Cheating through rule violating cash transfers - a new epidemic?

[Kadachiman]

I agree Seb, it needs to be clarified so that we all know how to play this game without running the risk of being accused of cheating
It is no good making a rule retrospective and then punishing a player for 'his' interpretation which at the time was not wrong

IRL Airlines of the same alliance do share bases and pax demand
e.g.
Qantas and Ethiad both fly out of Sydney to some of the same destinations, and they do it amicably
But at the same time they are teaming (alliances and loyalty rewards) so that they take pax from Virgin...to me that is just good business, but to others e.g. Branson, that may be cheating, and we know how many times he has used that 'cheating' line against BA (his interpretation)

[kangkang]

Regarding the deal between Kelrick Airways and United Pacific Fleet.

Ricky needed cash, i'm in the same alliance, so of course i helped him.
I had no idea about committing a crime, he told me that he will buy back the planes which means no one makes profit, though money was transferred, that's true. Next time, i'm going to ask advice from more experienced players before such transactions.
Or we will split the 4x 731s among 4 members, if it's allowed. (?)

I admit, before, i bought some planes from other (poor) members, too. Sometimes secretly, sometimes on purpose, just to help them out. Not for profit. I will do this again, helping out poor members.

This is the PM i received from Ricky:

Hi Kangkang

I am hitting some financial difficulties at the moment, I have two Elite members opened up in Atlanta trying to sqeeze me out (King Airways just opened).  I am closing routes now, would you be able to buy some planes off me at high prices as I am short of cash, if and when I recover I will buy back.

I would really appreciate it.

Regards

Rickyricky101


I bought 4x731s, put them in storage and was hoping that Ricky will buy them back.
If it is against the rules and i caused financial trouble and dreamless nights for other alliance members, i apologize.
In his next PM he had told me that due to King's attack his income is slashed, he leaves Cloud9 and we can meet in the next game World.
The 731s are on the market now.

[Mr.HP]

Case 1)
Galaxy Express/frimp (bankrupted) and Connect America/xyeahtony in GameWorld #4.
Galaxy Express gave leased aircraft, some were leased from Connect America, back before their D-Check. While ate the same time acquiring replacement aircraft from the same user. In at least two cases an aircraft that was given back to Connect America was later again acquired by Galaxy Express - however, many aircraft were given back and other aircraft were taken. (To give you a picture: Player A gives back Aircraft X. Player B D-Checks aircraft X and leases it to player C. Player C gives back aircraft Y, Player B makes the D-Check and gives aircraft Y then to Player A).
Reason for this "aircraft carousel" were the fact Galaxy Express was undergoing heavy fights with his rival King Airways, short on cash, and each D-Check of about 1M would have brought him to BK sooner.

This means that D-Checks were outsourced to a rich de facto alliance member, which is in violation of the cash transfer rule.

Honestly, I don't see this as an issue. As a long term lessor, I've seen many cases my A/C is leased for 7 or 7.5 year and got returned before a heavy check. People even lease my 11.5 months from C check for 11 months. I'm pretty sure most if not all of us do so, to player or non-player brokers doesn't matter. I don't think anyone's in their right mind would lease an A/C for 8 years, do the D check before returning it to the lessor. Why is it a problem if it's involved Alliance members?

Violation of the cash transfer is when airline A short lease, for example 12 months, A/C X to airline B. Airline B, upon receiving X, does the D check, and terminates the leasing agreement. This would give A termination fee + free D check. That's what I call outsource D check to a rich alliance member

[kangkang]

Anyway, i'm tired of this cheating accusation. Alliance members help each other.
Actually, i don't see other major point of being an alliance member than helping out each other during financial difficulties.
That's the main reason of being together, an airline family.

Shall i just stare at silently when my family member is dying and i have the ability to help him ? No ! Of course i will help out the member who needs it. I would feel guilty myself if i don't help him.

Now i understand Ricky's move. He was sure, no Elite member will open a base in Atlanta, because Sunjet was already there. He was wrong, the rules are interpreted in different ways. We should mark the future top airline of GW#4 with a *.

[Curse]

Honestly, I don't see this as an issue. As a long term lessor, I've seen many cases my A/C is leased for 7 or 7.5 year and got returned before a heavy check. People even lease my 11.5 months from C check for 11 months. I'm pretty sure most if not all of us do so, to player or non-player brokers doesn't matter. I don't think anyone's in their right mind would lease an A/C for 8 years, do the D check before returning it to the lessor. Why is it a problem if it's involved Alliance members?

Violation of the cash transfer is when airline A short lease, for example 12 months, A/C X to airline B. Airline B, upon receiving X, does the D check, and terminates the leasing agreement. This would give A termination fee + free D check. That's what I call outsource D check to a rich alliance member

Have you looked at the screenshots? frimp has not given back random aircraft to a random person and then organized new aircraft from a random person.

He even gave in at least two cases back the same specific aircraft he got back after the D-Check was made (!). http://i.imgur.com/zmdxIlT.jpg

While what you describe is the fastest and easiest way to transfer cash it is not the only one. Doing costly D-Checks for others is, as the example shows, another way. The rule doesn't state HOW the cash transfer that is made is illegal, it simply says any cas transfer is not allowed, either due to increasing profit or due to reduction of losses or due to other actions.

Again: Please read Jona's post carefully and look at the screenshots again. The problem is different than the one you described.

I had no idea about committing a crime, he told me that he will buy back the planes which means no one makes profit, though money was transferred, that's true.

I guess many people are not aware of the fact they step over rules. You just helped an alliance mate and while I can see why, it's - right now - not allowed.

Of course there are people who intent to break rules, see Case 1 and Case 2 as examples.

[Mr.HP]

Have you looked at the screenshots? frimp has not given back random aircraft to a random person and then organized new aircraft from a random person.

He even gave in at least two cases back the same specific aircraft he got back after the D-Check was made (!). http://i.imgur.com/zmdxIlT.jpg

While what you describe is the fastest and easiest way to transfer cash it is not the only one. Doing costly D-Checks for others is, as the example shows, another way. The rule doesn't state HOW the cash transfer that is made is illegal, it simply says any cas transfer is not allowed, either due to increasing profit or due to reduction of losses or due to other actions.

Again: Please read Jona's post carefully and look at the screenshots again. The problem is different than the one you described.

What I saw from the screenshot was GE leased an A/C from CA for 3.5 years. GE terminated the leasing then about 4 months later, CA sold the same A/C to GE. What is wrong with that? I also lease many A/C to airlines (alliance members and not), and sometime they ask to sell them the A/C after the leasing is terminated

You talked about cash transfer but you couldn't prove it. How do you know the D check was done by CA? Even so, how do you know if CA hasn't increased price to compensate for his service? If GE sell that A/C back to CA or someone from the same alliance, then it'd be the case

[Curse]

What I saw from the screenshot was GE leased an A/C from CA for 3.5 years. GE terminated the leasing then about 4 months later, CA sold the same A/C to GE. What is wrong with that? I also lease many A/C to airlines (alliance members and not), and sometime they ask to sell them the A/C after the leasing is terminated

"Wrong" with it is the fact the lease cancellation was - totally coincidentially of course - right before the D-Check hit. This aircraft carousel therefor gave Galaxy Express illegal cash due to saving it from D-Check expenditures. If he would have gotten aircraft from other suppliers then it would be a normal aircraft change, the situation here however takes all the circumstances into account.

You talked about cash transfer but you couldn't prove it. How do you know the D check was done by CA? Even so, how do you know if CA hasn't increased price to compensate for his service? If GE sell that A/C back to CA or someone from the same alliance, then it'd be the case

There are screenshots and they prove all these things. I know the D-Check was not done by Galaxy Express because their was no $1 Million drop in airline value. We also know the aircraft was sold at the absolute minimum price due to the quarterly financial reports, together with used market data from "normal" aircraft.


Case 1 is also connected to Case 2.

[Curse]

To get back a bit to the actual topic:
What about a clear list of rules? That exactly mark the border between allowed and disallowed? And a fast enforcement (<48 hours) with status updates about investigations?

I don't think we need more and more hard coded walls.

[kangkang]

It's allowed. The system lets you buy 2 planes from a member, then it warns you to wait, because you have exceeded the limit of buying from your alliance member.
It took 9 days while Kelrick Airways received 42 million dollars for 4 planes. Does this bother you so much ?

If i accuse someone with cheating - who simply keeps the rules by following the system, the way it allows currently to trade planes between alliance members, - then i would open a new topic and publicly apologize from the "cheaters". Strongly recommended !

[LemonButt]

To reiterate, if brokers are doing their job providing liquidity in the used market and buying reasonably priced aircraft off of players, there is zero need to allow player-to-player aircraft transactions (lease/buy).  When players do slot transfers it is "slot hogging" and illegal, but when players do it with new aircraft it is "production slot hogging" and "everyone does it" which makes it a requirement for entering the market and remaining competitive.  An alliance is supposed to be a group of airlines working in loose cooperation, not colluding to gain unfair advantages against the competition which is what many players believe the primary function to be.

Create a leaseback system for players to access equity, remove player-to-player transactions, and tweak the brokers to do their jobs in providing liquidity and be done with it.  Sami shouldn't have to babysit players because they take AWS way too seriously.

[Curse]

It's allowed. The system lets you buy 2 planes from a member, then it warns you to wait, because you have exceeded the limit of buying from your alliance member.
It took 9 days while Kelrick Airways received 42 million dollars for 4 planes. Does this bother you so much ?

If i accuse someone with cheating - who simply keeps the rules by following the system, the way it allows currently to trade planes between alliance members, - then i would open a new topic and publicly apologize from the "cheaters". Strongly recommended !

It's a general used aircraft market limit, not a special alliance trading limit.

There was also no "accusation" of cheating, there was shown - with links to the specific aircraft and a quote from the game rules - cheating happened.


Again, for you:

Alliance members are also forbidden to effectively transfer money between their member airlines by for example repeatedly selling and buying aircraft between each others. Normal one-time sales of aircraft is naturally allowed but transferring aircraft with the only intention of at the same time generating profits/money to one airline is considered unacceptable.

https://www.airwaysim.com/game/Manual/General/Rules/#Alliances

And here you already admit the cheating:

Ricky needed cash, i'm in the same alliance, so of course i helped him.

This is the PM i received from Ricky:

Hi Kangkang

I am hitting some financial difficulties at the moment, I have two Elite members opened up in Atlanta trying to sqeeze me out (King Airways just opened).  I am closing routes now, would you be able to buy some planes off me at high prices as I am short of cash, if and when I recover I will buy back.

I would really appreciate it.

Regards

Rickyricky101

But, again, that's not the topic.

[Hillians]

"Wrong" with it is the fact the lease cancellation was - totally coincidentially of course - right before the D-Check hit. This aircraft carousel therefor gave Galaxy Express illegal cash due to saving it from D-Check expenditures. If he would have gotten aircraft from other suppliers then it would be a normal aircraft change, the situation here however takes all the circumstances into account.

To my understanding avoiding D checks is not illegal. There were other aircrafts available at the time on the used market so other aircrafts could be picked up to avoid these D checks, but given that there were cheaper options from an alliance member why should I choose the more expensive option and let him have grounded aircrafts. The issue you seem to have is that other players are doing the D checks. I think this is a widespread activity and if you ask me not a real issue. If I had done the D checks myself I would have extended the leases by another 8 years which would have lowered the monthly lease fee significantly and more than offset the D check cost.

a) Why did you not join ATA after you founded it a few years before with your well running airline in ATL?
    If you had done so, you would have paid a legitimate amount of money for these planes, and not been subsidized against KAW.

I had every intention to join the alliance but due to competition oversupplying with capped seating on 722adv & cutting prices against my airline (read forcing/squeezing an airline out - also against the rules but not in this topic but perhaps should also be clarified.) this meant that my airline was running a profit margin of 0.5%, (with single fleet of B732adv & 18hr utilisation) given that the alliance fee is 1% I simply couldn't afford to join the alliance.

Also means that the alliance missed out on points being scored when I wasn't part of it.

b) How did you explain to Sami, that this was not cheating, while it was effectively a scheme trying to avoid high prices in a fierce battle?
    What is also striking me is the fact, that the aircraft buying and killing leases for D-checks ended just shortly after it was reported. It seem you could explain a bit, but were still disallowed to continue as before. Which lead to the inevitable bankruptcy of your airline, showing how dependent it was on these cheap leases and cheaply sold aircraft

When CA bought the aircrafts, we agreed that I would eventually buy these aircrafts from him. I leased for 8years and then paid the lowest allowed price.. The 8 year lease payments + aircraft sale value was higher than the acquisition cost & D check CA paid for..  The reason why it stopped was because I ran out of cash... If I had resold these owned aircrafts for a profit (which I did not as it's against the rules) then it would definately be generating cash profit, and there are some clear examples of this in gw2.

(see attachment at the bottom showing an example where 1 aircraft was bought from UM and then sold to alliance member at huge profit without operating it - i.e. generating cash - the airline who bought it isn't even flying the aircraft and has stalled it on the UM) this happened 2x and has meant the airline managed to survive...


To avoid these sort of debates, Sami needs to explain what is interpretted by generating profit/cash so we are all clear on what's allowed and what's not. The issue is that Sami doesnt actively play the game and doesn't necessarily understand all the possible scenarios that need to be clarified.

feel free to add scenarios to the list, I've only listed the ones I know of but I'm sure there are more (I've put my interpretations next to it)

• avoiding D checks on leased ac from brokers - not an issue
• avoiding D checks on leased ac from non-alliance members - not an issue
• avoiding D checks on leased ac from alliance members - not an issue
• buying aircrafts cheaply with an intent of operating them - not an issue
• buying aircrafts cheaply with an intent of selling them again - clearly against the rules

[Longbow]

Hey. What a sunny day outside! Did anyone noticed it?

Woah!

[jackpot]

Hey. What a sunny day outside! Did anyone noticed it?

Woah!

Doesn't Look like it lol

[Jetsetter]

So, since I'm not part of an alliance, and I'm not getting heavily discounted aircraft and free D checks, I guess I'm in suffering from anti-competitive practices.

So, do the alliance members just want to transfer like 100 million into my account, like they do for their friends? Kthx.

[Curse]

Point is:
New players, old players with a limited amout of time, the average Joe here who sometimes bankrupts and just wants to play a casual game. Those people simply got, and will get, wiped away by individuals or alliances/groups and in 99.9% they will never learn what happened, how, and why.

===>>>

So, since I'm not part of an alliance, and I'm not getting heavily discounted aircraft and free D checks, I guess I'm in suffering from anti-competitive practices.

So, do the alliance members just want to transfer like 100 million into my account, like they do for their friends? Kthx.

Quod erat demonstrandum.

[jackpot]

This thread has been used to point out 'cheating' even though in the first 2 cases, no rules have been broken. The player involved said admin had discussed this with them and that no action was taken, therefore looking like no rules broken. The general tone of this thread indicates that this information was known by the original posters before the thread was started.

The OP indicates that this is in no way personal. It doesn't appear that way to me and probably to most people reading it, but if not the only explanation for this thread being created is to point out to the forum as a whole that they are unhappy that no sanctions were taken against the player(s) involved and the way that actions like this are dealt with by the site's admin. From what I've seen on here the person who runs the site does a good job and doesn't deserve his decisions to be dissected publicly like this.

Regarding the 3rd case it does look to me like rules have been broken. I don't know if this has been investigated and if not I think its unfair to be discussed on a public forum until which times as these discussions have been made.

[Jona L.]

Well, you obviously missed two parts of the post.

A) The main intention is not to "reinvestigate" these cases publicly, it is to get rules straightened, so that exactly this whole thing gets avoided for the next time. And thus saving Sami valuable time to code the game, rather than to investigate this stuff.

B) The cases listed were, as I mentioned more than once examples, and just there as a base for discussion, so that we avoid discussing a theoretical problem which most people would get confused by.

Looking at your profile, I notice you have just been on here for 2 weeks, and with all due respect, I doubt that you can understand the depth of this problem in its entirety. Also I wonder how much experience in cheating/as victim of cheating you might have gotten by having no airlines so far?

And the third point you see to have missed, was that we wanted to have a discussion of possible solutions rather than discussing if/how/why the examples given are correct or not correct.


Feel free to join a discussion with constructive and creative solutions for the problem shown, if you have any. Thank you.

cheers,
Jona L.

[bdnascar3]

Feel free to join a discussion with constructive and creative solutions for the problem shown, if you have any. Thank you.

Seems to me he did - but as it doesn't agree with your opinion you did what most 'older' players do in this forum and 'diss' the new person for speaking up. And Sami wonders why its hard to get and keep new players in AWS when anyone not part of certain cliques get slammed and ridiculed in these forums. Forums that are supposed to be used to make the WHOLE game of AWS better, not just one person or group.

[Curse]

@ bdnascar3

Please quote the constructive and creative solutions about the initial topic @dw1985 brought in here. Thanks.