My observation about pricing formula on Quimby

English Boards General
41

The major problem with the game is long haul.

in the ORS if you have 2 options between 2 destinations- one short haul flight and one Long haul flight, or two medium haul flights- the medium haul flights will always have a better rating. 

This is because the pricing and rating for the medium haul flights and the possible margin on flights with A320/737s etc can easily reach 99, but the rating for the long haul flight is almost impossible to reach 99 and stay profitable.

A couple of reasons for this are-

The rating for seats for long flights is hard to keep high- you need huge seats to keep people happy. 

the fuel burn per seat for LH aircraft is far high  no matter what distance you fly. 

I suggest change 2 things for the current system-

Fix the fuel burn per seat to be far closer between sh and lh aircraft

fix turn around times for Largeaircraft flying short sectors so we can get more sue from them

42

I meant "over the top" as in, way too luxury for this kind of flight. It should be (in my very own opinion) not be possible to have a profitable flight with these configurations. Afterall, this is Economy class we are talking about. If you want better you take business or first, right? And the problem that comes along with it is not enough capacity throughout the game world.

I completely agree with this, I mean lie flat seats on short haul J? Most people in reality won't do it. But like I said, it is a structural change to the whole game...

People using overly good seats results in low capacity leaving a lot of passengers on the ground. I kind of agree on that now. While demand may be on real world levels I expect the game world capacities dont go along with that number.

You can't really "fix" this issue... as long as the the current rating system stays. It is a supply and demand thing, if you use leisure seats and you find out that your flights are not filling, then you upgrade to leisure plus. Then when the AGEX does down and your flights are not filling again, you switch to comfort seats, and so on...

I once wrote that in a thread to SK after the AGEX "fix" where people complained about the higher demand (yes really they did that :D ). I dont remember exaclty but it was something like this:

"First, people complain about low demand because of the AGEX and it get's a fix. Now other people complain about too high demand, rescuing all those badly managed airlines. Actually you should change the AGEX back to original....it's the same logic"

I was among the people who complained about the higher demand, and I still think the higher demand is a bad thing. The whole point of introducing AGEX is to turn the originally static world into a more dynamic one. So when the AGEX goes down, naturally there will be fewer passengers and airlines will have to fight for them. And naturally, mismanaged airlines, no matter how big you are, will lose money and eventually shut down. That is all part of the game.

Unfortunately, that's not how some people see it...

43

Hi,

in a computer simulation you have to stick to the concept that a seat twice as big should be worth twice as much. You can however lower the maximum price players can ask for their tickets. At this moment it would be stupid to put suites in economy because you can only double the price. If you lower the maximum price to 125% or 150% (instead of 200%) you would eliminate the use of big seats in economy. By the way, that would also prevent excessive profits on new servers.

About the ORS rating... Real passengers would fly standing up like in a crowded bus if that would save them 10 dollar. Our virtual passengers are unrealistic because they look at value for money instead of mainly looking at the price. But I don't think the game would work if price was the main factor. You would get in a vicious circle where everybody is forced to continuously lower his prices. In the real world, deregulation has killed a lot of airlines. But at least in the real world investors are asking for a convincing business plan before they are willing to put money in a new airline. In the game there is just a limit of 1200 players per server. Creating a new category of passengers that mainly looks the price of a ticket will allow to play as a low cost carrier, but unless the game allows all the other "tricks" that low cost carriers use, I shall stay far away from operating a low cost carrier in the game  ;-)

And as for the AGEX... whining against or in favour of a lower AGEX is not necessary. Airlines tend to grow beyond passenger demand. Without AGEX, it may take 3 years before a server is completely saturated, with the AGEX it may take two years, and with a low AGEX it may take 1 year. At least from that point of view the game is a perfect mirror of reality... people keep going for more until the whole thing collapses.

Jan

44
But I don't think the game would work if price was the main factor. You would get in a vicious circle where everybody is forced to continuously lower his prices.

 

I agree on this one. I played airline-empires for a while, and it was exactly that vicious circle of price lowering, as pax bookings in that game are based mainly on price, and where IFS, image etc. are really not that important at all. It was a daily routine of reviewing routes being undercut, and undercutting back. The game was less about strategy and planning (network, planes, etc.) and more about price competition than anything else.

45
Creating a new category of passengers that mainly looks the price of a ticket will allow to play as a low cost carrier, but unless the game allows all the other "tricks" that low cost carriers use, I shall stay far away from operating a low cost carrier in the game  ;-)

Well, LCC business model is base don the following premises, and I will list if they are feasible in AS

- One fleet type and usually one engine type (possible in AS)

- Higher A/C utilization (quite possible in AS, but also other AS airlines could have high utilization even when using waves with tail-of-schedule flights, so this factor is minimized in AS)

- Higher seat density (slimline seats in AS have a huge negative factor)

- Lower personnel cost by limiting unionization (this could be achieved in AS by lowering wages, but then it has negative factor on your image which over time will "get you")

- Substantial share of revenue from "incidentals" e.g. onboard food/drink purchase, checked bag fee, etc.

- Lower landing fees by operating from secondary airports

- Contracting out smaller outstations to third party companies, both below-the-wing operations (in AS that would be ramp agents, and also ground handling staff if you have terminals), and also sometimes above-the-wing operations as well (in AS that would be check-in agents and partially customer service) ... this is not quite feasible in AS at the moment

and most importantly, GENERATING DEMAND.

AS would need to fundamentally change its demand routine from simple computer assigned demand to flights on pre-determined criteria, to actually being able to generate demand with your service... and more you fly into a certain airport the more demand you can generate. Then there comes marketing, which is very important tool for LCCs and for demand generation. And for LCC's to work, we would also need city-wide demand, so Charleroi and Brussels are actually sharing the same demand (and also sharing the generated demand). Once we have passengers with a mind AND marketing, then generated demand should not be a problem to implement... BUT with generated demand (by LCCs) the passengers should be price-conscious (as they are in real life - A Spirit Air passenger before took Greyhound bus, now he takes a Spirit flight ... that same passenger will not book full-fare economy ticket on Delta or American regardless of the fact that now he is flyer and not a bus rider).

46

Almost all of this is on our list somewhere in some way or another.

47

The major problem with the game is long haul.

 

in the ORS if you have 2 options between 2 destinations- one short haul flight and one Long haul flight, or two medium haul flights- the medium haul flights will always have a better rating. 

 

This is because the pricing and rating for the medium haul flights and the possible margin on flights with A320/737s etc can easily reach 99, but the rating for the long haul flight is almost impossible to reach 99 and stay profitable.

 

A couple of reasons for this are-

The rating for seats for long flights is hard to keep high- you need huge seats to keep people happy. 

the fuel burn per seat for LH aircraft is far high  no matter what distance you fly. 

 

I suggest change 2 things for the current system-

Fix the fuel burn per seat to be far closer between sh and lh aircraft

fix turn around times for Largeaircraft flying short sectors so we can get more sue from them

Thank you. There is no reason why two medium haul flights should be better than a direct long haul.