Garuda Indonesia poised to expand

IT came so timely that following the opening of the new Terminal 3 at Jakarta’s Soekarno-Hatta International Airport and its declared ambition to rival Singapore Changi Airport and Kuala Lumpur International Airport in attracting international traffic, Indonesian carriers have been cleared to resume flights to the United States after an absence of nine years.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is satisfied that Indonesia is complying with International Civil Aviation Civil Organization (ICAO) safety standards. Formal final approval from Department of Transport (DOT) and FAA is expected soon.

Indonesia has been plagued by a number of air mishaps involving home-based airlines Lion Air, Mandala Airlines and Garuda, particularly in the years before 2007 when the US imposed a ban on its operations on its soil. More recently in 2014, Indonesia AirAsia crashed into the Java Sea, killing all 162 people on board.

The US lift of the ban came after the European Union had lifted its ban on three other Indonesia airlines – Lion Air, Batik Air and Citilink – in June this year.

Garuda AFP

With the US and Europe open, Garuda for one, if not the other Indonesian carriers as yet, is poised to expand. The Indonesian flag carrier has launched direct services to London (Gatwick) and is planning to launch services to New York (JFK) and Los Angeles next year. And if the Sytrax survey for the last two years (2014 and 2015) is anything to go by for its success, the airline was ranked among the world`s top ten airlines which include other Asian airlines namely Singapore Airlines, Cathay Pacific and EVA Air.

Jetstar Hong Kong’s long and costly wait to fly

Courtesy Jetstar

Courtesy Jetstar


Twenty-one months after Qantas announced the birth of its fifth Jetstar venture in March 2012, initially in partnership with China Eastern Airlines, the airline (Jetstar Hong Kong) has yet to receive approval from the Hong Kong authorities to fly. No doubt it is a costly affair waiting, with three remaining Airbus A320 aircraft sitting in Toulouse after six of the orders have since been sold. But prime mover Qantas is confident that Jetstar HK will eventually take to the sky, expecting its case to be heard some time next year although no firm date has been set.

Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce said: “We are confident that Jetstar Hong Kong’s case is solid for the approvals. The process has taken longer than anyone expected, it’s taken longer than any jurisdiction hat we’ve seen in the world, but this is going to be a good business venture which we believe will make good profits.”

If you detect any hint of frustration at the lumbering approval process, you may be right. Yet could you blame Mr Joyce for running out of patience? Indeed it is surprising that Hong Kong as a thriving air hub is taking so long to reach a decision.

Cathay’s objection

Courtesy AIRBUS

Courtesy AIRBUS

It is widely believed that Cathay Pacific’s objection to Jetstar HK is in no small way attributive to the delay. Cathay remained confident that the Hong Kong authorities would not rule in favour of the budget carrier, the argument being that it is foreign controlled, effectively from Australia. That runs contrary to Hong Kong law. In a move to make the carrier more Hong Kong in character, Qantas and China Eastern inducted a third local partner, Shun Tak, whose managing director Pansy Ho assumed appointment as Jetstar HK chairman. Shun Tak would have the majority 51 per cent shareholder voting rights, reducing that of the other partners to 24.5 per cent each. Presumably the authorities will now have to decide whether that is enough, notwithstanding Mr Joyce now saying that the new airline is more local than Hong Kong’s other airlines.

But is there a bigger issue than one about ownership, which by its legality should be indisputable? Right from the beginning, Cathay has made its objection heard, arguing that such a business model does not have a place in Hong Kong. While many of its rivals such as Singapore Airlines (SIA) and Japan Airlines besides Qantas have spawned budget offshoots, Cathay has pooh-poohed the idea. Cathay may deny it, but its opposition to Jetstar HK is an issue of competition. Though in name a budget carrier, Jetstar HK backed by strong parents with international connections will compete with not only Dragonair but also Cathay, the same pressure that other mainstream airlines such as SIA, Air France and Lufthansa are already experiencing. The likes of Ryanair and easyJet in Europe, Southwest and JetBlue in the United States, and AirAsia and Jetstar in Asia are the new threat to the legacy business as the global economy continues to flounder. The market has become that less clearly demarcated.

Is there a case for Jetstar HK?

To say that budget carriers cannot thrive in Hong Kong is a supposition without much experiential evidence to support it. With the large China market at its doorstep, the potential cannot be overplayed. By comparison, the growth of budget traffic outstrips that of full service traffic in Singapore; the low-cost business makes up 30 per cent of Changi’s throughput. It is higher in Indonesia and India. Asia in particular has seen an increased number of budget carriers in recent years to cater to the growing number of travellers responding to the offer of affordable fares. It is no exception that Cathay together with Dragonair which account for almost half the seats sold out of Hong Kong will want to protect their dominant market share.

So, are Hong Kong air travellers worse off than their counterparts in the region, being denied cheaper alternatives? Jetstar group chief executive Jayne Hrdlicka would like to think so. She said: “The travelling public in Hong Jong have clearly signalled that they are fed up with paying high fares relative to their colleagues around the region.” That at best is an assumption, though not entirely baseless. At the same time it does not mean Cathay and Dragonair will immediately lose chunks of their business to Jetstar.

The onus on Jetstar HK is to show that its entry will not diminish the market size but will instead generate an increase in demand for seats, something that all airport authorities like to hear. Almost always that is the wistful thinking that goads airports to open their doors to more carriers. Then there are the arguments for competition to grow the airport. Hong Kong cannot be the air hub it is today without the competition.

Qantas CEO Alan Joyce/Photo courtesy bloomberg.com

Qantas CEO Alan Joyce/Photo courtesy bloomberg.com

Lest anyone thinks that Jetstar HK would not survive the competition even if given the go-ahead, Mr Joyce cited the success of Singapore-based Jetstar Asia, which had been profitable in the four years before last year. Even though it lost S$40m (US$32m) last year, it outperformed SIA’s Tigerair which lost S$200m. The losses were the result of market overcapacity. However, with Tigerair cutting back, Mr Joyce said: “We see a path through for that business to go back into profit like it was in the previous four years. I’m comfortable it will get there.” Now, is not excess capacity the very apprehension of Cathay and Dragonair? Indeed, many airlines are returning to profitability on the back of reduced capacity, the short supply helping to hold up airfares. It is equally valid to ask if Hong Kong as a major regional hub airport is already facing that issue.

At some point Jetstar HK partners will have to reflect on the worthiness of waiting indefinitely for the sanction to fly. No pun intended, if you think of sanction’s other meaning of being punitive. Questions are being asked if Qantas was putting in money chasing a rainbow that seems too far out of reach. And one is apt to ask too: Is the prolonged delay intended to allow time to resolve the issue, one possibility being a stillbirth?

This article was first published in Aspire Aviation.

Is ASEAN Open Skies a myth?

LESS than a year to its full implementation, the ASEAN Open Skies remains an uncertainty. First mooted some 20 years ago, it has been a long time coming. While there was some open discussion in its early days, all seems somewhat quiet of late. Is it likely to be postponed? Or is it after all a myth?

The issue really hinges on how ready the ten-nation association are collectively. Even deeper than that, how prepared are they to overcome the hurdles, real or perceived, that stand in the way of full implementation. Unlike the European Union, ASEAN is by definition an “association” and not a common government with binding law enforcement obligations. The bloc is made up of a disparate string of nations that are vastly different in their stages of economic development. How they weigh the opportunities that such a common policy could bring against possible losses at home would determine their readiness for participation. Some nations may still prefer the seeming protection of local businesses accorded by bilateral exchanges. This was already tacit when at the outset, the various nations agreed on “the importance of the development of Competitive Air Services Policy which may be a gradual step towards an Open Sky Policy in ASEAN.”

Yet the good news is that against the uncertainty, the skies are already becoming more liberal as a number of airlines have stepped up expansion plans across the region. The battle for dominance has begun.

ASEAN nations

Courtesy The Bangkok Post

Courtesy The Bangkok Post

Indonesia is the largest nation in the association, occupying a land mass made up of more than 13,000 islands that is almost 75% the total area of the other nine nations put together. It is also the most populous with 250 million people, followed by the Philippines (98,000,000) and Vietnam (90,000,000). While ASEAN has a combined population of over 600 million – which speaks a lot about its huge market potential – expectedly the focus is likely to be Indonesia. But Indonesia, hampered by slow infrastructural enhancement and the past poor safety records of its carriers, fears the loss of domestic markets to better endowed foreign competitors. In May 2010, Indonesia declared it was not ready to fully open its skies and would limit access to only five airports, namely Jakarta, Surabaya, Bali, Medan and Makassar. Other ports would be subject to bilateral agreements and foreign carriers would not be permitted to ply domestic routes.

So it is with the less developed nations of Myanmar, Laos, Kampuchea and Vietnam even as they seek more foreign investments and ways to boost their exports. Accessibility to the landlocked outback of these nations could open up opportunities for growth, as noted at a meeting of ASEAN transport ministers in 1996 that the association aimed “to promote interconnectivity and interoperability of national networks and access thereto taking particular account of the need to link islands, land locked, and peripheral regions with the national and global economies.” The question really is how ready they are to embrace this objective to see to its implementation.

At the other end of the spectrum is Singapore, which is the smallest of the nations but the most advanced economically and most ready to go full hog with the implementation of the ASEAN Open Skies policy. After all, Singapore has been a pioneer in advocating liberal skies on the global stage. A concern among its ASEAN neighbours may be that of how they perceive Singapore carriers as benefitting from an enlarged Asean hinterland. It works both ways. Foreign carriers, particularly short-haul operators with limited capacity and resources, will benefit from Changi Airport’s hub connections to tap into other markets in the region. Besides its strategic geographical position, Changi offers excellent infrastructure and has appeal aplenty for transits,

Middle-of-the-road Malaysia and Thailand seem less passionate about the push. Brunei Darussalam, which has the smallest population, appears quite comfortable the way it is for now. However, the Philippines with a similar geography as Indonesia could benefit from more liberal connections.

Which airlines will rule the ASEAN skies?

The region’s growth is likely to be led by budget carriers. With the focus on Indonesia, its home-based carriers are not sitting by idly. Flag carrier Garuda Indonesia is acquiring smaller 100-seat planes more suited to the shorter runways of secondary airports, which will be largely served by its budget subsidiary Citilink. Asked how Garuda was gearing up for the ASEAN Open Skies, Garuda president and chief executive Emirsyah Satar said: “The ASEAN Open Skies Agreement will open up the Indonesian market to carriers from other ASEAN member countries, but our position is very strong in Indonesia and we are prepared for the competition. Our network’s aggressive international expansion and continual developments and service improvements will also prepare us for competing in a more liberal environment.” (Interview: Emirysah Satar, president & chief executive, Garuda Indonesia, 4 September 2013) He projected that Citilink would carry 19 million passengers by 2015 and there were plans to add international routes to several destinations in Southeast Asia. Garuda is also developing a new hub in Bintan, which is a hop away from Changi Airport.

Courtesy Lion Group/Picture by Rudy Hari Purnomo

Courtesy Lion Group/Picture by Rudy Hari Purnomo

Compatriot Lion Air, which is Indonesia’s second largest airline, is also expanding its fleet and gearing up its regional subsidiary Wings Air to service smaller airports. Lion Air has long expressed its intention to hub through Changi although it has also announced plans to develop Batam as an alternative transit hub to the congested Soekarno-Hatta Airport in Jakarta for both domestic and international flights. Lion Air president Rusdi Kirana said: “The distance is actually shorter if you transit in Batam rather than flying south to Jakarta to transit. The shorter flying time makes flying more convenient for passengers and it means aircraft burn less fuel, leading to significant cost savings.” From Batam, which, like Bintan, is a stone’s throw away from Changi, Lion Air hopes to fly to destinations such as Guangzhou, Hong Kong, Bangkok, Jeddah, New Delhi and Mumbai.

It is to be seen how the plans of Garuda and Lion Air to develop Bintan and Batam respectively will impact on Changi, which is likely to see higher growth as Singapore becomes an attractive destination in itself and as a desirable feed port for international and regional traffic. In introducing a direct non-stop service from Jakarta to London in May this year, Mr Satar has hoped that Indonesian travellers would fly Garuda instead of routing their travel out of another airport such as Changi.

Other smaller carriers are expected to go for a bigger slice of the growing pie and new carriers launched to serve secondary airports.

Courtesy Airbus

Courtesy Airbus

Not to be left out of the race, AirAsia and Tigerair made early moves to establish their presence in the huge Indonesian market. Until a full open skies policy is in place, joint ventures are the expedient way to gaining a foothold. Indonesia AirAsia, which is 49% owned by AirAsia, operates beyond Indonesia to Singapore, Kuala Lumpur, Phuket and Ho Chi Minh City. AirAsia chief Tony Fernandes’ ambition is to dot the region with the AirAsia brand. The Malaysian budget carrier has also set up joint ventures in Thailand and the Philippines. This means AirAsia, which is headquartered in Kuala Lumpur, and its joint-venture airlines are serving destinations in all the ten Asean countries, as summed up by Mr Fernandes: “Think we are done in Asean.” But liberalization offers more than just opportunities within Asean; AirAsia is well positioned to connect its passengers beyond to destinations in Australia, Japan, Korea, China, India and the Middle East.

Responding to AirAsia’s thrust into Indonesia, Lion Air teamed up with Malaysia’s National Aerospace and Defence Industries to launch Malindo Airways for services from Kuala Lumpur across Asean and to China, India and Japan, a move that Mr Fernandes had rebuffed as no match for AirAsia’s strong brand and positioning as Asia’s largest budget carrier. So far Lion Air appears to be one with the biggest plans, which include an airline leasing company to be situated in Singapore, a new full-service airline Batik Air which was launched in May last year and which plans to fly to Singapore as its first international destination sometime this year, and a premium charter under the Space Jet brand.

Not so lucky is Tigerair, whose partnership with Mandala Airlines Indonesia is teetering on the brink, as was its partnership with SEAir in Tigerair Philippines which has since been sold to Cebu Pacific Air. Its attempt to spread its wings across the region had met with a string of failures added to a blemished record of poor service. Its ambiguous relationship with sibling airlines within the Singapore Airlines (SIA) stable has not improved its fortune; today Tigerair and Scoot are competitors on some routes. Scoot, which is 100% owned by SIA, looks likely to overtake Tigerair in the game. It has partnered Nok Air to operate a domestic service in Thailand. Nok has hoped that this will be its vehicle for expansion overseas. Regional carrier SilkAir continues to fly in the shadow of parent SIA, which may have to continue to shore up the fortunes of its offshoots with feeder traffic from and into its long haul services.

Jetstar Asia, the only other airline based in Singapore that is not part of the SIA group, has proven to be a tough competitor. Parent Qantas has been actively promoting the Jetstar brand across Asia, having also set up joint ventures in Japan, Vietnam and Hong Kong.

Whether the Asean Open Skies is finally formalized or not, regional carriers have already started to prepare for the eventuality. The question as to whether it is a myth is no longer relevant. Clearly, the end-date is not as important as the progression towards it.

What next, Tigerair?

Courtesy Reuters

Courtesy Reuters

Singapore-based budget carrier Tigerair which is 33-per-cent owned by Singapore Airlines has cancelled its aircraft order of nine Airbus A320 aircraft for this year and the next. This should not come as a surprise judging by recent moves to extricate itself from the loss-making Tigerair Philippines and Tiger Mandala Airlines. The Philippines stake has been sold to Cebu Pacific Air.

Instead, Tigerair signed a new deal for 37 Airbus A320neo aircraft worth US$3.8 billion to be delivered over eight years from 2018, largely as a replacement program.

Bitten by losses, Tigerair has begun to tread cautiously in a highly competitive environment even as there are promises of a growing Asean and nearby market, expressing concerns of overcapacity. This means the carrier is not embarking on any ambitious expansion program over the next few years as the carrier treads cautiously in a field dominated by rivals AirAsia, Jetstar and Lion Air.

Tigerair chief Koay Peng Yen said: “We have re-calibrated our strategy and taken the necessary steps to re-position Tigerair for a brighter future. This (aircraft) deal effectively dissipates some concerns over a potential capacity overhang in the next couple of years. It also allows us to continue building on our leadership position in budget travel at a measured pace.”

Of course, taking a step back could be strategic. The question is: Has Tigerair the choice? Not knowing what that strategy, if at all you can call it one, entails, we can only ask: What next, Tigerair? (See Tigerair sees red, continues to retreat: Will SIA let it go? Mar 4, 2014)

Garuda too wants to be close to Changi Airport

garudaSOON after Lion Air announced its decision to develop Batam as a transit hub for its flights, both domestic and international, complete with aircraft maintenance facilities, Garuda Indonesia followed up with its plan to develop a new hub in Bintan, which will also house a new maintenance centre. Both Indonesian islands are a hop away from Singapore and its Changi Airport.

Garuda president Emirsyah Satar said: “This new operation will help strengthen Garuda’s network development, with a potential to connect East Indonesia and West Indonesia, and become the meeting point for our international flights to Europe and the Far East.”

Is there something that more than meets the eye?

Jakarta, Indonesia’s capital city, is of course the major hub for both the airlines which are the largest in the country. But why the interest in developing hubs which are barely an hour ride by boat from Singapore? With Asean Open Skies set to be fully implemented by next year, it makes sense for Indonesian airlines to develop alternative ports to draw the traffic, particularly considering the island geography of the Indonesian land mass. For Garuda, Bintan will be its fourth so-called hub after Jakarta, Denpassar (Bali) and Makassar (Sulawesi).

Already Batam and Bintan are growing in popularity as an extended vacation options for visitors to Singapore.

The story may be more than about the rivalry between Garuda and Lion Air. Bet on it that the authorities at Changi Airport are watching from their tower, not that it is anything that they should be concerned about. For now, curious, they should be.

Lion Air moves transit hub closer to Changi Airport

Courtesy Reuters

Courtesy Reuters


LION AIR is clearly making moves to be a prominent player when Asean Open Skies 2015 kicks in, especially when it is expected that home country Indonesia, which is the most populous nation in the region, will experience the highest growth in air movements as a result of the liberalization.

Lion Air has plans to grow the airport on Batam island – a stone’s throw from Singapore – as an alternative transit hub to the main but increasingly congested Soekarno-Hatta Airport in Jakarta. From there, the airline hopes to fly to destinations beyond Indonesia, such as Guangzhou, Hong Kong, Bangkok, Jeddah, New Delhi and Mumbai.

Lion Air president Rusdi Kirana said: “The distance is actually shorter if you transit in Batam rather than flying south to Jakarta to transit. The shorter flying time makes flying more convenient for passengers and it means aircraft burn less fuel, leading to significant cost savings.”

Considering Indonesia’s multi-island geography, it may not matter where the transit takes place if the cost is kept low and the convenience of connection is not that much worse off. There is no reason why Lion Air cannot use Batam for its spoke operations but only for its flights. Jakarta will continue to be favored by the major legacy airlines and the added advantage of accessibility by land.

But what is more interesting about Lion Air’s move Batam’s proximity to Singapore’s Changi Airport. Is the airline looking at a siphoning possibility at lower costs in competition with airlines such as AirAsia which had for a long time been pestering the Singapore government to allow it to operate out of a domestic but separate base? Lion Air too has announced its intention to hub its flights at Changi with Open Skies, and Batam is near enough.

Boosting his proposal, Mr Kirana also announced Lion Air’s launch of a hangar on Batam to provide maintenance, repair and overhaul services, the first of four such hangars

Budget carriers want lower check-in standards at Changi Airport

Check-in queue at Changi Airport, Courtesy bbc.co.uk

Check-in queue at Changi Airport following a flight delay, Courtesy bbc.co.uk

BUDGET carriers at Changi Airport want lower standard for check-in times than the normal imposed by the authorities for all airlines. The Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) has set the standard of maximum 10 minutes wait time as soon as a passenger joins a line to be checked-in.

Budget carriers argue that they do not offer the same product and experience as full-service airlines and should not be subject to the same standard. This all but affirms that budget travellers must expect lower standards, a dictum that full-service airlines are only too happy to hear coming from the horse’s mouth.

While budget customers may tacitly expect lower standards, they are unlikely to be sympathetic. Some passengers have counter-argued that the lower fare has to do with the physical product such as the absence of certain perks and concessions rather than service. But it is a known fact that cost being the driver, budget carriers are less likely to provide as many staff numbers as full-service airlines. Consequently the service suffers. Yet any operator, whether budget or full-service, knows it is taboo to even suggest openly any compromise in the customer service department. We just know it exists.

It is easy to understand why CAAS is sticky about standards, for that is how Changi Airport has attained its reputation as one of the world’s best. To split hair between budget and full-service operators will compromise or weaken its standing, particularly as a hub airport where travellers may connect between any class of airlines and which has seen higher growth in budget than full-service traffic. Relaxing the rules with exceptions may open the floodgate for other considerations across the board. Any exception to the rule becomes all the more glaring when budget carriers now operate alongside full-service airlines in the main terminals following the closure of a dedicated budget terminal.

Budget carriers operating in and out of Changi Airport include Tigerair, Jetstar and Scoot which are based in Singapore, and others such as AirAsia, Lion Air and Cebu Pacific.