5 Star LCC

[Louis L. 2]

saw this ad on local newspaper ...obviously, it is ak's advertisement (sorry for the pic quality, phone cam )

 

 

 

but one thing that caught my eye is the "5 Star LCC" phrase that ak used, i just felt that they are teasing on mh or rather mr Idris Jala

Edited November 12, 2007 by Louis L.

[S V Choong 4]

AK should expect a lawsuit from MH, as 5 star LCC is a tagline of MH, not AK!

[Seng Lim 0]

AK never failed to tease and embarrassed MH whenever they have the opportunities, hahaha.

[Hakan 2]

I hope AirAsia would be continue like this promotions when we moved to Langkawi in near future sounds like good to often visits to KL and other cities for us

[Chan CS 0]

AK should expect a lawsuit from MH, as 5 star LCC is a tagline of MH, not AK!

 

I don't think MH registered that tagline, IMO MH can do nothing just get teased. And one thing, it didn't mentioned any "Malaysia Airline" there.

 

AK is a LCC, and MAS is not a LCC anyway.

 

The PR of AK is simply great!

[S V Choong 4]

AK is a LCC, and MAS is not a LCC anyway.

 

Sarcasm is the keyword, Chan

[Samsyuri 0]

AK should expect a lawsuit from MH, as 5 star LCC is a tagline of MH, not AK!

The tagline is simply different from MH. It read very similar..

 

AK - 5 Star LCC

MH - 5 Star Airline @ LCC cost

[adrianqcs 0]

SELF-PROCLAIMED 5 Star Airline - Tak Malu!

 

Skytrax only rate them as a 3 Star Airline......

 

duh!

[Galson Y. 0]

a 5 star LCC sounds better to me ....instead of some 5 star airlines with LCC COSTS....

[Louis L. 2]

a 5 star LCC sounds better to me ....instead of some 5 star airlines with LCC COSTS....

 

totally agree ....hehe..no offence but ak still a LCC..so they reserve the right to use the LCC word ...

 

 

but again...i dun think ak actually want to proclaim themselve as an 5 star LCC, their intention is just MH

[Alan B. 5]

Its just smart advertising/marketing plus sharp copywriters. This has always been the trade mark of most LCC around the world. Since they can't sell luxury, they use sarcasm in their adds.

Edited November 13, 2007 by Alan B.

[M. Sofian H. 0]

who qualified AK = 5 star LCC??? skytrax?

[Galson Y. 0]

Its just smart advertising/marketing plus sharp copywriters. This has always been the trade mark of most LCC around the world. Since they can't sell luxury, they use sarcasm in their adds.

 

agree....a true LCC laughing at a self-proclaimed 5 star at LCC cost probably .....since they themselves so keen in applying the LCC into their operations....

[Nik H. 3]

agree....a true LCC laughing at a self-proclaimed 5 star at LCC cost probably .....since they themselves so keen in applying the LCC into their operations....

 

Absolutely true, and very savvy poke by Malaysia'a FavouRED one.

 

However, during the management meets I went to, I never heard IJ proclaiming to be a 5 Star at LCC cost yet. Instead, he acknowledges it as an impossible dream. However, he has said that he has the ambition to make the cost structure of MAS as close to AK as possible yet ensuring a level of service as close to 5star.

 

I do not think its unintelligent for any airline boss in being keen to have LCC cost structure into the operations. There's a lot to learn from the favouRED one, for instance, quick turnaround time. But he also know not all things LCC can be applied. ie, Non Unionised crew will mean better utilisation of resources, but as it is not necessarily good for the crew MAS cannot do that.

 

Laugh and ridicule if you like but it won't stop MAS from achieving its aspirations.

 

Many also laughed and ridiculed when MAS announced its Business Turnaround Program (BTP) and aspire to turn a 1 Billion Loss to a 500 million profit in 24 months. The laughter seems to have subsided somewhat as MAS is currently ahead of schedule and the 'experts and analyst' seems to be singing a different tune now.

 

MAS is already part LCC as Firefly is wholly MAS owned. Let's all laugh and ridicule this effort launched with two old F50s. But when it starts getting the ATR, and SZB ops comes fully on stream, let's see then what will happen.

 

Ask yourself, which is faster point to point; KUL - PEN by jet or SZB - PEN by ATR. Then add the taxi fares. And the convenience of having to walk 50 steps from taxi to aircraft to board or deplane.

 

There is always a bigger picture to everything and certain things are not what it seems to be at forst glance.

 

 

[Walter Sim 1]

typical AK.

 

Did anyone notice? their AirAsia.com is different now.

[Keith T 2]

Somehow the AK/MH 'animosity' (for want of a better word) reminds me of BA/VS back in the 80s.

[Louis L. 2]

typical AK.

 

Did anyone notice? their AirAsia.com is different now.

 

yeah i noticed it when i did my online booking few days ago...i not sure whether i prefer the current or the old one

[Loh Wilson 0]

MAS is already part LCC as Firefly is wholly MAS owned. Let's all laugh and ridicule this effort launched with two old F50s. But when it starts getting the ATR, and SZB ops comes fully on stream, let's see then what will happen.

 

Ask yourself, which is faster point to point; KUL - PEN by jet or SZB - PEN by ATR. Then add the taxi fares. And the convenience of having to walk 50 steps from taxi to aircraft to board or deplane.

 

The current LCCT looks more like a refuge camp.

 

[Kenneth T 0]

Oops..i thougth MH claimed that they are 5 stars airline but with LCC concept?

[Izanee 0]

the problem is that MH is achieving its profit by selling 747s, their headquarters, and many town offices. Yield has only increased slightly, as has the load factor. Their turnover is nothing compared to SQ's or TG's.

 

Selling things to attain profit is good, but at some point you will run out of things to sell. Maybe they can sell the top management's bums off.

 

I don't think much money will be made from that either.

[Nik H. 3]

the problem is that MH is achieving its profit by selling 747s, their headquarters, and many town offices. Yield has only increased slightly, as has the load factor. Their turnover is nothing compared to SQ's or TG's.

 

Selling things to attain profit is good, but at some point you will run out of things to sell. Maybe they can sell the top management's bums off.

 

I don't think much money will be made from that either.

 

Very Observant. However, the B747s were sold years ago during the WAU exercise to PMB who owns the aircraft. That money was finished then.

 

Other asset sales like the building etc was worth about RM300 million. And you are right, MAS has ran out of things to sell.

 

MAS was running out of money and would have gone broke sometime in June 2006. The asset sale were the lifeline at that time. An RM1 Billion loss to an RM300 million profit is a turnaround of RM1.3 billion. Where did you get the info about yield and load factor? This is highly educational to me.

 

Guess its true about selling Top Management's bum off is a useless effort cos as you say they are not worth much.

 

[Mushrif A 3]

Very Observant. However, the B747s were sold years ago during the WAU exercise to PMB who owns the aircraft. That money was finished then.

 

Other asset sales like the building etc was worth about RM300 million. And you are right, MAS has ran out of things to sell.

 

MAS was running out of money and would have gone broke sometime in June 2006. The asset sale were the lifeline at that time. An RM1 Billion loss to an RM300 million profit is a turnaround of RM1.3 billion. Where did you get the info about yield and load factor? This is highly educational to me.

 

Guess its true about selling Top Management's bum off is a useless effort cos as you say they are not worth much.

 

The asset unbundling exercise, WAU, may have been done a few years ago, which had helped MH's cashflow position. However, as part of that arrangement, any profit (mkt or disposal value less depreciated value) generated through subsequent disposal of MH aircraft (& spares) owned by PMB, will be shared with MH and, I think, MH gets a bigger share of the profit.

 

So, there is this potential for more of such profit to flow through to MH, despite the completion of the WAU exercise some years ago. Think of the many 734s which are unencumbered.

 

The yields and load factor are made public as part of MH's investor relations exercise, available for download from its website. Interesting, yields are largely enhanced through the introduction of fuel surcharges and that stupid, annoying admin fee (apart from insurance surcharge, what is this for, esp. in the era of e-tkts? To help pay secretaries' wages?).

 

The last quarter, MH was also trying to gain a bit more $$ by cutting down on catering - this was evident when the quality of Y meals has gone done, especially on the long hauls. MH's Y meals are now at par with the likes of UA, etc. This is before the introduction of that 1-star-service-snackboxes to replace hot meals. The snackboxes may lead to a few more $$$ to be squeezed into the bottomline but on the pax service side - the differentiating factor between MH's Y and AK certainly diminishes, whilst the gulf between MH and other true 5-star airlines will expand.

 

 

[Izanee 0]

That is true - but hasn't MAS sold off its 747s to various airlines ... or is it PNB who sold them? Does MH see any of the cash? it is all very confusing.

 

As mushrif stated - yield and load factor is often announced in MH's press statements.

 

And by the way Capt Nik, I hope you're not offended by what I said about selling the top management - I DO NOT mean you at all...

 

 

[Mushrif A 3]

It was PMB (not PNB, btw) that did the sale to other parties. MH would have had a share in any profit generated from such sales.

 

Also, some 734 may have changed ownership from PMB to other third parties, whilst MH continue as the operator of the aircraft.

[Chan CS 0]

Hello Capt Nik,

 

I think it all depends on how MH position itself among us, the customer, not top management.

 

I know that there are soo many things that we, as a passenger do not know and will never know, just like what happenned in the meeting, what he said and what he had done. Anyway, we as customer judge from how they perform and what they published. Just like the 5 stars airline with LCC costs, which they have published.

 

Try think on the customers' side and maybe even employee side. Has MAS done something to actually satisfy the "real" customer? How actually about the MH's staff morale?

 

To be very honest, I have NO any interest on how MH's earning, it has nothing to do with me. But I'm really interested to know how they perform, because that will directly influence my next trip with them. And any mistakes done is crucial, because AK is there waiting for us! Just take an example of the snackbox, in MH's point of view, yeah that is brilliant as it cut costs. But what about passenger point of view? I really doubt the credibility of their survey (a survey can be done with what they want).

Edited November 14, 2007 by Chan CS