Viennair: not playing a fair game
Catita Bill:
Hi everyone.
I am here to complain about the company called Viennair.
It's based at the same airport as me (Vienna, Austria) and another 4 one..
Green Airways (GAW), Pekanuss (PKS), Catita Express (EXP), Viennair (VIE), Perseus Airlines (PRS)
And Viennair doesn't know how to play a fair game. He is saturating every routes with a huge offer os seats, but those routes has only 120 pax/day average.
Some examples of routes that this player is saturating:
http://www.airwaysim.com/game/Routes/Planning/LOWW/LIMC
http://www.airwaysim.com/game/Routes/Planning/LOWW/EDDT (absurd!)
http://www.airwaysim.com/game/Routes/Planning/LOWW/LKPR
http://www.airwaysim.com/game/Routes/Planning/LOWW/EDDM (there is no need to put an A300.. Or put then when no other player is flying the route)
You put an A300 in a route with 1000 pax a day, it's ok.. But put an A300 in a route with 120 pax a day, AND another airline is flying the route.. There is one route that 2 airlines are flying it, i think they are in an agreement, or at least, they are not saturating the route.. And then comes this player and put a huge A300..
I don't what this player is doing is fair.. This is not a good competition. Too bad.
sami:
Please read the game rules page before posting such public rants about other players, as that is not very polite: http://www.airwaysim.com/game/Manual/General/Rules/
Because the other player is NOT acting against the game rules / 'fair play', as we can see:
LOWW/LIMC
- demand 230/day
- he supplies 149/day
-> BELOW the daily demand.
LOWW/EDDT
- demand 120/day
- he supplies 120/day
-> BELOW/AT the daily demand.
LOWW/LKPR
- demand 120/day
- he supplies 120/day
-> BELOW/AT the daily demand.
LOWW/EDDM
- demand 250/day
- he supplies 280/day
-> Same as the daily demand.
None of the routes you mentioned is oversupplied by him. => no actions
Catita Bill:
He may not be acting against the game rules, but his actions, in my opinion, is not in a "good faith" (as we say here in brazil).
If you have a 120/day and there are already 1 or 2 airlines flying the route.. Come on, the demand is very low, and you still want to add 120 or 149 more seats?
Acting like that he may damage the other players.
I don't think acting like that is honest.
He should look to another routes, wich you can have a good competition.. Like in the Vienna - Paris - Charles de Gaule route.. I don't complain about this route.. And also the London heatrow route.. I don't complain about this route too..
Again, I don't think acting like that is honest.
I may be wrong.. the user may not have had a bad inttention.. But, what i see right now is that the user didn't have a good intention at all, saturating those routes.
Sigma:
Quote
Acting like that he may damage the other players.
One certainly hopes so!
That's the entire point!
Who cares if there's some other routes he can serve, maybe he really wants to serve that route. Just because you were there first, doesn't mean a thing. If you've got a problem with it and you feel there are other routes that can be served then you move to those routes. If you don't want to do that, then what you have is a little thing called "competition", where you all fight to see who can get those 150/day and the best player wins. As long as he's doing it fairly (not dumping or flooding) then there's not one bit of problem. And as long as you operate the better-run airline, he's not going to get very far.
Daveos:
I would share with Sigma's thoughts here.
He's merely acting in the what he thinks is the best long-term interests for his airline and by filling the capacity on those routes, he is hoping to stop your expansion.
Being one step ahead of your competitor is what the game is all about, however you want to acheive that. You should use your in depth analysis of his route structure to your benefit and open up on the routes he's not using.
Navigation