After being accused of unfair playing I would like to hear the opinions of other players.
Providing cheap leases for other players so far was explicitly deemed legal in order to help other players get into a market. Should this practice be reviewed? Please voice out your opinion!
PS: This is my personal curiosity and is NOT an official poll
Define cheap.
In this case I offered the aircraft at 10% of the current value.
It’s an option made available by Airlinesim. Of course it is OK.
If it shouldn’t be allowed, why would the option be there?
Isn't that the point of this poll (although not officially) the question is if players like to have this be allowed. It's of course OK to do at the moment as it is allowed by the game, but that doesn't need to mean that the players like this to be allowed.
Its shouldn't be allowed as Airline Sim should be equal not favour one airline over another
100% legal. If I own something, be it a chocolate bar, or an aircraft, and I would like to either rent it out or sell it, it is my right as the owner, to decide how much I want for it
But the game also stipulates or desires to achieve,
And yes, you can decide what to do with your aircraft. But what if it's a public company and you only own 50.1% of it, or even less? Is it then still your money?
What if you "sell" an aircraft to an other player at 10%? Is it then different?
We shouldn't be too focused on the one cheap plane. I am leasing out 1200 planes. There are some bargains (A321s for 50k, A330s for 80k per week). Developing business contacts. Thats it. No one could stop me. It would be ridiculous.
Can't vote a simple yes or no here.
Personally, I'm ok with such cheap offers, but am not when the lease is canceled right after should the "wrong" player win the auction.
100% legal. If I own something, be it a chocolate bar, or an aircraft, and I would like to either rent it out or sell it, it is my right as the owner, to decide how much I want for it
It aint that easy.
As a profit oriented operation, the things you own for your business are depreciated. And if you know that the lease rate you get is lower than your (calculated) costs, then that activity isn't for profit anymore.
Not much different to selling your aircraft at 10%, but here you at least cannot cancel the contract afterwards. So what you got is at least roughly the market value.
It's the possible cancelation of lease contracts that doesn't feel right here.
We shouldn't be too focused on the one cheap plane. I am leasing out 1200 planes. There are some bargains (A321s for 50k, A330s for 80k per week). Developing business contacts. Thats it. No one could stop me. It would be ridiculous.
A few out of many sounds perfectly ok to me.
As long as the entire operation (leasing) still is profit oriented.
I don't think Leasing as a business is ever truly profitable in this game.
Even with a full lease income, you have to lease it out at some 3.8 (real) years. That means, you can only hope to make any money if you are really in for the LONG TERM.
Effectively we are talking mates rates which is an everyday part of life. Everyone has equal chance of availing from this. If they have spent every second in the game competing with everyone else, pissing everyone else off, and not trying to be friendly then that’s their choice. Equally if I have a good working relationship with a player I do not see what’s wrong with either asking or been asked. I disagree with ones on here that want something for nothing
i should definitely be declared as illegal.
typically this feature is just used to provide some players a huge advantage over others.
as Matth stated rightly, we should play in a way:
the first paragraph is clearly violated when you lease 10 or even more expensive aircrafts to a "friend" for peanuts and others have to start slow with expensive leasings. the 2nd paragraph is not very clear as 1 AS$ per week is also "profit" but the return on capital by leasing is anyway so low that you hardly can describe it as profit and with a 10% leasing you can forget thinking about profit.
to do a reality check: of course nobody in his mind ever would lease away for 10% of the value in the real world and even company group internally this would be an illegal act and could not pass any financial audit.
My vote: it is and should be legal also on the future.
Well it is completely legal but it is as I previously said about moral. First of all canceling a contract is pretty rude on all occasions but some excuses are more accepted than others. Cancelling because one does not want a certain individual to have the plane is what I call bad moral. As there is only an open market everyone should have the chance to get that plane. I understand the initiative to help new players but how does that selection process work? Who will get help? I fully accept and understand giving out cheap leases but then they should be to everyone even if specifically intended to one person but everyone shall be able to bid. I don't see a problem to help a certain individual regardless of experience or influence. I have three planes leased for 20% from an alliance member. I only had the resources to overbid for two of them. Thereby the third 737 got leased out to Highlander who still leases the plane at a very cheap rate, even if he is on the alliance blacklist. I have previously suggest a private leasing market as well which could send these planes directly to the prospect passing by the open market. I cant say I have not benefited from this I have bought a couple almost new A330s for 7 million each while they should have been "transferred" between certain members of an alliance.
Then also comes another issue of moral. Should the biggest player on the world try to snitch planes meant for beginners? I would say no.
Oh yes Mr Upset had spoken. I am so tired of your constant complaining in the forums over the past 3 month ever since the patch was announced. First the small aircraft patch, then the landing fees, now cheap leases. Get a life! Or better yet, get elected to the UAB and change things! Until then, get that life I mentioned.
Why don't you also suggest banning cheap terminals? And when we're at it, why don't you actually even ban any player cooperation, because they are anti-competitive against other players, like when a big alliance gets together to gain certain markets or parts of the world - when you are not part of a successful and mutually cooperative alliance you stand much less chance of success - and not having equal chance should be prohibited by your opinion. Then ban also Skype, WhatsApp, Slack, Threema, Telegram and web forums, or even better yet, ban all the phone companies and ISPs from existence, ban the whole Internet! Because they all in a certain way act in a way that doesn't give equal chance to everyone in Airlinesim. But wait - with the Internet banned by you, you then couldn't play the AIlrinesim.
Sorry that your alliance is not as tight, cooperative and working towards the common goal,as some other alliances on AirlineSIm. Tough luck you selected the wrong one, better luck next time you chose the players you play with.
I don't think Leasing as a business is ever truly profitable in this game.
Even with a full lease income, you have to lease it out at some 3.8 (real) years. That means, you can only hope to make any money if you are really in for the LONG TERM.
It is profitable. Not as profitable as running an airline, but low maintenance and stable income. I'm making AS$ 300 m per week only on leasing. Just because I don't have the time maintaining a fleet of a few 1000 planes...
E1: I lease out a cheap plane to help a new player (and/or at a remote location, and ....) - no problem
E2: leasing out cheap planes to help a player boxing out a competitor - big problem
In this discussion all the circumstances have to be taken into account...
I forgot that ImperatorNero is Viennabert, the largest USA airline on Aspern who feels threatened by a competition, who feels that a successful and progressive company that recently started competing with him is encroaching on his territory. He feels threatened, he feels cornered, he feels he is losing the market. No wonder he is screaming at full volume. Makes sense now, I totally forgot about it when I wrote the previous post.
I forgot that ImperatorNero is Viennabert, the largest USA airline on Aspern who feels threatened by a competition, who feels that a successful and progressive company that recently started competing with him is encroaching on his territory. He feels threatened, he feels cornered, he feels he is losing the market. No wonder he is screaming at full volume. Makes sense now, I totally forgot about it when I wrote the previous post.
But there's a rule that prices for flights have to be above certain limits. Why not for leasing and/or selling/buying planes too? Doesn't sound too ridiculous anymore... But interfering in this area too much would result in a dent in my business model.