger load. Now a handful of African carriers are left servicing regional routes.

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle2759588.ece

 

Hmmm, BA kept flying to HRE longer than KUL. <_>

 

[BC Tam 2]

In spirit of south-south brotherhood (and Malaysia Boleh abandon), has MH any plans to do KUL/HRE ?!

[S V Choong 4]

Don't think Zimbabwe is in a good shape in terms of economy and politics to warrant a direct flight there...... unless it decides to become another Boleh legend again.

[affendi osman 0]

Don't think Zimbabwe is in a good shape in terms of economy and politics to warrant a direct flight there...... unless it decides to become another Boleh legend again.

 

 

why should they fly to HRE? Only a handful of malaysian staying there.

[Guest Michael]

Well we can just wait and see how MH pans out now with the PSS in place and e ticketing beginning to take off as well now.