Friday, 20 June 2014


An Open Letter to the Public
I note with grave concern the various comments attributed to politicians from both sides of the divide as they opined that Unions of the national airline were unreasonable in their demands, imputing that the employees were asking for the “moon” in terms & conditions of service, including perks & emoluments.

I would normally allow the current Union(s) leadership themselves to respond to the adverse inferences but I know that most Union Officials love the airline and are professionals who would not jeopardize its image or status publicly unless provoked or hard-pressed by excruciating circumstances that if not mitigated would prove detrimental to the very existence of the airline.

Two nights ago, frank and candid views were aired on TV3 by Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahman, a respectable gentleman who had once served with colours as MD of the airline. I was most fortunate to have been acquainted with him when representing AMALAE, the airline’s engineer fraternity. Also aired were the views of Datuk Nur Jazlan, the Chairman of the Public Account Committee.

As a responsible citizen and active unionist, though retired from the airline in end-2012, my conscience compels me to reveal the following about Unions in the national airline and that would be the truth.
Contrary to general perception, a Union is just an organized group of employees that represents and collectively highlights the plights of the employees to Management and also negotiate for a Collective Agreement with fair terms & conditions of service of employment concurrent with prevalent working scenario. I do not deny that the Unions would strive to obtain the best if not fairest terms & condition of service and this, simply put, translate to Ringgit & Sen.
But what most fail to understand is that the function of a trade union goes beyond that, extending well into the purview of employees’ safety, safety of his employer (and for airlines + aircraft) and the general public. You would notice that I had used the word “public” instead of “paying passengers” who are core business partners of the airline. This is no rocket science except to emphasize in air transport industry, casualties and collaterals for lapse in safety does not confine to crew and passengers only, but extend beyond into the realm of innocent public and properties in the vicinity of a crash.

To explain the above contention, investigations and findings following 2 catastrophic international air accidents involving airlines are illustrated below, albeit the identity of the airlines involved.
a)      In May 2010, a 2 year old Boeing B737-800 Next Generation aircraft flew from a Middle East city to an airport in the Indian sub-continent with 166 passengers. The Commander of the ill-fated (non-unionised) Operator’s aircraft feeding the main airline (unionised) was compelled by his employer to fly several sectors, with insufficient rest in between.

When close to the destination airport, the aircraft flew a non-standard, unstabilised approach to the runway situated on a “table-top” hillside that is designated as a critical airfield that mandate heightened awareness and a very precise landing approach only Commanders were allowed to perform. It touchdown about 2000 feet beyond the usual touchdown zone (TDZ) and with less than half of the runway remaining available, overshot, fell over a cliff and caught fire. At the bottom of the cliff was a squatter colony. Altogether, 158 souls on board the aircraft perished and a further undisclosed number of squatters on the ground were killed or fatally injured.

The aircraft’s 2 black boxes were recovered and analysis of their recording revealed a lull of about 110 minutes with some peculiar noise heard. Further analysis shows the Commander so severely fatigued that he was captured on the Cockpit Voice Recorder as snoring substantially.

Incidentally, had that service been operated by the unionised main airline, such onset of crew fatigue would have been arrested or mitigated as the Collective Agreement with the union has specific provision for strict adherence to pre-flight rest and allowing, as added measures, a pilot to refuse flight in fatigued condition for very obvious safety reasons.

b)      In October 2000 a 4 year old Boeing B747-400 jumbo aircraft with 179 passengers inadvertently strayed onto a non-active runway in Taipei. The inactive runway was not barricaded and during its takeoff roll, the aircraft crashed into construction equipments left on the runway. The error was partly contributed by the inactive runway lights being left on as it share a common switch with the active parallel runway on which the flight was cleared to departure on. At that time, the airport was lash by heavy rain that precedes an oncoming typhoon.

Like most other foreign carrier leaving the airport, they were in haste to take off and leave prior closure. All three pilots (highly competent with abundant flight hours) due to the poor visibility, inadvertently mistook the lighted inactive runway as the one cleared for departure and during takeoff roll, impacted construction equipments, broke up and burst in flames with 83 fatalities.
Commendably, 96 passengers survived, aided by impeccable training and high preparedness of the cabin crew who reacted with professionalism in evacuating passengers from the inferno.

Interestingly, a senior official of the airline had admitted liability initially but the truth was slowly uncovered revealing lapses including; inactive runway not barricaded; its runway lights not switched off and absence of airfield ground movement monitoring radar were contributory. The airline nevertheless stood fast on their crew’s skills and integrity throughout the investigation even though their pilots were detained.

Only after the local authority insisted on blaming the crew via release of an air accident report disputed by several parties as controversial, that the airline reluctantly conceded a degree of blame on pilots’ error.

There are many more international and even local accident/incident that could be quoted arising from adverse working conditions and poor management skill and organization that could fatally endanger the crew, passengers and the general public, but the 2 cases above would suffice to show that SAFETY of ALL parties is of PRIME concern and not just a lip service by certain personalities. 
Unfortunately, in our own recent case of misfortune, I am of the opinion that the same views and spirit were NOT exhibited by our management or leadership. Moreover, it was further exacerbated by misleading and inaccurate information from the authorities and politicians who seem too eager to prematurely apportion culpability via release of ill-informed, inaccurate and misleading information.
Inevitably, they only help provided was to cast further aspersions on the crews (in turn, airline) integrity, irrespective of fact that the aircraft has yet to be located and the poor crew were in no position to put up any defence against speculative and irresponsible deductions unsupported by any cogent evidence.

Personally, I blame the management action/omission for allowing others to freely assail the integrity of their employees, unions & associations that worked very hard and diligently to ensure operation safety. Don’t they notice that these are basically the same group of employees that had won international awards and accolades for excellence in operation, aircraft maintenance, safety and professionalism?

Don’t they realize that their brash and premature jabbering, disguised as informed findings had only served to cause insurmountable amount of anguish to family members of the poor souls on board the ill-fated flight, irrespective of crew or passengers?
Don’t Management knew that their omission/commission over such speculations contributes nothing more towards resolving the mystery but only served to create animosity, unnecessary and prolonged doubt on Safety & Integrity of the national airlines to the detriment of long serving staff who worked their level best to produce the much needed recovery of the airline?

I abhor the imputation that unions were demanding too much, thus making the economics of running the airline unsustainable. Ask any mid/lower level staff how much they are paid then and now and how much pay percentage rise they had secured in the past ten years and most would be too ashamed to admit they are nowhere close in comparison to even a civil servant with similar qualifications. I can safely tell you that mine was almost zero if not just a low number in the single digit “rise” percentage.
How about bonuses? I beg your pardon; but that word to the staff is equitable to a four-letter expletive as it is almost non-existent. Moreover being non-contractual, the last I could recall that it last paid many, many moons ago!

Aha! Never fear Datuk Nur Jazlan, you are not entirely wrong about staff cost, but just check what upper management and the Board were paid! But then, maybe they come with absolute accountability, right? But I tell you what, you tell us; how many have you made to pay for their shenanigans!
As for multi-skill tasking and downsizing, I just wish to relate to you an attempt by some smart Alex who compare our baggage loading workforce and turn-around time allocation as inefficient as compared to an LCC operation, only to discover that he fail to register that legacy or full-service airline passengers only paid premium for seat but get free baggage allowance of 20-30 KG depending on class of travel, whilst for LCC, the passengers never pack a big bag as their passage is cheap but they pay premium for anything other than a tote bag!

So you see my dear Datuk, it’s not an apple to apple comparison because we carry more baggage! The same argument applies to Food & Beverages.      
How, anyone could conveniently discount the intrinsic of the airline that abide to every request of its political masters to fly the Nation’s Flag to even the most uneconomical destination, right from the early days, when everyone else would refuse to do such national service for losses?
Of course, how could you remember such sacrifices after the Jolly Reds were served our most lucrative routes on silver platters, in the guise of route rationalization by the very masters that conveniently secede our then ailing but potentially lucrative catering arm of the business, awarding a long-term, lop-sided contract to a new (politically connected?) entity to the absolute detriment and huge loss in term of long-term cost to the airline!

How, I recall the fanfare when another ex-MD contemplates making huge savings for the airline through a reduction/modification of meals/menu, but fail to realise that the catering contract for the seceded function had incorporated a fixed-cost per meal per passenger irrespective of cost! In the end, every apparent saving was simply reaped by the new catering provider as it is they who actually benefit as the unit cost of meal delivered is reduced but the charges remain the same! No prize for anyone who can guess who that ex-MD was and whether he put to any form of retribution!

Anyway, someone did finally managed to partly “exit” or partially evade the damning catering contract proviso by simply reassigning a substantial number of flights to be operated under a different Flagship of the Group, resulting in a true reduction of catering cost as meals served on board were source elsewhere. A round of applause for that ingenuity!
I certainly do not have any wish to embroil further in any form of semantics by degrading the very airline that I had proudly served for 40 years. I shall therefore rest my case.

Yes, I do concede that the union were apparently stubborn, but only for good reasons equitable to the Safety of Flight and Security of Tenure. Nothing more is taken for what provided and negotiated for in the CA but if those agreed terms were indiscriminately dishonoured, over our dead body!
My thanks and salutation to the esteemed Tan Sri Aziz, you have always listened to staff concerns and grouses without any bidding. But the same cannot be said of your successors. I had my share of advising them to listen out murmur from the grassroots, but have they?

To all politicians and the general public who were swayed into thinking that unions are just radicals and are impediments to progress, I only wish to state the wisdom enunciated by the current Vice President of Malaysia Airline Executive Staff Association (MESA), a registered and recognised trade union, i.e.:
“If the Management is sincere, resolve the employees issues and concerns amicably in a timely manner without short-changing the employees, there is no need or basis for the existence of unions”

Matdiah Bin Mohammad
Ex-Secretary of MESA

20 June 2014 

Friday, 16 May 2014



MAS started like a small restaurant.. all DIY and the manager cum owner works like mad and the salary was small. Aziz doesn't mind.

When the restaurant gets bigger, reaching the economies of scale, the manager think tank. Grows vege himself, chicken farm, rempah ratus diy, beverages process improved, having their own busses to send their staff home.

Aziz was seen as old fashioned gentleman blind of the potentials by the $eing eye$. "Let us run the show!" They came in many, rushing for the top posts with fat salary. Then... they split amongst themselves. We sign up agreements, you take the chicken farm, you take vege farm, F&B and so on.

The restaurant became a self made franchise. Only to serve customers.
We supply vege, chicken, beef and all (we signed contract remember?)
The busses, you rent, drivers you hire, old drivers.. let them wash the dishes.

The restaurant finally could not make the ends meet due to 'profit sharing'. The uplines and downlines are smiling all the way to the bank. So when the restaurant close shop.. who would cry hardest?


In the third and final part of the interview with Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahman, the former Malaysia Airlines managing director says for MAS to fly high again it must be serious about plugging mismanagement, leakages and corruption.

This, Abdul Aziz says starts by appointing the right people. "If they have proper leadership then the rest will work out by itself. If they have the wrong leadership at all levels then everything will go haywire," he said, adding that it was time someone be held accountable - not the least over the disappearance of Flight MH370 two months ago, but for the current financial situation that MAS finds itself in. 

He also acknowledged that having too many CEOs in the last 10 years (five) does not augur well for an airline or any company that wants to turn around.

One must, Abdul Aziz advised, be consistent and have a long term plan. And this consistency can only be achieved if the man at  teh top is allowed a reasonable amount of time to implement his plans. In last week's segment, Abdul Aziz called for a review of lopsided and iffy deals which has continued to put the ailing national carrier in the red.

Saying he would accept if called upon to do national service once more, Abdul Aziz also posed these questions: why is MAS using the same business plan of 40 years ago? And why is it operating low fare at full service?

Friday, 21 March 2014


Bubur sudah jadi nasi.

Our fundamental weakness is our analytical and problem solving skills which can manifest to conflicts and eventually to a serious crisis such as this. There were many tell-tale signs that we chose to ignore and now suffer the consequence due to our ‘tidak apa’ and ‘not our problem” attitude. 

Allow me to share the article below that we may take for granted.

TIGERTALK  |  MARCH 18, 2014 3:44 PM

In all honesty, we have not handled the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 perfectly. But really can anyone? Regardless, Tiger thinks the incident offers invaluable lessons that Malaysians must not miss.
The national tragedy that is MH370’s disappearance has turned into a crisis management test for Putrajaya and Malaysia Airlines (MAS). But it has not been an encouraging showing.
In the jungle the apex predator (namely Tiger, thank you very much) has certain expectations to meet when it comes to handling major issues affecting its kingdom like dried-up watering holes, filthy air choking Tiger’s food sources to death and brushfires. These expectations include giving clear directions and providing consistent, accurate information.
Most of all, there must be strong leadership that translates into swift action. That has not been evident for the past 11 days since the plane went missing.
There were contradictory statements from the start which caused confusion. Agencies which should be scrambling to share information with each other with all haste appeared to be doing so lethargically. The military’s apparent lack of alarm over unidentified aircraft passing through national airspace is alarming.
And as the pilots face trial by media in absentia this week, MAS had not leaped to their defence with vigour. At the very least MAS should have attempted to protect the pilots’ good reputation until such a time that they were found guilty of anything.
Tiger does not intend to dwell overly long on the things we did wrong — there are plenty other reports outlining those amid the endless speculation. But Tiger cannot help but be particularly disappointed with how we have managed information as far as the MH370 incident goes.
After MH370 went dark and was announced missing, there should have been an official compilation of confirmed facts that the media can work from and which the public can refer to for factual information, constantly updated as new information materialises or is verified. All speculation must be acknowledged and followed-up on as either true or false, perhaps tagged as unverified in the interim.
There should also have been a single spokesperson to provide updates and take questions. But there was no such factsheet as far as Tiger is aware and no single spokesperson emerged. The result was myriad figures commenting and providing information in different capacities, sometimes contradicting each other.
This lack of proper information management added to the apparent slowness on our part in analysing and cross-checking our own military radar data with secondary radar to affirm where MH370 headed towards after going dark in the Igari area.
End result: Speculation spread like wildfire and confusion ensued as myriad information came out via press reports much faster than from official sources.
Not to mention that we had sent several neighbours’ assets on a wild goose chase in the South China Sea when it appeared that we could have determined the plane’s last known location — either one of the two corridors west of the Peninsula —much earlier.
Little wonder then that a narrative of lethargic incompetence had emerged about Malaysia’s handling of the crisis, painted by and propagated by foreign media, especially those from China. By all accounts along this vein, Putrajaya, unused to heavy scrutiny, is wilting in the face of international criticism
“The Malaysians deserve to be criticised — their handling of this has been atrocious,” said Ernest Bower, a Southeast Asia specialist at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington to Reuters. “They have no maritime domain awareness and it doesn’t look like they have a strong command and control structure and they’re not well coordinated with friends.”
To some extent, Tiger concurs that we have not given our best showing in terms of managing this disaster.
However Tiger thinks there is a runaway train heading towards Bash-Malaysia Station and there needs to be some objectivity in assessing how we performed.
It bears repeating that MH370’s disappearance is unprecedented. There had been no directly comparable incident such as this and we are pretty much in uncharted waters.
Couple that with the fact that we have not had much experience with crisis management and there were always going to be slips, confusion and mistakes, especially in the early hours of the crisis.
“Most of the local guys are pretty darned good … The problem they have is, they don’t do it a lot. We do this a lot,” Thomas Haueter, a former chief of air safety at the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), told New York Times.
So to Tiger we haven’t really dropped the ball, although admittedly we are fumbling. Our slips are inexcusable but certainly understandable in the face of an exceptional crisis. The important thing to pursue now is to push our authorities to do better, not pin blames and nitpick relentlessly.
As an aside, it is also interesting to note that as a narrative took shape saying that Beijing should and need to take control of the situation — which it cannot, since the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) protocols dictate that Malaysia has jurisdiction and must lead efforts — another narrative has been noticeable: that the US is quietly in the driving seat.
The emerging taste in Tiger’s mouth is of Malaysia being caught in a subtle contest of influence at a time when all thought should go towards finding the plane.
In any case, above all, this incident should be our lesson in crisis management. Pray we never need to call upon what we learned this time around ever again.

Wednesday, 25 September 2013


AirAsia, MAS rapped for ‘monopolistic’ deal

KUALA LUMPUR: AirAsia Bhd should have been slapped with a higher fine for the “monopolistic” share swap deal with Malaysia Airlines (MAS), said Umno supreme council member Datuk Dr Mohd Puad Zarkashi.

Puad also said MAS managing director and group chief executive officer Ahmad Jauhari Yahya must accept full responsibility by resigning.
He urged Ahmad Jauhari to pay the RM10 million fine imposed on the national carrier by the Malaysia Competition Commission (MyCC) from his pocket.

Puad said AirAsia, which was fined the same amount, should be made to pay more as it was the bigger beneficiary of the deal, which was ruled as unlawful by MyCC for being monopolistic.

“AirAsia, without a doubt, stands to benefit more from the share swap deal than MAS.

Tony (AirAsia group chief executive offi cer Tan Sri Tony Fernandes) is a staunch supporter of the deal, which saw an exodus of MAS workers to AirAsia.

“I can’t ask Tony to step down but in my opinion, MyCC should impose a higher fine on AirAsia.”

Stating his case for Ahmad Jauhari’s dismissal, Puad said Ahmad Jauhari had shown that he is incapable of leading.

“He should step down immediately or the government should not renew his contract, which is expected to expire this month.

“Everybody was taken aback when MAS was fined. We understand that a consultant was hired for the swap deal and we know that consultants are there for the sole purpose of making profits.

“Ahmad Jauhari should have spotted any weaknesses in the deal and objected to the consultant on the deal’s viability,” Puad told Business Times yesterday.

Ahmad Jauhari was appointed to spearhead MAS on September 14 2011 and his contract is believed to expire this month.

Earlier this month, MyCC - a unit under the Domestic Trade, Cooperatives and Consumerism Ministry - fined MAS and AirAsia for violating the Competition Act 2010.

They were found to have breached Section 4(2)(b) of the Act by entering into a Comprehensive Collaboration Framework agreement in August 2011.

The deal saw Khazanah Nasional Bhd, which owns 69 per cent of MAS, having a 10 per cent stake in AirAsia. In turn, Tune Air Sdn Bhd, AirAsia's controlling shareholder, was given a 20 per cent stake in MAS.

The deal was called off in May 2012 following heavy political and union pressure.

Friday, 13 September 2013


Malaysian Air Recovery Offers Bet on Government Exit: Real M&A

Malaysian Airline System Bhd. (MAS) offers a bargain investment for traders willing to bet on a sale, as a turnaround stokes calls for the government to exit its stake.
Malaysian Air fell to an all-time low this year amid competition from budget airline AirAsia Bhd. (AIRA) Now the company is projected to post its first profit in four years in 2014 on record revenue, according to analysts’ estimates compiled by Bloomberg. With the carrier on the mend, the government may seek to shed its majority ownership by selling or breaking up the $1.6 billion airline, said Malayan Banking Bhd.
“Selling parts of the company is definitely viable,” said Ang Kok Heng, who helps manage $428 million of assets, including Malaysian Air shares, as chief investment officer at Phillip Capital Management Sdn. in Kuala Lumpur. “They must show some results before people are confident to buy. ”Among those calling for a sale are former Premier Mahathir Mohamad, who oversaw Malaysian Air’s initial public offering in 1985, and the executive -- now a minister -- who previously returned the carrier to profit in 2006. While the government may wait for the airline’s shares to recover before seeking buyers, RHB Research Institute Sdn. said potential acquirers include local billionaire Syed Mokhtar Al-Bukhary, who last year persuaded officials to sell him the national carmaker.

Stay Out

Former Malaysian Air Managing Director Idris Jala, who is now a minister in the office of current Premier Najib Razak, last month said the government should stay out of the airline business, sending the stock up 7.9 percent the next day. Idris returned the company to profit on a quarterly basis in 2006.
The state’s 69 percent stake in the carrier is held by investment division Khazanah Nasional Bhd.
Mahathir, Malaysia’s longest-serving leader, backed the idea of a sale, telling state news service Bernama that a private owner would work harder to avoid losses than the government. Several groups have submitted takeover offers, The Star newspaper said Aug. 14.
Malaysian Air is forecast to generate net income of 88 million ringgit ($26 million) next year fromsales of 15.6 billion ringgit, according to analysts’ forecasts compiled by Bloomberg. After an estimated loss this year, a profit in 2014 would end a three-year, cumulative loss of 3.4 billion ringgit, the data show.
“It will make more sense for Khazanah to sell at that time,” once the company, whose stock ticker is MAS, has restored profitability, said Jerry Lee, an analyst at RHB Research in Kuala Lumpur. “By that time, the share price has rallied. MAS are doing the right thing with their turnaround.”

Filling Seats

The shares fetched just 32 sen last week in Kuala Lumpur, down from 2.107 ringgit in June 2007 when Idris was in charge. Malaysian Air is trading at just 0.19 times sales, near its low of 0.15 in June, data compiled by Bloomberg show.
The plan to stem losses hinges on retiring older, less economical aircraft and leaving fewer seats empty on flights to Asia’s major tourist destinations.
Najib, the Malaysian premier, said last month the government won’t sell its stake and the airline’s turnaround “cannot happen overnight.”
The government “needs to see tangible and credible improvement and the share price to reflect that,” said Mohshin Aziz, a Kuala Lumpur-based analyst at Maybank. “Only then will they start to sell it off.”
Khazanah probably wants at least 60 sen for each Malaysian Air share, according to Mohshin, almost double last week’s price. Malaysian Air investors bought more shares for 23 sen each in May in a rights issue to raise 3.07 billion ringgit, data compiled by Bloomberg show.

Suggested Buyer

DRB-Hicom Bhd (DRB), the Malaysian conglomerate and auto dealer controlled by Syed Mokhtar, has bought at least two other stakes from Khazanah in the past two years. Based in Shah Alam, outside the capital, DRB in 2012 bought Khazanah’s 43 percent stake in carmaker Proton Holdings Bhd. for 1.29 billion ringgit. A year earlier, DRB purchased the state investment fund’s 32 percent stake in the national postal company.
A representative for Malaysian Air declined to comment on the possibility of a sale. Khazanah and DRB both said in e-mailed statements that they don’t comment on speculation.
“If there was a genuine attempt by a Syed Mokhtar Bukhary company to buy MAS, the resistance wouldn’t be as bad,” said Maybank’s Mohshin. “The notion of a national airline is an outdated one. There’s no need for it anymore.”

Spinoff Options

There aren’t any government-owned national airlines in the U.S. and such entities are becoming more rare in Europe, according to Mohshin. That trend will spread to Asia, he said. Even without an outright sale, the government could raise billions of ringgit listing some of the airline’s units that do make money, he said.
Malaysian Air’s engineering and maintenance business could fetch a valuation as high as 1.98 billion ringgit, and the airport terminal services unit could be valued at 1.07 billion ringgit, according to Mohshin’s estimates. The airline’s low-cost rural service Firefly could be worth as much as 1.78 billion ringgit on the stock market, he said.
“I would be open or even excited if they were to venture down this sort of route,” Mohshin said.
All told, those profitable units have a combined value as high as 4.8 billion ringgit, based on Maybank’s estimates, equivalent to most of the airline’s total market value now of 5.3 billion ringgit. The remaining pieces are the unprofitable main airline and the cargo unit.

Adding Value

“You can add a lot of value,” Sharifah Farah, an analyst at Affin Securities Sdn. in Kuala Lumpur, said in a phone interview. “At least the profit-making side would not be pulled down by the main operation.”
Singapore Airlines Ltd. (SIA) in 2000 sold stakes in SIA Engineering Co. (SIE) and Singapore Airport Terminal Services Ltd. (SATS), known as SATS, in initial public offerings. They now have a combined market value of $6.7 billion.
Previous efforts to scale back state control of Malaysian Air failed. The government agreed to bail out the unprofitable airline in 2000 by buying back a 29 percent stake from businessman Tajudin Ramli for more than double the airline’s stock price at the time.
In May 2012, Khazanah reversed a share swap that had handed 21 percent of Malaysian Air to the parent of AirAsia, the budget carrier run by Tony Fernandes. The about-face followed complaints by Malaysian Air’s biggest union.

Less Interference

Malaysian Air employees are less productive than their counterparts at neighboring airlines, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. They each generate an average of $222,000 in revenue, less than half the figure at Singapore Airlines, the data show. Workers at Thai Airways International Pcl and PT Garuda Indonesia Persero (GIAA) each bring in more revenue.
That may not put off buyers who see an opportunity to increase efficiencies.
“Can MAS be revamped and made more competitive, even profitable?” said Shukor Yusof, a Singapore-based aviation analyst at Standard & Poor’s. “Absolutely, provided the right people with the right motives and mindset run the carrier and with little government interference.”

Saturday, 13 July 2013


Day After Day Gomen Doing The Moron Things.
Folks, makin lama Gomen kita makin mati akal. They are doing mindboggling things with little or no thinking put in. Then when it becomes too controversial they either cancel it, "tarik balik', drop the subject or just Flip Flop. 

1. The Gomen's overeagerness on the TPPA shows the Gomen really does not know what is best for the country.  The Gomen is drifting in La La land. 

2. Now the Gomen is considering crafting another law to replace the Emergency Ordinance that has been abolished.  Who asked you to abolish the Emergency Ordinance and the ISA in the first place? 

No one asked for the EO to be abolished. The Pembangkang only asked to abolish the ISA. The abolishment of the ISA plus the EO took even the Pembangkang by surprise. Pembangkang pun terkejut. Now the Gomen itself says crime is rising because the EO has been abolished !! Tak nampak bodoh ke bang?  

3. After that the Gomen tried to rush through the "Unilateral Religious Conversion Bill" - another piece of really tak masuk akal legislation. Only to create another huge controversy and then having to "tarik balik" that  Bill also. Another flip flop - nampak bodoh lagi. What is wrong with the Gomen? 

4. Then the Gomen went and established diplomatic ties with the Vatican. Some guy wearing a dress representing the Vatican is now in town and saying silly things that have only stirred up more useless, totally useless religious tension in this perfect land.  You can click on this link here to read more : 

Pasal apa pi jemput mangkuk hayun macam ini masuk negara kita? 

Every other day the Gomen seems to be shooting itself in the foot (or in the @$$). Cant they get anything right?  

5.  Norman Fernandez has already spoken about the Gomen's plan to give refugees jobs.

6.  And here is another controversial action - now the Gomen wants NON-MUSLIM students in private universities to study Islamic Civilisation as compulsory TITAS subjects. Pasal apa pula? 

(They changed the livery (colour and appearance) on the MAS A380 Airbus  so that the stationery, crockery and napkin suppliers can make money.  Petronas and some Ministries have changed their logo to give new contracts to the stationery suppliers and ad agencies. Its all about someone making easy money.) Janganlah buat kerja bodoh. Buat lah kerja dengan baik.  

Kalau bukan senang nak jadi pandai macam itu juga bukan susah nak jadi 'tak bodoh'. 

Friday, 7 June 2013

Throwing good money after bad!

MIDF Reseach downgrades MAS to "Sell", target price 27 sen
Friday June 7, 2013 MYT 2:45:01 PM

KUALA LUMPUR: MIDF Research has downgraded Malaysian Airline System Bhd (MAS) to “Sell” from “Neutral” and reduced its target price to 27 sen from 34 sen due to its weak prospects.

“Due to the worsening market yields and sticky high operating expenses, we opine that it is improbable for MAS to be able to turn around its business by financial year 2013-2014 as we had earlier expected,” it said on Friday.

It also revised its financial year 2013 and 2014 forecast to a net loss of RM762.5mil and RM187.5 4 respectively and expects the turnaround to happen only in 2015.

MIDF said international “headwinds” will continue to weigh down MAS business turnaround plan despite its recent membership into the Oneworld alliance and ongoing fleet renewal plan.

“In the domestic market, MAS also faces intensifying competitions from accelerated capacity expansion by AirAsia and the launch of Malindo Air,” it said.

It noted MAS regional full service carriers are pursuing the strategy of sacrificing yield in return for a higher load factor.

“Thus under immense international competitions and yield pressure, MAS fare yield dropped by 4.7% on-year to 24.2 sen in 1Q13 despite a leap in passenger load factor by 3.6% points to 76.6%,” it said.

MIDF added MAS have already replaced its entire fleet of B747 and a large portion of its B737-400 with the newly acquired A380 and B737-800 models respectively.

“Nonetheless, there is still a fleet of 17 near aging B777-200ER with an average age of 13.6 years. The management is considering either Airbus A350 or Boeing B787 Dreamliners to replace these long-haul aircrafts,” it said.