What is best?

[MRFREAK]

What is best?

1x flights to 3 different destinations or 3x flights to 1 destination or are there no difference?

Thanks 

[Curse]

3x 1 destination

[swiftus27]

Rule #1 of AWS:  FREQUENCY FREQUENCY FREQUENCY


edit:  well that is really rule #1a... Rule #1 is Worship Sami and all his creations.  He is the master of all AWS.  Without him we wouldn't have AWS.  Hail Sami creator of virtual airlines.  We await your return.  Through Sami and AWS we pray.....  AMEN!


edit 2:  can I have some free creds, please?

[slither360]

If no competition, 1x flights to 3 destinations
If competition, 3xf flights to 1 destination

[GEnx]

If no competition, 1x flights to 3 destinations
If competition, 3xf flights to 1 destination

Um, no.

[Jps]

Here's some, loosely related, discussion about the matter. It concentrates on the beginning of the game, and is not general, that is, apply through the whole game.

Um, no.

Maybe give some reasons why you think that?

[Curse]

3x marketing/staff payment > 1x marketing/staff payment => 1 destination > 3 destinations

[GEnx]

Maybe give some reasons why you think that?

This:

3x marketing/staff payment > 1x marketing/staff payment => 1 destination > 3 destinations

And the fact that you'll not only be less vulnerable to route competition from the airport you're flying to, but your Route Image will also increase much faster this way, thus providing you with higher load factors.

[slither360]

This:

And the fact that you'll not only be less vulnerable to route competition from the airport you're flying to, but your Route Image will also increase much faster this way, thus providing you with higher load factors.

Assuming that you nor your competition plans to oversupply by a lot, you are better off getting the head start on RI on the second route than finishing the first, because that way you'll have better marketshare.

[psw231]

  What does assuming do?

[alexgv1]

  What does assuming do?

Never ASSUME -

It will make an ASS out of U and ME.

That's what a wise friend told me.

Not really directed to Bob though.

[slither360]

Yeah, I've used that one on the alliance forums before. That said, it's a fair assumption, because unless one of you is trying to go out of business, oversupply won't help.

[swiftus27]

Yeah, I've used that one on the alliance forums before. That said, it's a fair assumption, because unless one of you is trying to go out of business, oversupply won't help.

I like 110-115% of demand.  It allows for the eventual increase in pax and generally dissuades someone else from trying to go after the route.

[slither360]

By oversupply, I meant 300% demand served between you and your competitor.

It has happened to me before.

Fortunately, my competitor, not me, went BK

[GEnx]

Assuming that you nor your competition plans to oversupply by a lot, you are better off getting the head start on RI on the second route than finishing the first, because that way you'll have better marketshare.

Then let's put it this way.. What would you rather: three routes where you fail on or one successful route and two routes you fail on?

Also, someone is far less likely to fly a certain route when the demand is supplied for 100%, than a route which demand is supplied for 30%.

[Jona L.]

By oversupply, I meant 300% demand served between you and your competitor.

It has happened to me before.

Fortunately, my competitor, not me, went BK

This is not what usually happens in the beginning of games, rather further into a game where you don't have to choose between 3x 1 and 1x 3 routes....
because you make 3x 3