mamakk!!!

[pic source]

via Flight:

Going down the checklist of what the most successful short-haul low-cost carriers have in common, some of the existing and planned widebody low-cost carriers clearly fit the general mould. Starting with a clean sheet of paper? Check. In-flight frills only at an additional cost? Check. Point-to-point operations? Check. Single aircraft type? Check. Ensuring aircraft utilisation is high? Check. Operating to secondary airports where possible? Check. Cutting distribution costs by selling through websites or call centres? Check.

There are plenty of obstacles, however. These include the competitive response of the big network airlines, which can subsidise their low-yield, cheap fare offerings at the back of their aircraft with cargo revenue and high-yield revenue from front-end traffic. Major long-haul airlines also tend to have sizeable fleets, allowing them to spread costs over a wider base; natural feed through interline arrangements; and they already push the envelope in terms of high aircraft utilisation. In short, many full-service airlines are already fairly cost-competitive when it comes to the long haul, leaving less room for a new player to differentiate itself with radically lower fares.

Well, I’m no aviation expert, but according to theStar report, the unit cost of flying by AirAsia Xis US$0.019, and if we take into account the current flight distance from Kuala Lumpur to London is 10,561 km, we get ~US$200. Convert that to Ringgit & it’s ~RM700!

But there’s this confusing report on CNN quoting the ASK at RM$0.019, which in this case would make AirAsia X’s business model even more convincing…

Link