Jump to content
MalaysianWings - Malaysia's Premier Aviation Portal
Sign in to follow this  
Naim

Airbus Says Ready To Deliver A380 To MAS By 2009

Recommended Posts

I'm sure MH will be able to fill the A380s- on a much smaller scale than EK.

 

As mentioned above - LHR, AMS - KUL - Australia (maybe NZ) can be filled up. AMS and LHR to KUL is underserved - there is a huge demand for flights. They are often overbooked, especially at peak periods.

 

The problem is that France and Germany (combined population of 140 million) have a huge market which is waiting to be served. If thailand ( a lot of leisure traffic) and singapore (combined transit, leisure and business) can benefit from that i don't know why we can't. its simply a matter of good promotion and marketing skills.

 

CDG may even be served with an A380 - MH needs to make the most of the opportunities there. Why fly AF/QF via SIN to australia when you can fly MH via KUL (five star with low cost)? hmm.. i wonder.

 

 

FRA is an important financial centre in Germany - also a major airline hub. I know SQ and TG are star alliance members but why can't MH fill 5 weekly 772s?? Malaysia is just as good a tourist destination as thailand...i suppose Thailand also has its 'other' attractions... Malaysia is an excellent destination for families/couples on holiday - if only Tourism Malaysia would spend its cash properly and attract more tourists from Europe rather than just concentrate on the Asian region.

 

Another problem is that many more tourists visit Malaysia than Thailand or singapore but a vast majority actually come from south of the causeway overland (Singaporeans and other foreign tourists who use SIN as an entry point). We need them to come via KUL and then travel south to SIN....

 

If not, KUL is destined to be a satellite of SIN - providing LCC feed to SIN from around the region.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possible that the Malaysian Government has not been working hard enough to attract more tourist into Malaysia. Look at the KLIA, the number of forgeigh airlines flying into Malaysia are lesses than Thailand or Singapore. Im ashame that to certain extend that we need to give incentives and free landing fees in order to beg other airlines to land in KLIA. It's high time that Tourism Malaysia looks into the infrastructure offer too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Possible that the Malaysian Government has not been working hard enough to attract more tourist into Malaysia. Look at the KLIA, the number of forgeigh airlines flying into Malaysia are lesses than Thailand or Singapore. Im ashame that to certain extend that we need to give incentives and free landing fees in order to beg other airlines to land in KLIA. It's high time that Tourism Malaysia looks into the infrastructure offer too

Agreed. Malaysian government does not have a proper package that is neat and accessible for tourists. MM2H is always targetted to older gen. What about those who are in transit? Just in comparison with our neighbour. When in transit at Changi, you can take the brochures on what to do if we are in transit for 2 hours, 3 hours, 4 hours, overnight, etc., this will make the transit more enjoyable. It's tourism website is also superb. My friend recently complained that our tourism malaysia website is full of glitz and blitz but offer no visible good packages (1 day package etc) in it. She compared to the Uniquely singapore website which offer packages right down to prices and choices of what to do for a 1 day, 2 day, etc trip. It is also highly customisable. Oh, don't get me started with other tourism website such as the HK ...even better~

 

See, many times the government has done the right things, but never done things right. Pity pity...

 

Sorry OT . :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As mentioned above - LHR, AMS - KUL - Australia (maybe NZ) can be filled up. AMS and LHR to KUL is underserved - there is a huge demand for flights. They are often overbooked, especially at peak periods.

Not anymore. MAS LHR flights are reporting not so encouraging load in recent months. It's probably due to its high air fares. Even SIA Economy Flexi fare is cheaper than MAS'.

 

 

If thailand ( a lot of leisure traffic) and singapore (combined transit, leisure and business) can benefit from that i don't know why we can't. its simply a matter of good promotion and marketing skills.

Many other factors need to be taken into consideration as well. Yes, BKK does have a lot of leisure traffic (which is the same case for Malaysia) but it's very funny that many major foreign carriers (such as BA, AF, LH, SK, TK, EK, QR, EY, QF, UA, NW, JL, NH, KE, OZ etc.) can do so well there at Don Muang/Suvarnabhumi but not Subang/KLIA.

 

 

Malaysia is just as good a tourist destination as thailand...i suppose Thailand also has its 'other' attractions... Malaysia is an excellent destination for families/couples on holiday - if only Tourism Malaysia would spend its cash properly and attract more tourists from Europe rather than just concentrate on the Asian region.

To be frank, Thailand does have a lot more to offer compared to Malaysia. If i were a European and was going to visit Southeast Asia, i definately will choose BKK.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not anymore. MAS LHR flights are reporting not so encouraging load in recent months. It's probably due to its high air fares. Even SIA Economy Flexi fare is cheaper than MAS'.

 

Will have to concur with Isaac on this one, as reported by some of my colleagues who flew return LHR-KUL on MH recently - load factors back in cattle class running at around 60-70% (as opposed to 5-6 years back when it was always chalk-a-block full in Y)

 

Interestingly, my recent LHR-AUH-KUL on EY was about 80% load factor LHR-AUH and near 100% load AUH-KUL - unsurprisingly, filled with Arabs and also a number of Brits coming to Malaysia for hols

 

Sigh....I guess the consumers are no longer stupid and know that there are better competitors serving the route ie SQ, EK, QR, EY

Edited by Jamie H

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes there are a few more reasons why airlines prefer BKK - thailand has a population of 60 million - plus it is an important entry point to Indochina which includes vietnam (population 80 million).

 

I don't think Thailand has much more to offer than us - unless you factor in the thriving sex industry. that is a major draw for europeans...

 

so tell me isaac - what does thailand have to offer than we can't? i would like to know as I only have been to BKK (which i hated!)

Edited by Izanee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes there are a few more reasons why airlines prefer BKK - thailand has a population of 60 million - plus it is an important entry point to Indochina which includes vietnam (population 80 million).

 

I don't think Thailand has much more to offer than us - unless you factor in the thriving sex industry. that is a major draw for europeans...

 

so tell me isaac - what does thailand have to offer than we can't? i would like to know as I only have been to BKK (which i hated!)

 

Thailand does have more to offer, although not much more. They are more interesting to visit though.

I found that Thailand still maintain their cultural heritage very well. It is very thick and its in their daily life. Can you watch something like traditional performance in KL? In Bangkok, they have Siam Niramit, does KL offer something similar?

 

Not to mention, they are very open to any other cultures. Women doesn't feel intimidated when they wear something minimalistic, something that you can't always do in Malaysia.

 

No offense here, but I found that Malaysia is a bit too sterile. I found it more interesting to visit the temples or Jim Thompson House than Petronas or Putrajaya. I would rather ride the boat in stinky Chao Phraya than fake gondola in Putrajaya artificial lake. For many, being messy is an attraction by itself. Have you been to Singapore? Despite its economic success, I found that place is depressing. They are just too clean and everything just in order.

 

Their aviation industry is also more liberal in comparison to Malaysia, hence there are more airlines using bangkok as a transit hub in comparison to KUL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If money can be made by officials and politicians, the government will create scheme to attract them to the country e.g. Bangladeshi workers.

 

:drinks:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With only 6, there's only so much it can do, but service the prime markets and slot the A380 into ports where Skyteam members can help is a good idea. I think:

With 6:

 

KUL - AMS will be daily (MH16/17) possibly supplemented with a 3x weekly / Daily B744 service - Daylight departure... Roughly same time as MH4 (or 3, I keep forgetting which is which). 2x A380s needed.

 

KUL - SYD daily (MH122/123). Keep MH140/141 as a B744. 1x A380 needed

 

KUL - LHR daily (MH1/2). The other one remains a B744. 2x A380s needed

 

With the spare one, potentially operate into CDG. I know, it isn't the best at times in terms of loads but the Skyteam feed could really give the A380 a run for its money on that route. 3x weekly even...

 

It will be interesting to see the configuration and even a new product, if there is one. I mean, they only introduced a new product not so long ago!

 

With the potential spare B744s could there be a possibility we could see some hubs ie Penang, KK or even Kuching gain flights to Europe and beyond? I remember in the past they were saying there is demand for a Penang - Sydney direct service and even a London - Penang service. 3x weekly on both would that work?

 

Alex.

Edited by Alex L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
With the potential spare B744s could there be a possibility we could see some hubs ie Penang, KK or even Kuching gain flights to Europe and beyond? I remember in the past they were saying there is demand for a Penang - Sydney direct service and even a London - Penang service. 3x weekly on both would that work?

 

The key here is yield. 3x weekly will only likely be filled by leisure travelers and students, it will not be profitable. Business travelers prefers frequency and does this route has much business traffic, if any?

 

KUL itself is already deemed low yield destinations by many airlines, PEN or KCH won't even stand a chance.

The only thing that MH should do is strengthen their KUL hubs, Malaysia is simply too small to have more than 1 hub.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the reason MH stopped flights from europe to LGK,PEN and KCH was that most passengers were low yield leisure or students returning home.

 

All the LHR-KUL flights via PEN,LGK were avoided by business travellers, making it untenable for MH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...