Thai Airways denies bankruptcy rumors

[tomacht8]

If this were a private airline, they would already bankrupt.

But the taxpayers covered so far the losses.

Nepotism, corruption, incompetent management and innovation inability bring the losses.

As long as the state airline is a retirement place for outworn politicians and old state officials, no change will come.

The competition in aviation has become much harder in the past 10 years.

On long routes the subsidized Arab airlines (Emirates, Etihad, Qatar, Gulf, Oman, Kuwait) take over more and more market shares.
On short ranges the budget airlines (Air Asia) are increasingly taking over market shares.
In the freight aviation Thai is missing to have topnotch logistics know-how like Lufthansa Cargo.
The same applies for the maintenance business. Sad but true.

May they try to copy Vietnam Airline or CEBU Airline more.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6-lnPfTH7I

Edited January 7, 2014 by tomacht8

[surangw]

it must be true if they deny it.

[beautifulthailand99]

Flew Business a few years ago with wife in economy (long story which I dont want to recount here) had flown with them many times on business class before tried to charm an upgrade with the missus. Met with dumfounded arrogance and an attitude of what the cheek. Had had similar upgrades willingly proferred with Cathay Pacific before and let them know I had a choice. Suffice to stay Business was only about a third full. The old boot in charge of the Business Class cabin treated me with barely hidden contempt for most of the flight. Vowed that would be the last time. No longer in a position to get Business gratis anymore so fly Eva which are always flexible , the cheapest perfectly adequate and pleasant hostesses. Even when our Thai monks are in England and return to Thailand they fly EVA now - no upgrade either. Lest we forget ....

Edited January 7, 2014 by beautifulthailand99

[kuma]

Flew Business a few years ago with wife in economy (long story which I dont want to recount here) had flown with them many times on business class before tried to charm an upgrade with the missus. Met with dumfounded arrogance and an attitude of what the cheek. Had had similar upgrades willingly proferred with Cathay Pacific before and let them know I had a choice. Suffice to stay Business was only about a third full. The old boot in charge of the Business Class cabin treated me with barely hidden contempt for most of the flight. Vowed that would be the last time. No longer in a position to get Business gratis anymore so fly Eva which are always flexible , the cheapest perfectly adequate and pleasant hostesses. Even when our Thai monks are in England and return to Thailand they fly EVA now - no upgrade either. Lest we forget ....

Hate to be selfish, but can everyone please stop praising EVA...next thing you know it will be unusable.

Taiwan is a dirty and dangerous place and the airport is nasty...try another airline

[Thai at Heart]

Last time I flew Thai Air it was very expensive and the plane was rather old. Let's

just say I won't be booking any flights with pre paid tickets in case it goes belly up.

Well if people start to think like that, you may as well kiss goodbye to the airline.

It would only take a few percent of customers to decide to do what you do, and their cash flow would fall through the floor, and then it really would be goodnight.

The competition is blowing THAI out of the water at least as far as economy class is concerned. This has being going on for years now.

I don't know about all their routes but the KKC flights are always busy.

They get stung on some routes for sure but when I guess 10% of the passengers are on freebies or big discounts it all adds up

[fish fingers]

The only thing going for Thai is their VERY generous drinks policy. The last time I had one nice stewardess replacing my G&T every 45 minutes…

With EVA they write it down like a 'special order', and bring the drink 5-10 minutes later. With this extra hassle you tend not to order much. Quite a clever way of reducing costs.

[Torrens54]

Maybe they Blew their Budget on Black Paint to cover up the TG Logos when they have a mishap.

[FredNL]

Thai Airways: never again !!!

I booked a flight from BKK to HKG for doing business on september 4th. My Thai girlfriend only wanted to travel with Thai Airways (26,000 THB), while I wanted to go with Air Asia (12,000 THB). Departure 8:00 PM (check-in at 6:00 PM). Parking our car at Suvarnabhumi around 5:00 PM. At departure it was delayed for 1 hour and 30 minutes. So we left the gate at 9:30 PM. At arrival in HKG we had a delay for 2 hours and 40 minutes. Seems to be pretty normal on the flight from BKK to HKG with Thai, I heard on the plane. On the 4 hour flight there were no meals. Only served 1 free non-alcoholic drink. Extra drinks, a can of Coke for 100 THB and a Singh Beer for 250 THB. (Even on Soi Cowboy they are cheaper)

Spending the weekend in Hong Kong we had to take the Monday September 9th, 2013, 6:00 AM flight to get back in BKK at 9.30 AM. Check-in at 4:00 AM. Around 6:00 AM we got the message that the flight was delayed for 3 hours. At 9:00 AM we heard that the flight was delayed for another 2:45 hours. There was another Thai Airways flight leaving at 10:00 AM. They were also delayed for 4 hours. As by then the news that a Thai Airways Airbus crashed at Suvarnabhumi the evening before, reached us. Asking ground staff if that was the problem, they denied that a Thai airplane was involved with the crash. Even when we showed them the news on the Ipad, they denied that it was a Thai Airways plane. We could clearly see the logo on the tale of the crashed plane but they kept denying.

At noon, we heard that we were going to be transferred to the 7:30 PM plane and we had to check-in again at 5:30 PM. Getting our luggage back took them till 2:00 PM. At 5:30 PM we heard that we were on stand-by for the 7:30 PM plane.

At 7:15 PM we heard that we were going to be transferred to the Tuesday September 2013 flight of 1:15 AM plane and we had to check in at 11:15 PM. Also then we heard that we were on stand-by and the news came at 1:00 AM that we were transferred to 6:00 AM flight from that day. Check-in again at 4:00 AM and on the stand-by list again. At 5:00 we heard that we were transferred as stand-by on the 10:00 AM flight (check-in at 8:00 AM). We were already more than 24 hours on the airport without any sleep.

Checking in at 8:00 AM for the 10:00 AM flight as we were stand-by. At 10:00 AM the flight was delayed for 2 hours and 30 minutes. At 12:30 PM we heard that we were transferred on the 7:30 PM flight to BKK (check-in at 5:30 PM). At 5:30 PM we heard again that we were on the stand-by list. but the plane was also delayed for about 2 hours. At 9:00 PM we heard that we were transferred to the 0:30 AM flight on Wedsnesday September 11th to CNX and then on the 5:45 AM flight to BKK arriving around 8:00 AM on Wednesday morning. We agreed with that, not knowing that also the flight to CNX was delayed for 2:30 hours. We finally left HKG at 3:00 AM on Wednesday.

Arriving in CNX on Wednesday 6:15 AM our plane to BKK had already left for half an hour. So again to Thai ground staff. We could get the flight from 11:45 AM to BKK. We were so happy that we would be back in BKK at 1:30 PM. Check-in at 10:45 tells us that we were again on a stand-by list. At 11:30 AM the news reached us that we would be stand-by on the next available flight of 3:45 PM.

By then I had enough of Thai Airways and walked to the Air Asia office, buying ourselves 2 one-way tickets to Bangkok DMK for 4,600 THB for the 2:30 PM flight. We arrived at DMK at 4:00 PM. We had to take a taxi back to Suvarnabhumi to get our car, which was parked there for over a week. We boht didn't have any energy left over so we let the taxi driver bring us back home. Finally on Wednesday, after a 2 hour taxi ride we saw our beds. Next day taking a taxi from home to Suvarnabhumi, getting our car and heading back.

We complained at Thai Airways about all the denials, the lying, the delays. We haven't heard from them since. Also our lawyer send them a couple of letters with claims (loss of income, extra fares, etc.) and hasn't heard from them either.

I am cured ever taking Thai Airways again and so is my girlfriend. I really wonder why all the Thai Airline planes are completely booked and even overbooked. Must be the free flights for government officials, I think.

By the way: It seems that Thai Airways is on the black list in Amsterdam, Brussels and Paris, due to the use of fake (Chinese) spare-parts on their Airbusses. It was in several belgium, dutch and french newspapers late November 2013. (On one of these flights there even was a Thai princess on board, I've read)

Edited January 7, 2014 by FredNL

[fish fingers]

By the way: It seems that Thai Airways is on the black list in Amsterdam, Brussels and Paris, due to the use of fake (Chinese) spare-parts on their Airbusses. It was in several belgium, dutch and french newspapers late November 2013. (On one of these flights there even was a Thai princess on board, I've read)

wow thats scary. do you have any links?

[Bazw57]

Thai airways is on the edge of bankruptcy for years now , I just came back from abroad 2 days ago in biz with TG , awful service , lousy food and staff over 50yo looking bored .... No wonder they have issues ....I prefer not to mention the food and the terrible seat and arriving at suvharnablabla airport after 11h flight discharged in a bus .... the corruption at TG is very well know for the last 2 decades ...

I've never flown Thai international but their domestic flights from Bangkok to Khon Kaen are pretty good with new planes. Expensive though.

Thai Smile from Udon to BKK are very high priced, at 2850 baht one way------ same plane as Air Asia 1500 baht no promotion. A poster said why ???

Monopoly that's why, I used to fly A Asia to Swampy now it takes me to D Muang. Thai smile Budget airline believe it or not was not told with other budget airlines all D muang.. it flies into Swampy to get all international passengers--hence the price-no competition. Budget at near 3000 baht one way. JOKE

I totally agree but I use Bangkok Airways as they go to swampy and ARE EXCELLENT and leaves others EVEN INTERNATIONAL carriers... FOR DEAD

I have to use Thai for BKK - MEL Australia routes as it goes in the day which I prefer. Others take me overnight. GRRRR But I do find booking DIRECT with thai for International is OK on the fares TO OZ but NOT europe

You must be very wealthy, congratulations. ...or you just like wasting money, or your company pays for flights and you just don't care? . .... TG prices are just a rip off and I have not used them in years.

I just booked a return flight from Melbourne to Bangkok on Jetstar for less than $500 AUD (less than 15k Baht) on one of their sales and I have had many tickets in past for under $600 AUD and this can be done regularly if you watch for the promotions and book well in advance.

Sure Jetstar are a budget airline and there are no extras but all I want is a seat to get me to the destination.

I would rather save my money and spend it in Thailand rather than burn it up on over priced air tickets.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Bkkbound]

I;ve stuck with this airline for for 15 years, 11 yrs of which were a Gold card holder, up until the The coup free upgrades were common, The newer aircraft LHR-BKK are much better that the old crates. I;ve seen various changes with flight crew profiles which are clearly linked to the people in charge at the time,

Its true the service is generally crap, the last 3 years have involved travelling with very young children, has one confrontation with a stewardess who refused to supply milk for the baby, ended up demanding to see the pilot and submitted one of a number of complaints, they always seem to give 100$ as compensation for some reason.

I booked flights in Dec for April 26th this year at £560 per adult and ridiculous prices for the two kids but all in under £2k , I have used Eva and singapore but there is something about having that first singha on the thai flight that really relaxes me...

Edited January 7, 2014 by Bkkbound

[hendy6741]

Nice to know that everyone on TVF has the ability to run a multi billion bhat company, bunch of arm chair managers

Sent from my GT-N8000 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[ezzra]

With all the LLC (low cost carries) nibbling at the hills and taking business from 1st tier

airlines, no wonder why TG is in the lurch, I booked AAX BKK-MEL this month RTN

for b.21,000 inclusive 30kg luggage, food and seats selected while TG want b.38,000

for the same, soon AA Thai will fly non-spot direct to Oz and TG will have a real challenge

on their hands....

[MrSlatersParrot]

Flew Business a few years ago with wife in economy (long story which I dont want to recount here) had flown with them many times on business class before tried to charm an upgrade with the missus. Met with dumfounded arrogance and an attitude of what the cheek. Had had similar upgrades willingly proferred with Cathay Pacific before and let them know I had a choice. Suffice to stay Business was only about a third full. The old boot in charge of the Business Class cabin treated me with barely hidden contempt for most of the flight. Vowed that would be the last time. No longer in a position to get Business gratis anymore so fly Eva which are always flexible , the cheapest perfectly adequate and pleasant hostesses. Even when our Thai monks are in England and return to Thailand they fly EVA now - no upgrade either. Lest we forget ....

Been bumped up to business class from premium economy from heathrow with Eva which was nice. Not quite as good as virgin putting me in upper class Lhr-LA.

It's all getting very pricey now

The fewer customers the fewer planes.

Thai not fit for purpose anymore I fear.

Way too expensive

[davehowden]

"THAI is abnormally risky asset. Analysis and calculation of next after-hype price of THAI AIRWAYS F is based on 1 month time horizon."

http://www.macroaxis.com/invest/market/THAF.F--hype--THAI-AIRWAYS-F

[tomyummer]

"The airlines has never missed its payment date since it was founded."

In other words, they've never been profitable since being founded? Yikes. What a great company.

[tomyummer]

My best experience with Thai was a few days ago catching a flight from Chiang Mai back to Bangkok. At New Year's end I picked up a business class seat for 700 baht more than Air Asia from the counter. With an included 30kg luggage check in, priority boarding, lounge use, food on the flight and large seats, it was the best gift I received from Thai.

[Ricardo]

I thought that All domestic airlines-routes Budget were moved to DM.

True, Air Asia & Nok Air & One-Two-Go switched to DMK, but Thail Smile (like it's parent-company Thai International) flies from BKK Suvarnhabhumi.

Bangkok Airways, as a boutique/premium-service airline, also uses BKK and not DMK.

[geriatrickid]

Smile approx. income from 200 persons=600,000 Baht.--to BKK from Udon

Air Asia ::::: income from 200 persons=200,000 Baht-to DM from Udon.

Smile need 400,000 baht to cover extra charges ??? BS##T

I thought that All domestic airlines-routes Budget were moved to DM.

You see Nok 50% Thai are competing against Air Asia. Udon DM.

Thai using smile runs a monopoly to BKK--nice move Thai-Government---this started after AAsia moved to DM

I long for the day AAsia get the UK go ahead from DM so as there is no switching airports. Then Thai will have to re think.

Some pretty impressive stats more like an epic thanks for them.

As 90 odd percent of ex Thai passengers on forum here have pointed out, still many planes outdated-cabin crew-food- and all the deadwood big wigs on these boards, extra high amount of VIP free bees, I was a regular over years until I said sod the air miles perks. Now EVA-Emirates-Etihad. most of my friends Turkish.

We need one or two Big named carriers to fly out of DM to Europe. is someone stopping this ??? London has 5 airports why not utilize DM. Gatwick and Stanstead. do ok.

Again, you are making statements that are erroneous and not based on fact. If you had taken a few minutes to read Air Asia’s most recent investor presentation you would see that what I wrote was correct.

You illustration uses an estimate of income that is absolutely false. When did Air Asia ever have 200 seats on any domestic flight in Thailand? It is a complete impossibility because Air Asia uses the AB-320 configured to carry 180 seats. Air Asia crams its pax onto its metal using seats with 29” pitch. Thai Smile also uses the AB-320, but it offers 168 seats for domestic and 172 seats on international flights. Thai Smile offers a range of pitch from 29” in the back to 31” in special rows to 33” in Smile Plus. Do you understand the significance and that there is a cost associated with providing the extra space?

You assume a 100% yield. Air Asia reports a load factor (Q3-2013) of 83%.This is its largest yield rate to date and is a large increase over the previous quarter. Even though the annual load factor will most likely come in at approx. 80%, let’s use the higher yield. Can you do basic math? 0.83 * 180 = 149.4 pax per airplane. Your yield income calculation is WRONG because your input values are WRONG. You do not even include the Air Asia declared ancillary income of 354 THB per pax. Thai Smile's load factors are largely dependent upon the international feeder flights. (While the load factors have not been released yet, they are reported as in excess of 80%.

You refuse to recognize that BKK generates significantly higher costs than the use of DMK. Those higher costs are not specific to Thai International , but apply to any airline using BKK.

Do you know what another cost component is? Maintenance. If you took the time to read the Air Asia presentation, you would see that Air Asia takes pride in its operating strategy as a cyclic fleet leader with highest amount of time and cycle on its engine @ 16,604 cycles without removal. Thai as a company has a different strategy and its last report indicates that it uses a shorter cycle approach. More maintenance means higher costs. Even Airbus acknowledges that some operators stretch out maintenance. According to Airbus, A320 operators adjust maintenance intervals to suit their own schedules. For example, one has adopted a 20-month C-check cycle, distributing six-year tasks between 60- and 80-month checks to ensure maximum aircraft availability, while another operator uses 24- month C checks to save one heavy-maintenance shop visit every six years.

Do you understand what that means?

You comment that you want to see an LCC fly out of DMK to Europe. All I can say is wow. Where were you in 2012 when Air Asia cut its long hauls to Europe and India because of the high costs associated with the routes?

In respect to why Thai Smile is still located at BKK, it is due to 2 reasons;

1. The DMK airlines did not want Thai at DMK because Thai is fed by Star Alliance carriers and there would have been a greater likelihood that this would have resulted in pax originating from *A carriers choosing a Thai airways product. In plain language, it was to in the LCC carrier's best interest that Thai not relocate Thai Smile to DMK.

2. Most international arrival Pax prefer to connect to an airline that offers interline baggage transfer service. None of theDMK LCC's offer interline baggage services because it has a cost. More labour and equipment is required. It is not in the LCC operating model. Do you not understand that pax connecting to the major destinations of Krabi, Koh Samui, Phuket, Udon Thani and Chiang Mai expect baggage transfer and it is a necessity. A full service airline like Bangkok Airways remains at BKK because of its code shares and willingness to incur the costs associated with interline transfers. Full service such as complimentary meals and beverages, a proper response to IROPS, lounges and baggage services have costs. Those costs are reflected in the airfare.

Edited January 8, 2014 by geriatrickid

[belg]

nothing to do with

overpriced seats in old airplanes

would it ?

[ginjag]

Smile approx. income from 200 persons=600,000 Baht.--to BKK from Udon

Air Asia ::::: income from 200 persons=200,000 Baht-to DM from Udon.

Smile need 400,000 baht to cover extra charges ??? BS##T

I thought that All domestic airlines-routes Budget were moved to DM.

You see Nok 50% Thai are competing against Air Asia. Udon DM.

Thai using smile runs a monopoly to BKK--nice move Thai-Government---this started after AAsia moved to DM

I long for the day AAsia get the UK go ahead from DM so as there is no switching airports. Then Thai will have to re think.

Some pretty impressive stats more like an epic thanks for them.

As 90 odd percent of ex Thai passengers on forum here have pointed out, still many planes outdated-cabin crew-food- and all the deadwood big wigs on these boards, extra high amount of VIP free bees, I was a regular over years until I said sod the air miles perks. Now EVA-Emirates-Etihad. most of my friends Turkish.

We need one or two Big named carriers to fly out of DM to Europe. is someone stopping this ??? London has 5 airports why not utilize DM. Gatwick and Stanstead. do ok.

Again, you are making statements that are erroneous and not based on fact. If you had taken a few minutes to read Air Asia’s most recent investor presentation you would see that what I wrote was correct.

You illustration uses an estimate of income that is absolutely false. When did Air Asia ever have 200 seats on any domestic flight in Thailand? It is a complete impossibility because Air Asia uses the AB-320 configured to carry 180 seats. Air Asia crams its pax onto its metal using seats with 29” pitch. Thai Smile also uses the AB-320, but it offers 168 seats for domestic and 172 seats on international flights. Thai Smile offers a range of pitch from 29” in the back to 31” in special rows to 33” in Smile Plus. Do you understand the significance and that there is a cost associated with providing the extra space?

You assume a 100% yield. Air Asia reports a load factor (Q3-2013) of 83%.This is its largest yield rate to date and is a large increase over the previous quarter. Even though the annual load factor will most likely come in at approx. 80%, let’s use the higher yield. Can you do basic math? 0.83 * 180 = 149.4 pax per airplane. Your yield income calculation is WRONG because your input values are WRONG. You do not even include the Air Asia declared ancillary income of 354 THB per pax. Thai Smile's load factors are largely dependent upon the international feeder flights. (While the load factors have not been released yet, they are reported as in excess of 80%.

You refuse to recognize that BKK generates significantly higher costs than the use of DMK. Those higher costs are not specific to Thai International , but apply to any airline using BKK.

Do you know what another cost component is? Maintenance. If you took the time to read the Air Asia presentation, you would see that Air Asia takes pride in its operating strategy as a cyclic fleet leader with highest amount of time and cycle on its engine @ 16,604 cycles without removal. Thai as a company has a different strategy and its last report indicates that it uses a shorter cycle approach. More maintenance means higher costs. Even Airbus acknowledges that some operators stretch out maintenance. According to Airbus, A320 operators adjust maintenance intervals to suit their own schedules. For example, one has adopted a 20-month C-check cycle, distributing six-year tasks between 60- and 80-month checks to ensure maximum aircraft availability, while another operator uses 24- month C checks to save one heavy-maintenance shop visit every six years.

Do you understand what that means?

You comment that you want to see an LCC fly out of DMK to Europe. All I can say is wow. Where were you in 2012 when Air Asia cut its long hauls to Europe and India because of the high costs associated with the routes?

In respect to why Thai Smile is still located at BKK, it is due to 2 reasons;

1. The DMK airlines did not want Thai at DMK because Thai is fed by Star Alliance carriers and there would have been a greater likelihood that this would have resulted in pax originating from *A carriers choosing a Thai airways product. In plain language, it was to in the LCC carrier's best interest that Thai not relocate Thai Smile to DMK.

2. Most international arrival Pax prefer to connect to an airline that offers interline baggage transfer service. None of theDMK LCC's offer interline baggage services because it has a cost. More labour and equipment is required. It is not in the LCC operating model. Do you not understand that pax connecting to the major destinations of Krabi, Koh Samui, Phuket, Udon Thani and Chiang Mai expect baggage transfer and it is a necessity. A full service airline like Bangkok Airways remains at BKK because of its code shares and willingness to incur the costs associated with interline transfers. Full service such as complimentary meals and beverages, a proper response to IROPS, lounges and baggage services have costs. Those costs are reflected in the airfare.

Oh my god you surfaced again.

I used 200 seats on both aircraft for easy figures. whose to 15 seats.

The prices were rounded up -down for easier figures NOT for exact figures, you think everyone is a fool but you.

Air Asia pulled out because of High cost for the route ???? so Thai at a higher cost from BKK can afford to run the UK route then--maybe that's why they are near bankrupt

Thai smile was put on routs to steal from budget carriers knowing of transfer probs. Hence the reason I have to use SMILE to get to BKK for meeting friends and family and my own transfers.

My figures of revenue taken by both Airlines is not a true one BUT look at them again ---we therefore say 185 passengers x the fares--still give way over the top money needed to be landing at BKK by Smile. Your figures please from an Air Asia flight say 80% full and likewise Smile.

Now please tell me after you get the money calculated why Smile have to charge these prices--after all it is a budget airline. Bangkok airways are a boutique airline luxury-not budget and therefore do charge OTT prices Smile is set up for budget NOT boutique.

Please reply without the BS as we all can look at this any time stick to easy figures and why the price difference --not this rant.

[Arkady]

Better claim those air miles.

[fish fingers]

"Oh my god you surfaced again."

[geriatrickid]

Smile approx. income from 200 persons=600,000 Baht.--to BKK from Udon

Air Asia ::::: income from 200 persons=200,000 Baht-to DM from Udon.

Smile need 400,000 baht to cover extra charges ??? BS##T

I thought that All domestic airlines-routes Budget were moved to DM.

You see Nok 50% Thai are competing against Air Asia. Udon DM.

Thai using smile runs a monopoly to BKK--nice move Thai-Government---this started after AAsia moved to DM

I long for the day AAsia get the UK go ahead from DM so as there is no switching airports. Then Thai will have to re think.

Some pretty impressive stats more like an epic thanks for them.

As 90 odd percent of ex Thai passengers on forum here have pointed out, still many planes outdated-cabin crew-food- and all the deadwood big wigs on these boards, extra high amount of VIP free bees, I was a regular over years until I said sod the air miles perks. Now EVA-Emirates-Etihad. most of my friends Turkish.

We need one or two Big named carriers to fly out of DM to Europe. is someone stopping this ??? London has 5 airports why not utilize DM. Gatwick and Stanstead. do ok.

Again, you are making statements that are erroneous and not based on fact. If you had taken a few minutes to read Air Asia’s most recent investor presentation you would see that what I wrote was correct.

You illustration uses an estimate of income that is absolutely false. When did Air Asia ever have 200 seats on any domestic flight in Thailand? It is a complete impossibility because Air Asia uses the AB-320 configured to carry 180 seats. Air Asia crams its pax onto its metal using seats with 29” pitch. Thai Smile also uses the AB-320, but it offers 168 seats for domestic and 172 seats on international flights. Thai Smile offers a range of pitch from 29” in the back to 31” in special rows to 33” in Smile Plus. Do you understand the significance and that there is a cost associated with providing the extra space?

You assume a 100% yield. Air Asia reports a load factor (Q3-2013) of 83%.This is its largest yield rate to date and is a large increase over the previous quarter. Even though the annual load factor will most likely come in at approx. 80%, let’s use the higher yield. Can you do basic math? 0.83 * 180 = 149.4 pax per airplane. Your yield income calculation is WRONG because your input values are WRONG. You do not even include the Air Asia declared ancillary income of 354 THB per pax. Thai Smile's load factors are largely dependent upon the international feeder flights. (While the load factors have not been released yet, they are reported as in excess of 80%.

You refuse to recognize that BKK generates significantly higher costs than the use of DMK. Those higher costs are not specific to Thai International , but apply to any airline using BKK.

Do you know what another cost component is? Maintenance. If you took the time to read the Air Asia presentation, you would see that Air Asia takes pride in its operating strategy as a cyclic fleet leader with highest amount of time and cycle on its engine @ 16,604 cycles without removal. Thai as a company has a different strategy and its last report indicates that it uses a shorter cycle approach. More maintenance means higher costs. Even Airbus acknowledges that some operators stretch out maintenance. According to Airbus, A320 operators adjust maintenance intervals to suit their own schedules. For example, one has adopted a 20-month C-check cycle, distributing six-year tasks between 60- and 80-month checks to ensure maximum aircraft availability, while another operator uses 24- month C checks to save one heavy-maintenance shop visit every six years.

Do you understand what that means?

You comment that you want to see an LCC fly out of DMK to Europe. All I can say is wow. Where were you in 2012 when Air Asia cut its long hauls to Europe and India because of the high costs associated with the routes?

In respect to why Thai Smile is still located at BKK, it is due to 2 reasons;

1. The DMK airlines did not want Thai at DMK because Thai is fed by Star Alliance carriers and there would have been a greater likelihood that this would have resulted in pax originating from *A carriers choosing a Thai airways product. In plain language, it was to in the LCC carrier's best interest that Thai not relocate Thai Smile to DMK.

2. Most international arrival Pax prefer to connect to an airline that offers interline baggage transfer service. None of theDMK LCC's offer interline baggage services because it has a cost. More labour and equipment is required. It is not in the LCC operating model. Do you not understand that pax connecting to the major destinations of Krabi, Koh Samui, Phuket, Udon Thani and Chiang Mai expect baggage transfer and it is a necessity. A full service airline like Bangkok Airways remains at BKK because of its code shares and willingness to incur the costs associated with interline transfers. Full service such as complimentary meals and beverages, a proper response to IROPS, lounges and baggage services have costs. Those costs are reflected in the airfare.

Oh my god you surfaced again.

I used 200 seats on both aircraft for easy figures. whose to 15 seats.

The prices were rounded up -down for easier figures NOT for exact figures, you think everyone is a fool but you.

Air Asia pulled out because of High cost for the route ???? so Thai at a higher cost from BKK can afford to run the UK route then--maybe that's why they are near bankrupt

Thai smile was put on routs to steal from budget carriers knowing of transfer probs. Hence the reason I have to use SMILE to get to BKK for meeting friends and family and my own transfers.

My figures of revenue taken by both Airlines is not a true one BUT look at them again ---we therefore say 185 passengers x the fares--still give way over the top money needed to be landing at BKK by Smile. Your figures please from an Air Asia flight say 80% full and likewise Smile.

Now please tell me after you get the money calculated why Smile have to charge these prices--after all it is a budget airline. Bangkok airways are a boutique airline luxury-not budget and therefore do charge OTT prices Smile is set up for budget NOT boutique.

Please reply without the BS as we all can look at this any time stick to easy figures and why the price difference --not this rant.

Are you simply being obstinate or are you that bereft of basic business knowledge to understand cost structure?

1. Thai Smile was not put on routes to steal customers from the LCC. That is an idiotic statement and absolutely false.

Thai International unit transferred its domestic routes to Thai Smile. Thai was flying these routes long before Air Asia, Nok, Thai Orient et al.

2. How many times do you have to be told that flying out of BKK is more expensive for the airlines than DMK?

Does it not register with you that if landing & parking fees are running about 40-50% more expensive at BKK,, that the additional fuel costs related to taxiing, delays and congestion can add a fuel consumption of an extra hour, that additional the services such as complimentary F&B and IROP allowances and contingent expenses assumed by Bangkok Airways & Thai Smile, additional services such as lounges and interline baggage transfers and a different approach to maintenance add costs? Those costs are reflected in the pricing structure for Bangkok Airways and Thai Smile. LCC carriers such as Nok and Air Asia do not have those expenses so their airfares reflect that.

The major carriers flying the EU to Thailand routes have airfares that reflect the higher costs. Air Asia made the business decision that the pricing it would have to use would not be competitive with the other airlines, and it would not be able to meet the profit goal.

Thai Smile is NOT set up to be a budget airline. It is set up along the SIAL model similar to Scoot, to have a lower cost structure than Thai International. Thai Smile still is a full service airline that offers services that the LCCs do not. The creation of Thai Smile allowed Thai Airways to hire staff at lower wages and with a different pension and health care plan than Thai international. Labour costs were a big component of the costs.

If you do not want, nor need the services offered by Thai Smile, good. However, the millions of pax using the airline do want those services and are willing to pay for them. The transition to Thai Smile has turned marginal routes around.

Edited January 8, 2014 by geriatrickid

[geriatrickid]

Better claim those air miles.

You are opening up a new can of worms. The surcharges that the FF boards call scam charges are horrible on some routes. Air Canada is considered the worst offender along with Lufthansa. SQ doesn't even release its premium seats until about 2 weeks before departure. Flights using Hong Kong as a hub can minimize the surcharges. EVA and Swiss are two of the *A that don't impose some of the more offensive surcharges. I just booked a reward flight for March in business on a long haul using Thai, Lufthansa and Air Canada and my surcharges were $1500. Had I gotten the desire routing using Swiss & Thai it would have been $835. EVA would have used Vienna as a hub forcing me on to Lufthansa/Austrian adding various EU specific surcharges at $980.

[ginjag]

Smile approx. income from 200 persons=600,000 Baht.--to BKK from Udon

Air Asia ::::: income from 200 persons=200,000 Baht-to DM from Udon.

Smile need 400,000 baht to cover extra charges ??? BS##T

I thought that All domestic airlines-routes Budget were moved to DM.

You see Nok 50% Thai are competing against Air Asia. Udon DM.

Thai using smile runs a monopoly to BKK--nice move Thai-Government---this started after AAsia moved to DM

I long for the day AAsia get the UK go ahead from DM so as there is no switching airports. Then Thai will have to re think.

Some pretty impressive stats more like an epic thanks for them.

As 90 odd percent of ex Thai passengers on forum here have pointed out, still many planes outdated-cabin crew-food- and all the deadwood big wigs on these boards, extra high amount of VIP free bees, I was a regular over years until I said sod the air miles perks. Now EVA-Emirates-Etihad. most of my friends Turkish.

We need one or two Big named carriers to fly out of DM to Europe. is someone stopping this ??? London has 5 airports why not utilize DM. Gatwick and Stanstead. do ok.

Again, you are making statements that are erroneous and not based on fact. If you had taken a few minutes to read Air Asia’s most recent investor presentation you would see that what I wrote was correct.

You illustration uses an estimate of income that is absolutely false. When did Air Asia ever have 200 seats on any domestic flight in Thailand? It is a complete impossibility because Air Asia uses the AB-320 configured to carry 180 seats. Air Asia crams its pax onto its metal using seats with 29” pitch. Thai Smile also uses the AB-320, but it offers 168 seats for domestic and 172 seats on international flights. Thai Smile offers a range of pitch from 29” in the back to 31” in special rows to 33” in Smile Plus. Do you understand the significance and that there is a cost associated with providing the extra space?

You assume a 100% yield. Air Asia reports a load factor (Q3-2013) of 83%.This is its largest yield rate to date and is a large increase over the previous quarter. Even though the annual load factor will most likely come in at approx. 80%, let’s use the higher yield. Can you do basic math? 0.83 * 180 = 149.4 pax per airplane. Your yield income calculation is WRONG because your input values are WRONG. You do not even include the Air Asia declared ancillary income of 354 THB per pax. Thai Smile's load factors are largely dependent upon the international feeder flights. (While the load factors have not been released yet, they are reported as in excess of 80%.

You refuse to recognize that BKK generates significantly higher costs than the use of DMK. Those higher costs are not specific to Thai International , but apply to any airline using BKK.

Do you know what another cost component is? Maintenance. If you took the time to read the Air Asia presentation, you would see that Air Asia takes pride in its operating strategy as a cyclic fleet leader with highest amount of time and cycle on its engine @ 16,604 cycles without removal. Thai as a company has a different strategy and its last report indicates that it uses a shorter cycle approach. More maintenance means higher costs. Even Airbus acknowledges that some operators stretch out maintenance. According to Airbus, A320 operators adjust maintenance intervals to suit their own schedules. For example, one has adopted a 20-month C-check cycle, distributing six-year tasks between 60- and 80-month checks to ensure maximum aircraft availability, while another operator uses 24- month C checks to save one heavy-maintenance shop visit every six years.

Do you understand what that means?

You comment that you want to see an LCC fly out of DMK to Europe. All I can say is wow. Where were you in 2012 when Air Asia cut its long hauls to Europe and India because of the high costs associated with the routes?

In respect to why Thai Smile is still located at BKK, it is due to 2 reasons;

1. The DMK airlines did not want Thai at DMK because Thai is fed by Star Alliance carriers and there would have been a greater likelihood that this would have resulted in pax originating from *A carriers choosing a Thai airways product. In plain language, it was to in the LCC carrier's best interest that Thai not relocate Thai Smile to DMK.

2. Most international arrival Pax prefer to connect to an airline that offers interline baggage transfer service. None of theDMK LCC's offer interline baggage services because it has a cost. More labour and equipment is required. It is not in the LCC operating model. Do you not understand that pax connecting to the major destinations of Krabi, Koh Samui, Phuket, Udon Thani and Chiang Mai expect baggage transfer and it is a necessity. A full service airline like Bangkok Airways remains at BKK because of its code shares and willingness to incur the costs associated with interline transfers. Full service such as complimentary meals and beverages, a proper response to IROPS, lounges and baggage services have costs. Those costs are reflected in the airfare.

Oh my god you surfaced again.

I used 200 seats on both aircraft for easy figures. whose to 15 seats.

The prices were rounded up -down for easier figures NOT for exact figures, you think everyone is a fool but you.

Air Asia pulled out because of High cost for the route ???? so Thai at a higher cost from BKK can afford to run the UK route then--maybe that's why they are near bankrupt

Thai smile was put on routs to steal from budget carriers knowing of transfer probs. Hence the reason I have to use SMILE to get to BKK for meeting friends and family and my own transfers.

My figures of revenue taken by both Airlines is not a true one BUT look at them again ---we therefore say 185 passengers x the fares--still give way over the top money needed to be landing at BKK by Smile. Your figures please from an Air Asia flight say 80% full and likewise Smile.

Now please tell me after you get the money calculated why Smile have to charge these prices--after all it is a budget airline. Bangkok airways are a boutique airline luxury-not budget and therefore do charge OTT prices Smile is set up for budget NOT boutique.

Please reply without the BS as we all can look at this any time stick to easy figures and why the price difference --not this rant.

Are you simply being obstinate or are you that bereft of basic business knowledge to understand cost structure?

1. Thai Smile was not put on routes to steal customers from the LCC. That is an idiotic statement and absolutely false.

Thai International unit transferred its domestic routes to Thai Smile. Thai was flying these routes long before Air Asia, Nok, Thai Orient et al.

2. How many times do you have to be told that flying out of BKK is more expensive for the airlines than DMK?

Does it not register with you that if landing & parking fees are running about 40-50% more expensive at BKK,, that the additional fuel costs related to taxiing, delays and congestion can add a fuel consumption of an extra hour, that additional the services such as complimentary F&B and IROP allowances and contingent expenses assumed by Bangkok Airways & Thai Smile, additional services such as lounges and interline baggage transfers and a different approach to maintenance add costs? Those costs are reflected in the pricing structure for Bangkok Airways and Thai Smile. LCC carriers such as Nok and Air Asia do not have those expenses so their airfares reflect that.

The major carriers flying the EU to Thailand routes have airfares that reflect the higher costs. Air Asia made the business decision that the pricing it would have to use would not be competitive with the other airlines, and it would not be able to meet the profit goal.

Thai Smile is NOT set up to be a budget airline. It is set up along the SIAL model similar to Scoot, to have a lower cost structure than Thai International. Thai Smile still is a full service airline that offers services that the LCCs do not. The creation of Thai Smile allowed Thai Airways to hire staff at lower wages and with a different pension and health care plan than Thai international. Labour costs were a big component of the costs.

If you do not want, nor need the services offered by Thai Smile, good. However, the millions of pax using the airline do want those services and are willing to pay for them. The transition to Thai Smile has turned marginal routes around.

To me and a million others Smile is a budget airline.

Thai is on the route so they can operate Thai and Smile if they wish.

Knowing A Asia are only to DM smile are taking Swampy passengers, so to my mind are steeling.

Thai Smile Nok are 50% Thai, who is hogging it ???

Your No 1 is not idiotic, Do not reply if you want to try to use words like this, you then are a typing freak who bulls his way through S##T that I am not interested in.

You didn't answer the important part Revenue collected---I gave you a lower passenger and % carried it made little difference in profit margin and fees paid .

YOU told me Smile have to charge these prices to cover extra charges at Swampy. Why didn't Smile use DM as the charges were less there ??? because Thai could still cover the Swampy run.

SMILE are propping up Thai at the minute.

please answer simply quickly what point I made as to the extra revenue---YOU said and I will say it again Smile have to charge more because of landing and other charges--so the 250,000Baht is needed to cover is it.

Please do not again use a bleeding page full of stuff that is not of interest to my question No need unless you cannot help it.

[steveromagnino]

Comparing to SIA, isn't it that Nok Air is the low cost carrier (equivalent of SCOOT, Tiger), and Thai Smile is the regional secondary cities carrier (equivalent of Silk Air)? Like a bridge between LLC and a normal airline?

LLC usually means:

- paying for food onboard

- reduced luggage and no frequent flyer benefits

- possibly no assigned seating/preferred seating premium

- reduced seat size/recline

- using secondary airports

- point to point

Much as I love Tony Fernandez, I never fly Airasia and other LLC, the tiny non reclining seats, hygiene, bus like atmosphere and general way the whole experience works just means I either go with a 'proper airline', or I drive.

BTW I was actually at the conference when K Tossapon actually stated (way back when Suvarnabhumi first opened and they were running to there) that they didn't care about the plan of a low cost terminal at Suvarnabhumi, they were quite happy to move over to Don Muang to save their customers money. As it is point to point, the idea of linking flights matters less I think to their customer base (who don't mind paying 400b to go from one terminal to the other I guess, and that's not money Airasia sees anyhow).

So it's not a conspiracy from Thai to keep them out of Suvarnabhumi, rather mutual agreement to head over to Don Muang as a result of the airport being not really being able to handle the traffic.

[ginjag]

Comparing to SIA, isn't it that Nok Air is the low cost carrier (equivalent of SCOOT, Tiger), and Thai Smile is the regional secondary cities carrier (equivalent of Silk Air)? Like a bridge between LLC and a normal airline?

LLC usually means:

- paying for food onboard

- reduced luggage and no frequent flyer benefits

- possibly no assigned seating/preferred seating premium

- reduced seat size/recline

- using secondary airports

- point to point

Much as I love Tony Fernandez, I never fly Airasia and other LLC, the tiny non reclining seats, hygiene, bus like atmosphere and general way the whole experience works just means I either go with a 'proper airline', or I drive.

BTW I was actually at the conference when K Tossapon actually stated (way back when Suvarnabhumi first opened and they were running to there) that they didn't care about the plan of a low cost terminal at Suvarnabhumi, they were quite happy to move over to Don Muang to save their customers money. As it is point to point, the idea of linking flights matters less I think to their customer base (who don't mind paying 400b to go from one terminal to the other I guess, and that's not money Airasia sees anyhow).

So it's not a conspiracy from Thai to keep them out of Suvarnabhumi, rather mutual agreement to head over to Don Muang as a result of the airport being not really being able to handle the traffic.

Depends on what each individual wants doesn't it ? I am Udon based to fly down to BKK on a 50 min flight not carrying big suitcases around as was in the old Spain trip days. Who the hell wants a reclining seat on a 50 min trip, who wants nuts and coffee, I had seat numbers with A Asia, and no buses from plane to terminal. I have paid 150 baht--750 baht--1500 baht, price differs --early bookings internet Brilliant.

Thai Smile to Swampy 3000 bht 55 mins flight I had no different seat room with Smile, and for that extra I had to bus it from tarmac to terminal Ha Ha.

Now going to swampy with A.Asia flight 50 mins out and onto transport to swampy arrive and in again.

This government( lost a chair from the room,) not providing direct rail link between airports. Within a few years it is past it's sell by date---Brill Thaksin brain.

I always said control the airforce send them to Ubon-Korat base. Totally occupying DM for passenger/cargo.