78 replies to this topic

[-Newcdn]

I do think legroom is more important than IFS, so I don't care if you have PTVs if my faced is shoved up right against it because you have 550 seats in a 777. But as is shown in these screens, clearly they have neither

It is possible to have a 500+ seat 773 with decent legroom (32" Y) in a 3x4x3 config (which more and more airlines are using now).
It's going to be all Y though.

[Sheepy]

Now, another couple of replies. Again, my main ones are on the previous page... so read those first.

What's sad is that some of newcdn's flights compete with with US members, and he had a heck of a better IFS than they did.

Well, if newcdn uses SkyGroup-Standard IFS, I doubt there'd be that much of a difference, seeing as your 3* is '5* quality! But you have to pay $75 for dinner..'
Although receiving 5* may be better than one star, no pax would realistically be able to afford that and the difference to the consumer is largely irrelevant.

Lake, I agree with you on that one. I do that too. However, I try to do decent seating and scam them all with IFS... However, what aircraft are they using? 1056 Y?

All IFS systems have been changed to stop gaming the system, might I add!

1056Y? Completely wrong. If you'll note, the route in question is run at an incredibly high frequency... it's total daily seats, not seats per plane.


Hopefully, this issue should prove that we make an effort to fix our problems as soon as is possible, and that we do actually listen to criticism from outside the admin 'team'. ( Who would have guessed?)

Sheepy, I was especially surprised to see aeroperu and Swiss providing crappy service?

I only run aeroperu... not Swiss?
At any rate, I have fixed aeroperu. It was providing crappy service at the time, in order to gain a reasonable amount of cash. I didn't fix it when I should have.

People from UnitedSkies actively criticising SG, when they themselves are just as bad... Very disappointing.

I wouldn't say we are as bad. The only real issue worth noting is IFS, and well, as I've said, SG's IFS policy is chargemax in Y for 5* food. The in game IFS rating just seems to like this more.

Admin had better have a very good explanation for this.

Yes, we made a mistake. We will now fix that as soon as possible and actually take action on the matter, rather than pretend all is well and all our members are currently wonderfully quality.

[Alfrenzo]

I do not know why the flying flute SkyGroup is being a busybody here, but, check Swiss again (temporary planes are not configured with IFE yet)

[Sheepy]

This an updateable list of airlines that still have scam IFS, or if it has been fixed, the time at which it was fixed. Times are NZT.

aeroperu (4PM 15th Mar)
British Airways (15th Mar)
Australian International (6PM 15th Mar)
Swiss (6PM 15th Mar)
aeroseres (10PM 15th Mar, I have not technically been told this has been fixed, but all the routes I checked seemed fine)
Air Panama (7:50PM 15th Mar)
JAS (7PM 15th Mar)

[Alfrenzo]

Btw, newcdn's airline is the only reasonable one in SG

[ar157]

I totally accept your arguments on IFS/IFE matthew, however if you compare price, its more of when someone is offline because they have a life and can't change the route prices. I'm $87 more expensive on SYD-SFO because i am offline Also, note Qantas does NOT have a a sizeable domestic network. my utilisation is also lower.

P.S. We aren't just as bad. we do not operate 25" Y seats.

[Sheepy]

This an updateable list of airlines that still have scam IFS, or if it has been fixed, the time at which it was fixed. Times are NZT.

aeroperu (4PM 15th Mar)
British Airways (15th Mar)
Australian International (6PM 15th Mar)
Swiss (6PM 15th Mar)
aeroseres (10PM 15th Mar, I have not technically been told this has been fixed, but all the routes I checked seemed fine)
Air Panama (7:50PM 15th Mar)
JAS (7PM 15th Mar)

Well, there's your results. Under twelve hours since the complaint was filed.

[ar157]

Well, there's your results. Under twelve hours since the complaint was filed.

Like.

[Alfrenzo]

Matthew I hope we please you

[QK Flight Industries]

Sheepy, I will note that we will eventually upgrade everyone to a new level of service (probably start moving everyone to at least 4* in-game service) soon. We just need time to a) get everyone caught up and figure out who's inactive... some people, I think purposely check in once every three months.

[Sheepy]

Oh please. In game service is not a decent measure. If you tell me exactly what your IFS would involve, I would be able to get a sensible and accurate rating, rather than trusting the game which could vary by an incredible margin. And anyway, you just said you would eventually upgrade IFS. As I'm happy to say, we did it in twelve hours, so must be some serious flaws in your members' ability to adjust to change.

Anyway, more importantly,
http://www.airline-e...int-ifs-issues/

[QK Flight Industries]

Oh please. In game service is not a decent measure. If you tell me exactly what your IFS would involve, I would be able to get a sensible and accurate rating, rather than trusting the game which could vary by an incredible margin. And anyway, you just said you would eventually upgrade IFS. As I'm happy to say, we did it in twelve hours, so must be some serious flaws in your members' ability to adjust to change.

Anyway, more importantly,
http://www.airline-e...int-ifs-issues/

You know where the document is. PM me and I'll give you the link. Better yet, talk to Obelix, he's the one that designed them.

[Sheepy]

Why on earth would I need to make the effort get the link from you?
After all, you're the ones that need to improve, not me.
And if we're discussing the one with 5* Food at max prices, I already saw that one. I laughed.

[QK Flight Industries]

Then stop whining, I gotta go.

[Sheepy]

If you want me to 'stop whining' you better provide some evidence you've actually gotten better.

[X-Wing @Aliciousness]

I think those of us who do care need to lobby for a stop gap fix on the scam IFS. No one in real life would be able to double their profits by introducing IFS. Some airlines may make money off of it, but it is probably in the range of $10 per passenger and not $600 as is possible in AE.

This would also solve the problem of using it to compete with heavy competition as the other airlines in the route are also not making $600 a passenger on IFS.

I think a simple solution would be to have a dynamic limit on the price of different foods, e.g. if you have a 1 star meal, you can't charge more than $15 for it but if you have a 5 star meal you can charge $60 for it.

[X-Wing @Aliciousness]

Yes fox, but I think if an airline is dependent on it without having competition, then that airline wouldn't be able to exist in real life.

And if you are dependent on it because of competition, you competitors wouldn't be able to use use the scam IFS either

[Obelix]

Offering a meal or snack option at a price in short and medium haul routes is common practice in many carriers depending on the class. If you check their offerings and prices you will most likely find that it’s not uncommon to find options in the menu that cost no more than 50 cents being charged $3 or 4 (400 to 500% profit margin) so offering a snack option that costs $6.95 in AE for $15 (115% profit margin) or a meal option that costs $49.95 in AE for $75 (50% profit margin) in any given class on short to medium haul routes doesn’t seem unrealistic, at least from a profit margin perspective, and it gives a 1* food rating. Adding all accessories for free (5* accessory rating) to achieve an overall IFS rating of 3* while trying to make a profit doesn’t seem to be a scam to me. In any case the meals are options and it’s up to the pax to decide if they want to buy it or not.

[M4matthew]

P.S. We aren't just as bad. we do not operate 25" Y seats.

Well, let's not exaggerate - as I understand, the legal minimum is 28".

[M4matthew]

A summary so far

From what I can deduce from the comments and Sheepy's complaint report, I can see the general consensus is scam IFS was used to produce rapid expansion ('easy cash') and to effectively compete with competitor airlines.

Let me say at this point, Greenline (R4) has grown successfully offering full IFS since its founding - based at Kona International. (Please feel free to check it out for yourself).

For that reason, I fail to accept that as a valid excuse for offering poor IFS.

The second reason for the scam IFS, was to be able to compete with other airlines on lucrative routes. Again, I cannot fully accept this as an excuse as there are plenty of 'untapped' routes in all regions of R5 that I've found - due to the world's recent opening. Why not just fly and expand from these untapped regions - then once you have the cash - expand into the demand high markets, rather than doing it the other way around and offering scam IFS in the process.

...and sheepy, your remarks on the alliance's seat pitch are, well... Seat pitch is indeed the 'backbone' of any good seat, but what good's a backbone without any body to support?