MAS A380 - Fleet to be Retained

[Seth K 3]

That's a lot of premium seats!

[flee 5]

Hehehehe! Or they cud go the AK way and have 800 black leather seats!

[Ruiz Razy 1]

Hehehehe! Or they cud go the AK way and have 800 black leather seats!

... yeah and knowing them ; don't sell the "middle seat" at one of the cabins and you've got yourself Business Class / Econnomy+ ; good to put govenrment offices on duty travel!.... hey ... after all is about maximising profits and make money = Low Cost Value Carrier.

[Isaac 0]

Hehehehe! Or they cud go the AK way and have 800 black leather seats!

Or they can go the very realistic way ... F-10, C-40 and the rest Y

 

[flee 5]

Realistically, MH should have their planes configured according to their route characteristics. Maybe they should have one set of planes configured for high density economy seating and another lot for more premium seats. That way, they can have flexibility in aircraft deployment to suit market needs.

[Isaac 0]

Realistically, MH should have their planes configured according to their route characteristics. Maybe they should have one set of planes configured for high density economy seating and another lot for more premium seats. That way, they can have flexibility in aircraft deployment to suit market needs.

No way ! With only 6 aircraft it is a big no-no.

 

[Mohd Azizul Ramli 2]

TG made a shocking statement that they may cancel their 6 A380s. Earlier on, the airline deferred the delivery of their A380s until late 2011 (initially they were supposed to get their A380s earlier than MH). Will MH stick to their 6 A380s order?

 

THAI reconsiders costly jumbo jet deal

By: BOONSONG KOSITCHOTETHANA

Published: 9/06/2009 at 12:00 AM

http://www.bangkokpost.com/business/econom...-jumbo-jet-deal

 

KUALA LUMPUR : Thai Airways International (THAI) seems poised to cancel its order of six A380 superjumbo jets, which it considers not viable for its operations and, at a total cost of about US$1.8 billion, too expensive to fund. Wallop Bhukkanasut, chairman of THAI's executive board, revealed the national carrier's revised stance on procuring the world's largest civil aircraft, which it agreed to purchase back in 2007 when the carrier was struggling to weather its worst financial crisis in 49 years.

 

"It is not economically viable to have and deploy this aircraft in our network," Mr Wallop said at the sidelines of the International Air Transport Association (IATA) annual general meeting being held in Kuala Lumpur. Airlines operating A380s have found it difficult to achieve the yields they expected due to the global economic crisis, high operating costs and a lack of flexibility in moving the aircraft through airports, he said.

 

"It is a special mission airplane and can currently operate through eight airports around the world, meaning you can't put the aircraft on routes as you may wish," he said. With THAI's planned configuration of the A380, the airline must fill 88.8% of 501 seats just to break even, he said. "We need to make a major turnaround decision," he said.

 

He added that the final decision rests with the Thai government and the issue needs to be addressed by the Finance and Transport Ministries. Top Airbus executives have already sensed THAI's new stance on the A380 and are reportedly seeking a meeting with Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva. "From the operating point of view, the A380 does not make economic sense. My immediate preoccupation is to enable THAI to survive the current storm and later to sustain the airline," he said.

 

When THAI puts its first A380 in the air in late 2011, the aircraft's novelty may have worn off. The plane may therefore no longer appeal to passengers as it currently does for Singapore Airlines and Emirates Airlines, which have A380s with more luxurious features - such as shower rooms for first-class passengers, in the case of Emirates. "It could be a case of Johnny comes lately," Mr Wallop quipped.

 

THAI may be unable to compete effectively with other A380 operators on routes that the flag carrier has had in mind for some time, he said. The airline planned to fly A380s on its long-haul routes, such as Bangkok to London, Paris and Frankfurt.

 

Yet Airbus may not be able to consign the megajets to THAI as scheduled in the latest timetable, he said. THAI is prepared for "some acceptable" penalty arising from the contract breach with Airbus, but Mr Wallop said negotiations could take place on substituting the double-decker A380 jetliners with other Airbus aircraft.

 

"There is no contract that can't be broken or re-negotiated," said Mr Wallop, who retired as THAI's executive vice-president for commercial affairs two years ago and recently became chairman of the airline's executive board. Financing the megajets, each costing about $300 million, as well as other new aircraft under the airline's re-fleeting programme will be a great burden for the airline.

 

THAI may have to extend the service years of its fleet, now averaging 12 years, to 20 years to reduce the expense of procuring new jets, said Mr Wallop. "Instead of buying new planes, we can maintain THAI's appeal by refurbishing the cabins, which costs much less," he said. The flag carrier, which has more than 80 aircraft, previously planned to procure at least 46 planes over the next decade and to retire 24 aircraft more than 20 years old in the next five years.

[KC Sim 2]

Thai's rumoured wish to cancel its order for six A380s comes as no surprise to me . . . even if the economy hadn't worsened to its current level. The original order was not founded on sound commercial studies. It was a case of wanting to "join the A380 Club" and wanting to see their colours on the largest aircraft in the skies. Purchasing such an expensive fleet just for prestige is always going to be a folly that many airlines have previously experienced and regretted.

 

Remember those airlines that had just one or a few B747s in their fleet? Air Gabon, Air Madagascar, TMA of Lebanon . . . ? A present day exception might just be Surinam Airways - but their B747-300 was acquired second-hand and cheap and the airline's fares are high.

 

As far back as 2006, I have already gained the impression (through speaking to a Thai Airways International senior management personnel) that the justification for the A380 was very weak insofar as yield and year-round load factor is concerned.

 

It now remains to be seen how many other airlines that ordered the A380 for "prestige" will follow suit. There is after all a precedence set if Thai proceeds with the cancellation. And with this coming at a time when ILFC too is mulling a cancellation, it looks like the upcoming Paris Air Show is going to be a ride through hell for Airbus (and perhaps even Boeing). Manufacturers such as Embraer might still have a nice ride though with their more efficient and economical E-170s and E-190s.

 

KC Sim

 

 

[Alif A. F. 0]

MH A380 1st class seat, 1 only, is in szb for training purposes. It's a single person cubicle with 22 or 24 inch LCD with HD recorder on it.

 

You have further info?

 

But, it's better not showing any photos now (you have any?)...for competition reasons...

[Pieter C. 5]

A present day exception might just be Surinam Airways - but their B747-300 was acquired second-hand

 

It was 'sold' by KLM to SLM for 1 Euro...

[Mohd Azizul Ramli 2]

The original order was not founded on sound commercial studies. It was a case of wanting to "join the A380 Club" and wanting to see their colours on the largest aircraft in the skies. Purchasing such an expensive fleet just for prestige is always going to be a folly that many airlines have previously experienced and regretted.

 

It now remains to be seen how many other airlines that ordered the A380 for "prestige" will follow suit.

Yes, Mr. Sim. Now in MH's case, was it backed by a strong and sound business studies or merely for prestige? I leave it for us to ponder.

 

Just to share my thought, although no specific explanation has been communicated, most speculated that MH is planning to deploy the 6 A380s to its Kangaroo Route, and partly replacing their current fleet of B744s, which means they will be sent to the usual suspect airports; LHR and SYD, both of which currently handling the A380s of SQ, EK and QF. Personally, I thought AMS would make a great A380 destination for MH, based on my experience flying on flights MH 16 and MH 17. Some casual observers (like most of us here) suggested MEL could be well deserving too.

 

However, will the plan still valid by January 2011, 18 months away from now? By then, the followings challenges MIGHT have occured:

 

For LHR

- D7 will be having a daily A343 flight into STN. I won't be surprised if they manage to make it double daily too.

- EK would have 3 daily flights into KUL (EK rumoured 17 weekly flights into KUL by February 2010) to connect Malaysians to Europe and beyond via their massive hub in DXB/JXB.

 

For SYD

- In the last annual report by MAHB (FY 2008), it was revealed that passengers movement from SYD declined by 13.5% and SYD was no longer the largest gateway into/from Malaysia from/into Australia (it is now Melbourne). MH couldn't support a double daily B744 non stop flight, in which one of the flight has been reassigned with a B772 and it was tagged along with BNE in a triangular route. The declining number seriously reflecting MH's loss in market share for flights into SYD.

- Both SQ and EK enjoy 3-4 daily flights into the airport, half of it operated by the A380s.

 

For AMS

- While it was reported that MH's flights into AMS enjoyed a good load and yield, the recent equipment downgrade from a daily B744 to a daily B772 came as a surprise to many. Worse, it coincided with KLM's launch/equipment upgrade from their ancient B744 Combi to their brand new B772 and B77W for the route (which also being tagged on to CGK). One would think it is hard to believe if these 2 incidents are not inter-related.

- AMS is still EK, EY an QR free as of we speak, but will the situation remains come January 2011?

 

For MEL

- MH currently serve the airport twice daily using a B772. It looks like MEL could be a candidate city to receive MH's A380. But recent development shows much interest from the Middle Eastern carriers to increase their capacity into MEL. Etihad Airways and Qatar Airways may finally fly into the airport from their respective hubs and EK would have at least 3 daily flights into MEL from DXB. It has proven that MH lost significant market shares in SYD due to these Middle Eastern carriers. Would MEL denies the fact for MH? I guess all of us can predict the outcome.

 

So, do MH really need the A380s?

[Tony 1]

Azizul,

This is my personal view of MH and its A380 plan.

 

From the very day the Business Turnaround Plan was released, there was an immediate conflict of intention. The plan says they need to downsize - use smaller, more efficient aircraft, and increase flying frequency on popular routes. The A380 belongs to another set of puzzle in my opinion.

 

As to pride, the big question for IJ and friends is whether they should acquire the A380 and compete with SQ and the likes or just stick to rightsizing the organisation (staff expenses!!!) and its network? It's a tricky one, but I vote for the latter.

Edited June 10, 2009 by Tony

[BC Tam 2]

So, do MH really need the A380s?

Of course they do

Only KUL is currently dugong capable, though very limited I understand

Others like PEN, BKI, KCH, JHB, MYY, TGG etc are not

What a gold mine of opportunities there

[Mohd Azizul Ramli 2]

From the very day the Business Turnaround Plan was released, there was an immediate conflict of intention. The plan says they need to downsize - use smaller, more efficient aircraft, and increase flying frequency on popular routes. The A380 belongs to another set of puzzle in my opinion.

 

As to pride, the big question for IJ and friends is whether they should acquire the A380 and compete with SQ and the likes or just stick to rightsizing the organisation (staff expenses!!!) and its network? It's a tricky one, but I vote for the latter.

I believe the confirmation of the purchase of the 6 A380s was done before MH publicly told that they wanted to become a 'Toyota', as opposed to a 'Mercedes' (like SQ) as what one would expect. But acquiring the A380s for pride and prestige to compete with SQ is not a 'Toyota' thing, does it?

 

Quoting MH CEO and MD, Dato Seri Idris Jala in a February 2009 interview,

 

“We are positioning ourselves as a Five-Star Value Carrier,” he explained. “It is about providing value, but at very affordable fares. We want to be a Toyota, not a Mercedes.” MAS is pushing ahead with its rebranding exercise.

[S V Choong 4]

Using brand names of cars for airlines as analogies seems a bit inappropriate, especially more so when it came out of the mouth of the CEO....

[Tony 1]

In Microsoft Office, there is an Undo button. I am sure they can cancel the order if it is an "inappropriate" equipment for the business.

[Sharil Abdul Rahman 0]

In Microsoft Office, there is an Undo button. I am sure they can cancel the order if it is an "inappropriate" equipment for the business.

 

I think there are mostly legal binding that is preventing MAS to 'undo' their order with airbus.

We dont really know WHAT is in the agreement the two companies signed on the confirmation of getting the A380

[Tony 1]

I still believe MH can "undo" the order for A380s. Just that they need to pay a penalty for the cancellation. Much like if you order a new vehicle and then cancel the order later, you lose X percent (deposit/penalty, whatever they call it).

Edited June 11, 2009 by Tony

[Sing Yew 1]

However, will the plan still valid by January 2011, 18 months away from now? By then, the followings challenges MIGHT have occured:

 

For SYD

- In the last annual report by MAHB (FY 2008), it was revealed that passengers movement from SYD declined by 13.5% and SYD was no longer the largest gateway into/from Malaysia from/into Australia (it is now Melbourne). MH couldn't support a double daily B744 non stop flight, in which one of the flight has been reassigned with a B772 and it was tagged along with BNE in a triangular route. The declining number seriously reflecting MH's loss in market share for flights into SYD.

- Both SQ and EK enjoy 3-4 daily flights into the airport, half of it operated by the A380s.

 

For MEL

- MH currently serve the airport twice daily using a B772. It looks like MEL could be a candidate city to receive MH's A380. But recent development shows much interest from the Middle Eastern carriers to increase their capacity into MEL. Etihad Airways and Qatar Airways may finally fly into the airport from their respective hubs and EK would have at least 3 daily flights into MEL from DXB. It has proven that MH lost significant market shares in SYD due to these Middle Eastern carriers. Would MEL denies the fact for MH? I guess all of us can predict the outcome.

 

Zizul,

 

For SYD, a few months ago, I read from somewhere that AirAsiaX is planning on flying into SYD in future and that may potentially erode MH's load factor and yields into SYD further.

 

For MEL, EK already flies to MEL 3x daily, 2 of them nonstop from/to DXB and 1 of them via SIN. Etihad has already commmenced flights into MEL 1x daily nonstop from/to Abu Dhabi.

 

MH used to serve MEL twice daily using B744 for MH 149/148 and B772 for MH 129/128 but have for quite a while now used the B772 for both flights. Whilst most of the flights I have been on were mostly full in Economy, the yields may have declined since AirAsiaX joined the foray with 1x daily from KUL. So deploying an A380 to MEL may not necessarily be a wise decision since yields give precedence over loads.

 

Just my 2 cents.

[Waiping 12]

Zizul,

 

For SYD, a few months ago, I read from somewhere that AirAsiaX is planning on flying into SYD in future and that may potentially erode MH's load factor and yields into SYD further.

 

For MEL, EK already flies to MEL 3x daily, 2 of them nonstop from/to DXB and 1 of them via SIN. Etihad has already commmenced flights into MEL 1x daily nonstop from/to Abu Dhabi.

 

MH used to serve MEL twice daily using B744 for MH 149/148 and B772 for MH 129/128 but have for quite a while now used the B772 for both flights. Whilst most of the flights I have been on were mostly full in Economy, the yields may have declined since AirAsiaX joined the foray with 1x daily from KUL. So deploying an A380 to MEL may not necessarily be a wise decision since yields give precedence over loads.

 

Just my 2 cents.

 

My take - MH for business while D7 for leisure. For MH to fly from KUL to SYD using the A380 will be too close to SIN since SQ already started this way way ahead. If anyone choose to fly the A380 from here will have a choice of MH or SQ, but doubt MH will be any match to SQ's renown service and equipment and sometimes price. Plus Changi airport has better traffic than KLIA.

[Izhar Z 1]

If, say MH cancelled the A380s, how long will it take for them to have a new fleet of WB? Their current A330s and B747s are ageing as it is, and received fair amount of bashing around here. The T7s are still considerable, though it is clear they are way behind even on 1st glance. Me too think the A380s are too big for MH, but if done correctly - the interiors, inflight ent, seats - there might be some hope. How many of you are selecting certain airlines because they deploy A380 on a route you are on? This may not help, especially almost 2 years down the road, where A380 might be common sight, but its worth mentioning, I guess. And maybe, at that time, who knows, economy is good again, people may choose MH A380 instead of AK A330/340. Just my 2 cents......

[Izhar Z 1]

But then again, business decisions shouldn't be made based on if and maybe........

[Mohd Azizul Ramli 2]

An interesting post I stumbled upon in the parasite subforum.

 

This is the info from my relative working in MAS.

 

1. MAS will get their A380, because MAS has reach to some point that there is no turning back. But she doesn't know anything about the interior details. But, MAS is working on the interiors now.

2. The 'M&M' seats on the Boeing 737-400s are indeed chosen not in favour of many MAS staff themselves. (Shouldn't this be another major area for MH's auditors to look into?)

3. The Airbus A330s has been seriously involved in many technical delays, the worst performers of all. Boeing 777 is however excellent.

4. MAS staff is very aware of the dominance of SIA.

 

I really apologize if I give inaccurate infos...mods, please feel free to delete this post if deemed inaccurate.

 

she talked plainly (I started the conversation first about MAS, then she replied and continues) during a family dinner, without giving further details. But her stories are still interesting though considering the current situation that has affected aviation and MAS in particular.

MH is willing to spend USD 1.8 billion (that's approximately MYR 6,300,000,000.00) for the 6 A380s just because 'there is no turning back'?

[jani 0]

Hope the 777's convince them to get my dream 77W

 

Just hope it's not EK-ish with 3-4-3 seating. MATI.

[KK Lee 5]

Hope the 777's convince them to get my dream 77W

 

Just hope it's not EK-ish with 3-4-3 seating. MATI.

 

You may get more than what you wish for. IJ&co is trying to reduce CASM, the easiest is to increase the number of seats. Pax are not abandoning EK and EK is growing, why not MH 77W with 10 abreast seating?