The main differences between AirAsia and Tiger in term of expense: (as they categorize expense differently, estimate only)
1. Tiger spent more than 10 cents per $1 revenue on "Maintenance, material and repair", AirAsia only spent 3 cents per $1 revenue on "Maintenance and overhaul". What's worse is that AirAsia has higher depreciation and amortization expense(owned aircrafts, more than 10 cents) and Tiger has higher aircraft rental expense(more than 8 cents).
2. Tiger spent 14 cents per $1 revenue on "Airport and handling", another 5 cents on "Route charge, marketing and distribution costs". AirAsia only spent a bit more than 8 cents per $1 revenue on "User charges and other related expenses" which is not found on Tiger.
So in term of operating airline service, Singapore based Tiger seems highly disadvantaged to Malaysia based AirAsia. net net, Tiger is almost 20 cents per $1 revenue behind AirAsia.
1. Tiger spent more than 10 cents per $1 revenue on "Maintenance, material and repair", AirAsia only spent 3 cents per $1 revenue on "Maintenance and overhaul". What's worse is that AirAsia has higher depreciation and amortization expense(owned aircrafts, more than 10 cents) and Tiger has higher aircraft rental expense(more than 8 cents).
2. Tiger spent 14 cents per $1 revenue on "Airport and handling", another 5 cents on "Route charge, marketing and distribution costs". AirAsia only spent a bit more than 8 cents per $1 revenue on "User charges and other related expenses" which is not found on Tiger.
So in term of operating airline service, Singapore based Tiger seems highly disadvantaged to Malaysia based AirAsia. net net, Tiger is almost 20 cents per $1 revenue behind AirAsia.