flee 5 Report post Posted February 2, 2013 Very sad that SYD doesn't get the A380. I think the 777 will be gone too later this year and only have the A333? MH are scheduled to have two new A333s delivered this year. Maybe they can configure them with similar accommodation to the A380 and dedicate these aircraft for use on their Aussie services. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CH Teo 0 Report post Posted February 2, 2013 This could be a good thing for customers. MH fares on this route has always been high and that CX controls the majority of the market share. The extra capacity created with the deployment of the A380 will result in the followings: - lower MH's fares for sure, hence makes it more competitive with CX's offering. - if the product + fare are really good, MH can erode CX's market share on the route. - if the fare difference is not too material and within tolerable margin with AK's offering, AK could be in serious danger. HKG might be another CMB waiting a repeat. I would rather say HKG from KUL might goes to D7 if CX and MH dugong controls the maket share over AK narrowbody, as I remembered Uncle Tony also mentioned before 3 hours below are more ideal for AK for now... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BC Tam 2 Report post Posted February 2, 2013 I would rather say HKG from KUL might goes to D7 if CX and MH dugong ..... He may get a bit of stick from AK shareholders though Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flee 5 Report post Posted February 3, 2013 He may get a bit of stick from AK shareholders though Why should that be, if it is for commercial reasons? If AK can earn more profits by better deploying its aircraft, there should be no issue. AK does not fly for prestige, it flies for profits. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kris Kim 0 Report post Posted February 3, 2013 Looks like MEL Management pushing hard for A380 services, apparently MH doesn't have enough allowable capacity to up gauge it's aircraft to MEL. http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v6/newsbusiness.php?id=925589 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BC Tam 2 Report post Posted February 3, 2013 Why should that be, if it is for commercial reasons? Key may be that ownerships of AK and D7 are not identical, particularly as AK has a listed componentImagine time, effort and money invested in developing the HKG route, then handing it on a plate to the step parent - will need a big dose of magmanimity no ? Personally, I hope MH doesn't go revisit the LCC'ish approach to gain market share from AK/D7 - they have proven to be disastrous in that area and are nowadays still recovering from the resulting mess from that misadventure. And we know from history now how the red one can and is capable of neutralizing threats to their market share Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flee 5 Report post Posted February 3, 2013 Key may be that ownerships of AK and D7 are not identical, particularly as AK has a listed componentImagine time, effort and money invested in developing the HKG route, then handing it on a plate to the step parent - will need a big dose of magmanimity no ? Route development costs are sunk costs - I don't think that there would be any problem with that. Besides, AK would have recovered that many times over already. They also share the costs with FD and maybe PQ. AK itself is a shareholder of D7, so they stand to gain directly if D7 can make a better commercial return on the KUL-HKG route. If AK's yields or load factors suffer as a result of MH's A380 services, they will be the first to reduce their frequencies or withdraw from the route. This is what is meant by "commercial reasons" so often cited in their PRs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ashley Lee 0 Report post Posted February 3, 2013 Slightly a bit OT, but has MAS announced an official date for the final flight of the 747-400 to and fro Sydney? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nrazmoor 0 Report post Posted February 3, 2013 After HKG, NRT will be my bet to be added into MH's A380 network as compared to SYD With multiple destination in the USA from both JAL and AA, MH shld send their flagship a/c to carry on paxs with further connection to SEA. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Isaac 0 Report post Posted February 3, 2013 After HKG, NRT will be my bet to be added into MH's A380 network as compared to SYD Will not happen unless they cancel their plan to put the 388 to CDG or to substitute one of the double daily 388 service to LHR with a 772. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nrazmoor 0 Report post Posted February 3, 2013 Will not happen unless they cancel their plan to put the 388 to CDG or to substitute one of the double daily 388 service to LHR with a 772. Really..? But they still have two more 380 yet to be deliver. So, 5 A380 cannot do the 2x daily LHR and daily CDG with HKG inbetween? If can i think the last one can do the KUL-NRT-KUL. Well.., i might be wrong then Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Isaac 0 Report post Posted February 3, 2013 (edited) Really..? But they still have two more 380 yet to be deliver. So, 5 A380 cannot do the 2x daily LHR and daily CDG with HKG inbetween? If can i think the last one can do the KUL-NRT-KUL. Well.., i might be wrong then If they pull the utilization of the 388 too far, it will face the same problem that BI faced in December 2012. They do have more than enough 772 as back-up but it won't look good on MAS because the inflight products are different. They can't afford to do this if they want to capture the high yield traffic from SQ, CX etc with the 388. Edited February 3, 2013 by Isaac Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flee 5 Report post Posted February 3, 2013 If they pull the utilization of the 388 too far, it will face the same problem that BI faced in December 2012. They do have more than enough 772 as back-up but it won't look good on MAS because the inflight products are different. They can't afford to do this if they want to capture the high yield traffic from SQ, CX etc with the 388. I think that MH cannot be to gung ho about the A388 utilisation. All their aircraft will still need to be returned to Airbus for a permanent wing fix at some point in time in the future. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mohd Suhaimi Fariz 2 Report post Posted February 4, 2013 Something that'll put a kibosh to any hopes of seeing MH's A380 to AU - Qantas' Asian strategy which includes: "A new destination Kuala Lumpur available to Qantas customers via the combined Qantas-Emirates network." http://www.qantas.com.au/travel/airlines/media-releases/feb-2013/5486/global/en Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nrazmoor 0 Report post Posted February 4, 2013 So they will codeshare with EK on the KUL-MEL instead of codeshare with MH... so much for oneworld spirit 😆 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Johan Z 0 Report post Posted February 4, 2013 If that could happen with BA (when they dropped all the JV), it will happen with MH or CX or any other oneworld carriers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Najib Ramli 0 Report post Posted February 4, 2013 Something that'll put a kibosh to any hopes of seeing MH's A380 to AU - Qantas' Asian strategy which includes: "A new destination Kuala Lumpur available to Qantas customers via the combined Qantas-Emirates network." http://www.qantas.com.au/travel/airlines/media-releases/feb-2013/5486/global/en So they will codeshare with EK on the KUL-MEL instead of codeshare with MH... so much for oneworld spirit but Qantas also mentioned the following quoted: "Expanded network within Asia through local partners (such as Japan Airlines, China Eastern, Jet Airways, Cathay Pacific and Malaysia Airlines)" (source: http://www.qantas.com.au/travel/airlines/media-releases/feb-2013/5486/global/en) and in the 5 airlines mentioned, 3 are oneworld members....so Qantas would still probably be code sharing MH on certain routes not covered by Emirates ie: PER - KUL Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dean hizudy 0 Report post Posted February 4, 2013 but Qantas also mentioned the following quoted: "Expanded network within Asia through local partners (such as Japan Airlines, China Eastern, Jet Airways, Cathay Pacific and Malaysia Airlines)" (source: http://www.qantas.com.au/travel/airlines/media-releases/feb-2013/5486/global/en) and in the 5 airlines mentioned, 3 are oneworld members....so Qantas would still probably be code sharing MH on certain routes not covered by Emirates ie: PER - KUL and SYD-KUL Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nrazmoor 0 Report post Posted February 4, 2013 So instead of sending their own metal they will just codeshare with MH... still hoping that at least they will start SYD-KUL.. if not, too bad for KUL then. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flee 5 Report post Posted February 4, 2013 So instead of sending their own metal they will just codeshare with MH... still hoping that at least they will start SYD-KUL.. if not, too bad for KUL then. Not sure if the bilaterals will allow that, since MH cannot deploy the A388 due to the route hitting the agreed upon capacity ceiling. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kee Hooi Yen 0 Report post Posted February 4, 2013 Refer this : http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/international/files/register_available_capacity_230113.pdf And this : http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/international/timetable.aspx Notice Northern Winter timetable - Malaysia Airlirnes operates KUL-SYD vv with A330-300 and B737-400 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mike P 0 Report post Posted February 4, 2013 Not sure if the bilaterals will allow that, since MH cannot deploy the A388 due to the route hitting the agreed upon capacity ceiling. Time for opened skies policy! Refer this : http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/international/files/register_available_capacity_230113.pdf And this : http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/international/timetable.aspx Notice Northern Winter timetable - Malaysia Airlirnes operates KUL-SYD vv with A330-300 and B737-400 pure mistake... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nrazmoor 0 Report post Posted February 4, 2013 Not sure if the bilaterals will allow that, since MH cannot deploy the A388 due to the route hitting the agreed upon capacity ceiling. I thought the limitation is only on MH side only... no? since QF didnt fly to KUL so i guess they didnt use their right yet. Well i have no idea on how this air service agreement work.. Anyone can explain? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Najib Ramli 0 Report post Posted February 4, 2013 I thought the limitation is only on MH side only... no? since QF didnt fly to KUL so i guess they didnt use their right yet. Well i have no idea on how this air service agreement work.. Anyone can explain? yup, i wonder about this as well...since QF doesn't fly into KUL at all...let say if they decide to code share MH on let say PER - KUL, SYD - KUL etc...would the restriction be lifted to MH? then again I don't understand how bilateral works in the 1st place, I would assume that Malaysian carriers are allowed a certain number of flights/capacity into Australia and Australian carriers are allowed a certain number of flights/capacity into Malaysia. Then again no Australian carrier fly directly to Malaysia (with the exception of Virgin Australia flight code share with Etihad) so where is the restriction exactly? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Johan Z 0 Report post Posted February 4, 2013 Refer this : http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/international/files/register_available_capacity_230113.pdf And this : http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/international/timetable.aspx Notice Northern Winter timetable - Malaysia Airlirnes operates KUL-SYD vv with A330-300 and B737-400 It's interesting to read that different countries have different limits (or unlimited for some). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
