Hello community, hello Sami!
I would like to bring up an old topic again about LongHaul.
There was some whining from defenders of the either sides about this a while ago. I don't want to start this whining again, nor do I want to blame anyone.
IIRC after the long discussions, you, sami, have tweaked the C and F class incomes and LH income especially. You cut it down a "bit", which was a pretty lot too much.
To go back to beginnings: The discussions were started when someone complained that LH airlines were making too much cash and could grow too fast. This in the end led to the tweak named above.
After a couple of games since then I now come to the substantiated point that this tweak was definitely too much.
Talking about MT#5 I must say that with current fuel prices (>$900) it is hardly possible to run on LH business. I have a fleet of >500 a/c with only 50 SH aircraft and only 3 fleet Types in total (777; A330/340; B737NG) and make losses in a high million Range (around -$30M/week). Most of that caused by fuel cost. These went up (understandably) from ~$600-650 first to ~$800 lowering my income from +$100M to ~$20-30M and then jumped to ~$950 cutting my remaining income to this high loss.
Having read the story, I now ask you all: Can this be a fair tweak if a Long Haul Airlines (not even touching +6500NM routes!!) makes these high losses while Short Haul airlines still make much cash? Can it be fair that because someone couldn't grow fast enough the others have to swallow such a tweak? Can it be fair, that an airline operating tightly scheduled aircraft on decent routes makes losses because someone not knowing that part of business thinks it is too much?
My answer is NO! I think it is not fair towards airlines that operate flights across the Atlantic make these losses while the 3 aircraft-regio airline is still operating at a great plus.
- Don't get me wrong here though, I don't want to say that SH airlines shall not make as much cash as they do now. But I wish for the old price-calculating system to be returned as that seems more fair in my eyes.-
Despite that, for the shouters that demanded more growth control we have a 50% reduction of deliveries from used market, we have highly increased slot cost in big airports and magic carpets are history since v1.1. So I think we don't need this income-cut anymore to control growth as there are more and more effective other control systems now.
Thanks for reading and sharing your opinions,
Jona L.
P.S.
For swiftus: You were asking for a lowered LH income and afterwards you complained that 777 was broken for Trans Atlantic flights.... rethink please, on which side you actually stand ;)
I agree that the reduction was bit much.
3000-5000nm was very profitable, and can still be profitable.
> 5000nm was barely profitable 1.2. It is worse in 1.3.
Quote from: Jona L. on October 07, 2011, 07:19:09 PM
P.S.
For swiftus: You were asking for a lowered LH income and afterwards you complained that 777 was broken for Trans Atlantic flights.... rethink please, on which side you actually stand ;)
Since I am being called out... you said that 777s weren't broken and called into question my ability to play the sim. If i wasnt in the car, id list the myriad of posts you put on here. additionally, i asked for you to post the data so i could have included with my trial run. You refused. Honestly, you are trolling here and am not going to play into your games.
I asked for there to be less revenue from those flights comparatively to sh. You keep infferring that I meant less income overall. They are not one and the same. Sami swung the pendulum too far lowering the
Also they're broken because a 777 always loses to other smaller planes in frequency. Without cargo income the 777 has no chance.
Something had to be done concerning lh income. Anyone here during the Magic Carpet era would understand why. He would have a billion dollar airline within one year or so.
If this is your way of saying that I am right, just eat your crow and say you were wrong. Don't sit here and ty to make me out to be the villain here. I find your methods to be confrontational and not for the betterment of this community.
Quote from: swiftus27 on October 07, 2011, 08:08:26 PM
Since I am being called out... you said that 777s weren't broken and called into question my ability to play the sim. If i wasnt in the car, id list the myriad of posts you put on here. additionally, i asked for you to post the data so i could have included with my trial run. You refused. Honestly, you are trolling here and am not going to play into your games.
I said so because they aren't. They are just not as competitive as smaller planes (like A332/3). I have run the effectively at 65% LFs, but thanks to 772 and A333 the LFs went into the 40ies leading to actually any aircraft making losses.
Quote from: swiftus27 on October 07, 2011, 08:08:26 PM
I asked for there to be less revenue from those flights comparatively to sh. You keep infferring that I meant less income overall. They are not one and the same. Sami swung the pendulum too far lowering the
Please explain to me what is the difference between lower LH income compared to SH and lower LH income overall... I don't see a difference, but am eager to learn it.
And yes, he did, and that is why I opened this topic again.
Quote from: swiftus27 on October 07, 2011, 08:08:26 PM
Also they're broken because a 777 always loses to other smaller planes in frequency. Without cargo income the 777 has no chance.
Well, since we don't have cargo (yet) this is (yet) no solution, thus I call back the older pricing system.
Quote from: swiftus27 on October 07, 2011, 08:08:26 PM
Something had to be done concerning lh income. Anyone here during the Magic Carpet era would understand why. He would have a billion dollar airline within one year or so.
If I may ask you to read this again:
Quote from: Jona L. on October 07, 2011, 07:18:04 PM
Despite that, for the shouters that demanded more growth control we have a 50% reduction of deliveries from used market, we have highly increased slot cost in big airports and magic carpets are history since v1.1. So I think we don't need this income-cut anymore to control growth as there are more and more effective other control systems now.
Where I said already that, as Magic Carpets are history since 2 versions by now, this income cut is pretty outdated.
Quote from: swiftus27 on October 07, 2011, 08:08:26 PM
If this is your way of saying that I am right, just eat your crow and say you were wrong. Don't sit here and ty to make me out to be the villain here.
I take back the "incapability" half. The part I don't take back is that you didn't manage to get them perfectly running (not saying you weren't good) as they killed you on $700 fuel prices while I made it at least to $900. Anyhow I take back the part of saying they aren't broken. I see you point now. And I see it clearly (in the red numbers I see on my Dashboard).
So, yes, John, you were right.
Cheers,
Jona L.
P.S. as you said you are in car: Better concentrate on the road then, mate, make sure you don't crash or get stopped by police.
i've never played during this "magic carpet" era, with either a SH or LH airline so cant comment on how pricing has changed.
Past games I have played with a substantial SH and minimal LH network, yet have gone for more of a balance this time and I can undoubtedly say that the bulk of my profits come from the LH network.
If anything, I think its the issue of the player that cannot adapt to a new environment.
and IMO, LH isnt broken, the aircraft types youre using are ;) *cough* 777/340 *cough*
Quote from: Ansettaddict123 on October 08, 2011, 02:52:56 AM
and IMO, LH isnt broken, the aircraft types youre using are ;) *cough* 777/340 *cough*
Which they shouldn't be. They both have their uses, i.e. for beyond A330 range.
Quote from: Ansettaddict123 on October 08, 2011, 02:52:56 AM
i've never played during this "magic carpet" era, with either a SH or LH airline so cant comment on how pricing has changed.
Past games I have played with a substantial SH and minimal LH network, yet have gone for more of a balance this time and I can undoubtedly say that the bulk of my profits come from the LH network.
If anything, I think its the issue of the player that cannot adapt to a new environment.
and IMO, LH isnt broken, the aircraft types youre using are ;) *cough* 777/340 *cough*
As you said you weren't playing in the older times, thus you don't know it.... knowledge of nothing but an opinion about everything... *thumbs up*
Anyhow, In past games 777 and 330/340 used to be great planes even if not used as a magic carpet (C and F class only, for those who don't know the term).
About what you say about me: I play in LHR ever since I started, and never had these issues yet. Neither with 777, nor A330/340, not even 744!
Quote
With fuel at $985 profits at American Southern remain above $70m p/w. Seems just EMB & 757's was a wise choice as it is not the size of your a/c that matters or the length of your routes, the size of profits is key
« Last Edit: Today at 09:49:02 by SAC »
Well, read the topic, please, we talk about LH routes on widebodies, and not a domestic airline flying mini a/c ;)
From a thread a while back....I think you remember which one, Jona ;)
Quote from: jetwestinc on September 14, 2011, 05:59:07 PM
Or a lesson in fleet commonality. Let me know how those 777's treat you when fuel is over $1200
Jona's reply
a) Fuel not yet went over 1000$
b) my break even point of fuel pricing is at 1400$
c) B777 > Other Boeing > Airbus > other manufacturers > producers from former USSR
Point B is of particular interest to me, as fuel is at $981 as you close up shop this game.....
Quote from: jetwestinc on October 08, 2011, 02:05:21 PM
From a thread a while back....I think you remember which one, Jona ;)
Quote from: jetwestinc on September 14, 2011, 05:59:07 PM
Or a lesson in fleet commonality. Let me know how those 777's treat you when fuel is over $1200
Jona's reply
a) Fuel not yet went over 1000$
b) my break even point of fuel pricing is at 1400$
c) B777 > Other Boeing > Airbus > other manufacturers > producers from former USSR
Point B is of particular interest to me, as fuel is at $981 as you close up shop this game.....
Well, then I only flew <200 a/c and thus needed not to exceed 5000NM on my route distances. After I filled most of these routes I kindof had to use the longer ones which lead to a lower break even point. Also my CI broke in after taking delivery of DPed aircraft which lead to even lower LFs (40-50% vs. 65% before). So to conclude: you refer to outdated data!
In fairness to Jetwest Jona that post was dated 14 September, surely you had far far more than 200 a/c just 3 real weeks ago ?
Quote from: SAC on October 08, 2011, 04:14:27 PM
In fairness to Jetwest Jona that post was dated 14 September, surely you had far far more than 200 a/c just 3 real weeks ago ?
Maybe 250, but not much more. I had my fastest growth close to the end, as I had opened my 2nd hub AMS and took delivery of my regular new orders (A346 and 773) and also took deliveries off the used market (A343E/X and B772/3). Anyhow, I started most of the 5500NM+ routes about at that time (a bit after that posting). The problem here is that from LHR most of the big Asian cities (Tokyo, Hong Kong, Singapore, Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta, Shanghai and Manila) and also South America (Sao Paulo, Buenos Aires, Santiago de Chile [Pudahuel airport]) and last but not least Honululu are all over 5000NM (most of the named also exceed 5500NM). Thus most of the big routes are not reachable in a profitable way effectively. You can cover a part, by mixing them in 7-day-rotations with some shorter legs, but you have by far not enough of these short distance flights [meaning 2000-3500NM flights] to cover all the long routes and still be profitable. This only with no competition, if you add that, pretty massive, factor in, it looks pretty dark in this sector.
And for those of you shouting that LHR is so different: distances are nearly equal to FRA, AMS and CDG ;) Also all the gains you have through high demands are evened out with (if not reduced to less than) other airports by the high competition you have because everyone flies into LHR.
Cheers,
Jona L.
There is a huge difference between flying a route with 15% or more C demand and one with 5% or less C demand, and LHR has far more of the former ones than any other airport. That's why the argument that LHR is different still has merrit.
As far as competition into LHR, Dan Dantes said it as well, that everyone eventually flies to LHR. And with Frequency having such an overwhelming effect in AWS, 777, 340, 747, 380 can really be vulnerable.
Which is why frequency should not be as big of a factor still...(I thought was improved, but can still see it being a major influence on market share and ultimately profits/losses). Maybe it could be improved based on distance of route too instead of just the demand (just a suggestion?)
Also with smaller planes with tech stops should be penalized especially in Modern Times era where based on real life, no major airline does fuel stops anymore as there are planes that can fly non-stop and real life passengers would not like it...
On the other hand, these sim passengers really have no preference after all for ways of travelling from point A to B...and thats because this game is a simulator trying to replicate the real life in some aspects effectively, while missing the real life aspect in other ways.
And back to the post, the A330/A346 make great profits with no competition, but with competition it barely breaks even..so one can either try to manage and build an airline that replicates one in real life, or just run an airline far from real life but be successful in this simulator with its limitation.
And I will be leaving once I reach my personal goal set for this game world as replacing old expiring planes really does become annoying.
Kevin
Quote from: kevin.yeung on October 09, 2011, 04:00:42 AM
And I will be leaving once I reach my personal goal set for this game world as replacing old expiring planes really does become annoying.
Kevin
You know about "Move schedule" function, correct?
Or is American Southern proving to be more competition than you can handle? ;)
Quote from: kevin.yeung on October 09, 2011, 04:00:42 AM
And I will be leaving once I reach my personal goal set for this game world as replacing old expiring planes really does become annoying.
a la, fuel is too expensive for my cumbersome wide bodies and i don't cope well with competition? ;)
Quote from: Ansettaddict123 on October 09, 2011, 06:13:39 AM
a la, fuel is too expensive for my cumbersome wide bodies and i don't cope well with competition? ;)
Yes and No. This topic is about long haul (again) which relates to wide bodies. I won't say that fuel is the only determining factor resulting in low profits for the widebodies. How does one even calculate break even for fuel cost?
Competition? No not really, I was always open to new competition as it was getting lonely and boring without new unserved routes to open with all the new planes coming in so I just use them to replace existing ones.
And maybe I will consider running a medium and large AC only airline in the next MT game world as this is still only my 2nd game world I have been in and first time actually flying a lot of LH (MT4 was based in ZGGG, China)...LAX wasn't my preferred base but I wanted a bigger challenge.
But yeah anyways, I'm just hoping my airline can carry 500M total passengers before leaving (so stop telling your other alliance members to tech-stop to LAX haha)
Yes I do know about the move schedule...but it gets really repetitive with finding and leasing used AC to replace the expiring AC, then to move the schedule, open a new window, terminate old AC lease, rename the upcoming delivery AC with the same registration code, etc.
Mind you, all done with mobile (android) and occasionally the ipad.
Quote from: kevin.yeung on October 09, 2011, 08:27:14 AM
Yes I do know about the move schedule...but it gets really repetitive with finding and leasing used AC to replace the expiring AC, then to move the schedule, open a new window, terminate old AC lease, rename the upcoming delivery AC with the same registration code, etc.
Mind you, all done with mobile (android) and occasionally the ipad.
You do all that work to avoid C/D checks? That's certainly not a worthwile thing to do for airline your size. I just take the checks as they come. All that happens is that other aircraft flying the same route get a slightly higher LF, while another aircraft is in the middle of C/D check.
I really don't avoind C/D checks at all. Early in the game, I don't want to lose any aircraft. Late in the game, it is just too much work and savings are minimal. The replacement aircraft is already losing 2 weeks you are paying just to get it delivered...
Quote from: JumboShrimp on October 09, 2011, 06:10:23 AM
You know about "Move schedule" function, correct?
Or is American Southern proving to be more competition than you can handle? ;)
It may well be a factor Jumbo as my EMB's are doing fantastically well at LAX. Seems frequency is king EMB v 320, aswell as 757 v 777, but I know that so that is how I play. No point having loss making a/c types just so I can say I fly long haul properly - it just BK's you ! Personally I want an airline that can survive fuel spikes, and I have more than succeeded at that, as with fuel at $998 I was still making $65m per week plus spending $25m on advertising - a stark difference to many long haul airlines.
I am actually a little disappointed Kevin is giving up after inviting me there in the first place, you could have stuck it out a little longer than he has. You never know what is around the corner Kevin...fuel could drop to $600 - you never know....on other the other hand bad could happen aswell so maybe now is a good time to get out without having no choice but to BK.
For me LAX will be boring without Kevin...maybe a new challenge is needed to keep the game interesting...I may possibly get some widebodies of my own and see if I can make LH work.
Quote from: SAC on October 09, 2011, 09:26:45 AM
as with fuel at $998 I was still making $65m per week plus spending $25m on advertising - a stark difference to many long haul airlines.
For me LAX will be boring without Kevin...maybe a new challenge is needed to keep the game interesting...I have heard LAS is nice this time of year, or possibly get some widebodies and see if I can make LH work.
Oh, I am making 100Mi profit now, with spending only 11M on advertising, but I have just 3/4 of your revenue, see the difference? :laugh:
Btw, if you wanna operate "large" widebody, you are welcome to seek guidance from me ;) (Sorry that I don't know how to operate 767s :'()
Quote from: vitongwangki on October 09, 2011, 10:29:27 AM
Oh, I am making 100Mi profit now, with spending only 11M on advertising, but I have just 3/4 of your revenue, see the difference? :laugh:
Btw, if you wanna operate "large" widebody, you are welcome to seek guidance from me ;) (Sorry that I don't know how to operate 767s :'()
But wait, I see you flying 767 version 2, AKA 787. I think your actions are speaking louder than your words.
I take your immitation as a flattery. If you can't beat them, join them...
If your pilots need to learn how to fly 787 8,000+ nm, you can send them to Chicago for training...
Nice profit Vito, obviously you are one of the few that can make long haul work profitably....good work indeed ;D
I would suggest though you help your own alliance airlines to fly LH before offering your services to Elite though....who's side are you on anyway ;)
All in all your success proves LH can work within v1.3, and your stats add weight to the fact that LH isn't broken IF done correctly, however in the bigger picture Elite airlines have also proven that 757's/767's, even with a tech stop, are a more viable option for most, which has led to Elite airlines survivng and striding towards victory in its first outing.
That's the most stupid and boring bash thread I was ever forced to read. In fact it's this s*** I stopped thinking about joining and maybe throwing some old quotes from Skype in here or so.
Seriously, if you can't offense others subtle and make them cry, just stop this and go and manage your airlines or do some normal postings in normal threads.
What you do is a shame for all the high skilled forum trolls out there!
Quote from: JumboShrimp on October 09, 2011, 10:41:09 AM
But wait, I see you flying 767 version 2, AKA 787. I think your actions are speaking louder than your words.
I take your immitation as a flattery. If you can't beat them, join them...
If your pilots need to learn how to fly 787 8,000+ nm, you can send them to Chicago for training...
I am so sorry that my pilots don't know how to tech-stop, although they can fly SIN-SEA, SIN-ORD or SIN-JFK non-stop ???
I dont think Jona´s losses had anything to do with 340/777 but about extreme expansion and huge leases. As a matter of fact I was the one who told him to take higher risks and play harder when profits were at such extreme levels. It is something I regret now of course.
But to all the posters in the thread: Cant you see that by talking about how splendid the 757 is for longhaul with tech-stop that you are only making Jona´s argument even better? Noone in their right mind would enjoy that a game aiming for simulating real life business models or market situations works with an advantage for the 757.
If we continue see 757 world domination in 2010 game scenarios it is obvious to me that something needs to be tweaked. There is an economical advantage to flying bigger in real life and without putting words into Samis mouth Im pretty sure Sami would like to know what the parameter would be.
I would love to fly widebodies Lilius, but from previous experience I have struggled with 777's, and that was before v1.3 ! So yes maybe a tweek is needed...but on the other hand then you have Vito who has done really well - so is a change actually needed, or do airlines just need to run LH like Vito's successful model ?
Quote from: vitongwangki on October 09, 2011, 10:29:27 AM(Sorry that I don't know how to operate 767s :'()
Never fear, your pilots have 3 flights per day from SIN- Mexico with tech stops they're welcome to buy tickets on (we'll show them the ropes for free) ;)
Quote from: Curse on October 09, 2011, 10:46:03 AM
That's the most stupid and boring bash thread I was ever forced to read. In fact it's this s*** I stopped thinking about joining and maybe throwing some old quotes from Skype in here or so.
Seriously, if you can't offense others subtle and make them cry, just stop this and go and manage your airlines or do some normal postings in normal threads.
What you do is a shame for all the high skilled forum trolls out there!
I thought you left?
Quote from: Ansettaddict123 on October 09, 2011, 03:23:24 PM
I thought you left?
Another point on the very long list of things you are wrong with.
Quote from: Ansettaddict123 on October 09, 2011, 03:23:24 PM
Never fear, your pilots have 3 flights per day from SIN- Mexico with tech stops they're welcome to buy tickets on (we'll show them the ropes for free) ;)
As long as I don't operate tech-stop hell flight, your flight training is completely irrelevant to us.
And I won't treat my pilots as slave and tell them to spend 24 hours like those poultry on truck. :-\
Every time I think about posting in this thread again I go back and read:
Quote from: swiftus27 on August 25, 2011, 06:04:48 PM
Widebodies are broken for transatlantic flying
Quote from: Jona L. on August 26, 2011, 10:11:03 PM
You say so... maybe you just failed in it... my B773 make 1.3M/week despite being leased... maybe just about a knowing to play or not...
I do think we now have consensus here about the 777???
Quote from: Curse on October 09, 2011, 03:54:51 PM
Another point on the very long list of things you are wrong with.
Allmighty Curse, may I beg forgiveness ::)
Quote from: lilius on October 09, 2011, 11:05:53 AM
I dont think Jona´s losses had anything to do with 340/777 but about extreme expansion and huge leases. As a matter of fact I was the one who told him to take higher risks and play harder when profits were at such extreme levels. It is something I regret now of course.
But to all the posters in the thread: Cant you see that by talking about how splendid the 757 is for longhaul with tech-stop that you are only making Jona´s argument even better? Noone in their right mind would enjoy that a game aiming for simulating real life business models or market situations works with an advantage for the 757.
If we continue see 757 world domination in 2010 game scenarios it is obvious to me that something needs to be tweaked. There is an economical advantage to flying bigger in real life and without putting words into Samis mouth Im pretty sure Sami would like to know what the parameter would be.
Well, my dear Marcus; not that I'd not have thought about my rapid expansions (infact you just supported my plannings when I was nearly finished with them ;) )
Anyhow, what you said about B757 (herin especially the 752); is fully true and I had a topic (maybe with a bit un-perfect title) where people said the same as comes out now. People aim for unrealism... guys, did you know that B757 is out of production since 2005 IRL?! Not that i aim for real production line closing dates or so, but just see the point that (at least in Europe) Airlines phase out 757 (see BA/Iberia f.e.) And they gotta have a reason! B757 is not efficient enough in Europe/ for Transatlantic flying to them (might be that CO|UA|DL|AA still fly some of the over to us, but most remain in Domestic service). B777 and A330/340 as well as 744/8 and A380 are a lot more efficient and, people get it: I don't need 3 daily flights, If tehre is one I am fine, I cannot split in 3 parts, so what do I care for the other 2 flights?!
Quote from: swiftus27 on October 09, 2011, 06:20:41 PM
I do think we now have consensus here about the 777???
I wrote something about that in reply to your first post, so if i may ask you to bother yourself with reading it again...
Quote from: Ansettaddict123 on October 10, 2011, 08:22:27 AM
Allmighty Curse, may I beg forgiveness ::)
No, Curse is like an Elephant (not talking about his physical condition but about his brains) - he never forgets and forgives even less ;)
Quote from: SAC on October 09, 2011, 11:13:50 AM
I would love to fly widebodies Lilius, but from previous experience I have struggled with 777's, and that was before v1.3 ! So yes maybe a tweek is needed...but on the other hand then you have Vito who has done really well - so is a change actually needed, or do airlines just need to run LH like Vito's successful model ?
Vito's sucessful model?! No (serious) competition!!
Quote from: Jona L. on October 10, 2011, 09:57:33 AM
Vito's sucessful model?! No (serious) competition!!
Exactly, the way I have succeeded is due to lack of competition. If my model in LHR, I would face the similar problem when I can't own my planes. When I went for 744 I thought it is gamble now I found that I won it. ;) And SIN is just a special airport, with looking into the demand profile the number of mega-routes is quite much. Using widebody could guarantee both LF and profit.
Quote from: Ansettaddict123 on October 10, 2011, 08:22:27 AM
Allmighty Curse, may I beg forgiveness ::)
I don't like yes-persons who just want to make the level between them and me smaller than it actually is. So yeah, allmighty Curse, but I never forgive.
Quote from: Curse on October 10, 2011, 03:27:38 PM
I don't like yes-persons who just want to make the level between them and me smaller than it actually is. So yeah, allmighty Curse, but I never forgive.
Didn't I tell you?!
I just know you too well, Curse ;D