YOURSAY | It is not as if KLIA1 is overflowing with traffic.
KLIA2 is not a low-cost terminal, MAHB tells Pua
Ian2003: First, they move all the low-cost airlines from the old LCCT (Low Cost Carrier Terminal) to KLIA2 as a substitute, and now they say that KLIA2 is no longer serving as a low-cost carrier terminal?
Anonymous 1719401496919916: This is more bull from the government. Everyone knows KLIA2 is a low-cost terminal.
They twist and turn their words every time they are cornered, just like in this case and many others before this. If KLIA2 is not an LCCT, why announce it as such when it was built?
Annonymous: Does the Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad (MAHB) think the rakyat and the world are stupid?
Why don't you read Centreforaviation.com's article “Kuala Lumpur Airport’s new low-cost terminal uniquely aims to be a model of connectivity”?
Here is more proof KLIA2 is a LCCT, as declared by Transport Minister Liow Tiong Lai last year: 'Minister: KLIA2 name stays but AirAsia can promote airport as LCCT'.
Kit P: And what of Prime Minister Najib Razak's official ground-breaking ceremony speech for KLIA2: "It is with great pleasure that I officiate this ground-breaking ceremony of the new LCCT, which is to be known as KLIA2."
(“The new low-cost carrier terminal (LCCT) or KLIA 2 will mark the nation's growth and leadership in aviation globally and serve as an economic stimulus for the country, Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak said on Monday.” - KLIA2 website, Aug 30, 2011)
But then again, perhaps we shouldn't believe everything that Najib says in his speeches...
Quigonbond: If KLIA2 is not a LCCT, why the need for it to begin with? Was KLIA1 overflowing with traffic?
Ipohcrite: MAHB, come on, all the while the plan was to build a new airport to replace the old LCCT as the latter couldn't cope with the ever-increasing passenger volume there, where AirAsia was the biggest user of its services by a long stretch to the next carrier.
And AirAsia boss Tony Fernandes was constantly reminding the parties involved that they should be building a bigger low-cost terminal and not a "luxurious" one that was incompatible with the needs of a low-cost carrier like AirAsia.
Anyway, with the latest developments, I would suggest AirAsia use KLIA instead of KLIA2 since the charges are the same.
Abasir: MAHB is correct. KLIA2 is not a 'low cost' terminal. It is the world's most costly LCCT, only due to the fact that it was born out of colossal incompetence and alleged kickbacks to cronies of the regime (locally known as 'stakeholders').
It is a living monument to the shameless bunglers who created neither a traveller-friendly airport nor a shopping mall.
As a gateway to the country, it most faithfully reflects its DNA, which is made up of three strands - incompetence, arrogance and corruption.
Royal Salute 21Y: At a budget of RM4 billion, it sure is not "low" in cost, but apart from the cost, it is a LCCT.
If you would like to claim otherwise, then like fellow commenters here suggested, get MAS and AirAsia to swap airports. Then we will have no problem paying the new charges.
Caripasal: With the cost 2.5 times the original budget, we might as well build another airport.
The need to change the building plan during the construction of KLIA2 meant poor planning right from the beginning. The need to keep changing the initial plan also gives rise to the opportunity for corruption.
CNHT: I am really sick of the poor design of KLIA2, in particular the airport information floor map being put on a makeshift box-shaped booth that actually blocks the corridors.
This information box has sharp corners that are actually dangerous to people walking past it.
I feel sad about such bad design and management. And now they are using the airport to milk the people for more.
Bad Feng Shui: I agree; KLIA2 is not a low-cost terminal. It is worse than that. The layout for the arrival hall's Immigration desks and auto-gates for Malaysian passport holders is a disgrace.
There is hardly any room for travellers to queue up. I have seen small-town bus stations with better designs. Where did all the money go?
NNFC: Such poor planning and design is a reflection of the quality of the management we have. The government should stop their game of trying to suck more money from the people.
We are terribly tired of this. You will pay dearly in GE14.
Salvage Malaysia: If KLIA2 is not a low-cost terminal, then it definitely looks low cost, compared to Singapore’s Terminal 4.
KLIA2's built up area of 257,000 square metres compared to Changi’s T4 of 225,000 square metres, both roughly cost the same. But look at the architectural design and the technology deployed at T4.
How did Singapore manage to build such a high tech and nice-looking terminal with roughly the same cost?
Spinnot: KLIA2 is not a low-cost terminal? But all airlines operating at KLIA2 - AirAsia, Cebu Pacific, Jet Asia, and Tiger Air - are budget airlines.
The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now.
These comments are compiled to reflect the views of Malaysiakini subscribers on matters of public interest. Malaysiakini does not intend to represent these views as fact.
