Does CI really calculate realistically?

[Cornishman]

I'm increasingly intrigued by how this game calculates the benefits of CI

I have a CI of 100% and have done for many decades. On European routes out of global major bases like CDG I fly only jet aircraft in here 2015.  Yet my competitor continues to fly hundreds of routes out of CDG with an ageing fleet of hundreds of Saab 2000s on his comparatively low CI of 30%, yet there seems little penalty for that in this game which to me is totally unrealistic.

There are dozens and dozens of examples I could give, one being CDG to Salzburg.  I fly at 06h10 and a 16h20 both with newish EMB195 with pax ability at 105. He flies twice with Saab 2000 with pax ability of 58. There is 1 other flight by another competitor. Route demand is about 280 pax per day.  I get 44% and this guy with old Saabs with almost half the capacity and CI at 30% get 36%

I cannot get my head around this. Pattern repeated everywhere. Seems to me the game is designed to reward route-bombing turbo-props and scant regard for CI. ?

[Sami]

For a) short 1.5hr route and b) economy class seats the Company Image is not a very relevant factor. Unless you have <0 CI or something drastic.

Also you are charging a bit more for tickets on that sector than him that and explains a bit. And I also see many of your planes on that route were on B check last week and the flight was not flown further skewing the recent market share. The plane type and age are not relevant here (in this comparison) if you wish to compare only the effects of Company Image.


(why did you have to make a new thread, since you already posted this to the 'marketing' thread but deleted it, just when I replied...)

[Cornishman]

Thanks for the answer Sami - (sorry for confusion by me making a new thread.)

OK, so on this one route some mitigating circumstances, but I see this pattern right through my game.

So how do we explain, same competitor with 30% CI, on LH routes. Take for example CDG to Cancun. We both fly 1 daily flight, me with 777 and him with 787.  I get 31.8% he is nicely rewarded with a bigger share of 37.15% ?

I mean... I'm not begrudging him that he gets away with this, but to me it seems something is not right somewhere? Why am I bothering to pay such huge fortunes to get a decent CI (I know that 100% is probably overkill anyway and that about 90% is probably almost just as good.) But is this working correctly on LH?

[schro]

So how do we explain, same competitor with 30% CI, on LH routes. Take for example CDG to Cancun. We both fly 1 daily flight, me with 777 and him with 787.  I get 31.8% he is nicely rewarded with a bigger share of 37.15% ?

First thing first, is the market share consistent over time? The market share number has a trailing couple of weeks in it and is impacted by cancelled flights and MX checks...

[Cornishman]

Doesn't look like any of my planes were in any major check at the time, there was 1 complete cancellation with cause given as weather conditions - so presumably therefore we would both have had the same cancellation on the same day. No other delays.

[Obi-Gun Smokenobi]

Perhaps the money your competitor saves with lower marketing costs allows it to absorb lower profits with lower ticket prices on the long haul, absconding with your high CI passengers?  Ingrates--void their frequent flyer miles!

[groundbum2]

Doesn't look like any of my planes were in any major check at the time, there was 1 complete cancellation with cause given as weather conditions - so presumably therefore we would both have had the same cancellation on the same day. No other delays.

I don't think AWS weather cancellations work that way, though I like your logic 

I once got Euro1200 compo from Easyjet for my little family of five when they didn't fly MAN-CFU due to blizzard. Act of god so no compo. I simply sent them a picture of the MAN departure board that showed Britannia and Ryanair both having on-time departures on the same route. The blizzard (the day before) I told them simply exposed their lack of planning and staff!

Simon

[gazzz0x2z]

My experience is that CI investment pays off... But not by much. You make slightly more money overall with a better CI, but it is far from being a game changer.

[Cornishman]

I'm thinking Gazzz hits the nail on the head here. I don't think in any future game I would aim any higher than about 70% CI because the costs involved to get higher are astronomical, yet here we are... someone offering LH at 30% CI can get better results than a company at 100%.

Additionally to be told that, "For a) short 1.5hr route and b) economy class seats the Company Image is not a very relevant factor" - I find that pretty damned hard to take given one player puts in all the effort and expense to "achieve" a better standing... and another does minimal effort and expense and can be rewarded with similar if not better results in some places. Why bother ?

[groundbum2]

I'm thinking Gazzz hits the nail on the head here. I don't think in any future game I would aim any higher than about 70% CI because the costs involved to get higher are astronomical, yet here we are... someone offering LH at 30% CI can get better results than a company at 100%.

Additionally to be told that, "For a) short 1.5hr route and b) economy class seats the Company Image is not a very relevant factor" - I find that pretty damned hard to take given one player puts in all the effort and expense to "achieve" a better standing... and another does minimal effort and expense and can be rewarded with similar if not better results in some places. Why bother ?

pretty much what the flag carrier British Airways decided with domestic and UK regional flights in the age of Ryanair, Easyjet etc..

S

[MikeS]

Keep in mind that CI is more important for C class and very important for F class. So check a long haul route and see your load factors in F and C and compare those to demand. You will probably see better market share there.
So a high CI makes good sense from airports like LHR where premium classes are at a high demand.

Mike