Started by gazzz0x2z, July 20, 2017, 09:40:06 AM
QuoteIt's often worth, early in the game, to bite higher costs in exchange for conquering the territory and increasing income.
Quote from: gazzz0x2z on July 20, 2017, 09:40:06 AMIt's often worth, early in the game, to bite higher costs in exchange for conquering the territory and increasing income. You see the consequences in my polish costs.
Quote from: gazzz0x2z on August 06, 2017, 08:31:18 AMThat's interesting. I've never been able to use premium seating correctly. I always tended to increase my prices anyways, flying sometimes with 30% load factor with effectively more profit than at 60% load factor. Reducing available seating to improve the "milk your customers" effect is something I never made work, but maybe you're right. I shall try on a few choosen routes. Thanks for the tip.
Quote from: Danny Williams on September 09, 2017, 09:32:58 PMSo after all the time that has passed since i last posted here, the staff salaries are still kicking my ass.Slowly going down Quarter to Quarter as i change out some of my Saab's for the Handley MK.100 and F27, but still.Also decided to go full RyanAir on my employees yesterday to see if they can deal with 5% lower salaries for now, if it does i might just go down even more seeing as i am nearing $30m in monthly salaries already...
Quote from: qunow on September 09, 2017, 09:58:54 PMI think the main reason why salary take up so many percent of expenses in your airlines for now is simply because of cheap fuel price. Try to redraw the chart with quadrupled fuel cost.And as mentioned, never manually adjust salary
Quote from: Danny Williams on September 09, 2017, 10:09:09 PMOnly manually adjusting it trough this quarter to see how i am performing with it on manual, if i save $3-5m monthly in doing so that just another plus for me i guess
Quote from: Zobelle on September 10, 2017, 05:36:39 AMI always do manual, I let morale drop to about mid 90's before I relent and let them have their blood money.
Quote from: gazzz0x2z on September 10, 2017, 07:28:14 AMYou'll spare also a lot by going on replacing Scandias by F27s. One pilot less. And it's also high because you are in the USA, and because you've got 5 bases for mere 250 flying airframes. Still, it's going to stay high because_you're cautious on the commonality_you're flying low-consuming airframes, and ful costs are low_you don't overspend in marketingEven with less pilots, it's going to stay a major part of your income. Which is not really a problem. You began to do the only sensitive thing to reduce costs : replacing 3-pilots airplanes by 2-pilots airplane. The rest, well, just bite it. It's the same for everyone in your fishing zone.
Quote from: Danny Williams on September 10, 2017, 09:35:24 AMSaving alot more once i stop using these Saab's on 700+ nm routes and change them out with either the MK.100 or the F27...And as you can see those 5 bases are mostly at really small airports or at airports that i am already spamming every route under 900nm on.One of the only reasons as to why Seven opened a base at Oakland is because he has planes capable of reaching all of the US market without a tech-stop, that gives him ALOT of options seeing as none of us at Oakland previously had planes planes like that...
Quote from: qunow on September 10, 2017, 05:31:57 PMJust do tech stops..at this era of the time... also, plan your fleet better so that you would have longer range aircraft at your disposal.. and that aircrafts can also be used beyond their stated range, just look at the payload range curve to see where it drop off
Quote from: gazzz0x2z on July 23, 2018, 04:20:52 PMBeware, the left graph is for the running week, the right graph is for the previous week. As some costs are weekly and not daily, always take the right graph and the previous week as a reference : those data are far more reliable.
Quote from: Hotcliff on July 23, 2018, 04:47:42 PMThis is the right graph