Too Easy to form Local Monopoly

My biggest gripe with this game is once a company has 40%+ market share in a market it is impossible to compete with them unless a sufficient number of slots are still available.  (Not likely if it is one of the top airports)

With that in mind I think there should be a hard cap on slots that any 1 airline can control in any large airport.  Most airports (regions,etc) would regulate and stop a monopolistic situation.  (really small airports do not apply...or small countries)  Too often in this game you see the top carrier with 50%+ (with 95%+ of the slots taken) in a market with the next best being 10% and they only really move people back into their own hubs that they have 50%+ market share.  So you have the major hub carrier, a couple of sub carriers that only move people back to their own hubs, and a few airlines in the process of dying or barely hanging on. 

With that in mind I think that all airlines should be limited to a total of 25% of the slots in all the major (7-8 bars and more) airports.  With only 25% slots available to any one holding you would almost guarantee that you would get at least a more competitive landscape.  Which after about six months in the game doesn't exist naturally.  All you have to do is go look at all the old servers and you see major airlines eating up the bulk of the slots with no ability to break into their market share.  None!   

This would also make for a more realistic game as few modern day carriers actually use the hub and spoke system.  This game OTOH you almost always see a hub a spoke system being used.  At least by the successful airlines.

To me this makes the game boring once you've either been knocked out of the game OR you've become so big that only your own mistakes/quiting can end your game.

My .02.

Hi,

While I appreciate what you are saying I don't really think it is fair, or encourages diversity. There are a number of reasons....

  • If I start up an airline in Hong Kong, only one airport, and 10 rated I would be limited to 25% of slots, that means the game will become very very boring with only 4 airlines each doing the same thing. Then what happens, I get bored and quit.
  • If you think about most large airports in real life you will actually find that one airlines has close to 50% of slots. LHR,FRA,CDG,ATL,AMS all spring to mind. I do not really support anything which makes AS less realistic. Most airports in the real world do not mind the likes of BA, AF taking more slots. If I was the owner of LHR and (if they could in real life) BA came along and said I want a daily slot pair, I would be happier to give it to a good reliable customer than a new one unkown one.
  • You have to remember with the old servers that those airlines did not always own a majority, and started with the same money as everyone else. It is only through years of playing, and companies going bust that they have been able to grow (and hence large credit spend). I think it is totally unfair for a player that has been in a game world for 5 years and spent 7300 credits on that airline, to be told he has to uproute everything for a player that may not of spent any credits on the game world.
  • Hub and spoke is still used by the majority of airlines in the world. The LCC have really changed attitudes and do point to point, but the likes of BA, AF, AA, UA, NH, JP all are hub and spoke.

I have been trying to push for a long time a system where the airport runs as a business and its goal is more passengers (more money). This is achieved by minimum charging. Every airports starts off with no minimum charge, when the available slots decrease below a number (say 10%) the airport will increase the minimum charge. The minimum charge is based upon passengers and aircraft TOW. So the first month the airport goes below 10% then a minimum charge of 50 passengers is levied on every flight. So if you are flying a trislander with 15 seats to the airport, you will still be charged as a 50 seater. This gets reviewed automatically and increases or decreases every month. This forces small aircraft out of slots (as no longer profitable) and larger aircraft into slots. This is what an airport business would want (more pax), and happens around the world.

Thanks

Ian

Take the example HKG - there is a total of 20160 slots per week. So having a 25% limit would mean an airline should have 5040 slots/week.... or ... 2520 departures/week. Go through the game worlds and find these airlines ;)

Take the example HKG - there is a total of 20160 slots per week. So having a 25% limit would mean an airline should have 5040 slots/week.... or ... 2520 departures/week. Go through the game worlds and find these airlines ;)

Are you hinting at 2520 being a lot or too little? ^_^

IMHO, such limits lead to nothing - at least to nothing good as has been discussed more than once.

sk, how about an experiment?

Launch the next server with an infinite number of available slots. In the end, the result would be lots of frustration among players as unrestricted market access for everyone would lead to overall margins of zero (Remember, unlike in reality we have unlimited funding in the game!)

AS naturally offers too little instruments for diversification (marketing, reputation, image, sense of nationality or whatsoever) - consequently our airlines are all more or less the same. Little diversification, little to no profit margin.

2520 Departures is nothing, even long-haul makes no sense with only 2520 flights feeding them. 

2520 Departures is nothing, even long-haul makes no sense with only 2520 flights feeding them.

Depends on the concept.

With the usual “create connections with a randomly scheduled mass of flights”, maybe.

It is very well possible to have a working long-haul operation with just 30 aircraft and less than 200 departures/week.

Depends on the concept.

With the usual “create connections with a randomly scheduled mass of flights”, maybe.

It is very well possible to have a working long-haul operation with just 30 aircraft and less than 200 departures/week.

That takes well timed banks and your planes will also be running closer to 200% MX than 100% MX.

Trade-offs. I agree with your premise though.

Competition does not take place on one Airport only. There is huge competition between the hubs in a region. An airline can use 80% of slots in LHR. Its competitor has 95% of the slots in LGW or STN. There is still competion. There many regions in the world where the hubs of different airlines are close to each other.

In reality FRA and AMS or CDG. And there is still competition between Skyteam and StarAlliance.

The aircraft industry is globalized. It does not make sense to focus on a single airport and call an airline with a 90% market share on that airport a monopolist.

Speaking the one who has a virtual USA monopoly on Nicosia :)