Malaysia adds a third daily MEL - KUL service

[docjames]

Yet QF dont consider it worthy of being a destination.....

+1 to this - how QF can't fill one A330 a day to their OW-sponsored airline's hub.......

 

[markis10]

+1 to this - how QF can't fill one A330 a day to their OW-sponsored airline's hub.......

Probably a learning from past experience, JQ, QF and AN all had KUL services that did not last long.

 

[Mak404matt]

Yes they do, EY operate daily double flights.

Plus SQ and MI fly there a bunch of times a day.

 

[SeatBackForward]

Probably a learning from past experience, JQ, QF and AN all had KUL services that did not last long.

Why was that the case? if MH can fill their planes what was the differing factor for the Australian airlines?

 

[markis10]

Why was that the case? if MH can fill their planes what was the differing factor for the Australian airlines?

No idea, but I wonder what MH pay for fuel at KUL, I suspect not much.

 

[vitagen]

Cost basis? Also Malaysians prefer to fly their flag carrier. According to all my relatives.

My extended family in Singapore Don't like QF for some reason.

 

[whatmeworry]

Cost basis? Also Malaysians prefer to fly their flag carrier. According to all my relatives.

My extended family in Singapore Don't like QF for some reason.

Ia it because some Singaporeans and Malaysians have a superiority complex?

 

[MH_fan]

Most South-East Asians would prefer to fly a SEA airline because they are expecting better service standards than on QF. Lots of family and friends would have QF as their last choice.

KUL is not seen has a high-yield destination, which is why airline have pulled out in the past. I don't understand why JQ pulled out because they cater mostly for tourist traffic.

 

[Melburnian1]

I know that I'm just an outsider looking in, but it's just baffling that QF seem to not even bother with what are clearly popular routes. Surely they could at least take a punt on a once daily service.

Have a look at a thread I commenced on AFF 'why can't QF9 run on time' that discusses QF's woeful punctuality on the MEL - LHR via DXB route to see just how poorly QF compares to SQ.

Unfortunately for QF, its high labour costs, seniority based crews with (for the airline industry) relatively generous allowances and conditions, arrogant management's belief that 'it's the best' when clearly other airlines are ahead of it and unwillingness a few years ago to invest in Boeing 777-300ERs means that it is most unlikely that it will operate a MEL - KUL flight using a QF liveried plane.

Also have a look at AFF thread 'the demise of QF International' to see how many destinations that QF used to serve are now but a distant memory.

If you fly MH or indeed any other airline ex Australia except QF, EK or JQ, you're in the majority, because even with low cost airline JQ added in, the share of that latter threesome of airlines in carrying passengers ex Australia is only about 42 per cent. So 58 per cent of us or so choose to travel on an Asian (preferably), Middle Eastern, US or other non QF or EK group airline.

I'm not surprised that MH is increasing its frequencies to MEL. A majority of passengers know that Asian airlines such as this are safe yet offer competitive airfares and convenient flight frequencies, without the 'you right?' "service" (an oxymoron if ever there was one) mentality of too many QF staff.

 

[seanpodge]

Have a look at a thread I commenced on AFF 'why can't QF9 run on time' that discusses QF's woeful punctuality on the MEL - LHR via DXB route to see just how poorly QF compares to SQ.

Unfortunately for QF, its high labour costs, seniority based crews with (for the airline industry) relatively generous allowances and conditions, arrogant management's belief that 'it's the best' when clearly other airlines are ahead of it and unwillingness a few years ago to invest in Boeing 777-300ERs means that it is most unlikely that it will operate a MEL - KUL flight using a QF liveried plane.

Also have a look at AFF thread 'the demise of QF International' to see how many destinations that QF used to serve are now but a distant memory.

If you fly MH or indeed any other airline ex Australia except QF, EK or JQ, you're in the majority, because even with low cost airline JQ added in, the share of that latter threesome of airlines in carrying passengers ex Australia is only about 42 per cent. So 58 per cent of us or so choose to travel on an Asian (preferably), Middle Eastern, US or other non QF or EK group airline.

I'm not surprised that MH is increasing its frequencies to MEL. A majority of passengers know that Asian airlines such as this are safe yet offer competitive airfares and convenient flight frequencies, without the 'you right?' "service" (an oxymoron if ever there was one) mentality of too many QF staff.

I feel a little strange commenting on QF given that my last flight with them was in 1997 (and that was on a school trip) and am very much a *A passenger. Despite this, for some reason I still feel some sort of disappointment with their current position and especially their increasingly patchy international offerings. It just feels like such wasted potential when one sees airlines from all over the world launching new services to Australia whilst QF seems to just shuffle sideways.

I'm a bit sceptical that labour costs being the main issue. QF's might be higher than most, but I don't think their main competitors such as EK, EY, SQ, et al are paying 3rd world wages either. Rising fuel costs also make up a greater portion of the fare on all airlines, so the knock on effects of higher labour costs are reduced somewhat. Obviously can't comment on how things are on board given the aforementioned lack of experience, but I have flown SQ a bit recently and they're not struggling to get repeat business from me.

The bloody minded refusal to get some 777s is also completely baffling. It is a plane that is suits Australian airlines very well but despite being involved in the design and development process, QF never bought one. Would help fix up the issues with DFW-BNE-SYD (via whichever Pacific island takes the captain's fancy) at the very least. Even in Asia, it seems to be very hesitant to open up new routes to rapidly developing countries such as China and India.

 

[Ric]

Ia it because some Singaporeans and Malaysians have a superiority complex?

Don't know about the Singaporeans but nah, the Malaysians take MH for their "legendary" satay on board.....admittedly on J and above

 

[joyvee]

Reckon i would rather fly on Malaysian airlines direct from Mel at a civilised hour and then transfer to BKK in a warm climate than fly at 06.30 or 07.00 to Sydney to connect with QF flight and then come home with Jetstar. More sleep in, better food and seating. JoyV

 

[SeatBackForward]

Don't know about the Singaporeans but nah, the Malaysians take MH for their "legendary" satay on board.....admittedly on J and above

Just had a taste of that legendary satay today...and I concur!

 

[dajop]

Don't know about the Singaporeans but nah, the Malaysians take MH for their "legendary" satay on board.....admittedly on J and above

No way is a MALAYSIAN satay going to cut it for SIngaporeans. It's simply not as good as the satays that the uncle makes in abc stall in hawker market xyz.

Satays aside I think MH wouldn't be chasing KUL bound traffic with service #3. It's timing mirrors the third service SQ introduced quite a few years ago that really works well for intra Asia connections. Foreign carriers certainly seem to be able to get good patronage from MEL due to limited services from our local carriers.