Just want to see your guys' opinion and I’d like to communicate peacefully=)
24.01.2014 - I received the pm that there would be a 30 millions penalty fee and due around 29.01.2014. I wrote back and asked about my configuration, and the reply was ”it's not bug-using“
05.02.2014 - The penalty fee was increased to 60 millions and deducted immediately. The reply was "I've doubled the profit during this time so the penalty will be doubled"
Here is my configuration in question:
737-600 C48/Y84 Leisure Plus/Standard
C36/Y102 Leisure Plus/Standard 4 of 10 a/c are small seaters
737-700 C42/Y96 Leisure Plus/ Leisure 10 of 26 a/c are small seaters
737-800 C42/Y126 Leisure Plus/Leisure Plus only 1 a/c
extra pitch and 2 extra F/A in all Business Class total: 15 of 76 planes are small seater
It's ture that I'm upgrading the plane so the small seaters are less than before, 16 of my first 20 planes were small seaters.
Please clarify - by "small seaters" you mean the airplanes with the configuration you indicated (i.e. Leisure Plus in C) or the rest of your aircraft (assuming they have smaller seats in C)?
I assume it's the latter... since how could Leisure+ be considered small seat since it has one green sub-1000-km rating, i.e. that's what the passenger actually expects (at least that's what I read in a different thread that one green bar means).
Just want to see your guys' opinion and I’d like to communicate peacefully=)
24.01.2014 - I received the pm that there would be a 30 millions penalty fee and due around 29.01.2014. I wrote back and asked about my configuration, and the reply was ”it's not bug-using“
05.02.2014 - The penalty fee was increased to 60 millions and deducted immediately. The reply was "I've doubled the profit during this time so the penalty will be doubled"
Here is my configuration in question:
737-600 C48/Y84 Leisure Plus/Standard
C36/Y102 Leisure Plus/Standard 4 of 10 a/c are small seaters
737-700 C42/Y96 Leisure Plus/ Leisure 10 of 26 a/c are small seaters
737-800 C42/Y126 Leisure Plus/Leisure Plus only 1 a/c
extra pitch and 2 extra F/A in all Business Class total: 15 of 76 planes are small seater
It's ture that I'm upgrading the plane so the small seaters are less than before, 16 of my first 20 planes were small seaters.
What is your opinion?
Thank you :)
Leisure Plus/ Leisure are OK for economy class
But they are NOT for business, and you have 126 seats on business with small economy seat?
and you have dignity to say you are not cheating ?????
I agree with morefocus. I think Leisure/Leisure Plus is the very bottom of business class seats, and I remember as he does -- one green bar is what the customer expects, or what they will accept as basic.
It would be important to see the routes on which the plane was being used.
I have just created a text config for 73G, and Leisure plus in C is 1-green bar for up to 500 km.
Considering that Leisure plus is 10% bigger than standard seat, using C fares (3x standard economy) would be most likely considered "usage of small seats in higher classes to generate undue advantage and financial benefit". If the C fare was maybe Y+50% then it probably "could" be considered less benevolent by UAB.
Comfort seat gets 2-green bars for <500 km, and 1-green bar for 500-1500 km.
Comfort plus gets 4-green bars for <500km, 2-green bars for 500-1500 km, and 1-green bar for 1500-2500 km.
So if Leisure plus was used but on routes of less than <500 km, it could be objected that it is not cheating as the seat gets 1 green bar and it is what passenger expects. But if it goes over 500 km (even 501 km) it would be a red bar, meaning dissatisfaction, and case for UAB considering it as "usage of small seats in higher classes to generate undue advantage and financial benefit*."
* I refrain from calling the "usage of small seats in higher classes to generate undue advantage and financial benefit" as cheating, given the fact that I have my objections to calling it cheating, for reasons I have expressed clearly in various threads, but I do accept UAB/AS decision to consider it "cheating". However, what I do consider it is lack of rules and clarity of definitions of socially acceptable (in-game) behavior, but not cheating.
Anyway back to topic:
Based on how UAB/AS handled the other cases, I strongly believe they considered it cheating if you served any route of over 500km with those seats, at default or higher-than-default C-class prices.
24.01.2014 - I received the pm that there would be a 30 millions penalty fee and due around 29.01.2014. I wrote back and asked about my configuration, and the reply was ”it's not bug-using“
To the OP:
What I would like to know: if the message you received stated that you will penalized by a hefty AS$30 million fine, and AS wrote you back it was not because you were using/exploiting a seating config bug, weren't you one bit curious to ask them WHAT WAS THE PENALTY FOR? If it was not for using seat config bug, what did they penalize you for?
Please clarify - by "small seaters" you mean the airplanes with the configuration you indicated (i.e. Leisure Plus in C) or the rest of your aircraft (assuming they have smaller seats in C)?
I assume it's the latter... since how could Leisure+ be considered small seat since it has one green sub-1000-km rating, i.e. that's what the passenger actually expects (at least that's what I read in a different thread that one green bar means).
nope, Leisure Plus is the smallest seat in Business class in my fleet.
What I would like to know: if the message you received stated that you will penalized by a hefty AS$30 million fine, and AS wrote you back it was not because you were using/exploiting a seating config bug, weren't you one bit curious to ask them WHAT WAS THE PENALTY FOR? If it was not for using seat config bug, what did they penalize you for?
I've asked someone and the reply was to “make the balance of the advantage gained before”
and second time was that "You made a lot of money more than you could make by using a reasonable configuration."
Meawhile I was told “Leisure Plus in Business is no bug using and therefor not forbidden.”
That's really mixed information.
As for range, I do have 800km+ route operated by small seaters, but I have super good on-board service - four greens to compensate one red. but is that ”generate undue advantage and financial benefit“? red means overuse? so if the my service was red then we could say I'm overusing the bad service to ”generate undue advantage and financial benefit“? or if the price was red then we could say It's high price overusing and ”generate undue advantage and financial benefit“?
This really has the feel of something you should be taking up with support rather than here in the forums.
We've no way of checking whether you have now, or in the past, used configurations that are considered unfair. Your self-reported high profits might make some suspect you might have done. On that basis, I'm not sure how our opinions can really help you.
If you are suggesting that you have used a different highly effective and fair business strategy to give you this advantage that has caused people to mistakenly think you have unfairly configured your planes, then you've nothing to lose by revealing it ...
The highly effective plan is pretty easy to figure out. You can do a little checking on a few airlines (some which were liquidated earlier and have since re-emerged) that ride high in the amount of planes and passengers. The plan is basically a 50-50 split between Y and C classes. Since there was a large increase in the fare a business traveler would pay, some are flying with 40-50% business seats.
If you look at his information above, that's generally what he is/was doing. I'm not sure if that's why it's considered unfair, etc. I don't particularly see it as "cheating", but I can see how some people would.
If that's the case, I know of several other airlines that are doing the same thing.
To the OP... If you really have not used "standard" or "slimline" in Business or First EVER since the game Aspern server start, and if you have all the documentation (e.g. copies of AS support emails which state using Leisure Plus in business is not abuse/bug usage, and especially the email where it says you have made a lot of money --- this is so ridiculous answer I am completely stunned that they actually sent you this .... what's next..charging 30% over default would be abuse to make much money?)
What I would to is this:
I would ask AS support by email (lof the ticket number) to request that the case to be brought in front of UAB (again). If AS will not open up case for you, I would contact UAB members directly, for example newly elected member SovietSplicer or Derpendja or MxM (search for their username in this board, then click it, then send a private message) and ask them to open the case for you. If you really are sure you have never used standard/HD config in C/F, and have the emails of your communication with AS to backup your statement, you have nothing to lose.
.... And prepare a cover letter/statement to UAB explaining your position... outlining all the facts, succession of events, etc. , all in the narrative way (with listed exhibits, e.g. Exhibit #1 - Email from AS about this and that, etc. ... print out emails into PDF and attach to your case documentation... also make screenshots of your configs, of in-game financial statements, etc.)
I was only bringing it up as what I see as different from what others have been doing. Personally, I'm at a loss as to why he was penalized... it honestly makes me think there is more to this than keisei is saying.
The soap opera of small seat still continues? C'mon, why just don't disable the choices of using small seats in business class. It's getting annoying to see such accusation and penalty thingy all around
The soap opera of small seat still continues? C'mon, why just don't disable the choices of using small seats in business class. It's getting annoying to see such accusation and penalty thingy all around
Well, there are players here who confirm AS support said that Leisure Plus is acceptable seat in Business class, and the OP complains that in spite of being advised by AS that it was OK to use Leisure Plus seats in Business class, he was still penalized ... so what exactly is your point? (this is a friendly question)