New AGEX with slightly higher demand

English Boards General
1

I think demand is already high enough, seriously. I don't comprehend people complaining about demand in this game. You see airports like ATL with an annual movement much higher than in reality.

Last week, in Tempelhof, ATL offered 1,261,016 seats to USA airports, representing a market share of 87.04%. This means

1,261,016/0.8704 = 1,448,777 seats offered in ATL (only departures)

A year has 53 weeks.

So, this means:

1,444,777*53 = 76,785,211 seats offered per year from ATL

Multiplying by 2*0.8 = 1.6:

2 — seats offered from ATL*2 = departures + arrivals offered

0.8 — hypothetical LF% of 80% (Tempelhof global LF was at 83% last week)

122,856,338 passenger per year! (current AGEX level: 772; normal)

Isn’t it enough? Doing the same calculus for other airports (using LF of 80%).

GRU = 59,169,562 pax/year (~35 mi pax/year in reality)

MAD = 97,159,484 pax/year

JFK = 97,859,068 pax/year

HND = 97,910,967 pax/year

PEK = 116,630,511 pax/year

Tempelhof global passengers per year = 97,707,605*53 = 5,178,503,065 (real data for 2012 = 2.9 billion)

This means this game has a global demand 75% above reality. This game already has a natural high demand.

Source: http://tempelhof.airlinesim.aero/action/info/stat?type=transrecpax

 

2

I would also agree that this change in the AGEX is a very big step backwards for Airlinesim and was achieved by a few whiners who couldn't manage the idea that there isn't only growing in the life of a company.

Even though there were hard times on some servers (including the one i'm on) it was challenging and fun to try to run a successful company in these times.  I think i managed well and in this "crisis" i even grown a bit.

Now we are going back to endless growing and adding the planes one after another without considering if demand warrants it. 

It's such a pity.

3

Couldn't agree less with the previous posts. Definitely a step in the wrong direction, all flights are full again.

Not the AGEX was the problem, the problem were missing tools (changing schedules between aircrafts) to cope with it.

Which raises a question I've brought forward long ago: Can't we have servers with different levels of demand, so everyone can choose his level?

4

I have to agree with VOC. I think there was plenty of demand and in the time of low AGEX you had to work harder to keep you company in the green. 

AGEX added depth into the game by creating economic recessions and economic growth. Of course a lot of companies will go bankrupt with low AGEX that is normal in real world too. 

I still do not know how strongly will this new change affect AGEX but I just feel that now AS will be too easy. Everyone will get PAX without a lot of effort.

5

I would also agree that this change in the AGEX is a very big step backwards for Airlinesim and was achieved by a few whiners who couldn't manage the idea that there isn't only growing in the life of a company.

One of the problems (if you also consider the German part of the forum) was that only the people who didn't manage to restructure there airline (or who where unwilling to try) raised their voices. Only few of those who succeeded because or despite the AGEX said something. So it seemed like everybody was against the AGEX.

6

100% agree. We need those extreme conditions to free up slots from badly managed airlines, become more efficient and look for new ways. A bit disappointed by this, but I guess its hard to please everyone.

Then again, the people who moaned the most just did not have a good schedule. It takes a little effort to plan your HUB times but if you nailed it you'll almost be imune to the AGEX. 

7

One motivation of today's change is that it is easier to configure the amplitude of the AGEX' effects. This means two things: Firstly, we can adjust the bounds on running game worlds more easily to figure out a healthy balance between necessary market dynamics and pressure to adjust, so the settings we introduced today might not be the final word spoken. Secondly, I could imagine making these bounds game worlds specific, so we could launch "advanced" game worlds with a large amplitude and "easy" ones with a low one, respectively. In the end we can't please everyone...but we can try ;)

8

That's fine, you're not complaining about a low AGEX because you're in a huge market (USA or Europe).

Try any kind of approach in smaller markets like South America (excluding Brazil), Africa or some countries in Asia, and you'll soon realize there's nothing you can do. I have a 60% market share in Argentina, the second airline has only 25% market share, I've downsized a lot, and still can't fill routes that in real life are booked solid. I can't even get 70% SLF on routes that I have a monopoly on, with subpar prices and extraordinary seats and services!

I don't think AGEX should be raised, I think the balance on some markets is just not right. Like in my market, South America...

9

That's fine, you're not complaining about a low AGEX because you're in a huge market (USA or Europe).

Try any kind of approach in smaller markets like South America (excluding Brazil), Africa or some countries in Asia, and you’ll soon realize there’s nothing you can do. I have a 60% market share in Argentina, the second airline has only 25% market share, I’ve downsized a lot, and still can’t fill routes that in real life are booked solid. I can’t even get 70% SLF on routes that I have a monopoly on, with subpar prices and extraordinary seats and services!

I don’t think AGEX should be raised, I think the balance on some markets is just not right. Like in my market, South America…

+1. Being situated in Nepal, with no competition at all, a low agex is slowly killing my company. I had a perfectly healthy company, but now wages for unused staff is killing me.

People who believes that low agex is something everybody can overcome, clearly havent tried to build companies in complex/very difficult areas.

10

That's fine, you're not complaining about a low AGEX because you're in a huge market (USA or Europe).

Try any kind of approach in smaller markets like South America (excluding Brazil), Africa or some countries in Asia, and you'll soon realize there's nothing you can do. I have a 60% market share in Argentina, the second airline has only 25% market share, I've downsized a lot, and still can't fill routes that in real life are booked solid. I can't even get 70% SLF on routes that I have a monopoly on, with subpar prices and extraordinary seats and services!

I don't think AGEX should be raised, I think the balance on some markets is just not right. Like in my market, South America...

+1 Someone you disagree New AGEX  please play airlines in low demand market or area

11

I am in Chile, or I should say, I am one of the leaders of the South American market in Gatow. For the past three months, my profit runs down from 100,000,000 profit each week drops to -20,000,000 deficit each week.

You people in developed market can easily take advantage of big lines falling apart. But there is nothing we can take advantage. We cannot develop new market (long haul not profitable), we explored the existing market (basically I am flying to nearly 70% of airports in S.A.). Then we suffer from AGEX and fall into a vicious cycle caused AGEX. -> The long-haul flights were hit hard. So I had no choice but to cut them. As a result, the loads of my short-haul flight were affected. Ultimately I had to reduce short-haul flights too. Then long-haul flights no connection, remove long-haul flights...and it continues!

12

I am in Chile, or I should say, I am one of the leaders of the South American market in Gatow. For the past three months, my profit runs down from 100,000,000 profit each week drops to -20,000,000 deficit each week.

You people in developed market can easily take advantage of big lines falling apart. But there is nothing we can take advantage. We cannot develop new market (long haul not profitable), we explored the existing market (basically I am flying to nearly 70% of airports in S.A.). Then we suffer from AGEX and fall into a vicious cycle caused AGEX. -> The long-haul flights were hit hard. So I had no choice but to cut them. As a result, the loads of my short-haul flight were affected. Ultimately I had to reduce short-haul flights too. Then long-haul flights no connection, remove long-haul flights...and it continues!

This is what happens in real life. I think the only problem with AGEX is that in two months we see the swing that the real world of aviation sees in 5 years. It just moves too fast, which is why the cutting of routes/adding of routes seems crazy in the good times and bad. I've never heard of an airline adding 20 aircraft to it's fleet in a week, nevermind in a day...which happens in Airlinesim. On top of this, because of the fact that new game worlds start with 0 airlines in them and tons of old planes, airlines that start with a bunch of old 737s or 757s or A300s or whatever the case may be get hit very hard when the market goes down from one week to the next. In real life the airlines running old aircraft have established routes and reputations. Also in real life, airlines can (should) anticipate the economic downturns and be always looking for more efficient aircraft. In AS, the economic downturn is unexpected and happens in a week or two (ex.: June 23-June 30 in Gatow, 10% drop in AGEX). The only time such a dramatic shift could happen in real life would be with major events (ex.: 9/11) and usually would affect every airline whether they operate 757s or 727s or brand new 787s.

Personally I think AGEX in the game and the game in general just moves too fast...maybe this new buffer will improve that, and hopefully it doesn't make things too easy.

13

On top of this, because of the fact that new game worlds start with 0 airlines in them and tons of old planes, airlines that start with a bunch of old 737s or 757s or A300s or whatever the case may be get hit very hard when the market goes down from one week to the next.

...

Personally I think AGEX in the game and the game in general just moves too fast...maybe this new buffer will improve that, and hopefully it doesn't make things too easy.

I do agree with you in most of the points, except the part about old planes. The current game mechanics do not reflect the disadvantage of using old planes, no matter in good or bad times. On the other hand, operating old planes even have a HUGE advantage when it comes to AGEX economic downturn - that is, you suffer less when it comes to leasing cost of suspending your flight.

The game indeed moving too fast. So when you airline blobs a bit. It becomes a hell when you try to manage every plane of yours

14

That's fine, you're not complaining about a low AGEX because you're in a huge market (USA or Europe).

Try any kind of approach in smaller markets like South America (excluding Brazil), Africa or some countries in Asia, and you'll soon realize there's nothing you can do. I have a 60% market share in Argentina, the second airline has only 25% market share, I've downsized a lot, and still can't fill routes that in real life are booked solid. I can't even get 70% SLF on routes that I have a monopoly on, with subpar prices and extraordinary seats and services!

I don't think AGEX should be raised, I think the balance on some markets is just not right. Like in my market, South America...

This is one of the things. Everyone takes his own example an generalizes it. Especially if you can't manage or adjust your airline in the right way. First of all markets like Europe or the US are bigger but there also numerous competitors while in smaller markets you're often the sole airline. That is also why we constantly advise new players not to start in Europe as you don't really have your home country for yourself and competition may start any other day. So everything has it's pros and cons. If your in a small country you have your home-country for yourself but its your task to be attractive enough (seats, service, overall flight times) for connecting passengers. Try to figure out where they are and where they wanna go. It is very likely that they don't fly with your airline because you don't fly where they wanna go!

Secondly (an example contrary to yours) besides my main airline I also run a subsidiary in a small country with only one 4'-airport. I do very well there even tough there is high competition from another airline.

15

Being situated in Nepal, with no competition at all, a low agex is slowly killing my company

Well, that's because you're oversize for Nepal. Did you ever heard of a Nepalese airline having 53 aircraft ?

And all that in just under 7 months ? KTM had a traffic of 3.4 million in one year during 2009 (according to Wikipedia) - and that's not only one airline!. You had that traffic in 6-7 months (only your airline). Do you think that's realisitic ? We know that the demand in AS is based on real demand to a certain degree. 

And that's the problem with all people complaining about how hard it is during low AGEX in their market. No one even think that the market they built upon was never a solid base for large companies. It went good when the AGEX was at it's peak. But now it's not going too well. Adapt!

And no, being situated in Europe is not a blessing. One of the companies that has fallen during the last months on Tempelhof was the biggest airline at LHR. The slots come handy for the rest of us, that's sure. But the fact that this airline has fallen at such a big airport in EU invalidates your whole argument about regions.

It only depends on how good are you at managing your company.

16

+1 Someone you disagree New AGEX  please play airlines in low demand market or area

I'm not only in Brazil. I have companies in Dominican Republic and Ecuador too. They're really fine, doing very well.

The points are: IL network and reasonable routes. People don’t try that.

 

17

I am in Chile, or I should say, I am one of the leaders of the South American market in Gatow. For the past three months, my profit runs down from 100,000,000 profit each week drops to -20,000,000 deficit each week.

You people in developed market can easily take advantage of big lines falling apart. But there is nothing we can take advantage. We cannot develop new market (long haul not profitable), we explored the existing market (basically I am flying to nearly 70% of airports in S.A.). Then we suffer from AGEX and fall into a vicious cycle caused AGEX. -> The long-haul flights were hit hard. So I had no choice but to cut them. As a result, the loads of my short-haul flight were affected. Ultimately I had to reduce short-haul flights too. Then long-haul flights no connection, remove long-haul flights...and it continues!

Man, when you fly from SCL to 70% of South American airports, it can't be good. Your routes are pretty unreal and some competition in other country may be the reason to this deficit. Try to readjust your routes.

I think all the markets are oversized compared to reality, but you are all oversizing an already oversized market.

I think I’m reaching the limit for Brazilian market, I’m not going to expand more, even with a load factor of 94%. I think you’re offering too much for Chilean market.

As you can see, Brazil is full of space. I’m not against competiton. I didn’t fulfill Brazilian airports with tons of Dash 8 with a +1,000 fleet. I only use turboprops where they’re used in real life. Otherwise, I use 737’s.

This game is about economics. You have to estimate the optimal offer considering expectation on demand. If you oversupply, you will face deficit. I already have planes ready to go if I start to face oversupply, I have a plan, I know the first flights/aircrafts to be cut off. It’s all about knowing where you are and managing it.

18

It's kinda funny that some of us have been lectured like novices.

We know that AGEX is coming down and we should scale down. Yet there are no buffer or second choices for us. We can't compensate the loss caused by bad market environment by getting % from other compeitiors. We already dominated the market. We know we have to scale down. Indeed we can scale down, and we should scale down. But apart from that, there's nothing we can do. That would definately annoy you when you have a fleet of widebodies with flight longer than 12 hours.

19

FWIW, I agree with the sentiment that AGEX weeding out the less well managed has been awesome. For me, it has made the game more fun, not only due to freed-up slots and the demise of the airline that decided PIT should be a hub for his established airline as well, but also because it forced me to adjust my own strategies and future plans. It threw new wrinkles into the game that slowed growth, but added interest. It's been fun trying to right-size equipment in some places, weigh the cost and benefit of canceling routes with other routes, and experiment to find new avenues for profit. 

At the same time, I understand the Chile perspective. I've always wondered what this game really offers (or should offer) for someone who bases their airline in a cramped environment (e.g., virtually anywhere other than the EU or US). I don't know that it *should* be possible to run a gigantic airline out of SCL (or LIM or UIO or SDQ or AKL or...) -- there aren't enough large demand centers surrounding those places for that to make market sense I don't think. OTOH, if you base your airline in one of these countries, it seems like the game would kind of stop being fun once you've hit your "terminal size", which seems a little unfair to those players whose presence as de facto national monopolies does, in fact, make the whole thing seem a little more real.

It's a hard balance. I don't envy the AS people for having to decide where it should be.

o

20

This is one of the things. Everyone takes his own example an generalizes it. Especially if you can't manage or adjust your airline in the right way. First of all markets like Europe or the US are bigger but there also numerous competitors while in smaller markets you're often the sole airline. That is also why we constantly advise new players not to start in Europe as you don't really have your home country for yourself and competition may start any other day. So everything has it's pros and cons. If your in a small country you have your home-country for yourself but its your task to be attractive enough (seats, service, overall flight times) for connecting passengers. Try to figure out where they are and where they wanna go. It is very likely that they don't fly with your airline because you don't fly where they wanna go!

Secondly (an example contrary to yours) besides my main airline I also run a subsidiary in a small country with only one 4'-airport. I do very well there even tough there is high competition from another airline.

You should take a look at my airline before making any assumptions. I have a well oiled hub and spoke system, with waves at given times, and fly to every major airport in the region, plus EVERY airport in the country. I have better seats that my competition (that currently is in far worse shape than I am), better service, and have 5 bars on all classes, along with competitive prices, sometimes even too low to be profitable. So, in response to your statement, it's not that I "don't know" how to cope with it, there's just no way to cope with it but cancel the lease on half of my fleet and stop flying to half of the routes, all the while losing a lot of money on cutting staff and all. Since you don't know when AGEX will rise, I try not to do that, just in case it rises. And since it's been going down for months, I'm stuck in a very acute problem. And as I've said, all my competition is Argentina is in a FAR worse state than I am. Many companies have shut down, including the major carrier in the country, and that is why I'm currently at #1. But still can't get a SLF above 65% and thus I'm not profitable!