Have you considered that BTS is not a very strong airport to start at?
If you can fly one 20 would not be illegal but it might be illegal to fly the CRJ700 whatsoever. I also thoroughly dislike player using this tactic to block slots. US is a complicated market on Stapleton as you got quite a number of skilled players. As it is currently quite open I have considered also trying my luck in the US but it probably wont happen. I am currently trying to break into Europe on Stapleton and to be honest I am quite happy with the results, even if I got very tight competition. As a main part of my cash is made from my long haul operations they will see great growth and as I dont have the possibility to collaborate with the Ganesha Group I need to find US partners in other ways. I will shortly launch flights to DEN, and I would need a new partner there.
When starting in an old world remember to do everything to drive down costs, every cost counting measure possible without hurting ones ORS is needed. For example I have been able to set the break even point at about 45% loads for my long haul flights and even if my loads are at 70% a lot of money is made.
A European IL partner in Stapleton would be awesome. Also, I’m wondering, how’d you get your breakeven costs so low? Like, what specifically did you change? Feel free to shoot me a message in Stapleton, too, along with your airline name. I was thinking I could open up a whole new holding in EU on Stapleton to test the market, if it’s good up there. Thanks!
Have you considered that BTS is not a very strong airport to start at?
Indeed I have, but that hardly answers the question (or this thread). I would re-consider had I started a long-haul company with 10 widebodies from BTS, obviously, that would be an error. But operating a fully sold regional flight at market prices and still unable by far to cover costs? That seems odd to me.
Well this all depends on your seating, pricing and scheduling strategy. Looking at what I have comparable to yours (ATRs and LETs).... My pricing is 110% usually
ATR72-600
- 4-5 years old, leased.
- Total seats = 45
- Maintenance Ratio 145%
- 100% LF on a 45 minute flight
- Profit at end of flight $600 - $1000
- Profitable loadfactor = 79%
LET410
- Brand new
- Total seats = 18
- Maint Ratio = 124%
- 100% LF on a 1:10 minute flight
- Profit = $400 - $800
- Profitable Loadfactor = 85%
But it must be said I do not operate turboprops to be profitable...I operate them to operate to small airports that my jets can't
Just checked, my profitable economy loadfactor on my leased, 5yo A320 is 69%. This pretty much assumes 75-100 in business, since I usually fly pretty full there. I'm hoping to make a bit more money in a few days when my new pricing and IFS take place.
I've been playing AS for 6 weeks now, on Ellinikon, and I find it very frustrating not being able to hit profit even at 100% SLF. There is no point in breaking your brains scheduling and benchmarking only to see that whatever you do, you always sink into red numbers.
Example: Say I have my best route with SLF 95%, operated with AT5. Say I can schedule 10 daily flights to this destination (which I doubt).
If I rent a new 42-600 it costs 65k a week + maintenance 50k = 115k a week. I tried a cheaper 14y 42-500 for 30k a week, but maintenance skyrockets to 140k weekly = 170k a week. This has absolutely no sense, it makes operating a "cheaper" old plane 50% more expensive at the end than a brand new version.
Say I can make 2k profit on each flight (flight related costs discounted), that will do 20k a day (providing I can operate all that flights to the same destination at 95% occupancy, which is unreal) = 140k a week. That is, covering the aircraft rent and maintenance, basically. Meaning my airline has to be run by either slaves or robots, as I can not pay a penny on salaries. Operating fully occupied flights on my most profitable route. This is a nonsense.
Maybe I am missing something, but I have tried different schedule models, cabin configs, aircraft types, salaries, interlines etc. and still nothing seems to be working out. And again, I would understand this if my operations were 50% load factor, but this is not the case....
The leasing, maintenance, salary, etc. costs are already accounted for in the 2k profit that is shown in the flight information page. So if that page shows a 2k AS$ profit, that's the profit that remains after those expenses are paid.
The leasing, maintenance, salary, etc. costs are already accounted for in the 2k profit that is shown in the flight information page. So if that page shows a 2k AS$ profit, that's the profit that remains after those expenses are paid.
I know, but I wasn't referring to the flight information page, rather to the bank account data (real money), from where I get my excel. Still if I check the FI total result (this at SLF 100%) it never rises above -300$.
So it seems the efficiency problem here is cost of personnel and maintenance. Little to do about the first (you compromise staff satisfaction thus flight rate), so it comes down to maintenance.
I have programmed this 2h maintenance window at noon as I understood this will help keep my aircraft in good shape, but... does it not actually cost more money than having a single maintenance per day?
As an example, here are today's results from my two ATR 42-500's:
A: 8 flights, SLF 52%, revenue (w/o maintenance, salaries) $4.592. 3x maintenance (ttl 80.142 points) at total cost $18.954. Operational result w/o employee salaries: $-14.362.
B: 8 flights, SLF 79%, revenue (w/o maintenance, salaries) $13.248. 2x maintenance (ttl 86.512 points) at total cost $22.162. Operational result w/o employee salaries: $-8.914.
Result: I pay more for maintenance than I can ever get in revenues. Unsustainable...
If you make a loss at 95% SLF then your prices are too low.
Regarding maintenance window. It doesn’t matter if you have one window or two, just make sure the ratio is below 150% (but keeping it above 100%).
Also check your ORS ratings. You want to have it as high as possible (99 would be perfect). Then raise your prices till the ORS is decreased.
I can give you an IL, but on stapleton im experimenting with my airline. So if it fails i liquidate. Also i do not have a hub and a pretty small airline
I can give you an IL, but on stapleton im experimenting with my airline. So if it fails i liquidate. Also i do not have a hub and a pretty small airline
My airline at this point is pretty experimental too. I'd give mine an extra week (until next Monday/Tuesday) before I decide to liquidate or build. I've newly configured service, prices, employee wages. Just waiting for it all to kick on on Sunday/Monday. If I can pay my weekend closing and leases the following Monday with the profits I made in the week (or come close), then I'll continue.
If you make a loss at 95% SLF then your prices are too low.
Regarding maintenance window. It doesn’t matter if you have one window or two, just make sure the ratio is below 150% (but keeping it above 100%).
Also check your ORS ratings. You want to have it as high as possible (99 would be perfect). Then raise your prices till the ORS is decreased.
Yes, I consider a price rise to about 110% market is needed, but that will not be enough to get profit, either.
The problem is clearly the maintenance cost. I pay $20k daily maintenance on my AT5, no way I can make profit with that.
I'm sorry I don't understand what do you mean by ratio below 150% and above 100%? How can I affect that?
Sorry I don't know how to paste image here (screenshot) or attach image, so i resume in text my plane condition:
LT4 (A) 88% / 392.4%
LT4 (B) 82% / 187.9%
LT4 (C) 87% / 183.2%
LT4 (D) 85% / 193.5%
AT5 (E) 88% / 215.2%
AT5 (F) 86% / 307.1%
What does the other percentage stand for?
Thanks for help.
The first number is the aircraft current state, the second is the maintenance ratio
A maintenance ratio above 100% will mean the aircraft will not deteriorate, however anymore than 200% you are using the aircraft inneffitiently
Hey guys. So I was looking over the loadfactors at my stations and saw that some stations were doing a lot better than others.
Here's the thing; I checked the ORS and the hubs that weren't doing well had really good ratings. As good of ratings as my no.1 competitor, but with lower prices. Some of my most loaded and profitable routes right now actually have a lot more competition than my not profitable ones. My most profitable routes will be no.10-12 in the ORS, while my non-profitable ones show as no.1-5 on the ORS (with the same rating and lower prices than my competitor). Any ideas as to why this might be happening?
Your competitor might have better network and connections than you.
Your competitor might have better network and connections than you.
Thanks. So why would I be beating the same person on other routes?
Hey guys. So I was looking over the loadfactors at my stations and saw that some stations were doing a lot better than others.
Here’s the thing; I checked the ORS and the hubs that weren’t doing well had really good ratings. As good of ratings as my no.1 competitor, but with lower prices. Some of my most loaded and profitable routes right now actually have a lot more competition than my not profitable ones. My most profitable routes will be no.10-12 in the ORS, while my non-profitable ones show as no.1-5 on the ORS (with the same rating and lower prices than my competitor). Any ideas as to why this might be happening?
I guess you are doing well on routes that have actually a decent demand. That’s also what your competitors have figured out and concentrate on those routes. Where you score better are probably routes with less demand? So you have a higher ORS score, but still don’t get enough pax.
Now on the good routes, slowly adjust your prices to match your competitors, just make sure your rating stays the same. Or try to improve your rating to get even more pax.
Yes, I consider a price rise to about 110% market is needed, but that will not be enough to get profit, either.
The problem is clearly the maintenance cost. I pay $20k daily maintenance on my AT5, no way I can make profit with that.
I’m sorry I don’t understand what do you mean by ratio below 150% and above 100%? How can I affect that?
Sorry I don’t know how to paste image here (screenshot) or attach image, so i resume in text my plane condition:
LT4 (A) 88% / 392.4%
LT4 (B) 82% / 187.9%
LT4 (C) 87% / 183.2%
LT4 (D) 85% / 193.5%
AT5 (E) 88% / 215.2%
AT5 (F) 86% / 307.1%
What does the other percentage stand for?
Thanks for help.
As ianmanson wrote. The first percentage is the current state.
The second number is the interesting one. You don’t plan enough flights. You should try to get that number between 150% and 100%, but not less. If you get below 100% your current state will deteriorate over time and get below 50%, meaning your aircraft gets grounded.
If your maintenance costs are then (with a lower MX ratio) still too high, check which maintenance provider you have chosen. There are some big differences in costs (and quality).
Why is suddenly Stapleton becoming so hyped. I have been one of the few players active there from the forums in over two years and now everybody is there?
Because there are tons of free slots on this server. Luv it