1. The configuration was Slimline HD in business and economy - not sure about the explicite number of seat. IIRC some 40 seats in Business. And sorry, don't have the regs anymore - but also IIRC there still has been 4 aicraft with this confiuration.
Please! Were these 4 aircrafts EMB-195s?? Why not tell me dirctlhow many EMB-195s were in the configuration? I had 5 EMB-195s, but only 3 of them were reconfigured with small seats in past. 2 of EMB-195s were still in the original configuration of its delivery. How could I have 4 EMB-195s with small seats? I am really stunned. There must be some mistakes.
Sorry, I do not know what the abbreviation ofIIRC is. But, my major is computer science. So it is really unusual for me to know that you could not have the data any more. Fundamentally, there is a database running at server to store data. Based on the basic mechanism of operating one database, there must be some backups at different times and at different frequency, especially for this commercial system. For the recent data, there will be daily or even hourly backups. For older data, there will be weekly or monthly backups. For the important decisions made by UAB and the AS team, it is very unusual that there was no any backups to check.
2. You received a message at christmas about this which was later, you also asked directly about the 737-600 where I told you that this won't matter if you put them in storage. And after this you still had the EMB in high density configuration - so please don't make us responsible for something you should have known better.
I had not had 4 EMB-195s with small seats ever. So I ask/beg you to check the data again and see what really happened.
3. The motivation is clear - a fair competition. And using the smallest seats in larger classes only to earn more money as you reasonable could is not the way a fair competition is working. Nothing more and nothing less.
Comply with rules and play in a fair way as the type of game is expectable to do, we will have no problem. Wanting to be the number one and using each loophole and/or bug even if they are unlogical always have the risk to cross the line and to be punished. But you shouldn’t accuse us for punishing you when you crossed the line - that is a poor attitude.
If I made you think I was accusing you, I apology. I did not intend to accuse anybody. I only want to seek for answers. You mentioned "the line" that we could not cross. But, could you clearly define where the line is? Would the Slim HD/Standard in business be the line? But, why you punished someone using Leisure Plus in business, even the configuration is "not bug using"? Would the high profit be the line? But, how much a fair profit should be? After so many discussions, I still do not know (actually I am even more confused) where the line is.
Just to add, the rule IS there. You are forbidden to exploit bugs/loopholes. If you need AS to tell you explicitly what the bugs/loopholes are, that would imply AS knew about these. That is not the case, hence the rule, bugs and loopholes are initially unknown to AS, until someone finds it. When that person finds it, the correct action would be to inform the AS team, not exploit it.
I still cannot fully gasp how using HD seats in Business can be a bug, on server start it is a bug but on older server it is not a bug.
Sorry to say, but I am a business person, have BSBA (business administration) and I am to start my MBA. For me, from strictly business perspective, there is absolutely nothing wrong with using "HD seats in FIRST" class and charging 50% on top of default fare, on server start, with huge demand. That's how ANY airline in REAL LIFE would behave. That's how ANY business in ANY industry would behave if it faces new untapped markets with huge demands and low capacities. It's called ECONOMICS of DEMAND and SUPPLY... and MONOPOLISTIC behavior. AS in its core is based on the two theories, so punishim them just seems absolutely illogical.
When space travel will become economically feasible for average folk (at least going to the orbit and back), spacelines will be charging exorbitant amount of money (they already are, hello Virgin Galactic) for very basic service (you do not get a private suit with designer sheets and Michelin-star chef designed 5-course meal).
For me this is not just a pastime, it's an economic simulation. Given this view (of mine), there is nothing wrong with HD seats in C/F class from economic simulation standpoint. From a "pastime game" view it might not be right. But from any-MBA-graduate standpoint it is 1000% OK. As a business graduate, and soon-to-be-MBA, I simply cannot see a bug in this, so if I cannot see a bug I cannot be convinced that such actions are cheating. Again, this is my opinion... how many BSBA's, BABA's, MA's or MS's in business, MBAs, are playing here? (Probably not many, they are busy running real airlines...fortunately for me I run my own business and at the moment I am happy not to (yet) run a multinational.) But I am quite sure they would be inclined to agree that from an economic perspective, from pure business view, there has never ever been any bug that relates to "illegal use of small seats".
Okay, those are two different arguments where you've taken something I said and put it against each other. I said 'even arguing that point is moot' in response to your saying you are a new player, when you said earlier in this thread you played on Gatow. In any case, the situation about you being new is moot because of what SK said a bit earlier:
Where I said I don't think the configurations are illegal is also moot. Doesn't matter what I think. The AS team and UAB have determined this is exploiting a loophole, and those found will be reset/deleted.
You are not a new player, right? You have well known rules and the discussions in the forum. But, you still think there isn't anything wrong with these configurations (of small seats)! I do not want to do it personally, but, do you think it is fair for you to expect me to know the configurations are wrong even you think they are not wrong?
Just to add, the rule IS there. You are forbidden to exploit bugs/loopholes. If you need AS to tell you explicitly what the bugs/loopholes are, that would imply AS knew about these. That is not the case, hence the rule, bugs and loopholes are initially unknown to AS, until someone finds it. When that person finds it, the correct action would be to inform the AS team, not exploit it.
Yes. One answer I am seeking for is what a bug or a loophole is defined as. If even AS does not know what a bug is, how should we know it is a bug or a good strategy to operate the airline? How could we distinguish these two strategies, "I should not offer small seats because IRL everyone in business has better seats" and "what about if I do not offer drinks in business class because IRL everyone in business class gets their drinks"? This is an economic simulation game. The pursuit of profit and financial growth is the core of an economic simulation. Before AS's clarification, how could we know the first one is a bug?
when playing a computer game, the main principle is that the system does not allow you to do any illegal moves. In most cases, you don't need to know all the rules. If you try to interline with your other holding, the system will not allow you to interline. If you try to support an IPO and your airline is too poor, the system will not allow you to buy these shares. And so on.
Secondly, at first nobody was concerned about this new "get rich fast" strategy. When the first player(s) complained, other players and the AS team alike replied that it was a legal thing to do. And to be honest, I hardly see a difference between selling tickets at insane prices and using small seats in business. Both strategies are based on the abundance of passengers on a new server. And both strategies would not work if there was less passenger demand on a new server, or if the minimum rating before passengers are willing to buy a ticket was higher. Starting a new server with an AGEX of 500 may also help.
Thirdly, the majority of players using this strategy could be identified as "it's them again". That provoked a mass reaction and a lynch mob. If the "small business seat" strategy had been a wide spread thing, the others would probably have thought: damned, why did I not think about this. And on the next new server, everybody would have done it.
Anyhow, the mass reaction caused the AS team to decide it was illegal to use small seats in business & first class. As soon as that was decided, it would have been a wise move to replace all cabin configurations (that had small seats). Postponing and trying to make that one last extra dollar, has cost some people their airline.
Knowing how to calculate helps when creating a successfull airline. But recognising the smell of a lynch mob also helps ;-)
I still cannot fully gasp how using HD seats in Business can be a bug, on server start it is a bug but on older server it is not a bug.
For me this is not just a pastime, it's an economic simulation. Given this view (of mine), there is nothing wrong with HD seats in C/F class from economic simulation standpoint. From a "pastime game" view it might not be right. But from any-MBA-graduate standpoint it is 1000% OK.
Even the harder nosed MBA graduate ought to have an half an eye on his company's image - few companies "like" to be seen to be profiteering, although undoubtedly many do it. ;)
AS CEO's are a diverse lot. Some of us are ruthless economists (and enjoy an excellent economic simulation), others of us create the airline of our dreams and enjoy more aesthetic rewards; and of course most of us have reasons that match some of these and others too. The AS management has to try and keep us all happy, providing a product that we all enjoy. Most of us have a keen sense of fairness, but that doesn't mean that you agree with what I think is unfair.
It seems that every server launch has the problem of those willing and wanting to quickly get a strong advantage, and that sits ok with some of us and not with others. In real life, I could choose to equip my airline with HD seating and charge exorbitant prices and see if the market liked it. If it did, happy days, if not I'd need to adjust my product to something the market was prepared to buy. It seems now that the problem is that in a new world with no airlines, the AS passenger is so desperate to travel that he will pay almost any price and tolerate any service level to get it. This distortion of the market is ripe to exploitation, and indeed in real life it would be exploited (as you point out). Because some of the AS resources are limited (slots), players who play hard at the start will inevitably get an advantage over those who don't.
Is the ability to place HD seats in business and first a bug? I've no real opinion. But if it is, then the sensible thing would be to close it straight away, or adjust the ORS so that the AS passenger would simply draw the line at booking the flight. If it's intended as a feature that is part of the market, then as the server gets busier then people using it simply have to adjust the product as no-one will purchase it. If it is an intended feature, then I'd hope we learn from Aspern that it's important to state any boundaries of it. That way a player's strategy is either a simple infringement or allowed.
As for the current situation? I think the AS team have reacted systematically to manage what appears to have been an unintended consequence of the new cabin editor. Keeping everyone happy whilst ensuring a balanced gameworld doesn't seem to be easy, and I think generally they're doing just fine.
I would not dare to disagree with an MBA graduate on the subject of percentages ;-)
So 1000% OK also means twenty times sure that something is 50% OK ? And twenty times not-so-sure equals very sure... or... ?
Anyhow, Aspern has seen a lot of 1000% surcharges and very few discounts. I guess that brings us back on topic.
If 1000% surcharge gets your airline deleted, what surcharge is then acceptable ? And if slimline seats in business are a no-go, what seats are acceptable ? And if 50% economy and 50% business seats are not allowed, what percentage is acceptable ? On every question, the answer is "it depends on the circumstances". But if everything has to be seen on a case by case basis, are you 1000% sure that the judgment is fair ? Or are you twenty times 50% sure that the judgment is fair ?
Let's be honest... if a configuration with 50% small business seats is not realistic, then selling tickets at insanely high prices is also unrealistic. And if high ticket prices are a realistic phenomenon in a world with high demand and little offer, then small seats are also economically realistic.
If you defend unrealistic high prices, can you be against small seats ? And if you don't allow small seats, can you defend the exorbitant ticket prices on every new server ?
Neither question keeps me awake at night. And I have little sympathy for people who are purely driven by greed. But my sympathy for lynch mobs is equally small, and I have doubts about rules that cannot be quantified.
Neither question keeps me awake at night. And I have little sympathy for people who are purely driven by greed. But my sympathy for lynch mobs is equally small, and I have doubts about rules that cannot be quantified.
I hope you get the point during your MBA courses. Perhabs depending on your business school they hopefully introduce you into the world of reality. And secondly, even I think non-MBA O'Leary wouldn't think of offering premium seats using HD seats, because this is absuletly no sustainable business modell.
You might say, a new AS-world is like a completely new product satisfying a completly new need. But this assumption is somehow weird and it does not reflect the market as it is. You wouldn't have staff, aircrafts, slots etc.
Given, that there is no market with extensive demand providing extensive resources to satisfy this demand, you can't use an argument, that any real business would act this way. To set up a game like AS, you have to simplify things and make assumptions. Doing so, you change reality into something where you have to manage the effect of gaps inbetween. That's what AS has done.
I think one of the central aims doing an MBA is to think out of the box and comprehending enterprises and markets wholistically. So I just want to point out, that an MBA graduate migth disagree with the opinion of someone who is about to do an MBA. Well, perhabs it is rather a matter of personal perspective than a matter of intended educational achievements.
1. The configuration was Slimline HD in business and economy - not sure about the explicite number of seat. IIRC some 40 seats in Business. And sorry, don't have the regs anymore - but also IIRC there still has been 4 aicraft with this confiuration.
2. You received a message at christmas about this which was later, you also asked directly about the 737-600 where I told you that this won't matter if you put them in storage. And after this you still had the EMB in high density configuration - so please don't make us responsible for something you should have known better.
@sk
I am still waiting for the answer. I think it was not only about the fairness, but also about honest now! You said I have 4 EMB-195s in small seats. But, in total I had configured 3 EMB-195s in small seats. One had quitted my fleet on Dec 31. Two had been reconfigured in Dec. How could these 4 EMB-195s be with small seats on Jan 4?
I do not know how your team and UAB made decisions. But, based on these informations you and Benjamin told me, it seems such a decision mainly based on my profit but not on whether I actually used small seats or not. I hope I am wrong, because many players think the AS team is fair, thorough and open for feedback.
What do we have to discuss right now? You say you reconfigured them, I say I reviewed your airlines and they were at the moment of the review still underway with the small seats. The main point: you had these small configurations in use and that's a bug using and had been punished.