29 replies to this topic

[mma]

Having just witnessed a number of Posts in this Forum on this subject, I and I am sure others who play the game feel the same way.

If you now look at legs in Europe that are a lead distance of 400miles, the asking price was $170.......now the USA Players have arrived and knocked it down to $40 ...........

Understand that I am not just stating USA Players as there are others but I have to state one major Airline thats started the price war and others follow.....leaving small airlines unable to match...

This will wreck the game........and time will be its ending if this takes hold !!!!

Steps I feel must be taken to protect ALL who Fly The Sky...

[Edited on 8/7/2005 by mma]

[vivavivah]

100% True.

I think we should create this association and stop the ones that, like Bluewings, charge $0 for some tickets.

Regards,

[Nidhal]

I'm not talking about charges of 0$ but for cheap tickets I guess there is no problem ! that's the game !

[davidt]

Or simply stop people from instigating 'loss leaders'.

[mma]

Originally posted by vivavivah
100% True.

I think we should create this association and stop the ones that, like Bluewings, charge $0 for some tickets.

Regards,

Yes this is one area that ruins the game not least upsets many others who log-in every day and have to sit there for hours trying to get a route back into a profit.:cool:

[Simpleboy]

I think this would be a bad idea. Hell, right now i can book myself on a 1,500 mile flight to Australia for NZ$39 (US$26.93). So a 400 mile flight above that price isnt out of the question.

What you are asking to do is remove realism away from the game.

[Edited on 8/8/2005 by Simpleboy]

[Dukeflight]

I was going to make a thread about the same issue going on in South America but i'm gonna post here.
OK, I don't know in Europe, but in South America the only country that has an open sky policy (i think that's the name for it) is Chile, the other nation's skies are regulated by the goverment meaning that if the airline wants to go local on a particular country it has to be a national airline. This is made to prevent major airlines to depredate local markets and this taking away people's jobs.
Since I have an ariline in South America I think it is unfair that foreigns airlines "invade" my routes with wide bodies simply trying to destruct the competition. That's NOT real, that's NOT what is going on in this part of the world.
And I know that all this is the consecuences of being too many airlines considering the airports are just too few. In Argentina, for example, you just can't go local... because the only two airports are one next to another. The only South American country in witch you can go local is Brazil, and it's invaded by american and european airlines (that is completely illegal in real life).
Anyways... that is just for letting everybody knows that you simply CAN'T manage an airline in south america with that kind of competition.

[drv4truk]

Welcome to the real world. Haven't you ever seen what happens when a new carrier enters a route and offers discounted ticket prices? Normally the other carriers on the route will also drop prices. If you can't handle it or can't compete then get off the route.

[Dukeflight]

drv4truk, what I'm saying is THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN in the real world, because it is ILLEGAL. OK? I don't know how it is administrated in the USA but in South America is illegal for a non local airline to operate local flights (except for Chile that has an open sky policy). Of course that doesn't happen in the international flights but (in real life) you cant operate, for example, Buenos Aires (any) - Sao Paulo (GRU) if your airline is not from Argentina.
Of course there are exeptions but that is another subjet that is not related to this thread.

[piercey]

dukeflight- the game, as miller has said before, is to simulate the business, not the politics, like open skies.

[Dukeflight]

I understand that Piercey... but don't you think economics depends on politics? I mean... economics depends on the political model of society (capitalism, comunism, anarchism, etc...) so... can u tell me that the economic model followed in this game doesn't suppose the world is capitalist and there is open sky politics in every country?
In this case the first afirmation would be reallistic (we live in a capitalist world, that's why we are speaking of offer and demand) but the second one not quite as well.
I know that miller wants to make things simple, but some times business are NOT simple and I think this is the case.

PS: Another solution would be calling the world "USA" and just go local, don't you think?

[mma]

Quote:

PS: Another solution would be calling the world "USA" and just go local, don't you think?


Un-quote:

Hmmmmm - Yes.....

Bush World Wide Airlines........

[piercey]

dukeflight your also completly missing another point, the fact that this is a game, and with that a game still considered betta! Also, programing somthing like this would suck up a lot of bandwith and would require a reset, which I don't think a lot of members would love to do.

[WSHNationals]

I believe it was El-Al that was operating JFK-LAX, but they couldn't carry domestic passengers(only the passengers that flew on El Al's flights from Isreal). They then closed this route and gave a new airline, North American, some capitol to start that route again. The reason they couldn't carry domestic passengers is because of the IATA 5th freedom rights. I think that maybe a way to fix Dukeflight's problems, and the way to implement this is you cannot have flights on another continent UNLESS you have a flight that connects to one of the cities that the flight that is on another continent from where you are based, so the flights that are on another continent then the one where you are based you may have something like you get 20% off the loadfactor or there is a max loadfactor of 50% or something. This would make the sim real and fair, and would still technically still make it a "Free Market" economy. I hope this helps!

[Dukeflight]

Originally posted by piercey
dukeflight your also completly missing another point, the fact that this is a game, and with that a game still considered betta! Also, programing somthing like this would suck up a lot of bandwith and would require a reset, which I don't think a lot of members would love to do.

It is supposed to be a business simulator, not a game. And even if it is a game, why not making it fair for those who don't want to start in USA or Europe? I mean... if the intention of the game is to reflect the economy of an airline... well... i think there are regulations everywhere and there is no airline absolutely free to do whatever the CEO wants.
Anyways I am aware that what I'm asking only benefits a few and that there is nothing planned regarding this issue, I just wanted to state that it's unfair.

Cheers!

[Chicken]

Politics becomes a programming nightmare. Either be willing to pay for playing AE, or live with it.

Politics makes airports international / domestic, game has all international.

Politics makes flight paths longer because we have to fly around certain things (like flights out of Israel cannot fly over Saudi Arabia, and flights out of USA cannot fly over Cuba), game allows straight line distance flight path to be used.

I vote keep the game free, and tolerate the non-real issues.

[piercey]

well said, chicken.

[Dukeflight]

OK, then simply change "simulator" for "game" and fly only in the nothern emisphere because it makes no sense flying in south america if the only real thing is the airport name and location.
Just put yourself in my position... would you like to play a game that only benefits a part of the world?
This is not just complaining about something I would like miller to put in the game, I think that at least the most basic rules must be mantained in order to make it at least a little bit alike reality... I insist that everything that is going on in South America at this moment is the opposite of what's going on in real life.
I'm glad that you're doing well in the game, chicken, but we are not all american, you know?
Anyways... I'm going to hold on until rubber chicken transport and company takes all my routes and I can make no profit and then I'll just quit (I'm thinking of Aerolineas Argentinas, LAN, Varig, TAM and others at this moment).
Thanx anyways... I still think it would be a great game!

[Chicken]

Originally posted by Dukeflight
I'm glad that you're doing well in the game, chicken, but we are not all american, you know?

I am Australian

Originally posted by Dukeflight
OK, then simply change "simulator" for "game" and fly only in the nothern emisphere because it makes no sense flying in south america if the only real thing is the airport name and location....

Fair comment, not just South America, but also lots of Asia and Africa, and even Canada. But from what I have gathered, the game started out as a USA only game, and grew.

The game will be awesome when Miller adds all airports that have more than 100000 passengers per annum. Think about Recife-Rio Branco non-stop!

[drv4truk]

Originally posted by Dukeflight
Just put yourself in my position... would you like to play a game that only benefits a part of the world?
This is not just complaining about something I would like miller to put in the game, I think that at least the most basic rules must be mantained in order to make it at least a little bit alike reality... I insist that everything that is going on in South America at this moment is the opposite of what's going on in real life.

You still don't get it. This is not an airline simulation or even a simulation of real life airlines. This is a business simulation. There are no borders and the skies are open. You can fly wherever you want as long as you can pay for gates. If you can't compete in South America then you can choose a different area to operate out of or you could give up.