Questions about basic playing rules

[Tha_Ape]

The A380 does the job. The A340-500HGW as well. Just got to pick the right one depending on the demand and competition.
But, most of all, pick the plane that suits the majority of your demand, not only 2 or 3 prestigious routes.
Last GW#2, some alliance fellow based in Australia used a combination of 737, A330 and A380. Did wonders, always sticking to the top 20. Because above 8000nm he was unopposed and the demand was high enough, his A380 were all filled up to the brim, printing loads of cash.

But do your fleet structure, cashflow, profile, etc. allow some space to such an expensive bird? You need to check. But usually, ULH is the last area in which one expands.

Now, about your potential new base. It depends how well your competitors is doing. What do you call "well established"? covering all the demand doesn't mean he's doing well. How much cash does he have in reserve? What is his cashflow? His margin? What kind of fleet does he operate? How well done is his scheduling?
The basic idea would be to go first on the routes where there's clearly money to make: either he serves it with a bird you can undercut (you beat him with frequency) or he doesn't covers the whole demand, or you go for routes he does not fly yet (too far away for his fleet).
You'll always have more chance, at least initially, on thicker routes. But spread your apples, check what counter-attack he might put up, etc.

[Infinity]

Firstly, thank you all for the answers
I just have two last questions, someone mentioned Ultra Long Haul working from Sydney, but my issue there are planes, lets imagine I wanted to run a LHR route, which I did last time, I needed a 777-200LR with a specific engine to do so, or a 777-8X with a different from default configuration to do so or are there any other planes that can make the direct flight?

The 77L with increased weight is the only sensible choice for ultra long haul from Australia. All other options (A380 or A340-500HGW) have limitations with range/payload on certain routes and also have worse economics, so they turn into a bomb if a competitor moves in with 77L.

[Gunsmoke]

There is only way - frequency. Say there is 2000 demand and there are 20xAirbus A321 (say 200 seats for easy math) covering the route. 2000/20 planes means each plane gets 100 pax. 200 seats per plane, so 50% load factor.

The only way to attack this is frequency, so put 20x daily Embrear's on the route (50 seats each for easy math). Still 2000 demand, but now there are 40 aircraft daily. 2000/40 = 50 pax/plane. So the 200 seat Airbus's are now 25% LF, and your 50 seat EMBs are 100% LF!

In the end if they are established and making money they can by and large ignore you as you do the monkey business above. You're like a Jack Russell yipping and yapping and dancing around. They're the big dog and will snooze on. The other way is wear them out. Things like seat, price etc swing LF by a few percent up and down, but no more than that.

Lets say you're both flying an A321 on the route, but player A has 100CI, 30% off fares, lux seating,brand new planes. Player B has 10CI, default fares, std seating, 20 year old Airbus's. I'd expect A to have about 54% of the route and player B 46%.

The above works on LH as well. If they're flying a 747, fly 2x787s. Same for cargo. If there's an MD11F, fly 2x757PFs

Simon

Agreed.

I'd caution the fledgling to be mindful of:

1.  Whether or not the CEO he/she is attempting to crush has solid earnings elsewhere.
2.  Comparative margins after employing such a tactic.
3.  Related to 2., your lower seat revenue-generating capacity in presumably a high-cost market (using the example) where handling fees, on a percentage increase basis are smaller for the larger aircraft than the smaller aircraft.  (Thanks, Fisher970, for helping me prove that!)

However, using Simon's example, but not focusing on trying to squash a CEO flying big birds, 10 E-120s would easily keep you out of bunching those little birds up too much and eating those gluttonous employee salaries. 

These are my observations, only.  Not an AWS law.  Keeps the little birds from hurting me in the long-term as costs begin to exceed the little birds ability to keep pace with limited seating and lower ability to increase prices consistent with rising costs...me thinks.

[groundbum2]

It's one of the reasons the Airbus's 3XX family have done so well in real life and in AWS. You can go from the teeny A318 105 seats to the 210 seat A321 all in same fleet, and spread over many years of productive life! And with cargo conversions later on. So one fleet does what it could take 2 fleets to do. The only downside is the A3xx family trip "too small" over the Atlantic whereas the 757 doesn't. The 737 family is a mess with 3 fleet types, 737-1/2, then 737-5/6 (?) then 737-7 onwards. Ick!

I'll often use the A321 as the main trunkliner, then get a bunch of A318 and spam a short route, say LAX-SFO, 2500 pax, 250nm with A318s every 30 minutes.

S

[Zobelle]

It's one of the reasons the Airbus's 3XX family have done so well in real life and in AWS. You can go from the teeny A318 105 seats to the 210 seat A321 all in same fleet, and spread over many years of productive life! And with cargo conversions later on. So one fleet does what it could take 2 fleets to do. The only downside is the A3xx family trip "too small" over the Atlantic whereas the 757 doesn't. The 737 family is a mess with 3 fleet types, 737-1/2, then 737-5/6 (?) then 737-7 onwards. Ick!

I'll often use the A321 as the main trunkliner, then get a bunch of A318 and spam a short route, say LAX-SFO, 2500 pax, 250nm with A318s every 30 minutes.

S

321 TATL won't be a problem anymore (next to impossible w/o tech stop on westbound) with the new ESAD range calculations.

318's don't really have much advantage over the 319, also....except "better LF's", but this is subjective.

[Tha_Ape]

321 TATL won't be a problem anymore (next to impossible w/o tech stop on westbound) with the new ESAD range calculations.

Maybe if the 321LR makes it to the game...

[Zobelle]

Maybe if the 321LR makes it to the game...

Big IF. Lol. Even then the "too small" boot to the behind will still get you on most routes worth flying — Would be nice to get rid of that since there will now be little incentive to use the types for that purpose.

[Grandmen123]

Just wanted to quickly thank everyone again for all the answers, hopefully I can implement some of what I've learned into the game now.