There is an interesting 'conversation' going on in the readers'opinion page of the NST these last couple of weeks. It all started a few weeks earlier when a frequent Malaysian Airlines customer wrote-in to remind Malaysia Airlines (MAS) to not loose focus by competing with low cost carriers and to stick to full service offerings. This was followed by another reader who complained about MAS providing only mealboxes for domestic and short haul international destinations. This was followed by a reply from MAS that their survey had indicated that MAS customers are satisfied with the mealboxes and it is comparable with 15 other international airlines. This was followed by a letter from another MAS customer who questioned many aspects of the reply and insisted that either MAS bucks up or he will take his business elsewhere!
According to the reply from MAS, the survey found that customers are quite happy with the mealboxes. Its not clear how many respondents were involved in this survey or which sectors were covered. Did the respondents say mealboxes are ok, great or one of the 10 things that are ok? It seems customers, during the fasting month found the mealboxes useful as they can 'take-away' for later consumption. What would these very same customers say now when it is no longer the fasting month? Comparable with 15 other international airline standards? Well, lets be clear here. Firstly, just because it is a foreign airline it doesn't mean that it is of international standards. The benchmark for MAS must always be the likes of Singapore Airlines, Cathay Pacific, BA, Lufthansa, Emirates and the like. Secondly, air-travel in the USA and Europe has lost most of its privileged status. Air travel for them is just another mode of transport. In Asia and Malaysia air travel is still considered a status symbol even after the arrival of low cost carriers like AirAsia and Tiger Airways. So, if a Malaysian flies MAS to Kota Kinabalu (2 1/2 hours) instead of AirAsia I can quite safely say that there is still a prestige issue at play here. Otherwise, why would he /she pay so much more for a MAS ticket when a much cheaper alternative is available? Now, with that purchase, what does he/she expect? Full service treatment of course! That means what was previously offered if not better.
Lets look at some of the possible reasons why MAS would want to take this path. Having pre-prepared mealboxes instead of the usual full service offerings together with its utensils will reduce take-off weight of the plane which will translate into reduced fuel consumption ( a huge cost savings) and increased RPK (revenue per kilo metre). There will also be a reduced need for a big team of cabin crew which once again reduces cost and increases revenue.
So, its all about cost reduction. I can appreciate that. Idris Jala said he will do a business turn around and as far as I am concerned, such cost reductions are absolutely critical for him.
However, what is the impact on MAS over the long term? The following 3 possibilities present themselves:
1. MAS customers get used to this new service offerings and are pacified by an increase in service standards in other aspects, or
2. MAS customers find little differentiation with low cost carriers on those routes and switch their alliance, or
3. Regional airlines fill the gap left by MAS in the full service category once the open sky policies are in effect.
The thing is this, service and the resultant customer experience is more a function of 'perception' than real product/service experience. For example, Japanese watch brands like Citizen make great watches but the perception is that Swiss brands are a class of their own. How would a current Porche owner feel if Porche starts selling RM100,000.00 models in Malaysia? It is a precept ion game isn't?
Good things have started to happen for Malaysia Airlines. However, lets also remember what one modern business sage have said : "Good is the greatest enemy of Great".
We would like to see a great Malaysia Airlines. You with me?
