[-] Aircraft lost $17.5m of its value in a day

[JumboShrimp]

The used recommended market price is driven by player's actions,

Loosely, I suppose.  Which is, why recommended that if Sami does not equalize the Recommended and Dynamic price on Day 1 of the aircraft delivery (odd thing NOT to do, seem like just an oversight, which now has been pointed out). that he should just scrap the Dynamic Pricing.  It never worked right, and Sami has not synced it with the rest of the system.

ultimately. Buy every A320 available on the UM, and you'll see used prices skyrocket.

No exactly opposite happens.  A321s almost never appear on UM, but when I try to put one on an empty UM, the system suggest a Recommended Price that is $17m below the price of new aircraft.

That's right!  As mindboggling and counterintuitive it is.  Not $17m above of the new aircraft, but $17m below the price of new aircraft, while none are listed on UM.

A320 follow the same pattern as A321.

Forget 787s on the used market, and you'll see prices plunge. The link is not immediate, but it's strong, and consistent.

Which one of the 2 prices will plunge?  Are you suggesting that 787 will go against the pattern I am describing, or are you suggesting that 787 will exhibit exactly the same problem I am describing?

My prediction: 787 pricing will be as broken as the fleets I listed above: A320, NG, A333/334, 757, 767 currently.

And also : define "good"

"Has > 100 new orders" (scale by the size of aircraft)

Several players, including me, have been extremely successful in early Modern times playing the MD80 card, hence pushing pressure up on prices. Especially on used prices, we're not that many to order new. Who cares if it's old crap, as long as this old crap gives you a competitive advantage?

Different, unrelated subject.

Also, the point of the entire Bug report forum is not to report that: "Aha, the system works in this case and that case.  That it works 75% cases", the point is to find the 25% of the cases where it does not work, find reasons why and fix the system

The problem I am describing is actually bigger than 25%.  I just counted, and the fleets I listed actually represent > 50% of all new orders.  (I put 737 Classic and 777 - big lines - under "working" category even though they may be borderline not working).

[DanDan]

@JumboShrimp

1) so the basic idea should be, that
   "recommended price" (@ age0) = a bit above the price of a new factory aircraft, and for older aircraft, the price is deducted accordingly?
and i assume
2) accordingly, the prices for minimum price/maximum price/minimum alliance price/maximum alliance price should orient themselves on this new recommended price?

how about we ask to have  AI brokers setting their prices differently, especially after the initial launch phase of a gameworld?
   possibly, they could be using the concept called "dutch auctioning" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_auction )
   meaning: the price starts at e.g. maximum alliance price and every game-day, the price goes down a bit further, until it reaches e.g. minimum alliance price after 60 days or so.
   so people that think the aircraft is too expensive will wait a bit longer, while people that are in urgent need will just buy it right away.

[JumboShrimp]

@JumboShrimp

1) so the basic idea should be, that
   "recommended price" (@ age0) = a bit above the price of a new factory aircraft, and for older aircraft, the price is deducted accordingly?

Yes, exactly.

And for older aircraft, the system already has a good curve for dealing with the aircraft value as it ages.  As long as we get the price of Day 0 right.

2) accordingly, the prices for minimum price/maximum price/minimum alliance price/maximum alliance price should orient themselves on this new recommended price?

I think so.  And also, the UM should be able to deflate the New Prices, if the Used Market is flooded with unsold aircraft.  The Dynamic Pricing of New aircraft was so sensitive that even a butterfly flapping its winds would send the New Aircraft prices through the roof, with nothing to constrain it.

So a flooded UM should constrain how high the new prices of aircraft could go.  Right now, these two markets / systems are unconnected and unrelated - per Sami, and can also be seen by the huge price disparities that I am reporting.

how about we ask to have  AI brokers setting their prices differently, especially after the initial launch phase of a gameworld?
   possibly, they could be using the concept called "dutch auctioning" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_auction )
   meaning: the price starts at e.g. maximum alliance price and every game-day, the price goes down a bit further, until it reaches e.g. minimum alliance price after 60 days or so.
   so people that think the aircraft is too expensive will wait a bit longer, while people that are in urgent need will just buy it right away.

Honestly, I don't know what the best system would be.  You have some good ideas there.  Part of the issue is that because of playability reasons, AI brokers hide maybe 95% of their stock, show only about 5%, of which the desirable aircraft gets sold quickly.  So there is not much data for Sami to work with.  Whatever the Recommended Price does is probably good enough...

[Tha_Ape]

2) accordingly, the prices for minimum price/maximum price/minimum alliance price/maximum alliance price should orient themselves on this new recommended price?

I think so.  And also, the UM should be able to deflate the New Prices, if the Used Market is flooded with unsold aircraft.  The Dynamic Pricing of New aircraft was so sensitive that even a butterfly flapping its winds would send the New Aircraft prices through the roof, with nothing to constrain it.

Ahem...
Just a point of detail considering the whole matter of the thread, however...

Currently, given the model is a tiny bit popular, when we order by batches of 40+ a/c and get a 26+% discount to resell to alliance members at min AP, we already make quite a nice profit.

Add to this the 10% discount of launch customer and a long delivery time, and the profit will rise accordingly.

For example, in previous GW#2, I had 733 with a book price of 14m, and alliance min was around 41m. And this even without the launch customer discount.

So if the new model you're proposing increases these prices further (because recommended is higher), you're basically forced to rob your alliance mates. Which I don't find much in line with the idea of alliance sales.

[DanDan]

So if the new model you're proposing increases these prices further (because recommended is higher), you're basically forced to rob your alliance mates. Which I don't find much in line with the idea of alliance sales.

even though i like to rob everyone, alliance or not, by selling overpriced aircraft: fair point