Frequency vs. Demand

[Fegelein]

This is a subject that I am altogether unclear on. I have seen many people talk a great deal about flight frequency, CI, and RI being the most important factors in your operation being a success.

Here is the route planning screen for my most profitable route, PVD - ORF:


I have two flights a day in a DH8 with the following results:


So is this frequency enough? The capacity bar is just about right at the demand bar and I'm getting 60-70% LF on the routes, so is that market tapped out? How does frequency actually work? I'm quite confused on this point. Because you also end up with flights like PVD - BWI that I feel like I can't compete on because there's demand for like 700 odd pax a day and capacity for like 1200 pax a day on the route.

[alexgv1]

The frequency doesn't matter on this route because you have no competiton. However, with 2 daily flights, you may have an advantage if somebody flies against you with one flight (however other factors like RI and CI come into play as well).

[schro]

When you're first starting out, you usually don't see full loads on flights until they've been flying about 6 months (aka 100RI). Having a higher CI will help get the loads up faster as well.

[TPMP]

Just to be clear, is it more beneficial to have 2 or 3 daily flights to a destination rather then 1 daily flight offering the same amount of seats?

[Sami]

The systems looks for weekly frequency first, but if your demand is let's say 200/daily, it is _generally_ better to have two flights per day instead of one. Up to certain point.

[TPMP]

Thanks Sami.

[exchlbg]

Up to acertain point it is also worth to oversupply a route, it depends on the freqency/conditions other players offer. Roughly you should get your share of demand/per flight, even more, if your overall conditions are better (CI,RI,price etc.).
You should not aim to fill your flight 100%, that way your price is too low, and you can´t see, if some more people are willing to fly with you, if you adjust anything.

[TPMP]

Up to acertain point it is also worth to oversupply a route, it depends on the freqency/conditions other players offer. Roughly you should get your share of demand/per flight, even more, if your overall conditions are better (CI,RI,price etc.).
You should not aim to fill your flight 100%, that way your price is too low, and you can´t see, if some more people are willing to fly with you, if you adjust anything.

Surely it makes more financial sense to have 1 full plane instead of 2 half full planes??

[Talentz]

Surely it makes more financial sense to have 1 full plane instead of 2 half full planes??

True, you have to weigh the cost of 2 aircraft (increased overhead) vs 1. It depends on the demand of the route and if that route can support the added aircraft.



Talentz

[exchlbg]

I was not talking about half full. LF of about 80-90% are perfect for balancing and make room for those additional passengers to show up.
Besides, many airlines are profitable with LF% around 60, especially with low fuel prices.
And if routes are underserved by just one big aircraft, you invite other players to put maybe 2 smaller ones on it (if route profiles allow).
Exception: under new formula it´s ok to underserve routes with low CI/RI, because you can´t get all possible passengers.

[LemonButt]

The way I view frequency on routes without competition is the threat of competition.  If you have a 100nm route with 200pax demand you can either fly 1x daily with a 200 seater or 4x daily with a 50 seater.

If there is no chance of new competition entering the route then fly the 200 seater.  If the threat is big then fly 4x daily.  This means for a competitor to profitably compete they need to also fly 4x daily and will get 50% load factors doing it.  The opportunity cost is other more profitable routes where they can get better load factors with less competition.  As a result you won't find new competitors entering routes where you have the frequency stacked because the costs are too high to compete with you.