TigerAir

Tiger Airways passengers to Shenzhen

find items missing from their luggage

So many cases of 'items missing from the luggage'.  ARe the luggage from Tiger Airways' passengers go thru 'Different' types of belts ?   Cheap air fares goes to cheap belts?  hahaha!

Barely into the trip, but ‘missing you’ already ...

Tiger Airways passengers to Shenzhen

find items missing from their luggage

Ong Dai Lin

dailin@mediacorp.com.sg

SINGAPORE

The new iPhone 3GS he had bought for his brother was missing from his luggage. The combination lock on his luggage was missing when he collected it from the conveyor belt.

Mr Liang was not the only one flying to Shenzhen in recent months who found something missing upon arrival.

MediaCorp has obtained a copy of the form an airport employee gave him, showing that from December last year to May this year, he was the 10th Tiger Airways passenger to make a complaint about missing items from his baggage.

The missing items ranged from cash, clothes to a bag.

Another passenger told MediaCorp that winter clothes and 1,000 yuan ($200) went missing from her luggage. The 26-year-old primary school teacher, who wanted to be known only as Miss Lai, said: “I got a shock at the hotel when I opened my luggage. Everything was a mess and the money and clothes were missing.” Mr Liang was in for a second shock when he tried to make a claim with the airline:

In an email, it replied saying that while it was “sorry to hear of the loss of items”, it had stated in its conditions of carriage that valuable and fragile goods should not be checked in as baggage.

When contacted by MediaCorp, Tiger Airways spokesman Charles Sng said the airline “can’t take responsibility for valuables, and we encourage passengers to carry their valuables with them and not check them in”.

According to Mr Sng, Tiger Airways receives fewer than three complaints about its service per 1,000 passengers in total. And he pointed out that complaints of lost belongings from luggage were not unique to the airline. SilkAir also flies to Shenzhen.

Its public affairs head Imran Khan said the airline had not experienced such problems on this route. MediaCorp’s queries to Shenzhen airport operators went unanswered. But a Changi Airport Group spokesperson told MediaCorp how it prevents similar incidents in Singapore.

The spokesperson said: “We have stringent monitoring of the baggage-handling process from the check-in counter right up to uplift onto the aircraft. This monitoring includes the use of closed-circuit television. There’s regular review of the process to ensure its integrity.”

Lawyer Premchand Soman told MediaCorp that it would be difficult for passengers to claim compensation if their missing belongings were included in the List of items that they were advised against checking in.

He added that if a passenger had travel insurance, the compensation claim would depend on the terms of the policy.

Otherwise, the onus would be on the passenger to do his own investigation.

Consumers Association of Singapore executive director Seah Seng Choon said: “If they (passengers) happened not to have bought insurance, the next step they can take is to investigate the cause of the loss or damages. Once identified, they can choose to take legal action against the party responsible for ensuring the safekeeping of the baggage.”— When technical engineer Steven Liang, 33, landed in Shenzhen for a monthlong family visit, instead of a welcome he got a shock.

and it hit S$2.17 from $2.07 just within hours of the news about Thai Tiger Airways deal.

Huat ah....

Is the romance of air travel dead?

Liang Dingzi

I

Ryanair chief executive Michael O’Leary has dealt another blow — after his controversial proposal to charge for use of the aircraft loo — to the romance when he revealed that Ryanair was considering vertical seating. Don’t forget, it was Mr O’Leary who once said:

“Air transport is just a glorified bus operation.”

Whatever happened to the novelty and glamour that, even as late as the 1970s when flying had become more affordable and less a privilege of the minority rich, was still an experience to look forward to and cherish?

Remember an early Singapore Airlines (SIA) slogan that said it was not about arriving, but the journey?

Then, travellers dressed up to board an aircraft. Some airlines would not permit openneck T-shirts. There was the possibility that if economy was full, you might get upgraded to premium if you were appropriately robed — which meant at least a tie for men. Look around the cabin today; notice how casually travellers are attired. Particularly in economy, T-shirts, jeans and flip-flops are not an uncommon sight. I remember travelling as an airline employee decades back. A strict dress code required employees to dress no differently so as not to be easily identified as freeloaders, as it might upset paying passengers. And if you were travelling premium, it meant jacket and tie for men.

Then, as the ’80s progressed, we were told to dress down because travellers were becoming less formal. It used to be a thrill to be seated by the window, but seasoned travellers today would prefer an aisle seat. You want the freedom of not having to skip over someone to go to the loo or to stretch your limbs when you become bored.

Those were the days that, when you were not staring out into empty blue space, you would feast your eyes on stewardesses that looked like movie stars. But not quite so, these days: You prefer to be left alone with your in-flight movies, video games and laptops, until you need the cabin crew’s assistance. High up in the air, mealtime was a treat. But after a few trips, you tired of the limited choice and same-style presentation. Some airlines tried to recapture the excitement by bringing on board a chef in premium class, but that became too costly. So does it not make good economic sense to pay for a meal only when you want it, as with liquor and earphones that many airlines now only offer as extras?

Perhaps Ryanair’s proposal to charge a toilet-use fee is really not all that bizarre.

Air travellers’ expectations, preferences and habits have changed over the years. Various surveys have shown that for the majority of travellers, flying is merely a function of getting from one point to another, and price is the most important factor in choosing a flight — much more than brand.

Many travellers are prepared to accept a lower cost even if it means experiencing some inconvenience such as making a connection instead of flying direct and incurring waiting time at the airport. It is really about getting the best bang for your dollar, unless there are overriding issues such as safety.

That — to give Mr O’Leary due credit — is probably where he is coming from, though some critics have dismissed his controversial outbursts as self-serving and stretching to the limits Ryanair’s attempts at cost-cutting.

For a long time since commercial flying became a preferred option of transportation for many people, it has been a business driven by what the airlines can offer rather than what the customers want.

However, that is changing, as demonstrated by the growth of budget carriers, though fullservice airlines insist they are catering to a different market.

The distinction is slowly blurring, particularly when the global recession has taken a toll on premium travel. The budget model brings the business back to the basics. Some full-service airlines too have begun charging for hitherto free perks such as checked baggage and emergency exit seating that provides more legroom. You pay when you need or want it.

In 2007, SIA spent $570 million on cabin retrofitting that, in the words of its senior executive vice-president Bey Soo Khiang, would see a return to “the romance of travel”. It is quite a challenge to keep that magic glowing today.s the romance of air travel dead, heralded by the flourish of budget carriers?

The writer is a management consultant.

Good for those still holding this and make profit.   :)

It reached $1.96 ! before profit taking kicked in.

offering a ‘standing-only’ option

SYDNEY

The carrier said it could follow in the footsteps of United Kingdom budget airline Ryanair and introduce “vertical seating”, reported

“Everything we do is about offering the lowest possible fare then allowing our customers to choose what, if any, extras they wish to pay for.”

Mr Michael O’Leary, Ryanair’s chief executive, has proposed ideas include charging customers £1 ($2.10) to use the loo.

A standing area with “vertical seats” will be introduced at the back of its fleet of 250 planes,

However, a spokesman for the Civil Aviation Authority said the plans would struggle to meet safety requirements.

Spokesman Simon Westaway for another airline, Jetstar, said the airline would never contemplate vertical seating or charging passengers to use the bathroom,

We have a completely different business model to Ryanair,” he was quoted as saying.

“It’s an interesting concept but I can’t see how this would fly in our part of the world.”— Budget airline Tiger Airways would consider introducing a “standing only” option for passengers in a bid to lower airfares, according to reports.news.com.au, an Australian news website. “We continue to look at ways of making our operation more efficient so we can offer even lower fares than we do now,” Tiger Airways director Steve Burns was quoted as saying.The Daily Telegraph has reported.news. com.au reported. “A lot of Jetstar destinations are over two hours and longer, so the stand up seating idea doesn’t register on our radar.

suvro@dbsvickers.comSuvro Sarkar +65 6398 7973

Operating numbers remain strong in first month of FY11