Online Airline Management Simulation

My Account
E-mail:
Edit account
» Achievements
» Logout
Game Credits
Credit balance: 0 Cr
» Credit history
» Credits FAQ

### Author Topic: the only factor still is frequency  (Read 2971 times)

#### meiru

• Members
• Posts: 745
##### the only factor still is frequency
« on: September 23, 2013, 03:43:05 PM »
the only factor still is frequency... and I don't think it's realistic...

• Members
• Posts: 921
##### Re: the only factor still is frequency
« Reply #1 on: September 24, 2013, 07:40:51 AM »
Wrong

#### LemonButt

• Members
• Posts: 1895
##### Re: the only factor still is frequency
« Reply #2 on: September 24, 2013, 12:53:00 PM »
This is a very well articulated and thought provoking thread.  I applaud you good sir.

#### meiru

• Members
• Posts: 745
##### Re: the only factor still is frequency
« Reply #3 on: September 24, 2013, 03:01:55 PM »
Wrong

So what else? Let's take this example: In total about 11 flights a day (all about the same a/c), in detail we should have (if we only distribute it according to number of flights)
M: 19.1%, A 16.4%, C 19.1 %, V 45.2% and what do we have?
M 14.3%, A 13.8%, C 19.9%, V 51.8%

of course, there is a difference between what we see and what should be... but it's not that big! And all we see is, that those with more flights (often the larger airlines) get even more than the proportional calculated amount.

It's a fact... nothing more and nothing less!

#### meiru

• Members
• Posts: 745
##### Re: the only factor still is frequency
« Reply #4 on: September 24, 2013, 03:06:51 PM »
Oh and... one of the M flight is in the morning (6.00), all others deart at 11.30 or later and after that time you have a lot of flights... almost every hour or at least every 2 hours... and this, for example doesn't make any difference!

I know, I'm always complaining about the same... but if it doesn't change... it's the same with the fuel consumption values of some jets... they're simply wrong

#### Sami

• Members
• Posts: 16214
##### Re: the only factor still is frequency
« Reply #5 on: September 24, 2013, 05:48:44 PM »
It's a fact... nothing more and nothing less!

These "facts" of yours are interesting to say the least, just some % values with no reference to anything. I assume you are talking of Dotm#6 game world route SFO-LAX since it's your main one? So let's examine that a bit quickly ( http://www.airwaysim.com/game/Routes/Planning/KSFO/KLAX/?go=1 ):

- First to be noted that the market share chart of route planning page is by NO MEANS a valid tool for detailed analysis as it is based on historical data (last two weeks was it?) and any changes made during this period in routes (prices etc) or maintenances etc. are not taken into account there if you compare it to the flights of present moment. In other words a player may have added flights which are not visible in the history data yet (just an example), or plane has been out of service in maintenance etc.

- There are 4 airlines, Aurora (A; #20), Globe (G; #53), mTravel (M; #1385), Talbot (T; #231).

- If we look at tuesday (-2-) we see that all airlines provide a total of 19 flights every day on this route. The frequencies & CI's are as follows (RI 100 @ everyone):
* T: 6 (CI 90)
* G: 5 (CI 68)
* A: 4 (CI 80)
* M: 4 (CI 30)

- I've taken the game world data on to the test server, where I've run a test calculation on this route (tuesday) without any randomization or such. Delays and maintenances are excluded too so all routes are flown.

- Looking at the data before test run, I see that airline T is selling tickets with hefty discounts (~\$40-80/Y class). Prices of A, M and G are identical. Looking at the flight schedules airline G is in disadvantage as two of his flights depart between 00 and 04am, while schedules of A and M (and partly T) are better. Company image gains advantage to T and A. Aircraft types are pretty identical except for the one F27 schedule by airline A.

- Test data: Sold seats 928 (of 2026 available seats), market shares for this single day: T: 33.5%, G: 23%, A: 23%, M: 20.5%. (If it would be truly and only based on the flight frequency the market share should be T: 32%, G: 26%, A: 21%, M: 21%.)

- These two seem pretty close, and we see that there is some correlation, but on the other hand no correlation as per these points: As how do you explain that while G has 5 flights it has same market share than A? Or why does M have less market share than A while they both server 4 flights a day? This is because he has 2 flights dep in the middle of the night, making them unattractive for the customers, and because M has a worse company image. But this being a domestic shuttle service type route, the image is not that important here and passengers are more price and time sensitive.

- Further more, and this is the biggie, ... Like mentioned T has also a price advantage, since if we drop everyone's pricings to default (Y \$109) the sales of airline T drop from 310 seats to 215 seats! And with the same prices for each airline the market share looks like this: T: 25%, A: 26%, G: 26%, M: 23% (again if it would be freq. only the numbers would be T: 32%, G: 26%, A: 21%, M: 21%.). So the added frequency of two flights for T makes no difference at all there!! (but here still all other factors like CI and flight times are included, so it is clearly visible that airlines A and M benefit there as their schedules are good)

it's the same with the fuel consumption values of some jets... they're simply wrong

And yet you keep repeating this but have provided no reference information even though I specifically requested so when it was last talked (a single number of xxx kg/h for example is not sufficient). The information in the aircraft database for modern jets is based on proper sources and while mistakes there are possible due to the vast volumes of data, the data used is reliable and very accurate. Further, I cannot and will not make any changes without proper reference data (which I am always happy to receive).
« Last Edit: September 24, 2013, 06:12:23 PM by sami »

#### meiru

• Members
• Posts: 745
##### Re: the only factor still is frequency
« Reply #6 on: September 24, 2013, 06:25:35 PM »

and about the fuel ... there is an official database used in the Airline industry... but you only get it, under some the restrictions, and those include, that you're not allowed to share it or to use it for projects other than bla bla bla... so that's why I simply can't give you the whole data set!
« Last Edit: September 24, 2013, 06:29:25 PM by meiru »

#### Sami

• Members
• Posts: 16214
##### Re: the only factor still is frequency
« Reply #7 on: September 24, 2013, 06:27:11 PM »
Same deal there, market share leader has a hefty price reduction. = everything written above applies ("this is the biggie" part).

It's the same what route is looked, for domestic sectors the calculation (proportions of values etc) is no different from each others.

#### meiru

• Members
• Posts: 745
##### Re: the only factor still is frequency
« Reply #8 on: September 24, 2013, 06:34:02 PM »
ok then... that's fine... in this case we have the other problem... this big guy is flooding the route and loosing money and destroying everything, but... he's the big one... so, no chance to enter an already crowded game... the only way to get in is in a very small Airport and flying 10-20 seat planes ... but that's... I don't know...

#### Sami

• Members
• Posts: 16214
##### Re: the only factor still is frequency
« Reply #9 on: September 24, 2013, 06:41:12 PM »
I did not say he is losing money on those routes, did I? On the contrary since, given low enough prices, the demand also grows (more people wish to fly), and you also gain the marketshare as pointed above, so it can be beneficial even. In my more detailed example (SFO-LAX route) the market share leader is earning (a bit) more than he would when using standard pricing (= his prices are not THAT low yet).

It's not a simple "just put price to \$10 and drive the poor newbies out". Instead you are supposed to find the fine balance between sold seats and profit (= maximum profit) and that is what he is doing I presume... Price cutting to force people off routes is in my mind rather difficult here and it's supposed to be so.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2013, 06:47:24 PM by sami »

#### Mr.HP

• Former member
##### Re: the only factor still is frequency
« Reply #10 on: September 25, 2013, 01:44:21 AM »
I'm interested to know which one you're talking about, Aoitsuki

Edit: post deleted? Wrong count, right?

#### Aoitsuki

• Former member
##### Re: the only factor still is frequency
« Reply #11 on: September 25, 2013, 01:50:55 AM »
damm you caught me it is in some older world(AKA JA ), notice it was somewhat off topic so I deleted it.

#### LemonButt

• Members
• Posts: 1895
##### Re: the only factor still is frequency
« Reply #12 on: September 25, 2013, 02:21:47 AM »
ok then... that's fine... in this case we have the other problem... this big guy is flooding the route and loosing money and destroying everything, but... he's the big one... so, no chance to enter an already crowded game... the only way to get in is in a very small Airport and flying 10-20 seat planes ... but that's... I don't know...

I'm in DOTM and was facing insane competition at my home base.  I dropped prices to -25% for Y and -50% for C and still turned a healthy profit.  If you think this game is ONLY about frequency, then you're not paying attention.  If you believe the game is all about frequency and that is all you focus on, then so be it.

#### brique

• Former member
##### Re: the only factor still is frequency
« Reply #13 on: September 25, 2013, 03:16:07 AM »
frequency matters, up to a point : after a certain number of flights, the effect reduces eventually to minimal levels : so, its not the only point that matters : its just one of a number of factors which each have an effect on their own, and cumulatively affect how much of the available demand will choose your flights above your competitors offering.

I agree with lemon, if you only look at frequency, and base all your decisions off that, then you are missing a whole lot of other stuff which, imho, can matter far more and affect market share far more.

even as the junior airline on a heavily competed route, you can still make a healthy profit : maybe not going head-to-head on their terms, but by going around your competition and choosing to emphasise a factor that then works in your favour, such as pricing, as described above.

My view, frequency is no longer the major element it used to be, the changes made have reduced it considerably as a factor ; it still exists, yes, and it affects matters considerably IF it is the only factor in play, but it is not and certainly not to the level the OP seems to think it does.

#### swiftus27

• Members
• Posts: 4395
##### Re: the only factor still is frequency
« Reply #14 on: September 25, 2013, 05:06:48 PM »
Perhaps the op should have said something like:

"There is too little of a hit for jets vs props".  Or. "Seat quality does not seem to affect demand"

I bet more ppl would agree.

#### meiru

• Members
• Posts: 745
##### Re: the only factor still is frequency
« Reply #15 on: September 25, 2013, 05:51:02 PM »
Perhaps the op should have said something like:

"There is too little of a hit for jets vs props".  Or. "Seat quality does not seem to affect demand"

I bet more ppl would agree.

yes... ok... but the discussion wouldn't have been so interessting I think.

Anyway... I see, it's much bether than in the "early days" ... maybe the biggest problem now is, that it's not very clear what has an impact at all... as you say, the seats or the leg-room... does it make a difference? and so on... and you know, trying to use less seats on a plane just for fun... that costs simply too much

WARNING! This website is not compatible with the old version of Internet Explorer you are using.