Saturday, February 28, 2009

No shit no-frills airline

Is this taking no-frills flying too far? Will this create a new kind of air-borne holding pattern formation?

The head of budget European airline Ryanair unleashed a flood of indignation and potty humor Friday when he suggested that future passengers might be obliged to insert a British pound coin for access to the lavatory to get some in-flight relief.

Airline chief Michael O'Leary suggested that installing pay toilets would lower ticket costs and make flying, somehow, easier for all.

Not even his own aides seemed to be sure if he was serious or pursuing his penchant for making brazen declarations to get free publicity for Ryanair.

Read here for more


Pat said...

Hahahah! Perhaps that's an idea, you know - and there'd be no queues for the loo when you do need to go! When they'd need to pay, watch how people'll suddenly develop excellent bladder control!!!

My friend did a search once and discovered that Ryanair offers some of the cheapest flights to the UK and Europe. I don't really know.

If you asked me, I could do without the alcohol as it just makes people drunk and a bloody nuisance! And the food? It sucks, so I think I could bring a sandwich or two instead of paying for the airline's crappy stuff. So why don't they cut those things? And make for cheaper tickets? Of offer us the option?

But I'd like a free loo lah :)

de minimis said...

Hi Pat

I place a lot of importance on the availability for conveniences. It is bad enough to air travel is cramped with too much waiting time. But, I really think the line should be drawn on having pay-per-use conveniences mid-air. As always, there must be alternatives available to passengers unless they don't mind us soiling the aisles!!!!! :D

walla said...

Anonymous said...

The ultimate! Makes sense if passengers are allowed to bring their own disposable diapers, in case? I wonder whether RyanAir will charge for disposing those diapers though? Or the airport could take care of it?

flyer168 said...

- With the escalating operating costs & the shrinking currency values, time to come...

- As soon as the aircraft is about to taxy to the Runway....during the "safety briefing" to fasten seatbelts & incase of "Decompression" to pull & put on oxygem mask....

Pax asks...I have no seatbelt & another says...where is my oxygen mask ?

Stewardess will say...Oh, sorry sir/ma'am that will be $10 for the seat belts (Detachable ones) & the plug in oxygen will be $20 & btw you will need to buy Toilet paper & soap if want to use the toilet....& the set will be $5!

At this rate...there will be no more "Freebies" on the LCC flights in time to come...

Your tickets are "basic Cost" by the time they add, baggage tax, Priority boarding, fuel surcharge, Takeoff & landing charges, etc & Optional additions....

- then it would be better to take the normal scheduled EY flights ....with safety , convenience & facilities, less hassles, claimable refunds if within the "Micro Print" conditions, etc.

-as we say in Aviation...Low Cost = Higher Risk of "Murphy's law", etc.

- like paying more at the Private Hospitals with not much waiting vs at the General, University etc Hospitals getting a number & waiting for 2 hours to see the Specialist.

- Let us take Mas vs Air Asia...

- The CEO is a very smart & a lucky man to be at the "Right Place at the Right Time"

- initial "Infrastructure" cost incurred by Hicom was about RM2.0Billion for the Boeing 737 planes, ground support equipment, aircraft spares, etc.

- Most of the B737 aircrafts then were on "Lease" basis.

- In every IPO there will be the "Grandoise" idea that they can float a brand to seek the needed funds for the purchase of new planes from Boeing, Airbus, etc. for their route & network expansion, etc...but there will always be "Leakages & shortfalls" in the process.

- Projections vs Dynamic Actuals is something that can sometimes suffer "Shortfalls".

- The initial IPO was RM4.0 Billion

- When one leases planes, ships, bus, cars, etc you are able to work backwards to arrive at the (Dry, Wet,Complete, part, etc) basic unit cost per year, per month, per day, per hour, etc.

- With the projected pax/cargo load you can then decide how much "Revenue/Profit" you want to make & it will definitely be cheaper than MAS....based on Local & Regional routes & not International.

- It can range from 40% to 60% margins, so you can afford to sell 5%, 10%, 15% of your seats/capacity at RM9.90 per seat/per Kilo cargo, etc.

- With the initial "Guarantees" of "National Service Perks" at your price - Airport Pax facilities landing fees, Transit parking & night-stop parking fees, ticketless operations, landing rights, etc.

- Now that is a Multi Million RM savings so it is sure profit money with eyes closed....yet they still owe MAB about RM110 million?

- Now why Airbus & not Boeing ?
RM4.0 Billion to buy the planes.

- Boeing caters to the Big boys & National carriers.

- Airbus caters to the Big boys (newer models) & for the small boys (older & "end of the line models").

- For new models planes both Boeing & Airbus can offer up to 40% & more discount (better with end of the line models at your risk - pakai sampai mati..... ta'boleh jual!)

- for "Lead Asian" customer buying several planes with options gives better package savings.

- "Must have" Flt, Cabin, Ground Personnel Training/Retraining package costs, Basic Spareparts, ground support equipment, Documentations, etc. can come up to about 20% the cost of the plane.

- So when AA buys their own planes vs leasing them....

- the whole equation changes as they now have "Holding Costs" & "Real Costs" vs "National Service Perks" at your price.

- This new Real costs is running every minute the planes are on the ground (just count the no. of planes sitting on the ground every day !)...& not flying atleast 16 to 18 hour/day earning revenue.

- Just how can they justify continueing to sell seats at RM9.90 & make "Absolute" profits ?
Given the tickets payments are upfront...

- but with the escallating "Holding" cost, the small margins, they cannot sustain the Leasing repayments, Insurance costs, Fuels costs, Flight/Cabin/Ground staff costs, etc.

Just how much of the original RM4.0 Billion (assuming with no leakages) supposedly to finance the 100 planes remains now to finance the batches of new planes being delivered (to make up the 100 planes)?

The government helped build the LCCT why now the Labu issue keep getting recycled?

Why the syndicated loan financing from Barclays?

To pay for the new batch of planes!

AA will now suffer the same fate as MAS..."Owning your new planes with "Higher Holding & Operating costs".

When their route network expand Regionally & Internationally ...there be no more "Cry- Baby" & "Daddy Kasi" perks...

You will have to "swim" in the Ocean with man eating sharks like everyone else !

Only the fittest will survive in 2009 onwards.

You go figure out.

My suggestion as an example... If you are a regular weekend flyer KUL/PEN/KUL vice-versa...then go to the Travel fare to book & pay for the maximum travel cycle & pay up front...

Say at RM40 AA return fare vs RM200 MH & you are a regular flyer...then book & pay up front for 4 cycles p/mth up to 12 cycles for 3 mths, then you "beat" them at the game & the savings would be worth it...

provided you are willing to compromise on the "Inconveniences & delays, etc.

All these "While it lasts" & before the new "Corporate Plans" kick in...