This document summarizes research on how brand image impacts the success of low-cost carriers, focusing on flights between Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia and Singapore. Secondary research found that Air Asia had the largest market share and seat sales on this route. Jetstar Asia increased its sales and market share after focusing on branding in Southeast Asia. Customer reviews gave Silk Air and Firefly the highest ratings, though they have smaller market shares. Primary research through surveys found some contradictions with secondary sources, as respondents' preferences did not always align with the highest rated airlines. The research could not definitively conclude whether brand image or other factors like cost were most important for airline success.

1. How much does the success of a low cost carrier rely on its brand image? – based on
Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia) – Changi International Airport (Singapore) route
Abstract
This project covers the fundamental ideology of how much brand image translates to success
for a low cost airline. Based on the South East Asian market, specifically the Kuala Lumpur
(Malaysia) to Changi International Airport (Singapore) route, this report aims to cover the
main factors deemed to be considered success along with investigating how important the
customer view and brand image really should be to an airline.
Introduction
My EPQ research project is to find out how influential brand image of an airline is to its
success in a saturated market place. The business dictionary definition
(http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/brand-image.html) of brand image in terms of
business is “the impression in the consumer’s mind of a brand’s total personality (real and
perceived qualities and shortcomings). Brand image is developed over time through
advertising campaigns and is authenticated through the consumer’s direct experience”. In
essence it is the consumer view on a business, or in this case an airline. Positive brand image
translated to a good customer view on the airline while negative brand image would refer to a
drawback or negative view.
I will be judging the success of the airline based on multiple factors including but not limited
to; seat sales, market share, fleet size and number of routes. I have based my research on the
Kuala Lumpur to Singapore route in order to see how much the success of a low cost airline
relies on its brand image. I specifically chose to base the research on one route because
otherwise the research would have taken too long, the scope would have been too wide and
the project would not have been able to be completed on time, this is because every different
route has different factors and different airlines may fly to them which would skew my
comparison data to airlines with the most flights to these different routes. I chose the Kuala
Lumpur to Singapore route because, as we are in Malaysia, I believed it to be a more popular
route as most people will have flown to Singapore before from Kuala Lumpur. This was done
so that I would get better and more reliable results with the primary research, along with the
fact that there was more available information online for this route as it is one of the largest
routes in Southeast Asia with 570 flights per week (https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-
busiest-air-routes-in-South-East-Asia).
It’s almost seen as an unspoken truth in the airline industry that brand image is one of the
most important things to an airline (LSG group blog, Feb 2017). In most cases this is what
will make them competitive in a very saturated market where everyone is striving for sales.
In the low cost sector there often isn’t a large difference between prices (google flights) and
so brand image is where the money can be made.
I have chosen to research into this topic because it unites my interest in business, marketing
and management while keeping to one of my major passions, that being the aviation industry
and how airlines operate. Growing up I had a vast interest in aviation and airlines, so much so
that I have read magazines like Airliner World for many years which is where a large amount
of my base personal knowledge has come from in this project. While I have had to fully
research all about the South East Asia market and the route in question, I have used my own
thoughts in some cases as to why certain trends may have been taking place.

2. Literature Review (secondary research)
Many of the figures, charts, tables, graphs and information in my secondary research has
come from SKYTRAX ranking systems and CAPA center for aviation as these are the two
largest and most reputable sites on airlines available online. Other newspaper articles and
magazines were used to further enhance my understanding of the topic but did not directly
contribute to the statistics and theories talked about in this report..
Secondary research has shown (centreforaviation.com, Feb 2013 (1)) that 101,248 seats were
sold on the Kuala Lumpur to Singapore route and the market leader was Air Asia Malaysia
who sold about 50% more seats than their closest competitor during the most profitable
month (figure 1). The percentage of sales were not appropriate in this case as the 101,248
seats sold included the likes of national carriers like Malaysia Airlines, Singapore Airlines
and SriLankan Airlines. This figure was also observed in February 2013 as opposed to Figure
1 which shows the change from mid 2011 to mid 2013.
As of 2013 (centreforaviation.com, Feb 2013 (2) Air Asia has enjoyed a 27% share in the
market, followed by their closest competitor Jetstar Asia at 18% (Figure 2). The general trend
on the graph shows a steady rate of sales that sometimes fluctuates during certain times like
in July 2012 where there was a sharp decrease in sales across most of the airlines. The only
real consistent increase in sales is displayed by Jetstar who went from being one of the lowest
selling carriers in 2011 to the second highest by late 2012 going into 2013.
Figure 1 (centreforaviation.com, Feb 2013 (1))

3. Figure 2 (centreforaviation.com, Feb 2013 (2))
This increase in seat sales could be seen as a direct result in Jetstar Asia’s persistent strategy
to concentrate on the South-East Asian market and focus on making Singapore’s Changi
airport one of their major hubs (centreforaviation.com, July 2013). This links to the question
at hand as a push to increase the airline’s brand image in South-East Asia resulted in much
improved seat sales when compared to close rival airlines, Jetstar Asia was the only airline to
really increase sales. The table below (Figure 3) shows how the number of seats sold by
Jetstar Asia has dramatically increased after the increased focus they placed on the South-
East Asian market. In the span of 1 year it had risen by 12,240 seats (centreforaviation.com,
July, 2013). This shows a positive correlation between branding and success for Jet Star Asia
swinging the balance towards the vast importance that brand image plays to success in terms
of seat sales on their flights.
Figure 3 (centreforaviation.com, July 2013)
A report (Newsroom.Jetstar, July 2012) showed that Jetstar won the SKYTRAX award for
best low cost airline in the Australia / Pacific region with over 18 million participants in the
survey. They also received a top 3 ranking out of the world’s low cost carriers in 2012 which
directly links to the campaigns and pushes for success in 2012. Their improvements in
branding not only increase sales but also increased their perceived worth to consumers.
Brand image is often measured and reviewed in terms of customer reviews and general
satisfaction. One of the major airline ranking systems (airlinequality.com) shows how the
various airlines were rated out of 10 by customers. The data was collected from this website
in December 2017 and reflects the figures around this time period only; this has been
displayed in a table below.

4. Airline Rating /10 Number of reviews it is
based on
Air Asia 6 500 reviews
Jetstar Asia 6 122 reviews
Silk Air 7 168 reviews
Tiger Air 6 161 reviews
Firefly 7 59 reviews
Scoot 6 312 reviews
Malindo 6 149 reviews
Silk Air and Firefly have both been highlighted as on average they both scored the highest in
terms of rating from customers. This result can be seen as contradictory as neither of these
two airlines has a significant market share and seat sales when compared to the other airlines
on this list. Air Asia has the most seat sales and the most reviews but only scores an average
mark of 6/10. It can be argued that these figures would be different given the amount of
reviews. Firefly has only around 12% of the reviews that Air Asia has and so when averaged
out it could have lowered the overall score. Silk Air may has also scored slightly higher as
they are a subsidiary of Singapore Airlines allowing them to possibly score higher in quality
and services at the airport. When the results of this survey are put into context is seem as if
the brand image of an airline had little or no effect on its success in the form of seat sold.
Jetstar Asia and Air Asia are market leaders however both get a just above average score by
consumers.
A similar ranking of these airlines was done by SKYTRAX in 2017 and published on
airlinequality.com but it focused on ranking airlines based on safety, timing and services
available to passengers. In essence it would look at what the other survey from customer
reviews may have failed to pick up on. As the largest ranking system for airlines in the world
people often look to these SKYTRAX reviews in order to choose an airline to fly with give
that they are similarly priced. The results of this survey is displayed in the table below.
Airline Star rating / 5 Notes
Air Asia 3
Jetstar Asia 3
Silk Air 4
Tiger Air 3
Firefly 3 Not fully rated
Scoot 3
Malindo 3 Not fully rated
This research shows that Silk Air was the only airline which got a 4-star rating which
correlated with their higher customer review rating. On the other hand, it can be argued that
the main reason for this increased rating would be due to the services that they offer being a
subsidiary of the much larger Singapore Airlines (singaporeair.com, 2018). This factor could
have increased their brand image in terms of synonymity with top of the range services at
Changi International Airport which could have also tied in with why customers review them
so highly. In terms of that correlating to success for Silk Air it is debatable. Even though they
seem to have the most positive brand image painted by customers they only have a 14% share
in the market (centreforaviation.com, Feb 2013 (2)) which is 13% less than the top airline;
Air Asia. This therefore contradicts the notion that success relies on brand image as Silk Air

5. has a great customer image but sits fourth in terms of seat sales (centreforaviation.com, Feb
2013 (1)).
Another way to see possible success would the size that the airline has grown to outside of
the one route. This can be shown both by the fleet size of the airline and also the number of
routes that they fly. The table below shows the current fleet size of the 7 airlines in question
only considering the fleet which would fly the Kuala Lumpur – Singapore route
(www.airfleets.net).
Airline Aircraft operated (KUL-SIN) Fleet size 2017
Air Asia Airbus A320 121
Jetstar Asia Airbus A320 27
Silk Air Airbus A319 / A320 27
Tiger Air Airbus A319 / A320 50 + Scoot fleet (merged)
Firefly ATR 72 21
Scoot Airbus A320 24 + Tiger Air fleet (merged)
Malindo Boeing 737 26
(Disclaimer: the table shows the total fleet of aircrafts that could fly the route, not all of the
aircraft are used on this one route)
If we decide to base the success of a low cost carrier on its fleet size then Air Asia should be
the most successful, which correlates with their superior seat sales in the market. On the other
hand it can be argued that Air Asia only operated the Airbus A320 (www.airfleets.net, 2017)
meaning that they will have more aircraft. Compare this to Scoot which also operates
medium haul routes using Boeing 777 and 787 aircrafts then the measure of success begins to
look less appropriate. Nonetheless based on just this route it can be said that with the most
market share, largest fleet and most seat sales Air Asia appears to be the most successful
airline, however this further contradicts the notion as they do not have the best brand image,
as shown by the customer reviews (airlinequality.com).
Although we are basing this project specifically on the Kuala Lumpur – Singapore route the
success of an airline could also be measured based on all of the routes that it offers, in
essence its size of operations and that is important to put this main route into context. Below
are screenshots of the routes offered by each of the airlines I am researching in this study.
Tiger Air doesn’t appear on this list as their routes are the same as Scoot after the merge.
They have been taken from airline profiles on centreforaviation.com
(https://centreforaviation.com/data/profiles/airlines/ , 2018).

8. This data shows that Air Asia has the most routes especially around South East and Central
Asia which fits with all the other research in saying that they are the most successful low cost
carrier in the region. However, it can also be argued that Scoot has the most international
routes so they are successful in their own right. Air Asia, Silk Air and Malindo all operate
very similar routes meaning that this can be used as a direct comparison to success however it
is difficult to show the brand image that they have as they operate under different conditions.
A lot of Silk Air sales may just come from transit passengers who in fact are using their ‘big
brother’ Singapore Airlines. On top of that the brand image will be seen as different in each
country as both Malindo and Air Asia are Malaysian vs the Singaporean Carrier Silk Air.
Brand image therefore can’t be viewed as the only factor or most important factor in
determining the success of a low cost airline. An example of how this applies would be
Firefly. They scored a 7/10 on customer reviews meaning they should in theory have one of
the best brand images. But when we look at the measures for success; they are the smallest
airline with only 21 planes in service, they fly the least routes and have one of the lowest seat
sales figures on the Kuala Lumpur to Singapore route (all figures displayed in above charts /
tables). If brand image meant success, then why is Firefly not the top seat seller?
Methodology
The majority of my findings have come from secondary sources a lot of which is taken from
SKYTRAX which is a major online review and ranking site for airlines. As a result of my
secondary research findings, I decided to carry out primary research on the topic to get more
insight into if the views of people actually back up or contradict the online resources and
information that I had. As for the actual primary research carried out, a questionnaire was
created and sent out (results displayed under results) with a total of 88 responses. I aimed the
questionnaire at staff at school so that I could get both a local and expatriate view on the
airlines. This would hopefully tailor the questionnaire towards brand image as locals and
expats will generally judge airlines based on what they hear or read from reviews. I decided
to devise a range of questions that would show how well people view the brand by comparing
what they think vs the airlines that they have actually flown on.

9. Results
Below are the displayed results from the questionnaire that was sent out. 88 individual
responses were collected and then they were turned into appropriate graphs and charts.
Figure 4 (Question 1 from questionnaire)
Figure 5 (Question 2 from questionnaire)

10. Figure 6 (Question 3 from questionnaire)
Figure 7 (Question 4 from questionnaire)

11. Figure 8 (Question 5 from questionnaire)
Discussion (primary research)
One of the major things that I have found based on both my secondary and primary research
is that they contradict in many cases. My expectation was that people’s views are formed by
online sources and ranking systems however it seems that many show bias to some airlines
especially if they are less well known. It is possible that online reviews are not actually taken
into that much consideration by people and if I was to do this project again that could be one
of the things I look into as to why people don’t look at or choose to ignore the international
and official ranking of airlines. They instead choose to form contradictory beliefs, for
example 1 respondent said that the most important factor when booking a flight is “cost of
ticket mostly but if Malindo is only slightly more expensive I will choose them” which on the
surface looks fine as they may just have a perceived preference towards Malindo. However,
when the facts from secondary research are considered, Malindo is one of the lower scoring
airlines based on customer reviews getting a 6/10 and they are also not even fully rated by
SKYTRAX who estimate them to be a 3-star airline. It was responses like this that caught my
interest as they seem to be willing to pay more for their personally perceived ‘best airline’.
This could be down to brand image in that with their experiences, Malindo seems the best
choice.
Another interesting contradiction in the primary research results show that a large proportion,
56.8% to be exact, of people said that cost of ticket was the most important factor when
buying a flight ticket (Figure 8) however on the majority of days that I have checked Scoot
has been the cheapest airline to fly (google flights) often beating Air Asia by a few ringgits.
An example of this is displayed below:

12. Figure 9 (google flights)
The interesting fact is that although many said they will take the cheapest flight only 9 people
which is 10.2% have ever flown on Scoot before. This could be down to many factors the
major one being that Scoot is a Singaporean bases airline whereas Air Asia is Malaysian.
There is a larger general knowledge of Air Asia along with large advertising campaigns
throughout the country so many people may just assume that they are the cheapest because
they are advertised to be. Another possible factor that makes this happen is that there is only
1 flight operated by Scoot at a low price while Air Asia has 2 at the low price and many more
at slightly higher prices (google flights). This information actually contradicts the viewpoint
that brand image is the most important factor for success as the cost of the ticket seems to
play a larger role in this.
As for the best airline, the results of my primary research show that Air Asia gets the
majority vote at 59.1% (Figure 7) which shows that they clearly have a very strong and
positive brand image among the 88 people that I surveyed. This could be seen as
complementary to their success as they have the highest market share at 27% (Figure 3)
linking back to the question that a positive brand image seems to mean more success for Air
Asia.
Evaluation
Based on the limited timescale of this report there are a few possible areas of improvement
which I would have liked to delve into. This section of the report aims to show the difficulty
in researching such a generally unlit side of the aviation industry especially given the very
competitive market that is low cost carriers.
One of the main issues that I found when researching this topic is that it is so specific that
there aren’t many reports online about it. There is also a lack of reputable sites to review
airlines as the major ones are CAPA and SKYTRAX. A lot of the research comes also from
2012 when CAPA produced reports on the Kuala Lumpur to Singapore route and now in
2018 that information is nearly six years outdated. During that period there has been dramatic

13. changes in the market particularly involving two airlines. The research in 2012 didn’t take
into account Scoot, who only launched in June of 2012
(https://centreforaviation.com/data/profiles/airlines/scoot-tr) , and also Malindo who
launched in September 2012 but only started operations in March of 2013
(https://www.malindoair.com/about-us). Another substantial change was the merging of
Tiger Air and Scoot in July of 2017 (https://www.flyscoot.com/en/en-brandmerger), an
integration that saw the Tiger Air brand replaced by Scoot along with their prices being made
similar. Tiger Air’s website and app were both closed and these services were made available
on the Scoot website. The main thing that this would change is that now it may be irrelevant
to look at the seat sales of Tiger Air in 2012 as they are merged with Scoot, who’s market
share hasn’t been calculated in the last few years.
My research about the star rating system by SKYTRAX may have also not been a full
representation of the airlines as two of the listed airlines were not fully rated before getting
their 3-star rating; these being Firefly and Malindo. The part that was not fully researched is
not publicly published so I had no way of knowing what they were not fully checked on, if
this was safety practices for example it will drastically affect their brand image and rating to
customers however it could have been something small like in-flight entertainment which is
expected to be at the minimum anyway for low cost carriers. The ambiguity of this could
have skewed the opinion on these airlines, what if for example Firefly had very strong and up
to date safety procedure or even the best services at Subang Airport, it may have even lifted
their overall star rating, changing my success to brand image relationship for the specific
airline.
One other possible area that I could have explored more would be the routes as a measure of
airline success in terms of size. Are these routes operated by the airline actually selling
tickets? Are the planes full? Are they acting as loss making routes just to prevent
monopolization of that route? These are all questions that that section of my report failed to
pick up on as for example one low cost carrier could be flying smaller planes to more
destinations vs another carrier flying larger aircraft but going to less destinations. Their
success in terms of revenue may be quite similar. It would have been quite difficult to do but
given a longer amount of time for this report may have allowed me to actually look at
financial data as this could have given a better representation of success. Revenue, costs,
liquidity and profitability ratios may have possibly been more accurate in determining
success as it is the one thing that each low cost carrier definitely has in common, that being
the aim and objective for profit maximization. Even things like market share may not be that
similar as it could be a possible argument that some airlines don’t want to grow and are
happy to operate as domestic carriers and example in this case being Firefly as they don’t fly
international routes and seem to be happy with their current destination choices. This may
have been another route that I could have taken my research down to be able to draw a more
conclusive answer.
There are also quite a few contradictions between primary and secondary research and this
could be down to the fact that I was only able to get 88 responses from people working in the
same school. Common biases may occur as some people may only fly on airlines that may
have been recommended to them which could make Figure 7 obsolete. This may explain why
the data is very different to the data collected based on customer reviews by
airlinequality.com as that features hundreds of reviews from people living in various
countries around the world. By limiting my primary research to people living in Malaysia
there could be a more biased response to Malaysian based carriers as they advertise

14. predominantly in the country. An example of this would be how 100% of the people
surveyed had flown on Air Asia however only around 23% of people had even heard of Scoot
before.
A brand new alternative travel option may also have a huge impact on the airlines as why
would brand image matter if there is an easier, cheaper and faster way to travel between
Kuala Lumpur and Singapore. This comes in the form of the high speed rail link being
currently build to connect the countries (https://centreforaviation.com/insights/analysis/hsr-
could-decimate-traffic-on-worlds-third-largest-international-route-singapore-kuala-lumpur-
98233) . The 350 kilometers of track is said to be completed in 2020 and will decimate a
large percentage of the airline industry causing a monumental decline in seat sales. As
reported by the straits times Malaysia (Dec 2017) there will be ‘a train every 30 minutes’
which may render the airline route obsolete. With more timing options and even more
convenience offered, many travelers may choose this mode of transport which may
drastically change the conclusions of my report in the relatively near future.
Another improvement that I could have made in my primary research is question 3, What is
the most important factor when booking a flight. The change I would make is by adding
another option as I got quite a few responses saying convenience which related to the airport
that they were flying from. This is something that I didn’t take into consideration as Firefly
flies from a different airport to the other airlines in this study. Their major hub is Subang
Airport which is located in a much more convenient location as it is much closer to the city
and areas around Bandar Utama (which is where most of the participants in the survey
reside). Many people would have been willing to pay slightly more just to fly from Subang
because not only do they save time in travelling but it is also much easier as the airport is
quite small (it is mainly used by private jets and charter flights) and only services two
commercial airlines (Firefly and Malindo for domestic flights only).
With more time this report could have also been improved by looking at the possible
differences between low cost carriers and more international carriers as both Malaysia
Airlines and Singapore Airlines offer the Kuala Lumpur to Singapore route, the later using
the much larger Boeing 777 aircraft. Is it their superior brand image that allows them to
charge more or is this purely down to services offered? To improve the report, I would have
looked more in depth at this question as it poses an intriguing argument as to why and how
national carriers can do this. Another possible way I could have expanded to get a more
comprehensive conclusion would be to look at the various routes offered instead of just
focusing on one. The Kuala Lumpur to Singapore route may not be the most profitable for
each of the airlines as they may just be there to provide competition and prevent the
formation of a monopoly on the route. Factors like this will affect the seat sales and customer
reviews which may have given me less accurate brand image calculations. The actual concept
of a brand image can’t really be accurately measured as it looks at multiple different business
decisions and factors so it could have been easily affected by the route I chose. Looking at
multiple routes may have alleviated this issue as it is averaged.
Conclusion
Based on the information at hand it can be argued that a conclusion towards the vast
importance of brand image can be drawn. The success of an airline is largely affected by the
brand image of the carrier, and any efforts to increase advertising or customer service /
loyalty has often lead to an increase in seat sales as shown in 2012 by Jetstar Asia. It can
however also be argued that this is not the only factor and certainly isn’t the most important

15. factor for success in the budget airline industry. Other factors including but not limited to;
cost of ticket, convenience / location and duration of flight and the time of flight can also
play a major role in the seat sales and subsequent growth of the airline. In essence brand
image falls under the communications section of the four C’s of a successful business and at
the end of the day that is all an airline is, a business. They must ensure that customer, cost
and convenience are also met to ensure survival and success of the airline.
At the start of this report I mentioned that it is almost an unspoken truth that brand image is
one of the most important things to an airline and I have seen this to be relatively true with
finances and costs being the only real factor above brand image. An airline will always want
their brand to be the cornerstone of their business model and so yes, the success of an airline
as a whole does substantially rely on brand image.

16. Appendix
Reference Links
Listed below are the websites and resources that were used to make this report. They are
mainly the sites that the figures came from, some are already cited in the report itself. A few
of the links are to sites that are not referenced in this report but did help me further
understand the topic of brand image and how that affects the success of low cost airlines.
1. airlinequality.com
http://www.airlinequality.com/review-pages/a-z-airline-reviews/
2. Airliner World Magazine
http://www.airlinerworld.com/
3. centreforaviation.com, Feb 2013
https://centreforaviation.com/insights/analysis/hsr-could-decimate-traffic-on-worlds-third-
largest-international-route-singapore-kuala-lumpur-98233
4. centreforaviation.com, July 2013
https://centreforaviation.com/insights/analysis/hsr-could-decimate-traffic-on-worlds-third-
largest-international-route-singapore-kuala-lumpur-98233
5. Flight Global 2017 Review
https://www.flightglobal.com/asset/22499
6. google flights (for the example used)
https://www.google.com/flights/#search;f=KUL;t=SIN;d=2018-03-28;r=2018-04-01
7. LSG group blog, Feb 2017
http://blog.lsgskychefs.com/spiriant/branding-airline-industry-important-as-ever/
8. Newsroom.Jetstar 2012
http://newsroom.jetstar.com/jetstar-wins-skytraxs-2012-best-low-cost-airline-
australiapacific/
9. Routes Online
https://www.routesonline.com/news/29/breaking-news/250841/analysis-airports-in-south-
asia-the-biggest-and-fastest-growing-gateways/
10. The Asean Post Sep 2017
https://theaseanpost.com/article/southeast-asia-soars-low-cost-airlines
11. The Edge Markets
http://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/competition-easing-malaysian-skies-airasia-
dominates
12. The Star Malaysia, Feb 2018 (Business)

17. https://www.thestar.com.my/business/business-news/2018/02/27/airasia-to-double-
narrowbody-aircraft-fleet-size/
13. singaporeair.com, 2018
https://www.singaporeair.com/en_UK/us/travel-info/partner-airlines/silkair/
14. Straits Times Malaysia, 2017
http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/kl-singapore-high-speed-rail-service-to-have-a-
train-every-30-minutes