Database backup, game date 13-Apr-1982 (week 15). Current game date 15-Aug-1982 (week 32).
#1: I've compared a few routes and the increase in sales on those routes were because one competitor has dropped out (EWR-SEA for example). And on other routes with no competition change I am seeing only minimal market share changes (was 25.29% and is now 25.47%) so that's not something that could be considered - but overall there's a small increase in market share's and LF over most routes (by a quick look).
#2: For airports, I see a large change in market share in ATL and a very minor change in EWR (not relevant):
EWR - 4 airlines, market share 20.92%
ATL - 5 airlines, market share 6.18%
EWR - 4 airlines, market share 20.62%
ATL - 5 airlines, market share 4.41%
Since ATL is so crowded it's hard to see who is the market share loser between these two points, since all airlines have minor changes.
#3: Testing a route ATL-HNL, there have been no changes in schedules or demand. Your current LF (two routes) is 86.9% + 89.9% vs at the backup 80.9% + 81.1% so it has increased and prices have been increased too. Looking at route planning, Amanville has lost market share significantly while you and Volppe have gained it (both +4%).
Static test on route BU417 to see if the pricing has "negative" effect. Old price in Y/C were 333 / 758 and now you have 354 / 801.
First with old pricing ($333..) and all random noise off, you should sell (on a Tuesday): 114/14/1 seats.
Making a price reset and adding +5% gives prices 345 / 782 (since the game date hasn't changed it's lower what you have now, but did the same change you did) and the sales for the same day are: 106/13/1.
==> So increasing the prices does not increase your sales if everything else remains static and unchanged.
The reason is somewhere else, which I can't pinpoint directly due to the vast number of routes and variables from other players, but it's due to competitor's actions I'd suspect.