Anti-Competitive activity in violation of anti-trust rules (and in violation of Airline Empires Rule #2)

...

get used to it. No-one actually obeys 

get used to it. No-one actually obeys. I have only come across one alliance that actually is realistic

Its a game, FFS...

yeah but still, until it's coded no one will obey though.

I don't have an active O1 airline, so I cannot see the example you cited.

------
He said:
This is cheating, as Airline Empires is supposed to follow real world rules

-----

With regards to your above statement, there are plenty of 'real world' things that are not modeled in this game:
*** plane crashes
*** weather or political disturbances (civil war or social unrest)
*** government owned or subsidized airlines
*** code sharing (as was mentioned by others

Are there ways to improve the game?
Sure, but until alliance code sharing is implemented it is inevitable that you might have multiple airlines from the same alliance on the same route.

Actually in your example, while they are all in the same alliance, how are they gaining an unfair advantage? If they really were cooperating as such, they'd probably just let the one carrier have a monopoly. As far as I can see, they are not violating and are still competing with each other.

...

...

1) I suggest you change the text back to its original size.

2) Welcome to the O worlds, every trunk route is gonna be flooded.

3) They are still competing, there is nothing wrong with it in my eyes. Take the alliance out of the equation and the problem still exists. Many people don't care for alliances, other than being sources of a higher reputation and being able to put more frequencies on routes.

Because of this anti-competitive behavior I can not operate a profitable 7 x Weekly (1 x Day) flight

on sector ATL - ORD [...]
 

 

Then let the route go and concentrate on other routes. It happens. Sometimes I also let a route go if I can not or do not want to face the competition.

Because of this anti-competitive behavior I can not operate a profitable 7 x Weekly (1 x Day) flight

on sector ATL - ORD [...]
 

 

Then let the route go and concentrate on other routes. It happens. Sometimes I also let a route go if I can not or do not want to face the competition.

In the example you have given it is possible that supply exceeds demand by so much that the game has reset demand to a higher level. Doesn't always work but try this. Pull the route up and hit the reset button for prices, you might be surprised.

Just let the route go. ATL - ORD is anyway a high-competition route. And if you're only wanting to add a 1x daily flight, you might as well put that one somewhere else.
Looking at S1's ATL - ORD, supply is exceeding demand by a multifold and I don't believe that anyone is making a profit there.

...

The point is if this happened in the real world the government would step in to break this up
or another airline or a non-airline would file a lawsuit under anti-trust law to do the same through the courts
 
At a minimum this kind of anti-competitive activity should be outlawed in AE 4.0 (especially in the R worlds)
 
And this was an example, this happens in ALL of the Airline Empires worlds

But it isn't a real world game it is an open world. You may not like the way they are making a mockery of the game but they are not breaking any rules.

:rtfm:
all from the same Alliance: United Total Alliance Monthly O/W Seats: 8857 F 50185 C 448323 Y 32x weekly (4.6x daily) 767-300ER , A310-300 Monthly O/W Seats: 648 F 1673 C 33435 Y 146x weekly (20.9x daily) 747-400 , 757-200 , 737-400 , A320-200 Monthly O/W Seats: 165 F 10053 C 87703 Y 79x weekly (11.3x daily) 737-400 Monthly O/W Seats: 1083 F 2167 C 44691 Y 37x weekly (5.3x daily) 737-400 Monthly O/W Seats: 1015 F 2030 C 18014 Y 91x weekly (13.0x daily) 747-400 , MD-11 , A320-200 Monthly O/W Seats: 2294 F 8503 C 76766 Y 403x weekly (57.6x daily) 737-400 , A320-200 Monthly O/W Seats: 3652 F 25759 C 187714 Y

Do me a favour? Put your dummy back in, get used to it! nothing wrong with that also US anti-trust law, this is a GAME not a real life situation, please get over it

I don't see any kind for action, as all are having different prices and are thus competing with each other. In the real world that wouldn't happen either, unless all would have the same price in order not to compete, but lower prices than a specific competitor.

This is something we can look at for AE 4, but I don't see a solution that can be implemented in the near future because it would fundamentally change how many alliances operate. It's also not against the rules, because rule #2 applies to multiplie airlines owned by the same player and not to alliances. Because it doesn't violate any AE rules, it cannot be called cheating.

 

Real-world anti-trust laws (and all other aviation regulations) are irrelevant when it comes to the enforcement of AE rules, although they will be taken into consideration when designing AE 4 alliances. I suspect that with codesharing enabled, this will be less of an issue.

So in relation to rule 2.

 

Does having 1000 seats on a route, all provided by one airline, provide any actual disadvantage compared to having 500 seats each on a route, by two different airlines that I own?

Hence proving that putting realistic anti trust laws in AE is stupid...

 

Some things in AE need to be more realistic. Other things do not need to be...