What’s Your Problem, Tony?

No, I’m not referring to Tony Stark- the narcissist billionaire who literally fly with his iron suit.

Rather, I’m talking about our homegrown billionaire-  Tony Fernandes who enabled more people to fly.




For those who still remember, in 2009 Sime Darby and AirAsia proposed a RM1.8 billion LCCT project in Labu. The reason? AirAsia- the fastest growing and largest low-cost airline in Asia needs a permanent home. But why they refuse to locate their home in KLIA when Klia has 25,000 acres, bigger than Putrajaya is still a mystery. Maybe there is still not enough space for the 25 million Air Asia passengers.

Another reason is, AirAsia should operate their own airport because according to them, MAHB is not an efficient airport operator. MAHB has purchased the wrong radar, MAHB can’t use KLIA’s sophisticated conveyor belt really well, MAHB fails to upgrade KLIA’s security, MAHB this and MAHB that. Therefore AirAsia should step in and become the airport operator.

Never mind if MAHB operates second world’s best airport in the world and consistently paid the concession fees and taxes to the Government, issued dividends to shareholders, paid incentives to airlines and remained profitable for the past 15 years.  For AirAsia, it still not good enough.

But the biggest argument against Labu Airport is its nearness to KLIA. No city in the world that built two different airports with two different operators and two uncoordinated control towers in just 10km radius. With 70 air crafts movement and stacking before landing for each airport per hour, the possibility of crashes is very real. Presumably this is the main reason why the project later canceled and replaced with a KLIA2- located 1.5km away from KLIA with a new control tower to better manage all three runways including KLIA and of course with MAHB as the airport operator.


A respected billionaire like Tony Fernandes should not mislead the public by making a statement like- ‘it hard to believe that an airport that has delayed a terminal by three years and cost increase from (RM) 2 billion to 4 billion has so much credibility.’

Truth is, the cost of KLIA2 has been doubled due to revision to increase 71% of its original capacity. What started as a 150,000sqm terminal with 50 semi-contact gates and 2.5km runway to cater 30 million passengers per year has now become a 257,000 sqm terminal with 68 gates fully aerobridges and 3.9km runway for 45 million passengers per year.

Guess where the revised plan is based from? AirAsia’s growth projection. Even in 2013, AirAsia has flown more than 21.85 million passengers in LCCT. With 3% growth annually, the original KLIA2 will be crowded in 10 years’ time. So do we built a new airport only to last for 10 years?

Comparison- original and revised

Comparison- original and revised

And guess who benefits the most from the construction of a larger KLIA2? AirAsia and its passenger. Even with 71% larger than the original KLIA2, AirAsia will occupy 80% of spaces in the new airport.

As far as KLIA2 cost is concerned, it is hardly “cost overrun”. The extra money was spent to get more facilities rather than spending more to get the same.

Now as for the delay issue. Admittedly some of the main contractors have failed to meet their self-imposed dateline. The contractors have blamed poor soil conditions for the delay. However, AirAsia has equally to be blamed on this matter.

First, they had requested the semi-automated baggage handling system (BHS) that was first planned be changed to a fully automated BHS, which MAHB acceded to. At this juncture, 40% of the project had been completed as per October 2012 deadline and AirAsia late request has resulted 6 months delay to the project

Second, MAHB has agreed to make the distance between the present runway 2 and the new runway 3 to be 2.5km. This is to provide more space to AirAsia  for maintenance, repair and overhaul activities.

Third, AirAsia also had its way when it asked the length of runway 3 to be extended to 4km from 2.2 km.

No wonder MAHB has said they have given almost everything AirAsia asked for at KLIA2. Only spa and museum can’t be granted.

So Tony, why do you still need to stir a cauldron of hatred towards MAHB-the gracious airport operator who bowed down to every single demand you have made?

Or maybe the refusal to move in has something to do with…. airport tax?


AirAsia is already telling the public to brace any airport tax increase. If their assumption that the airport tax at KLIA2 is going to be the same with KLIA is true, international traveller will have to pay extra RM33 and domestic traveller is extra RM3.

But this increase should be taken into perspective that  KLIA2 is unlike any low-cost terminal aka ‘cargo warehouse’. It is not a low-cost terminal, but the airlines that utilise it are low-cost. It means the extra RM33 and RM3 will go for the vast retail space, a fully automated Baggage Handling System (BHS), aerobridges and smooth connectivity to the KLIA main terminal building and KL Sentral by ERL.

Strangely, Tony Fernandes wants all these facilities come cheap. He wants the airport tax remains the same or possibly lower. What make his demand ludicrous is that, it comes from someone who charge his customer for everything extra service they needed.

If you pay peanuts, you get monkeys or AirAsia. That is what Tony’s low cost business is all about.

Who charge less for more? Even AirAsia has to charge RM6 per credit-card transaction. So why can’t MAHB do the AirAsia way?

Anyway, three things Tony should know on airport tax.

First, airport tax at KLIA2 has yet to be decided. Even if Tony wants to jump the gun, why direct it to MAHB when airport tax is determined solely by the Government as enshrined in the Civil Aviation Act 1969.

Second, the airport tax in Malaysia is not linked with the construction cost of the terminal. When operations were moved from Sultan Abdul Aziz Shah Airport in Subang to KLIA in 1998, the airport tax remained the same in spite of the cost of the brand new airport. In fact in some cases, airport tax was reduced as was the case with the new terminal in Melaka where the tax was reduced from RM51 to RM25.

It means, there are possibility the airport tax in KLIA2 may be the same or lower. But even if the airport tax is higher, it is justified because of the facilities provided.

Third, airport tax is paid by passengers. Airlines only take the tax from passengers on behalf of the airport operator. So, if the airport tax is to be increased, there is little impact on airlines’ cost structure. Unless AirAsia’s business model is to subsidise airport tax just to ensure lower fare to the customers. But as far as AirAsia is capable of, not only they collect airport tax from passengers, they make payment to the airport operator until the government agreed to give them discount.

So what’s next? Aaaahh, safety and security issue.


Now Tony in his own words said ‘the main point is we wanted a safe and secure terminal. Ask MAHB how long operational readiness (Orat) takes? MAHB has not even received the CCC. How can we test the operational readiness of the airport?”

Tony speaks like the current LCCT is the safest terminal in the region and equipped with top notch security features.

The fact is, unlike present LCCT, KLIA2 has an inbuilt segregation of arriving and departing international passengers and this segregation is to strengthen safety and address the human trafficking and drug issue.

KLIA2 also is more secured than the current LCCT as it would implement a commonly-used passenger processing system by SITA —  the world’s leading service-provider of integrated IT business solutions.

The fact is- AirAsia refused to use the SITA system as it was insisting on using the manual check-in system. If you look at the current LCCT, it is a totally manual airport, where airport management is done in a traditional manner. What security then Tony?

As for the cracks found on the runway, it was not structural cracks as KLIA2 sits on land that consists mainly former oil palm plantations and mangroves with at least 40m depth of soft clay. Even many other airports in the country experience such superficial cracks.

To ensure that the runway is safe for aircraft landing, proof rolling and compacting the runway surface are conducted using 100-tonne proof roller. Even the big Airbus A380 can land and take off the new runway. Not only that, Malindo Air had undertaken a landing trial at klia2 in October last year to show that the runway is in good condition.

Again, Tony should remember the Department of  Civil Aviation (DCA) is the right authority to certify the runway, and not the airline. The new airport had also received the approval from independent consultant, Ikram Premier Consulting. But I suspect it still not assuring enough for Tony.

How about the CCC? With the last mile of works , which is the sewerage rectification, completed and IWK (Indah Water Konsortium) satisfied, KLIA2 will obtain the CCC between April 15 and 20.

ORAT should not be an issue as, since February Orat has been conducted successfully with 500,000 bags in the test and the system has proven to be stable. No major issues are anticipated.

Generally, ORAT is undertaken over one year but some airport operators do it in six months.

In klia2’s case, MAHB can complete the testing and commissioning within three months because KLIA has a similar system. Therefore comes May, the airport is ready for operation.

To test Tony’s sincerity on safety of passenger, we should ask why AirAsia refuse to use aerobridge when it is extremely useful during bad weather conditions such as heavy rain or sweltering heat especially to those who were physically challenged, senior citizens, and mothers with infants and small children.

Is Tony more concern about the cost 25 sen per passenger he has to absorb?


Without a doubt, AirAsia has enabled more people to fly. To certain extent, Tony may do Malaysia a favour. But Tony’s marketing gimmick and business acumen alone are not enough in propelling AirAsia to where it is now today. The underlying factor has always been- Malaysia’s business friendly environment.

Just look at numerous assistance rendered to AirAsia.

First, the current LCC terminal which cost RM108 million has been completed in 9 months just to support AirAsia’s growth. Previously, AirAsia was operated in Subang and refused to move to KLIA.

Second, airport tax in existing LCCT (where AirAsia starts to grow regionally) was reduced to RM25 from RM35.

Third, exemption from using aerobridge has been granted by MAHB just to support AirAsia’s business model that requires a quick turnaround time.

Fourth, the special airport incentives MAHB gave to AirAsia Bhd over the past 10 years despite not being the biggest contributor to the airports operator’s revenue or passenger traffic.

Fifth, discount or incentive amounting to RM25 million courtesy of the Malaysia’s government to Tony Fernandes’ airline company so that they settle their airport taxes owed to MAHB.

Sixt and ultimately- the new RM4 billion KLIA2 is commissioned to cater AirAsia’s growth, again.

Of course any businessman would hate to contribute their success to the government’s policies and assistance. It will insult their ego.

But considering Air Asia’s success can’t be emulated in any of the other markets where Tony has entered, this only prove that only Malaysia has given Tony the opportunities.

In Japan, the joint-venture with All Nippon Airways has been terminated by partner.

In Indonesia, the purchase of Batavia Air has been scrutinised by regulators.

In India, the deal with Tata has been objected by competitors.

In Malaysia? They started as a monopoly low cost carrier with numerous assistance from the government.

Just look at Malindo Air. The fact that they can operate just within 6 months show how the government is supportive towards low cost airline industry in Malaysia. Malindo Air has flown more than 1 million passengers less than a year. Obviously it has something to do with policies made and carried out by the government.

To Tony Fernandes, you need Malaysia more than Malaysia needs you. Think.


Tagged , , , ,

64 thoughts on “What’s Your Problem, Tony?

  1. Tony Shark says:

    nice topic but tony not understand cause her stupid

    • Johan says:

      Wow, can’t believe there are a lot of netizens who keeps defending Tony and AA just by personal opinions without strong points backing it. I think the writer of this article has gone to extra miles to make the articles as easy to point out, given the simple facts we read in the everyday newspaper. The point of the article backed by facts is enough to educate some logics behind this case, regardless who is at fault.

      I’m a Malaysian, and yes I get to travel cheaper with AirAsia. I am blessed we have a low-cost airline which does us proud in ASEAN. However these days, cheaper is always not the case, as sometimes flights to Jakarta and Kota Kinabalu on AirAsia costs even more than MAS if compared on the same day. So we all have a choice to make, of whichever fits our priority, timing, convenience and taste.

      Of course we can’t compare both airlines, as MAS and AirAsia has its strength and niches, and everyone knows this. If we do, it would be an endless debate of what’s better and what’s worst. As far as I know, both Airlines are from Malaysia, and both Airlines do me proud as a Malaysian.

      I do also want to share my first few years of travelling with AirAsia, I don’t think I should explain for MAS, as this has always been standard since i can remember.

      The way hundreds of thousands of people get tricked into subscribing for a insurance plan that is carefully embedded into the on-line ticket purchase when in reality they do not want to pay extra. Young people like Generation X and Y get to notice this, but the rest of the majority gets tricked into this each day. I’m just amazed at why this is never carefully highlighted? I believe Malaysians should be given the choice not to have insurance, but could opt for insurance if they want so.

      Need to have Perfect Data Input and Selection
      Having wrongly clicked or selected on the system (believe me this happens sometimes even to the most IT literate), and calling Airsia hotline, to wait for 15 minutes before a live operator attends to you, only to find out that ‘I’m sorry sir, I can’t help you with that, if I do, you’re going to have to pay for at least Rm100 extra as its already recorded into the system’.

      Raining Season
      How many times do you have to run to the air-plane on a rainy day, after the stewardess mentions, sorry no more umbrella’s?

      Long Arrival Walk
      For some reason, half of my flights arrival in LCCT requires me to walk for at least 15 minutes from the furthest bay, on an either HOT day or a COLD windy night?

      The above are just some of my experience with AirAsia. I don’t mind all of the above, as sometimes I find AirAsia’s schedules filled with more choices in terms of timing compared to other airlines on the destination i go to.

      Now the question we should be asking ourselves as Malaysians would be, What will the new KLIA2 bring to an average Malaysian? Not to AirAsia or to MAHB:

      1) Well I get a bigger Airport, more retail shops to go about.
      2) Meaning more restaurants and cafe’s, instead of the average Mc Donald and Mary Brown in LCCT
      3) Air-conditioned hallways right after you step out of the aircraft,the exact opposite to what you have now.
      4) More security to monitor and block all this unwanted immigrants, drug traffickers, mules, African con artist and un-welcomed visitors.
      5) More easier parking space, so instead of just dropping my loved ones, I can actually have time to park and rush them off to the check-in counter.
      6) More check-in counters, so don’t have to wait in the longest queue.
      7) Easier connectivity time, i can drop people at KL Sentral instead of reassuring them that the bus is going to arrive on time.
      8) Totally DISABLED UNFRIENDLY! Have you ever tried to help the disabled to board an AirAsia flight in LCCT? I have, and believe me, I kept asking to myself, why the hell can’t they just get the aero-bridge. They keep complaining about the costs, but you could charge insurance just like that, can’t you just make this compulsary?

      As an average Malaysian, I get to enjoy more, even if I have to pay a bit extra (of which has not be decided in tax). This is not about blaming MAHB, Government or AirAsia. This is about ‘Are the interest of the average and majority Malaysians taken into considerations’ for the KLIA2? I don’t care who the architects are, or who calls the shots, or who decided whether to have a short or long runway.
      What I as an average MALAYSIAN care, is will the airport be completed? Will I get to use it? Will I enjoy its facilities? Will I get to feel proud about the airport to my other ASEAN counterparts?

      Just my two cents…

      • MatRodi says:

        Dear Johan, thanks for saving my times from replying to most of the comments made. 🙂

        Strangely enough, there are people who still want to endure such experiences considering they wouldn’t have to if they are willing to pay extra RM3 or RM32. (Well, based from the assumption where the airport tax is going to be the same like KLIA.)

      • Seth says:

        Couldn’t agree with you any more on this.Your two cents worth is more than the billions he has. Excellent main article supplemented by your honest comments. Bravo

  2. vy says:

    One thing that baffling me is in bali, bangkok and other countries, air asia proudly uses aerobridge

  3. mohamad ali says:

    Very good bashing sir,

  4. Matt says:

    Security is more cheaper then nasi lemak on airasia….who stupid? Malaysian boleh…. That why they not really great in other country except malaysia….

  5. Tuan Rodi, you hit the nail !

  6. Roslan Bani says:

    Rodi, well written and respect you for the research you took to write this piece

  7. Tony Stark says:

    Hey Mat Todi,

    Keyword ‘low-cost’! How would it benefit the passengers when the airport tax is higher than the flight ticket?

    • Dr R@28 says:

      The low cost refers to ticket cost, one should demand AA to reduce its ticket price charge customer and absorb the cost of the airport tax

    • Charlie Squark says:

      Tony Stark

      AirAsia pays higher taxes elsewhere than at home in Malaysia yet makes far more noise at home.

      AirAsia uses aerobridges elsewhere but refuse to do so at home

      AirAsia has done so many misleading marketing plans (e.g The 3 million Free tickets, which meant all of their flights must fly free for a year, this “scam” was retracted within days when it was pointed out on Tony Fernandes FaceBook, now also non existent) and yet gets away with it

      Take at look at AirAsia Facebook, almost every thread is full of demands for refunds not done.

  8. anti tony says:

    dei , tambi… MAHb punya hutang kasi settle dulu la

  9. celaru says:

    Back then during MAS/AA share swap, someone told me AA wanted to swap not because they are willing to share expertise and help MAS in the long run but AA just want to get free maintenance, repair, overhaul services from MAS. They have the option to not go and have their aircrafts being fixed by MAS but that means they will have to take extra miles and factor in exchange rates and whatnot if they choose to have their aircrafts fixed somewhere else. Seems like Tony and AA are proud of being cheapskates and greedy at the same time.

  10. Wan Fuad says:

    Smack on. I like this piece

  11. SamKL says:

    Tony fail from the beginning he try very hard to takeover cash rich’s MAHB. It is very strategically important to have total control in airline industry in Malaysia….mentang2 dia fasih ckp english; he fart at his wish….

  12. Good write-up. Inilah yang dinamakan jaguh kampong. Di Malaysia bolehlah dapat layanan istimewa….kalau diluar negara nak tunjuk lagak juga orang asing pun benci.

  13. lsham says:

    Now only you all know who ‘ TONY ‘ is and all about.

  14. suhaimi nawir says:

    Keep it up … Mat Rodi!!!

  15. zak1881 says:

    The point was to build a low cost terminal. Not some fancy KLIA2. I travel at least 4 times a month with Airasia and other low cost carriers over the last 5 years. It doesn’t matter how nice the building looks or whether there’s aerobridge or not. I just want to get to my destination and be safe. I’ve been to several low cost terminals or terminals used for low cost carriers in several countries…the facilities are basic (even in UK). If you want a fancy place, why bother taking a low cost carrier. Also…what is the point of building a terminal that would last 50 years based on Airasia’s growth rate? Does anyone builds a school that facilitates 5,000 students when there’s only 1,000 students at the moment? It’s complete waste of money. Just imagine all the electricity wastage to turn on the hvac, lightings and extra security. More over…what if the aviation industry fails when bullet trains takes over after 20 years? What’s the additional space in KLIA2 for? Tony and Malaysia needs each other equally. Without Airasia, our tourism industry would have vanished years ago. I’ve spoken to many foreigners in my travels…the thought of visiting Malaysia came from the fact that Airasia’s hub is here in Malaysia and since they are transiting, my as well visit. Without Airasia, MAS would still be charging rocket high prices thanks to the so called partner companies (charging MAS 1 nasi lemak for rm150). So very few people would have the privilege to fly.

    • abdullah faruok says:

      Totally agree with you man.

    • iloveAAbut says:

      So you’re saying that mahb should build an airport based on current need only? Or short term need? Or medium term? Wow, ‘good’ strategic thinking you got there.

      By the way, did the aviation industry die in japan and korea because of bullet train? Please, connectivity is better when you have options. Plus, you can’t possibly travel long haul with bullet train. By long haul i don’t mean domestic destinations or our neighbouring regions. I’m talking about china, india, usa etc.

      Please stop talking about wanting to get to your destination and be ‘safe’. If you really want to be safe, you will not have travelled with AA, at least not domestically. See IATA list of members and see if you can find AA on the list.

      No wonder malaysia has been slow in many things.

    • pound foolish says:

      so…build a low cost terminal at the expense of safety & efficiency?
      KLIA2 is designed to cater for the growth but also have the responsibility to keep human/drug trafficking in check. once the tourist numbers kick in, then the cost can be spread, no? u want a low cost terminal now but it will shortly max out & decline in efficiency & safety surely – not a wise move. ever heard of the expression penny wise, pound foolish?
      p/s: airport tax is NOT set yet, so where’s the beef?

    • johnny says:

      You are damn right bro. MAHB change rm26 for current cheap build lcct …and increase to rm 33 for super airport klia 2…how come like that?

    • Alex says:

      Zak, the current LCCT is way too crowded and packed, it is time to shift to a bigger airport. Government has to be long sighted and see things further, building airport is not like widening roads, u cannot change the building structure and runway once u decided.

  16. Charlie Squark says:

    Link yang ini menunjukkan masaalah kewangan AirAsiaX … Dan Kalau kita tengok di KLSE (Bursa Saham KL) AirAsiaX Sudah pun mula “downtrend” crash.


  17. afnan says:

    ‘KLIA’s sophisticated conveyor belt’ are you referring to the baggage handling system?..no i was on of the 2 architect firm designed the airport.we lost because we do comply to the requirement set by Air Asia not MAB. It turns out this airport is too expensive to run with air bridges that cost 1 million per unit.Furthermore what MAB did was so severely stupid to have an airport built next to an already well establish KLIA.

    • afnan says:


    • Average Joe says:

      Quote: “Furthermore what MAB did was so severely stupid to have an airport built next to an already well establish KLIA.”

      Look, who is really stupid here. KLIA2 is not a separate airport. It’s a second terminal, integral part of KLIA, controlled from the same air traffic control (ATC).

      Of course you lost the bid since the real criteria are that of MAHB, not AirAsia’s. Do bear in mind that the whole project belongs to MAHB not AirAsia.

  18. Arep says:

    good bashing comes with facts and figures. thanks bro

  19. Runsing says:

    satu angle je saya rasa missing. kita tak tau apa yang dibincangkan dalam bilik meeting. mana tau MAHB nak defend diri sendiri kata semua ok. atau AirAsia cakap lain bende lain pulak keluar.

    saya rasa macam banyak miscommunication. takkan la MAHB nak buat hal dengan airline yang bawak masuk 30 juta penumpang setahun? atau AA buat palat dengan syarikat yang monopoli semua landasan kapal terbang di Malaysia (kecuali satu di johor)

    pokok pangkalnya. sapa yang bebetul iktiraf landasan ni selamat? IKRAM bukan pakar runway bukan? Ada ke pihak DCA cakap ok juga? ni keselamat penumpang dan semua kakitangan airport.

    aku nak naik AA bulan 6 nanti ni! tak nak la airport tak selamat. takut weh.

    • Average Joe says:

      Even the world’s highest international governing body in civil aviation, the ICAO has approved KLIA-2 Terminal (the new runway included). Is AirAsia trying to put itself above the ICAO?!

  20. Ubuntu Frans says:

    Thanks for the clarifying lists!! This explains a lot. Thanks also for the research. I think we see here “a kind of powergame”. Never mind Air Asia is operating from Subang Airport. They will miss opportunities especially for those international passengers landing KLIA1 who want to change to a “local” plane and even to foreign popular Air Asia’s destinations. Let us see how this will go on.

  21. consumer says:

    AirAsia claims to be champion for Malaysians but they are the only airline that charges RM1.95 per minute for basic telephone customer service. In other countries they fly to, they charge normal rate and even provide toll free number. It is cheaper to call their Singapore or Indonesia call centre than Malaysia.

  22. analia says:

    Hehe..tukar nama la to mr.tony arrogant..so many excuses n complaint..

  23. vincent says:

    wow..there’s a strong sentiment of anti-Tony & AA here…Haha, nvr mine, amateur writer couldnt uphold his impartiality, that’s normal. The tune is set up in a way that defend the establishment & all the later bashing r all directed into achieving the earlier. It is not hard to pickup some major flaws on your homework in collecting facts and figures surrounding the saga. As an architect who has been in the industry for over 15 years now, i can tell u that the building industry is not as simple as what u think. It seems that your writing is focusing on 2 parties consists of the common ‘non-bumi’ enemy – AA and the ruling-protectionist-government-backed MAHB. The involvement of both parties from the initial design stage until getting the CCC is not as direct as a childish fight betw Ali & Abu over a piece of cake. Someone else might also has a say in deciding the change of brief, in this case you must check who is controlling the building department behind MAHB who dictate the final features of the.building. From my experience, this post is the favorite department to sit in for a politician with a personal vision. In the case of KLIA2, it has been a open secret within the archi field of who is in it and why the drastic 180 turnaround happens on the building.

    Adding 72% floor area in the middle of construction bcos u suddenly find out your growth projection got some glitch? U must be kidding bro. I bet an corporate as good as AA know how to do professional growth projection estimate before the start of any job.
    MAHB could not grant a small spa but ‘bowed’ to the ‘demand’ by AA to have a 4km runway and 2.5km gap betw runways? Now u think a budget airliner has the power to decide how long a runway should be and the technical guidelines of airport design set by international bodies? Pls do your homework first. Can check airport design and procurement process and how many technical bodies involved when you want to fancy a 2.2km to 2.5km change in runway intervals.

    First of all dont make such a intentional and rush proposition that MAHB now acting like a slave to all AA’s demand. For example, the aerobridge issue, if AA didnt need it at first the place, then who the hell proposed it to MAHB. If proposal was done by submitting architect to the clients & AA didnt want it, who the hell in MAHB who decide to go ahead with it and results in such a fuss right now? This bring back to the area where u need to further check. The building and archi department under MAHB, who is behind this. U will find answer to a lot of your research flaws.

    Next you label cracks on the runway r superficial crack. R u the civil and structural or geotech engineer? Or you has the figure from the consultants regarding soil strength and its cause on the crack. This superficial assumption i think is dangerous.

    Next you talk about AA owing so much to MAHB in helping it to become what it is now. If MAHB is that good in spurring local aviation industry, why cant it do the same magic to MAS? If quality of corporate governance and competency r how u deemed as secondary to government aid in the aviation business.

    And last, as a citizen that need AA to continue to play its role as an low-cost alternative in flying, I fully support AA aggressive style of pushing the authority and its airport operator to perform, and to ensure the aim to built a low-cost airport for low-cost airliners to be achieve. Sincerely i dont want to buy a pricey AA ticket caused by the inefficient governance of public works by the government. The role of government is to govern. The lame protectionist policy got to go if you believe in the new economy, competency and competition. U need to be critical on both sides of the divide when making public argument. Otherwise, the emotional baseless part of it will be too obvious not to be picked up.

  24. Peter says:

    I think malaysia needs tony more than he needs malaysia. When airasia wanted to transfer their operations to Indonesia what chaos it created. Don’t be a fool, he can operate where he wants but Mahb cannot operate elesewhere. In other words he has a choice, malaysia zilch. If Mahb and Mas is so wise why do we need to wait for a Tony and Airasia.

  25. Ray says:

    There are very few points I may agree with MatRodi, and some i’m not sure since I don’t really know the conversation between AirAsia and MAHB on the KLIA2 expansion and cost.

    However, there are some point I would like to share:-

    Point 1 – MAHB charged AirAsia sky high rental and parking/landing fee and aerobridge fee at KLIA, thus as a low cost airline they can’t continue to survive. Give you an example, will you spend expensive rental fee like staying in Bungalow with low salary income, I bet you won’t. But again, LCCT monthly fee wasn’t cheap also. If you compare itemize billing between these 2 airports, you will find it end up stay in KLIA better.

    Point 2 – Because of that, MAHB build LCCT and asked AirAsia to move and operate there, but can you imagine the building looks like warehouse/factory? How can MAHB build such a lousy LCCT airport and without any good/reasonable facilities? And there is no path way for passenger to walk from waiting rooms to air plane until AirAsia requests hundred of times then only MAHB do it.

    Point 3 – Why AirAsia want to work with Sime Darby for another airport, because MAHB was too arrogant, and don’t really bother expansion requests of the growth in LCCT airport. Besides that, they promised to have KLIAexpress and Buses, but it didn’t happen until today, so AirAsia have to find their own Bus operator to run it between KL Sentral to LCCT.

    Point 4 – Do you know how much MAHB earn profit from LCCT? Every single shop / booth need to pay sky high rental fee + transaction fee but provide lousy facilities and AirAsia need to keep on requests then only MAHB do it. Have you also calculate the car parking that MAHB earn daily? You will be surprise those open parkings can make such a wonderful income for so many years, but yet you will heard some cases such as car got stolen especially in Zone A and Zone C.

    Point 5 – Do you know how much to pay for SITA system? Only those airline who don’t really study their system and willing to pay SITA. However, AirAsia know every well on how the airline system work, thus they save that cost and place their own machines with Navitaire system for check-in, which also bring down the low cost ticket back to passenger.

    Point 6 – AirAsia doesn’t want Aerobridge because end-up AirAsia have to pay for that rental fees, and certain fee will require passenger to pay in tax.

    Point 7 – as far as I understand, KLIA2 land wasn’t suitable for runway because the land was soft. Thus MAHB need to spent lots of money to ensure the runway can handle the aircraft landing and pressure. As I saw the runway crack from newspaper, I wasn’t surprise but at the same time, it also show that the contractor didn’t really put much effort on quality material to prevent it happen.

    • Bmax says:

      Who do you think is his ‘backer’ for him to get his way all this while? Thats the real brain behind air asia. Tony is just a spokesperson. Tony who?

    • Rodi doesn't understand says:

      Good answer Ray! #likeaboss.

      Sorry Rodi, I’m just a frequent flyer that don’t require aero bridge and other things MAHB is offering that will increase the cost of flying. AirAsia has kept flying affordable… so before you go all “reject AirAsia or AirAsia balik kampung”, remember this, you weren’t flying before AirAsia and probably couldn’t.

      Take it easy folks. It’s flying and if you want it at an affordable cost, some convenience has gotta give. We need Tony more than we need this corrupted government.

  26. […] What’s Your Problem, Tony?. […]

  27. Zulkifli says:

    Discussed on facts must show reference otherwise it is just heresay.

  28. Stitch says:

    Dear author, based on your previous write-ups, It is very obvious on who are you siding to start it all up. You article is well written. Good effort on doing the homework and spending time to show a whole new perspective to the public. Looks very convincing, but looking back at in in technical terms, I find your article not having the gist of it. I couldnt pin point any real substantiated hard facts. Yes you do have some facts, but its all on a publics perspective. If yes the government is helping AA, then why isnt that magic happening to MAS (where billions of tax payers money are being pumped into. YES including yours!). Ponder upon it. I find the write up of Vincent (few comments above) has more context as it is based on experience. I do wonder what is your profession, and how expert are you on this topic. Is it based on other biased articles that this has been wrote upon, or a much better viewed ones.

    • MatRodi says:

      Dear reader, I don’t think Ikram’s, DCA’s and Ministry’s report are all ‘public perspective’ as u claimed. MAS is a different problem. Please scroll down beloq and read my previous article on restructuring MAS. Thank you.

      • Stitch says:

        IKRAM, DCA and the Ministry? Haha. WOW. true much. So ur telling me u would put ur life in line based on them only? solely based on their report? We find a crack, reported in the papers and fb with pictures, but denied by ministry and DCA. and then ministry comes in with a statement of plausible minor patch works, and finally after a month another statement admitting to it. Remember all this IKRAM still approved the terminal. So which would u believe? ME? NONE, cause where the heck is the credibility of the said individual of the said organisation when u try to snake around the real truth. Would you want to be in an Aircraft that lands on a crack runway? If there are cracks before the terminal is being used by travellers, imagine whats going to happen when there are almost 2-3 million passengers using the airport. PS: Publics perspective meaning it looks very well structured, but where is the technicality of the article. U are solely depending ur article based on a report done by another dude who also reports it to favour himself and his organisation(and maybe his cronies). Dude, ur article? Ur one siding articles? come on man, maybe u try reading on The Sun, 16th April, New Chapter Opens in KLIA2 Saga. Cheers mate!

  29. Mye says:

    Kalau nak bina kembar KLIA baik AA serah diri kat KLIA je. Lagipon KLIA senyap sunyi mcm istana. Subang airport kecik sgt. Susah sgt ke nk tiru low cost airport mcm negara2 lain?

  30. Rush says:

    Hi Matt Rodi…I’m a first timer reading your article and this is my first article as well – it just happen to be on this topic 🙂 …personal I don’t really fly AA…as Garuda provide good deal going back home to KL for the price of AA close to AA – neither I am TF’s friend to support him on your article.

    I’m not sure who’s side are you with … are you with the public or with the government – your argument sounds like your are the voice the Government or the government paid you on writing this article … I believed you’re not suppose to favour any parities, and write for the best interest of the public and provide us cheaper solution, so that many could see the world…for the less fortunate needs solution to see the world…

    Not everybody is born as rich as you to afford your dream airport….:-)

    write with your soul for the people’s interest – not for your own dreams – if you like hanging out in a good airport – go to Dubai airport – …. you can’t beat that airport –

    • FaridRzk says:

      The government pay him to write this. I must confess. It’s thru MARA. Hundreds of Tousands bucks i think, and a UK round trip. That’s why he is just being thankful. Spare him pls.

    • MatRodi says:

      Hi, thanks Rush for your comment. KLIA2’s airport tax has not been decided yet. It could be higher or lower. However, the less fortunate deserve to hang around in a nice airport. 🙂

  31. Tony Stark says:

    This article is full of self serving bias. I disapprove.

  32. Well written article. I truly agree with your arguments.

    We need more comfort and safety in LCC than what the current LCCT (pasar borong standard terminal) has to offer.

  33. Average Joe says:

    Even the airport in that famine-stricken Ethiopia got modern terminals with aerobridges. Moreover, back there they don’t provide a separate reban ayam-like “low-cost” terminals. All are standard. Simply put, those who are in defence of LCCT are surely of below-Third World mentality – that’s thousands of metres below. Enough said.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: