Let’s be real: running an airline isn’t just a challenge—it’s a full-blown survival test. Malaysia Airlines Group (MAG) has been through more disasters than any company should ever have to face.

Financial collapses, fatal accidents, restructuring after restructuring—this company has lived through it all. And while it’s still flying, the question is, for how long?

For years, MAG has been a bottomless pit of taxpayer money, with billions pumped into keeping the airline alive. But before we rush to condemn, it’s worth asking—have we missed something? Could this national carrier actually be more than just a burden? Let’s face it: MAG’s numbers look bleak, but is it all as bad as it seems?

On the surface, the numbers are rough. In 2014, Malaysia Airlines was losing RM4 million to RM5 million per day. By the time it was delisted from Bursa Malaysia and replaced by Malaysia Airlines Berhad (MAB), the government had already poured RM17.5 billion into keeping it alive. Then came another RM6 billion as part of a recovery plan to salvage what was left. It’s not exactly what you’d call a good investment.

But here’s the thing: Malaysia Airlines isn’t just a business. It’s a lifeline for the country. At its peak, the airline was responsible for over 100,000 jobs and contributed RM55 billion to the economy.

That’s not something you can dismiss. Every time a plane takes off, it’s driving tourism, logistics, and business travel. Entire sectors rely on this airline, whether we like it or not.

Now, I’m not saying we should throw money at Malaysia Airlines without accountability—far from it. The airline’s history is a cautionary tale of bad management, overexpansion, and a lack of clear direction.

For years, it didn’t know what it wanted to be. Was it a premium airline? A low-cost competitor to AirAsia? The identity crisis only made the financial struggles worse.

Even the airline’s recent wins need to be taken with a grain of salt. Sure, in 2023, MAB posted a RM766 million profit for the first time in years. But let’s not forget that this comes after a massive RM16 billion debt restructuring. Without that, the airline would still be bleeding money.

MAG’s cash flow might have turned positive in 2021, but the bigger picture is murkier. The airline is still relying heavily on public funds—RM28 billion in taxpayer money since 2014—and critics argue that the profit figures might be hiding deeper operational challenges.

And there are plenty of those challenges. Malaysia Airlines hasn’t updated its fleet in over a decade. It’s dealing with an ageing fleet that not only impacts safety but also customer experience.

In August 2024, three flights had to turn back to Kuala Lumpur due to technical issues, and the Civil Aviation Authority of Malaysia cut its air operator certificate validity from three years to one. That’s not a good look, especially for an airline trying to rebuild its reputation.

The workforce is another problem. In January 2024, 63 engineers left Malaysia Airlines for Singapore Airlines’ maintenance unit. That’s a significant talent drain at a time when the airline needs experienced hands to navigate safety and operational challenges. Add to that the stiff competition from AirAsia and Singapore Airlines, and it’s clear MAG isn’t out of the woods yet.

So, what’s the answer? Should we continue to pump billions into an airline that’s still struggling to find its footing? Or should we finally cut our losses? It’s a tough call.

There’s an argument to be made for both sides. On one hand, Malaysia Airlines has an undeniable role in the country’s economy. Every ringgit spent on this airline creates a ripple effect across various industries.

The tourism sector alone benefits massively from having a national carrier, and let’s not forget the role Malaysia Airlines played during the COVID-19 pandemic, when it maintained vital trade links and repatriated citizens. For that alone, it earned its place as more than just a profit-driven entity.

On the other hand, how long can we sustain this? The airline has been in a state of constant turnaround for decades. A series of recovery plans have come and gone, each one promising to be the last, yet here we are again, discussing whether it can make it.

Even with recent profitability, MAG is far from self-sustaining. A new aircraft order was placed late, leaving the airline stuck with an outdated fleet, and that’s not going to change overnight.

At the end of the day, the question isn’t whether Malaysia Airlines deserves to survive—it’s whether we can afford not to have it. If managed right, the airline could be a vital asset, driving economic growth and national pride. But if it continues on its current path, it risks becoming a permanent burden on public finances.

So, is Malaysia Airlines a national asset or a financial sinkhole? The truth, as always, lies somewhere in between. It’s not a simple story of failure or success—it’s a complex tale of survival in an unforgiving industry.