Malaysia Airlines VS Singapore Airlines

[Hon Lin 0]

hey ya guys,

was just wondering, now that MAS has been rated as 5 star airline not long ago. What edge does MAS have over SIA?

Does anyone want to give the comparison between these 2 major carriers??

sounds interesting, looking forward for it ^^

[T Azahan 1]

with MH : i can take picture of the galley and the crew are happy to let me do that.

 

with SQ: after i took the picture, one of the crew came and warned me that i was in breach of security and safety of the flight.

 

 

hehe i just merely commenting on a lighter note but this is true.....

[S V Choong 4]

FINALLY and FINALLY someone started this topic......

 

First, A vs. B

Now, MH vs. SQ

 

 

For me it doesn't matter at all. I just choose who I should fly with and couldn't care less with other's comments about MH or SQ.

Edited October 14, 2005 by S V Choong

[Sanjay Thaker 0]

hmmm i got one GOOD POINT...i've heard that on SQ's Raffles Class on the 772....the lie flat seats...the legroom is so bad that if you're seating on the window seat...and the guy beside u has extended the seats fully to sleep in a lie flat position..u have to be realllly thin to get to the aisle...or if u're a lil bigger..theres no way u can get out unless u hop over or wake him up from his slumber sleep...lol..heard this comment from a pax....not so sure how true it is..but coming from a pax...i think i believe it

[Sing Yew 1]

Just from my experience. Some SQ cabin staffs tend to be pretentious, while MH's seem to be more sincere.

 

 

[Guest Fendy]

MH have TK and Radzi

 

 

both airlines have pro and cons, each have their own benefits over the other. honestly, its down to personal opinion, some may think MH are better some think SQ are better. we all have different tastes, so you cannot for sure say one is better, others may think otherwise.

[Sing Yew 1]

MH have TK and Radzi

 

 

both airlines have pro and cons, each have their own benefits over the other. honestly, its down to personal opinion, some may think MH are better some think SQ are better. we all have different tastes, so you cannot for sure say one is better, others may think otherwise.

10252[/snapback]

 

Would have to agree with you Fendy.

 

[Roszaimy 0]

Another perspective: SQ makes a lot of money without domestic operation. MH is losing money despite hiving-off its domestic operation.

 

HEHE

[Roszaimy 0]

Btw, this thread is a classic example of comparing apple to apple (not orange!). Both airlines are in the same class of service.

 

Some people praise SQ because that's pretty much the only "premium" airlines they have flown to, judging from how many destinations SQ flies to. For example, SQ flies more American from its 3 US airports it serves ie: LAX, ORD and JFK with 1x or 2x daily service. Less Americans have travelled on MH because of our less frequency to the US.

 

If we are on the same frequency as SQ, I'm sure we'll have more positive comments from them.

[Min Chun 0]

with SQ: after i took the picture, one of the crew came and warned me that i was in breach of security and safety of the flight.   

hehe i just merely commenting on a lighter note but this is true.....

10224[/snapback]

 

 

So serious ar? just take some pic wor..erm..maybe some of the window will brake cause by camera's flash light.

[H Azmal 0]

MAS pretty much effectively started from scratch. SIA had a great headstart with it acquiring much of MSA's former assets and routes. The starting playing field was not level, and I'm impressed MAS managed to 'level' the difference.

Edited October 14, 2005 by H Azmal

[Azman MN 1]

To me, MH is behind SQ in terms of efficiency (especially when something goes wrong, eg. unavoidable flight delays, etc.) , but MH makes up for it with the warmth and genuine service. Therefore, I find them to be equal.

 

On the other hand, I also find it interesting how Singaporeans view MH. Most of the Singaporeans I know would talk about MH like it is a less than 4-star airline, and none of them has even flown on MH. Last year, just after the MH tail strike in Zurich (which was all over the news over here), a Singaporean colleague who happened to be here that week said to me "see, that's why I only fly SQ!". Hmm... wasn't there a SQ 744 incident in New Zealand a few years ago?

 

 

 

 

[Izanee 0]

come on guys.....what are you all on about....MH is definitely better than SQ. if you can't support your national airline....don't start supporting SQ!

that's why MH is bankrupt and SQ has all the money!

 

to the pedants out there....yeah, i know there are many other factors involved.... but Malaysians using SQ is another reason for them to prosper!

 

 

 

 

 

[Sanjay Thaker 0]

To me, MH is behind SQ in terms of efficiency (especially when something goes wrong, eg. unavoidable flight delays, etc.) , but MH makes up for it with the warmth and genuine service.  Therefore, I find them to be equal.

 

On the other hand, I also find it interesting how Singaporeans view MH.  Most of the Singaporeans I know would talk about MH like it is a less than 4-star airline, and none of them has even flown on MH.  Last year, just after the MH tail strike in Zurich (which was all over the news over here), a Singaporean colleague who happened to be here that week said to me "see, that's why I only fly SQ!".        Hmm... wasn't there a SQ 744 incident in New Zealand a few years ago? 

10303[/snapback]

 

I dont think MH is behind SQ in terms of efficiency...MH handles incidents and unavoidable interference absolutely well...everything is done fast..and quick to ensure pax are happy...well talking bout incidents..forget the SQ 744 incident in NZ....u shld have told ur colleague to think back about the SQ 744 incident in Taipei..and say.."thts why i never fly SQ"

[Azman MN 1]

I dont think MH is behind SQ in terms of efficiency...MH handles incidents and unavoidable interference absolutely well...everything is done fast..and quick to ensure pax are happy...well talking bout incidents..forget the SQ 744 incident in NZ....u shld have told ur colleague to think back about the SQ 744 incident in Taipei..and say.."thts why i never fly SQ"

10317[/snapback]

 

Well Sanjay, my wife was once flying ZRH-KUL and was diverted to Dubai (engine problem or something). The whole thing could have been better handled by MH (don't want to elaborate too much and go off-topic).

 

Once I had a severe delay of about 11 hours for ZRH-SIN on SQ and everything was handled perfectly.

 

Once I flew Swiss ZRH-NRT... I never made it. Got almost as far as Russia and turned back.. was rescheduled but I was going to miss my important meeting anyway so I went home. Swiss made a mess of it. Of the 3 experience, SQ was the best, and MH second. It's good, but not as good as SQ.

 

As things like this do not happen all the time, I will always choose to fly MH.

 

Oh yes, Taipei, I forgot about that - I was just focused on tailstrikes.

[kandiah k 0]

There is an obvious distinction between MAS and SIA, no doubt about it !!!!!

 

As a Malaysian, I will surely support the national carrier of Malaysia, but my views are based on experiences which I deem an important factor on why I rather not fly with SIA.

 

Firstly, as mentioned before in this forum and other forums regarding my experiences on SQ, I have always had bad encounters with SQ, especially their cabin crew, who seem to be either robotic in their mannerisms or simply biased towards other races (foreigners vs asians) It is not a one-off thingy, more like after 8 flights with them, nothing seemed to differ. Yet I do not know how they can be the best airline in this and that etc. All I got were fake smiles and rude cabin crew throughout my flights and more so, reluctant to provide the services which they claim, "even other airlines talk about"......what a shame!!!!

 

MAS may not be the best in everything, but at least they have genuine and dedicated cabin crew(mostly) and a sense of warmth on their flights. Maybe some ground crew and personnel need some training for English and courtesy, but they still survive. I think one of the reasons why SQ is so HYPED is because they have done a great job marketing their SINGAPORE GIRL where else MH hardly boast their GOLDEN GIRLS and GOLDEN GUYS

Plus SQ has more frequencies than MH on many routes and the fact their hub is a popular choice unlike MH and KUL.

 

I think MAS is trying to market its product better now than before, but still lagging behind compared to SQ. But I dont want to pay RM3500 for a flight to LHR and get crap service for the 13 hours. I rather pay the RM4000 to fly on MH, at the comfort of my national airline, which I dare say, even SQ talks about so much these days (SQ is beginning to feel the pressure of MH's increased presence and popularity)

 

To ask for a postcard from a cabin crew who keeps walking up and down and be greeted with a fake smile on a "now you see, now you don't" policy.....meaning the moment you speak to them they stare at you and then smile fakely...then the moment you think they turn away, they actually turn sour...oh gosh !!!!

 

How clear can the distinction be between these two airlines ? I think sometimes there are not much options as the cheaper one wins the deal!!!!

 

I think the SQ incidents tend to be very biased ona cover up here as they have had many incidents on safety, the Taipei incident (which I should remind you all that the pilot was a Malaysian and he no longer works for SQ), the AKL incident which was very clearly covered up and many others......I was once told the flight out of PER was overbooked and that I need to go home and return the next day for my flight back to KUL via SIN. Nothing was offered to me as compensation noting that I was a student then. Last December when I returned to Malaysia from London for good on MH, I was offered GBP200 plus a hotel to stay the night, which was done at a very early stage as I was queing up at 1800hours for my 2200 flight. The MH official went to each and everyone to offer them the deal. I choose to decline the offer as I had plans in KL which could not be changed at that time.

Now who is better or rather PROACTIVE ?

 

SIA or SQ as it is glamourously known is just overhyped and has very cramped seats and robots as their cabin crew, even the walls can smile if you really smile at them....

 

[Sing Yew 1]

There is an obvious distinction between MAS and SIA, no doubt about it !!!!!

 

As a Malaysian, I will surely support the national carrier of Malaysia, but my views are based on experiences which I deem an important factor on why I rather not fly with SIA.

 

Firstly, as mentioned before in this forum and other forums regarding my experiences on SQ, I have always had bad encounters with SQ, especially their cabin crew, who seem to be either robotic in their mannerisms or simply biased towards other races (foreigners vs asians) It is not a one-off thingy, more like after 8 flights with them, nothing seemed to differ. Yet I do not know how they can be the best airline in this and that etc. All I got were fake smiles and rude cabin crew throughout my flights and more so, reluctant to provide the services which they claim, "even other airlines talk about"......what a shame!!!!

 

MAS may not be the best in everything, but at least they have genuine and dedicated cabin crew(mostly) and a sense of warmth on their flights. Maybe some ground crew and personnel need some training for English and courtesy, but they still survive. I think one of the reasons why SQ is so HYPED is because they have done a great job marketing their SINGAPORE GIRL where else MH hardly boast their  GOLDEN GIRLS and GOLDEN GUYS

Plus SQ has more frequencies than MH on many routes and the fact their hub is a popular choice unlike MH and KUL.

 

I think MAS is trying to market its product better now than before, but still lagging behind compared to SQ. But I dont want to pay RM3500 for a flight to LHR and get crap service for the 13 hours. I rather pay the RM4000 to fly on MH, at the comfort of my national airline, which I dare say, even SQ talks about so much these days (SQ is beginning to feel the pressure of MH's increased presence and popularity)

 

To ask for a postcard from a cabin crew who keeps walking up and down and be greeted with a fake smile on a "now you see, now you don't" policy.....meaning the moment you speak to them they stare at you and then smile fakely...then the moment you think they turn away, they actually turn sour...oh gosh !!!!

 

How clear can the distinction be between these two airlines ? I think sometimes there are not much options as the cheaper one wins the deal!!!!

 

I think the SQ incidents tend to be very biased ona  cover up here as they have had many incidents on safety, the Taipei incident (which I should remind you all that the pilot was a Malaysian and he no longer works for SQ), the AKL incident which was very clearly covered up and many others......I was once told the flight out of PER was overbooked and that I need to go home and return the next day for my flight back to KUL via SIN. Nothing was offered to me as compensation noting that I was a student then. Last December when I returned to Malaysia from London for good on MH, I was offered GBP200 plus a hotel to stay the night, which was done at a very early stage as I was queing up at 1800hours for my 2200 flight. The MH official went to each and everyone to offer them the deal. I choose to decline the offer as I had plans in KL which could not be changed at that time.

Now who is better or rather PROACTIVE ?

 

SIA or SQ as it is glamourously known is just overhyped and has very cramped seats and robots as their cabin crew, even the walls can smile if you really smile at them....

 

10440[/snapback]

 

Having service that even other airlines talk about could have 2 implications, it's either their service is outstanding or likewise.

 

[Sanjay Thaker 0]

wow kandiah..well done i totally agree with u....they r juz...i dare say..glamourizing their airline and the crew...but wht u get in reality is the opposite...thts a fact..something even their pax talk bout.....when it comes to cabin services theres no way SQ is anywhere close to beating MH and thts known worldwide..

[kandiah k 0]

How can I forget to say this.....

 

Someone I know who works for Changi Airport told me that as a result of the compensation to the Taipeh flight victims, all the free transport for airport workers and other FRILLS were withdrawn and they don't enjoy the glorious days SQ used to share with their workers.....Its sad but much has been done to cut down the cost and its obvious that its hurting them a lot.

 

Yet so much of hype and robots on board !!!!

 

 

Aiyo !!! what this man !!!

 

[Roszaimy 0]

The thing is that we don't service the enough routes that carry most of these people who tend to spread the word around. The people who would vote for the Skytrax or other survey, who are they? Maybe a lot of Americans, British, French, etc. Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

The image of SQ is somewhat elevated in UK and US just because SQ offers more flights, so more people have gotten the chance to flown with them. Just imagine, 2x daily from JFK and 3x daily from LAX, that's a lot of passenger SQ have carried. Don't even talk about MH vs SQ when it comes to serving London airports.

 

I'm sure these people would change their mind if they ever get the chance to fly MH.

[S V Choong 4]

How many SQ flights to LHR daily as compared to MH to LHR?

[Sing Yew 1]

How many SQ flights to LHR daily as compared to MH to LHR?

10501[/snapback]

 

SQ flies to LHR 21x weekly or thrice daily.

MH flies to LHR 18x weekly which means thrice on certain days and twice on the rest.

 

[Hon Lin 0]

hey guys, thanks for supporting this topic! only posted less than 24hrs and already got so many feedbacks! GLAD i AM!

 

well firstly i would like to tell u guys that, the main reason that i take SQ is either because MH is fully booked, or the price of SQ is significantly cheaper than MH

other than that, who cares?? what the hel* would i wanna take SQ? i don't want to go to changi and change my flight(transit)! besides, singaporean girls are quite hot, but damn arrogant..not like u can stare at them for ur whole life eh?

i mean no offense, but i seriously think that SIA crew members are quite arrogant most of the time. The last time i flew on SIA was back in 2003 to Auckland. and i can still remember the fruss i had to go through with myself(cause i personally didn't like SIA)

then again, the conclusion is.. not even the rich can buy happiness eh?and so, if u choose to fly happily with genuine quality and service, get urself a MAS ticket!

 

i am flying back to KL in a month's time by MAS!!! =D

[S V Choong 4]

In contrast to what you guys have said, I have never had any problems or any perculiar circumstances with SQ and their F/As, funny that. They are as friendly as MAS' own.

 

I think perhaps stepping aboard into SQ with a non-biased view? Never mind the negative perspectives of SIA and the country, which was shared by others.

 

I have had many problems with Air NZ and their rude F/As, however, I get many people told me that they have never had any problems with them and their F/As. They think Air NZ F/As are quite friendly and polite (eventhough I find it difficult to believe).

Edited October 16, 2005 by S V Choong

[kandiah k 0]

SV,

 

You are right that everyone has their own experience. As for me, I wasn't negatively biased when I boarded the SQ plane. I was young and excited and even thought that SQ was better than MH at that point, only to be disappointed with the shabby treatment I received....cold and unwelcomed.

 

On a similar note, I also found some of my flights on Ryanair to be great, especially the cabin crew who were very polite and courteous. I couldn't believe my eyes when they were so kind compared to some SQ crew....BA was also good on my flight out of AMS to LHR, I was impressed with them !!!

 

So its not fair to generalize, but I guess there can be some sort of indication as to how the service status is consistent or not. On many occassions, I have encountered rude and ignorant crew on MH, but that was dealt with the proper way after that when I lodged a big complain and was attended to immediately. It was more racist on my own national carrier. If you recall one of my threads, I mentioned something about the crew who purposely ignored me and my cousin when she was serving the meal, on my to LHR. The lady next to my cousin, an Aussie, had to stop her and ask her if we were INVISIBLE, what a shame on her!!!

 

I knew she was being racist/biased when she did the same thing for the next meal before landing at LHR. I took it personally and asked for a comment form, sent it, emailed the Enrich Customer Service and an immediate response was given about the warning given to her and the other guy, plus bonus Enrich miles. Now, is that a shame or what ?

 

So its hard to say that MH is the best, but neither SQ is better. I think a lot also depends on the team work within the crew.

 

On my way to KUA in August, our flight crew were good and friendly, same on the return to KUL. The return was very hillarious, although I thought it was not professional. The crew who was making the announcement was into voice acts and he pressed his nose and announced his messages....

 

Everyone onboard were laughing and it got better when the crew were demonstrating the safety procedures. One of the stewards, was next to me demonstrating, and when he showed the safety cards to us, it had an oran utan on it. Everyone laughed and he felt embarassed about the whole thing. Later, the crew walked and talked to me and my colleagues who were laughing like freaks for that short 30 mins flight. Drinks were served on time and it was not a rush although the flight was delayed by almost an hour.

 

I guess it all depends on individuals and how they expect to be treated onboard, as you mentioned SV, the biased notion as you enter the plane.

 

 

Edited October 16, 2005 by kandiah k