Let The Wau a.k.a Kite flies high

QPR sponsorship a ‘good deal’ for MAS

Written by Isabelle Francis

Thursday, 15 September 2011 14:18

KUALA LUMPUR: The recently inked home jersey sponsorship between Malaysian Airline System Bhd (MAS) with Barclays Premier League club Queens Park Rangers (QPR) is a “good deal” for the national carrier, said Khazanah Nasional Bhd managing director Tan Sri Azman Mokhtar. Azman’s comments come on the back of MAS getting flak for the sponsorship arrangement. Much of the brickbats stem from the national carrier looking at such a sponsorship after bleeding a net loss of over RM520 million in 2QFY11 ended June 30. Here are some of the facts 1. The company is bleeding and spent on undisclosed amount sponsoring Queen's Park Rangers, which belongs to Dato' Seri Fernandes ; 2. MAS sponsor the home jersey, while Air Asia sponsor away games; 3. QPR ? Why not Manchester ? Arsenal ? Chelsea ? or at least other club who has larger followers ? ; 4. How much ? Undisclosed; If you ask my view ? It depends on what type of views you are taking position on the matter ? Is it short term or long term view ? My position has always been a long term view. I agree with Dato' Seri Tony, what Malaysia Airlines is lacking is branding and marketing. The management before have taken branding and marketing as purely from expenditure points of view, which hits the income statement and hit the profitability. Which is short term view. I have no doubt and agree that Malaysia Airlines shall continue focusing on cost, but at the same time to be bold and brave enough to increase the branding and marketing cost and to monitor this over the return that the company will generate over time. While the accountant view it as an expense, the management shall view it as an investment and this have to be monitored like any other investment or capital expenditure. Look at the successful airline companies like Etihad Airways, Qatar Airways and Emirates Airways. What differentiate them with the rest ? Pricing ? or Brand ? What if I mentioned Emirates ? What do you have in your mind ? To me traveling in "luxury" and "comfort". That what come in my mind when the brand is mentioned. How about Malaysia Airlines ? Qatar Airways ? Etihad Airways ? Cathay Pacific ? Why QPR ? My next question is why not ? Who knew Air Asia before ? Ailing company which was bought over only for RM 2. How about today? The Best Low Cost Carrier in the world in 3 consecutive years within less than 20 years when it was bought over. The believe is that to make QPR in the same league if not better than MU, Liverpool, Arsenal and Chelsea - too far sighted yet not impossible. Similar vision for Lotus Racing Team though this year finishing in the 12-17th position in any races which is an improvement as compared to when it was first started. Again, " angan-angan Mat Jenin" but if one have faith and work hard to get it, surely one day you will get it. Those top teams were once like Lotus Racing and QPR, non ? So, the vision of MAS new management is clear. To learn lessons from Air Asia, to leverage on Air Asia's brand, collaborate instead of compete, to share instead of fight and in the end to propel for " General Interest" i.e. for the country Malaysia. MAS has all the ingredients to be a successful company. Just give MAS time and it will prosper, with ONE condition. All the "politikus" to stay away from meddling the company 's management directly or indirectly. We are all concerned with MAS and would like to see MAS fly and soar high. Even an eagle needs a push, and let the "Wau" a.k.a flies higher. Another "Wow" factor by Malaysian company ?

DISCLAIMER: Notice :Opinions, stories , thoughts expressed are blogger's own and do not necessarily represent the views of the institution or the organizations by which the blogger is employed or any specific person who so ever, either dead or alive. Hi! I am a green e-mail! Unlike my brothers and sisters, my presence on the Internet does not harm our environment. Please go to greenscroll.org and help make the Internet green like me!

Professional Qualifications ? How many are too many ?

I have an ex-office colleague who possess the following qualifications : 1. CIMA 2. MICPA 3. ACCA 4. Diploma 5. Degree 6. Master That was then when I worked in Malaysia. I am not sure what other credentials that he has added in his portfolio today since it has been a while since we were in contact. My first impression upon knowing his credentials ? Impressive !. When I asked him, why so many ? His immediate respond was " People said it is difficult even get one, so I want to prove them wrong ". He is right. Talking from my personal experience. I was struggling to get my CIMA qualification and the same for few others, at least the one that I know. He made it so easy. Then, I moved to Doha, Qatar and on my first day in the bus heading to the office, the fellow passengers introduced himself to me; " Hi I am Venkat and I have professional qualifications- CIMA, ACCA, CPA and all other Cs to in my credentials. What is your name and are you a member of any professional organization ? " " Owh. Hi. I am Irwan and yes I am a CIMA, UK member " This the facts. My organization will only consider candidates with professional qualifications on top of the first degree as one of the criteria to shortlist candidate for interview. Then, I moved to Dubai, UAE and I was asked the same question by my staff on the first day I introduced myself to them " Are you a member of professional organization ? ". " Yes, I am a member of CIMA, UK ". I learned later that all the staff in my department have at least a member of a professional organization, with one is a member of three (3) professional organization. The question or rather questions are ; 1. Does it help to have more than 1 professional qualification in this competitive job market as product differentiation strategy? 2. If the shortlisting criteria(s) are based on the above, aren't the organization narrowing it choices of getting the right candidates with the right quality and capability beyond the qualifications ? One proponent of this, at least the recruitment team managed to narrow down the scopes and shortlisting the candidate is faster, quicker, effective and easier for recruitment team whom being pressured to fill up the vacant positions which being left vacant for as long as the organization exists. My next question, at whose expense ? In the profession and industry that I am in, I would be more happy to settle for the following potential candidates who possess the following as criteria(s) to be shortlisted candidates for interview ; 1. Having first degree from established university in the country of origin; 2. A member of professional organization ; 3. Experience with audit firm as essential [not mandatory] ; 4. Working with organizations that are peer group if not bigger in size and market value; 5. Expected salary [market rate as benchmark] ; The rest are up to candidates performance during interview. So to my question, how many is too many ? One is enough for me.

DISCLAIMER: Notice :Opinions, stories , thoughts expressed are blogger's own and do not necessarily represent the views of the institution or the organizations by which the blogger is employed or any specific person who so ever, either dead or alive. Hi! I am a green e-mail! Unlike my brothers and sisters, my presence on the Internet does not harm our environment. Please go to greenscroll.org and help make the Internet green like me!