The good thing about being a ?guest? of Kingfisher Airlines these days is that even if you are six hours late for the flight, you can still catch it. I am told that, of late, they?ve started to put a new disclaimer in their tickets. However, it is in such fine print that nobody can read it. After all, Kingfisher ?appreciates your business? and doesn?t want to scare you. The zero-size font disclaimer reads: ?Plan for possibility of haphazard changes to routes and schedules, and be prepared to spend a lot of time at the airport. As long as the Kingfisher flight is still operating, you?ll almost certainly arrive sometime the same day or the next day, but it?s possible for a daytime flight to become an evening flight, or vice versa. Allow plenty of extra time between your so-called scheduled flights and any time-critical events such as business meetings. Better still, if it?s time-critical, do not fly with the king of good times. We know you have a choice of other airlines. A better schedule or a lower price isn?t worth the risk that you might not get to where you are going.
If you?ve already bought tickets in our airline, you may not be able to travel as per plan. Sit back, relax and enjoy this Kingfisher experience.?
Friends, Indians, countrymen, lend me your ears. I come to praise Kingfisher, not to bury it. The flight cancellations that airlines do, live after them. The good service of air-hostesses is oft interred with their bones; so let it be with Kingfisher. The noble Mr Mallya hath told you that Kingfisher Airlines remains viable. If it were so, he won?t be cancelling so many flights. And Mr Mallya is an honourable man. This airline hath more than a billion dollar of debt whose interest payments alone will drain its coffers. Did this in Kingfisher seem viable? When oil prices have soared, Kingfisher hath wept. Viability should be made of sterner stuff. Yet Mr Mallya says Kingfisher is viable; and Mr Mallya is an honourable man. We all did see last week that the International Air Transport Association suspended Kingfisher for alleged non-payment of dues. And on February 10, it was refused entry into Oneworld, a global airline alliance. Yet, Mr Mallya says that Kingfisher is viable. And, sure, he is an honourable man. I speak not to disprove what Mr Mallya spoke, but here I am to speak what I do know. We all did love Kingfisher once, not without cause. My heart is in the coffin there with Kingfisher, and I must pause till it came back to me.
Let me pause here to confess that I truly appreciate the ?Kingfisher experience?. I am a frequent flyer with them and their air-hostesses have been nicer to me than those of other airlines. But I do wonder if the airline would exist a year from now. I have heard so many times on Kingfisher flights that the airline is Mr Mallya?s most ambitious project and probably the dearest, both in money and emotional sense. He perhaps started this airline as he possibly hated spending time on planes and so he wanted to create the kind of airline he would like to fly. But running an airline is like having a baby: fun to conceive, but hell to deliver.
Mr Mallya has perhaps made the mistake of taking things too ?personal?. Airlines is not a testosterone-driven industry. Success is in making money and not in the size of the airline or the fleet of aircraft. So far Kingfisher has been run as a personal megalomaniac project with the purpose of making it larger than life. It seems like an ego and style statement of the Chairman rather than a responsible business designed to achieve a gainful return on capital, apart from being accountable towards customers, creditors, airports and employees. The airline has 69 aircraft, 20 of which are grounded right now because of poor maintenance. If return on capital had been a careful consideration, its balance sheet size would not have grown unduly. And its debt levels would not have soared above the billion dollar mark with a consequent increase in interest payments, which is further dragging the airline down into ?red?. Perhaps, Mr Mallya subconsciously knew the financial fate of the airline and so chose its colour.
All the five-star airlines who have been successful have consistently focused on return on capital, be it Singapore Airlines, Cathay Pacific or Qantas. They do this by offering superior service, high utilisation of aircraft, exceptional operating efficiency and lower overhead costs. They act responsibly towards their customers and creditors. They do not try to make an ego or a style statement. None of these airline Chairmen welcome passengers on the flights personally nor do they ask their crew members to treat ?guests? as if in their own homes. Five-star airlines sure are fun to conceive but difficult to deliver. To remain viable, Kingfisher now has to walk the walk than talk the talk.
The author, formerly with JPMorgan Chase, is CEO, Quantum Phinance