MAPA and MAS
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: UAE
Age: 61
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The malaise known as MAS
By Random Thoughts
MAS is about half the size of SIA or put in another way MAS has fewer aircrafts than SIA but why was aircraft maintenance so much higher than SIA? SIA uses about 3% of sales to take care the maintenance but MAS uses a whopping 11% of its sales revenue to service the aircraft.
Recently I read an article on MAS and Air Asia. HERE It prompted me to take a closer look at MAS from the financial angle. However instead of comparing to AirAsia I compare the financial statement of MAS with that of SIA. Why SIA and not Airasia ? The reason is AirAsia being a budget airline has a lower cost structure. Further it is always better to bench mark against a good competitor , isn't it ?
Although one would argue that it is not totally fair to compare the two airlines financial because of the different in companies size and different financial period as SIA financial year ends 31 March and MAS financial year ends 31 December. But in the absence of other info, financial statements comparison serves as a good starting point.
Now let us take a look at the two airlines' INCOME STATEMENTS.
I used exchange rate of 2.2 ringgit to 1 S$. The % shown is % to Sales of various expenses items.
MAS & SIA COMPARISON SIASIA MAS $SRM MILLION RM MILLION
YE31/3/20102.2 YE31/12/2010 Note REVENUE12,70727,955 12,980 Staff cost2,1554,74017.0%2,16416.7% Directors Remuneration5110.0%40.0% Fuel cost4,1959,22833.0%4,38433.8% Depreciation1,7143,77013.5%3732.9% Armotisation of Intangible assets43940.3%33 Aircraft maintenance3427532.7%1,46711.3%ACommision3176962.5%4873.8% Landing,parking, & overflying charges5891,2954.6%2461.9% Handling +in flight meal +crew+passenger costs1,4163,11411.1%1,38910.7% Rental of aircraft5531,2164.4%1,60712.4%BMaterial/Oth Engineering3758263.0%710.5% Adevertising & Promotion2104631.7%930.7% Computer booking system 1841.4%CInsurance581270.5%600.5% Compay accomodation / Rental1423121.1%1811.4% Other Operating Expenses5321,1704.2%5824.5% 12,64427815.92 13,324102.7% Operating Profit/(Loss)63139.480.0%(344)
DDerivative Gain 139
EFinance Expenses (net)-68.9-152 -138 Finance Income49.5109 71 Other Operating Income922020.7%5364.1%FAssociated Companies/JV149328 18 PROFIT BEFORE TAXATION285627 282
Those highlighted in color : blue and red are items that seems to be defy logic and common sense and are further explored below:
A) Aircraft maintenance
MAS is about half the size of SIA or put in another way MAS has fewer aircrafts than SIA but why was aircraft maintenance so much higher than SIA? SIA uses about 3% of sales to take care the maintenance but MAS uses a whopping 11% of its sales revenue to service the aircraft. AND not only the % to sales was high , the absolute figure was also higher than that of SIA. I could not help but guess and hopefully I am wrong that someone are getting really rich at MAS and indirectly the nation's expenses.
READ MORE HERE.
MAS is about half the size of SIA or put in another way MAS has fewer aircrafts than SIA but why was aircraft maintenance so much higher than SIA? SIA uses about 3% of sales to take care the maintenance but MAS uses a whopping 11% of its sales revenue to service the aircraft.
Recently I read an article on MAS and Air Asia. HERE It prompted me to take a closer look at MAS from the financial angle. However instead of comparing to AirAsia I compare the financial statement of MAS with that of SIA. Why SIA and not Airasia ? The reason is AirAsia being a budget airline has a lower cost structure. Further it is always better to bench mark against a good competitor , isn't it ?
Although one would argue that it is not totally fair to compare the two airlines financial because of the different in companies size and different financial period as SIA financial year ends 31 March and MAS financial year ends 31 December. But in the absence of other info, financial statements comparison serves as a good starting point.
Now let us take a look at the two airlines' INCOME STATEMENTS.
I used exchange rate of 2.2 ringgit to 1 S$. The % shown is % to Sales of various expenses items.
MAS & SIA COMPARISON SIASIA MAS $SRM MILLION RM MILLION
YE31/3/20102.2 YE31/12/2010 Note REVENUE12,70727,955 12,980 Staff cost2,1554,74017.0%2,16416.7% Directors Remuneration5110.0%40.0% Fuel cost4,1959,22833.0%4,38433.8% Depreciation1,7143,77013.5%3732.9% Armotisation of Intangible assets43940.3%33 Aircraft maintenance3427532.7%1,46711.3%ACommision3176962.5%4873.8% Landing,parking, & overflying charges5891,2954.6%2461.9% Handling +in flight meal +crew+passenger costs1,4163,11411.1%1,38910.7% Rental of aircraft5531,2164.4%1,60712.4%BMaterial/Oth Engineering3758263.0%710.5% Adevertising & Promotion2104631.7%930.7% Computer booking system 1841.4%CInsurance581270.5%600.5% Compay accomodation / Rental1423121.1%1811.4% Other Operating Expenses5321,1704.2%5824.5% 12,64427815.92 13,324102.7% Operating Profit/(Loss)63139.480.0%(344)
DDerivative Gain 139
EFinance Expenses (net)-68.9-152 -138 Finance Income49.5109 71 Other Operating Income922020.7%5364.1%FAssociated Companies/JV149328 18 PROFIT BEFORE TAXATION285627 282
Those highlighted in color : blue and red are items that seems to be defy logic and common sense and are further explored below:
A) Aircraft maintenance
MAS is about half the size of SIA or put in another way MAS has fewer aircrafts than SIA but why was aircraft maintenance so much higher than SIA? SIA uses about 3% of sales to take care the maintenance but MAS uses a whopping 11% of its sales revenue to service the aircraft. AND not only the % to sales was high , the absolute figure was also higher than that of SIA. I could not help but guess and hopefully I am wrong that someone are getting really rich at MAS and indirectly the nation's expenses.
READ MORE HERE.
Guest
Posts: n/a
MAS being used to make certain people rich! OMG! Its shocking! Wait.... its not, in fact its the way of the 1Bolehland! BTW just to add masala to the curry just go ask why they have a special adviser on top of a BOD and Chairman?
Oh yes he's got to look after his interest's and of his family!
Oh yes he's got to look after his interest's and of his family!
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Teluk Kemuning
Age: 54
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Will TR face justice this time around?
Ex-MAS boss broke the law, says Nazri
By Syed Jaymal Zahiid, FMT
KUALA LUMPUR: Former MAS chairman Tajuddin Ramli breached the Companies Act in not disclosing his interests when he was with the national carrier, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Nazri Aziz told the Dewan Rakyat today.
“Evidence shows that he breached Section 131 of the Companies Act, which involves disclosure of interests,” he said in response to Lim Kit Siang (DAP-Ipoh Timur), who noted that there had been no prosecution against Tajuddin despite the reports MAS had lodged with the police and anti-graft authorities.
Lim asked if the Attorney-General had the right to absolve Tajuddin of criminal liabilities.
Nazri said Tajuddin had incurred a compound fine but the Attorney-General had delayed action on the fine because a civil suit had yet to be resolved.
“As the case involves a civil claim that has not been resolved, he asked the Attorney-General’s Chambers to delay the compound. The AG’s Chambers has granted the request.”
In August, Putrajaya directed all government-linked companies (GLCs), including MAS, to drop all civil suits against Tajuddin.
READ MORE HERE.
By Syed Jaymal Zahiid, FMT
KUALA LUMPUR: Former MAS chairman Tajuddin Ramli breached the Companies Act in not disclosing his interests when he was with the national carrier, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Nazri Aziz told the Dewan Rakyat today.
“Evidence shows that he breached Section 131 of the Companies Act, which involves disclosure of interests,” he said in response to Lim Kit Siang (DAP-Ipoh Timur), who noted that there had been no prosecution against Tajuddin despite the reports MAS had lodged with the police and anti-graft authorities.
Lim asked if the Attorney-General had the right to absolve Tajuddin of criminal liabilities.
Nazri said Tajuddin had incurred a compound fine but the Attorney-General had delayed action on the fine because a civil suit had yet to be resolved.
“As the case involves a civil claim that has not been resolved, he asked the Attorney-General’s Chambers to delay the compound. The AG’s Chambers has granted the request.”
In August, Putrajaya directed all government-linked companies (GLCs), including MAS, to drop all civil suits against Tajuddin.
READ MORE HERE.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Scarborough
Age: 70
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is a bit disconcerting reading about the close ties of ex MAS boss with the government machinery; I hope this does not extend to legal matters when an aggrieved employee takes up an industrial case against MAS or any other Malaysian companies. I am tempted to apply for a position in either MAS or Air Asia, but some friends have cautioned me to get a clear view of the situation in Malaysia before embarking on such a " risky " venture. I would certainly appreciate if someone can enlighten me on how secure a job with MH or AK is, and what are their bonding conditions.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Arse end of the world
Age: 68
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Old Ace, Old Ace99 & Thrust Reverser
About a decade ago there was a bitter but colourful character known as Old Ace, Old Ace 99 and Thrust Reverser who used to post fairly inflammatory but largely true stuff about going ons in MAS and MAPA. I happened to run into an old mate who used to fly for MAS for a couple of years after the '89 debacle and he reckoned that Old Ace was a certain LCL. I begged to differ and I thought it was " Ah Kai " PW. Maybe after all these years you MAS guys can settle this for us.........a great bottle of Shiraz is on..............
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UAE
Age: 68
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MAS issues revisited
(The Malaysian Insider) - The government’s confidential settlement of its claims against Tan Sri Tajudin Ramli is under renewed scrutiny after Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin claimed knowledge this week that national asset restructuring company Danaharta did not lose money in the out-of-court deal.
The DAP today demanded answers from Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak after Khairy reopened the debate on the controversial sealed settlement by claiming during a televised debate with PKR’s Rafizi Ramli that he had been told by sources that the government had not lost out in the arrangement with Tajudin.
“Datuk Seri Najib Razak must immediately confirm if indeed his Umno Youth chief is telling the truth or is lying to the public over the above scandal. This is especially since it is the first time a BN (Barisan Nasional) politician has claimed that Tan Sri Tajudin paid part or all of his outstanding debt as part of the settlement exercise,” DAP national publicity secretary Tony Pua said in a statement today.
Khairy had cited “sources” that the former Malaysia Airlines (MAS) chairman may have paid more than the RM589 million owed to Danaharta as a result of the still undisclosed out-of-court settlement.
Pua pointed out that this was despite the fact minister Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz had last year directed all government-linked companies (GLCs) including Danaharta to withdraw all civil suits against Tajudin as both the government and the Finance Ministry had agreed that the cases will be settled out of court.
“Khairy’s claim is completely unbelievable and lacks all credibility given the clandestine manner in which the government has sought to cover up the entire episode and the refusal of any minister to confirm or deny the claim that Danaharta had in fact written off all of Tajudin’s debt,” the Petaling Jaya Utara MP said.
Danaharta and Tajudin ended their drawn-out legal battle when they settled out of court on February 14 after Putrajaya had directed in August all GLCs to drop civil suits against the former protégé of Tun Daim Zainuddin.
But the terms of the settlement remain confidential between the two parties despite a High Court decision in December 2009 for Tajudin to pay Danaharta RM589.14 million with two per cent interest per annum backdated to January 1, 2006.
Politicians from across the divide have demanded details of the out-of-court settlement between the tycoon and Danaharta be made public, but the government has kept silent so far.
In March Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC) had also demanded Putrajaya reveal details of the out-of-court settlement reached between one-time national asset management firm Pengurusan Danaharta Bhd (Danaharta) and Tajudin.
The Malaysian Insider had learnt that the 13-man panel made a “nearly unanimous” decision to ask the Finance Ministry and Prokhas, its unit which manages Danaharta’s residual assets, to explain the confidential settlement that was reached on February 14.
Tajudin was a poster boy of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s now discredited policy of nurturing a class of Malay corporate captains on government largesse. He flew high in the 1990s but fared poorly during the Asian financial crisis.
The former prime minister’s policies had been the subject of scrutiny after the Najib administration decided to settle out of court the outstanding RM589 million debt owed by Tajudin from the loan he took to buy MAS in 1994.
The case between Danaharta and the tycoon arose after he executed a facility agreement on July 13, 1994 to borrow RM1.79 billion from a group of syndicated lenders to finance the purchase by him of a 32 per cent stake in MAS.
The DAP today demanded answers from Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak after Khairy reopened the debate on the controversial sealed settlement by claiming during a televised debate with PKR’s Rafizi Ramli that he had been told by sources that the government had not lost out in the arrangement with Tajudin.
“Datuk Seri Najib Razak must immediately confirm if indeed his Umno Youth chief is telling the truth or is lying to the public over the above scandal. This is especially since it is the first time a BN (Barisan Nasional) politician has claimed that Tan Sri Tajudin paid part or all of his outstanding debt as part of the settlement exercise,” DAP national publicity secretary Tony Pua said in a statement today.
Khairy had cited “sources” that the former Malaysia Airlines (MAS) chairman may have paid more than the RM589 million owed to Danaharta as a result of the still undisclosed out-of-court settlement.
Pua pointed out that this was despite the fact minister Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz had last year directed all government-linked companies (GLCs) including Danaharta to withdraw all civil suits against Tajudin as both the government and the Finance Ministry had agreed that the cases will be settled out of court.
“Khairy’s claim is completely unbelievable and lacks all credibility given the clandestine manner in which the government has sought to cover up the entire episode and the refusal of any minister to confirm or deny the claim that Danaharta had in fact written off all of Tajudin’s debt,” the Petaling Jaya Utara MP said.
Danaharta and Tajudin ended their drawn-out legal battle when they settled out of court on February 14 after Putrajaya had directed in August all GLCs to drop civil suits against the former protégé of Tun Daim Zainuddin.
But the terms of the settlement remain confidential between the two parties despite a High Court decision in December 2009 for Tajudin to pay Danaharta RM589.14 million with two per cent interest per annum backdated to January 1, 2006.
Politicians from across the divide have demanded details of the out-of-court settlement between the tycoon and Danaharta be made public, but the government has kept silent so far.
In March Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC) had also demanded Putrajaya reveal details of the out-of-court settlement reached between one-time national asset management firm Pengurusan Danaharta Bhd (Danaharta) and Tajudin.
The Malaysian Insider had learnt that the 13-man panel made a “nearly unanimous” decision to ask the Finance Ministry and Prokhas, its unit which manages Danaharta’s residual assets, to explain the confidential settlement that was reached on February 14.
Tajudin was a poster boy of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s now discredited policy of nurturing a class of Malay corporate captains on government largesse. He flew high in the 1990s but fared poorly during the Asian financial crisis.
The former prime minister’s policies had been the subject of scrutiny after the Najib administration decided to settle out of court the outstanding RM589 million debt owed by Tajudin from the loan he took to buy MAS in 1994.
The case between Danaharta and the tycoon arose after he executed a facility agreement on July 13, 1994 to borrow RM1.79 billion from a group of syndicated lenders to finance the purchase by him of a 32 per cent stake in MAS.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Ampang
Age: 70
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This mess of MAS created during Tajuddin's time must be pursued relentlessly. A public ombudsman must be set up to continuously hound the interested parties. A lot is at stake; the crooks are forever confident they can somehow get away as the reckon Malaysians have very short memories...once this goes way from the internet media, it will be forgotten as the MSM will not touch such hot potatos. ln fact the MSM will spin in favour of the crooked parties.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Global village
Age: 66
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MAPA and MH370
MAPA has never come out publicly to declare that Captain Zaharie's reputation and good name MUST NOT BE BESMIRCHED until all investigations are completed. It doesn't matter even if he isn't a member by any chance. It is utterly disgusting for MAPA to keep quiet to be in the good books of Mr pink lips!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The lack of conviction and camaraderie is really appalling amongst MAS pilots. The MAPA presidency has lately been occupied by yellow bellied nincompoops and brown-nosers. "Nuff said!
