My understanding is that the Alliance Min and Max were
Min: 90% of market price
Max: 130% of market price
By Market price, I understand that to be the Recommended Price.
I am looking at what the system is suggesting, and it does not follow any rhyme or reason.
The "Recommended Price" seems to be just a random number. I open a page, I get $67m. I refresh it, I get $81m. I keep refreshing it, and I get a random number anywhere in that range. So that "Recommended Price" is 100% useless.
The Alliance Min, Alliance Max seems to be going off of some firm mystery number, that does not change, but it is as meaningless as the Recommended Price.
To investigate this mystery number, I take a look at a freshly delivered new aircraft. Price of the freshly delivered new aircraft should be identical a list price. For the model in question, MD-90-55:
List Price: $81,464k
Now I take a brand new aircraft, just delivered, try to sell it.
I get following Alliance Min / Max:
Min: $59,459 = 72.9% of the aircraft real value
Max: $89,189 = 109.4% of the aircraft real value
Since the alliance Min was clearly stated several times to be 90% of aircraft value, and 72.9% is very far from that, the system is using some mystery calculation do determine what the base for the alliance Min / Max should be.
The mystery number in this case 59,459 / .9 = 66,065
Where is this number coming from? It is based on nothing resembling reality. The aircraft is worth $81,464, which is 23.3% higher.
I have a theory: The price is based on recent sales on the UM, including privately listed aircraft.
Here is why this is wrong: This aircraft is never on the UM. The only thing that ever appears on the UM is privately listed aircraft. Majority (if not all) of the privately listed aircraft of this kind on the UM was at Alliance Minimum. So this is feeding on itself. The system calculates 90% of a flawed number, and then in the future, in theory, does it again and again. it can keep on going to .9 x .9 x .9.
Can this whole aircraft pricing be completely scrapped, and can we go to the old system? It was clear, straight forward, it worked consistently and flawlessly.