Author Topic: TripleA alliance thread  (Read 3162 times)

alex

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 198
    • View Profile
Re: TripleA alliance thread
« Reply #45 on: October 10, 2018, 08:06:15 am »
Interesting. I realized that even with brand new plane, I still got delays, shall we avoid using the maximum frequency?

You should not get delays with a plane at 100% condition. However it's possible that, each tick, airplane condition is degraded one step before route calculations are done.

trans nations

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 58
    • View Profile
Re: TripleA alliance thread
« Reply #46 on: October 10, 2018, 08:52:55 pm »
Interesting. I realized that even with brand new plane, I still got delays, shall we avoid using the maximum frequency?

You should not get delays with a plane at 100% condition. However it's possible that, each tick, airplane condition is degraded one step before route calculations are done.

I am running a test on increasing auto-renewal to 60%. How do I know if i'm still profitable? is the renewal fee reflected on the profit report?
Used to be a decent airlines

Stoich

  • Guest
Re: TripleA alliance thread
« Reply #47 on: October 10, 2018, 09:56:12 pm »
Interesting. I realized that even with brand new plane, I still got delays, shall we avoid using the maximum frequency?

You should not get delays with a plane at 100% condition. However it's possible that, each tick, airplane condition is degraded one step before route calculations are done.

I am running a test on increasing auto-renewal to 60%. How do I know if i'm still profitable? is the renewal fee reflected on the profit report?

No it is not, but it's not hard to calculate. Multiply the number of planes of each type you have by their price as brand new and divide by 5, then add the result for each type of planes together and divide by 728, this is your average weekly costs for renewals at 60%. Subtract it from your "income sheet" value and you get your net profitability after all expenses.

For example if you had 100 A380 planes, your weekly renewal cost will be:

100x450 mil / 5 = 9 000 mil
9000 / 728 = 12.36 mil weekly

So if your weekly profit from your "income sheet" is 40 mil, then:

40 mil - 12.36 mil = 27.64 mil weekly profit (that is the real one)

However the plane renewal costs are not evenly distributed so there will be times when your weekly profit is higher and others lower or even negative.

Stoich

  • Guest
Re: TripleA alliance thread
« Reply #48 on: October 10, 2018, 10:11:03 pm »
In other news, my recalibration is almost complete.

I lowered service funding by 50% to 75 mil, which lowered my rating to 58.41, then I have adjusted most prices on most lines and curently passanger numbers are back to almost what they were before:

passengers: 709K
total revenue: 731 mil
cash flow: ~160 mil
profit before plane replacement: ~98 mil
profit after plane replacement:  ~62 mil
profit margin: 8.48%
slots: - 510

So other then the lost slots, all other numbers are back to the same levels and my profit margin actually improved and I've accumulated a small war chest of 6Bil too. I'm however taking in cheaper passengers now, so I'm probably taking more lower end traffic from some of you as a result in North America and Asia.

I could probably lower investment by another 15-20 mil and improve my profit by 10 mil in doing so, but adjusting all the prices is such a drag that I won't bother with it. I think I'm gonna save up some money for now and pick my moment to explosively expand at a later time.

alex

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 198
    • View Profile
Re: TripleA alliance thread
« Reply #49 on: October 10, 2018, 10:29:01 pm »
Interesting. I realized that even with brand new plane, I still got delays, shall we avoid using the maximum frequency?

You should not get delays with a plane at 100% condition. However it's possible that, each tick, airplane condition is degraded one step before route calculations are done.

I am running a test on increasing auto-renewal to 60%. How do I know if i'm still profitable? is the renewal fee reflected on the profit report?

No it is not, but it's not hard to calculate. Multiply the number of planes of each type you have by their price as brand new and divide by 5, then add the result for each type of planes together and divide by 728, this is your average weekly costs for renewals at 60%. Subtract it from your "income sheet" value and you get your net profitability after all expenses.

There is a simpler formula. Your true depreciation cost, including renewal fees, is:

(list depreciation) * (1 + 0.2 * (autorenew %) / (100% - autorenew %))

Where "list depreciation" is the depreciation quoted on your weekly income statement.

At 60% autorenew this means your "true" deprecation is equal to 1 + 0.2 * 60 / (100 - 60) = 1.3 times the depreciation listed on your income statement.

trans nations

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 58
    • View Profile
Re: TripleA alliance thread
« Reply #50 on: October 10, 2018, 10:43:11 pm »
In other news, my recalibration is almost complete.

I lowered service funding by 50% to 75 mil, which lowered my rating to 58.41, then I have adjusted most prices on most lines and curently passanger numbers are back to almost what they were before:

passengers: 709K
total revenue: 731 mil
cash flow: ~160 mil
profit before plane replacement: ~98 mil
profit after plane replacement:  ~62 mil
profit margin: 8.48%
slots: - 510

So other then the lost slots, all other numbers are back to the same levels and my profit margin actually improved and I've accumulated a small war chest of 6Bil too. I'm however taking in cheaper passengers now, so I'm probably taking more lower end traffic from some of you as a result in North America and Asia.

I could probably lower investment by another 15-20 mil and improve my profit by 10 mil in doing so, but adjusting all the prices is such a drag that I won't bother with it. I think I'm gonna save up some money for now and pick my moment to explosively expand at a later time.

Amazing!!
my numbers would be -
passengers: ~270 mil
total revenue: ~170 mil
cash flow: ~54 mil
profit before plane replacement: ~40 mil
profit after plane replacement:  ~32.8 mil
profit margin: 19.3%

based on a 60% auto-renewal. Not sure if it's accurate since I just decreased the service fund largely so my service quality is now decreasing. (might affect the load factors?)
Used to be a decent airlines

trans nations

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 58
    • View Profile
Re: TripleA alliance thread
« Reply #51 on: October 10, 2018, 10:46:43 pm »
Interesting. I realized that even with brand new plane, I still got delays, shall we avoid using the maximum frequency?

You should not get delays with a plane at 100% condition. However it's possible that, each tick, airplane condition is degraded one step before route calculations are done.

I am running a test on increasing auto-renewal to 60%. How do I know if i'm still profitable? is the renewal fee reflected on the profit report?

No it is not, but it's not hard to calculate. Multiply the number of planes of each type you have by their price as brand new and divide by 5, then add the result for each type of planes together and divide by 728, this is your average weekly costs for renewals at 60%. Subtract it from your "income sheet" value and you get your net profitability after all expenses.

There is a simpler formula. Your true depreciation cost, including renewal fees, is:

(list depreciation) * (1 + 0.2 * (autorenew %) / (100% - autorenew %))

Where "list depreciation" is the depreciation quoted on your weekly income statement.

At 60% autorenew this means your "true" deprecation is equal to 1 + 0.2 * 60 / (100 - 60) = 1.3 times the depreciation listed on your income statement.

hmmm, based on this formula, my autorenew fee would be 18 mil, but based on the (value of brand new) / (5 * 728) formula, the fee goes half to 7.1 mil.

Correct me if I'm wrong.
Used to be a decent airlines

Stoich

  • Guest
Re: TripleA alliance thread
« Reply #52 on: October 10, 2018, 10:49:41 pm »
yes, you'll start loosing passengers as the service quality goes down and will need to adjust prices after that, but for a few weeks at least you'll have much higher profit margins because of the accumulated service quality from before and low investment now. Once it levels off and you readjust prices you'll get a more accurate picture but the numbers look healthy.

Accumulate some cash for when you start chasing rank points for extra basses, you'll need to run routes that loose money then. I run about 30 of those that are loosing me close to 20 mil weekly, some even with 0 ticket prices lol. However focus and develop well your initial network first, it will help a lot when you start expanding.

Stoich

  • Guest
Re: TripleA alliance thread
« Reply #53 on: October 10, 2018, 11:06:26 pm »
Alex that formula is not correct you've flipped things.

I tried to brake it down to simple operations as *I've found over time that it is easier to explain that way.

Im any case the cost would be 1.33x depreciation, not 1.3 as the increase is 33.3% not 30%.

The actual formula would be"

1+ [1- (100-autorenwe%)/((100-autorenew%)+20)]

alex

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 198
    • View Profile
Re: TripleA alliance thread
« Reply #54 on: October 10, 2018, 11:11:08 pm »
hmmm, based on this formula, my autorenew fee would be 18 mil, but based on the (value of brand new) / (5 * 728) formula, the fee goes half to 7.1 mil.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

What is the depreciation listed on your weekly income statement?

Your "true" depreciation is 1.3 times (listed depreciation).

Your "autorenew fee" (that is, the amount that accounts for the extra loss you take when renewing) is 0.3 times (listed depreciation) - it's the surcharge over listed depreciation.

alex

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 198
    • View Profile
Re: TripleA alliance thread
« Reply #55 on: October 10, 2018, 11:15:22 pm »
Alex that formula is not correct you've flipped things.

I tried to brake it down to simple operations as *I've found over time that it is easier to explain that way.

Im any case the cost would be 1.33x depreciation, not 1.3 as the increase is 33.3% not 30%.

The actual formula would be"

1+ [1- (100-autorenwe%)/((100-autorenew%)+20)]

This is not correct.

Let's say I have a plane that costs $100 million new with a lifetime of 25 years. Let's say I have autorenew at 60%.

We'll work with annual instead of weekly depreciation to make the numbers a little cleaner.

The game's listed annual depreciation on this plane will be $100 / 25 = $4 million.

After 10 years, it will have a condition of 60%, and we will renew it. In order to renew it, the game essentially sells the plane and buys a new one. It sells for $100m * (60% condition) * (80% sale discount) = $48 million. This means we are taking a loss of $12 million, since on our books we were valuing the plane at $60 million.

If you take that $12 million and amortize it over the 10 year owned lifetime of the plane, that's an extra $1.2 million annual depreciation - i.e. a 30% increase.

alex

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 198
    • View Profile
Re: TripleA alliance thread
« Reply #56 on: October 10, 2018, 11:21:08 pm »
Also note that your formula doesn't give an answer of 0 at 0% autorenew (which it should) nor does it give an answer of infinity at 100% autorenew (as it should).

Stoich

  • Guest
Re: TripleA alliance thread
« Reply #57 on: October 10, 2018, 11:35:19 pm »
Also note that your formula doesn't give an answer of 0 at 0% autorenew (which it should) nor does it give an answer of infinity at 100% autorenew (as it should).

It's late and I obviously need sleep lol. You're correct formula is for something else not that....


Stoich

  • Guest
Re: TripleA alliance thread
« Reply #58 on: October 10, 2018, 11:48:29 pm »
Alex that formula is not correct you've flipped things.

I tried to brake it down to simple operations as *I've found over time that it is easier to explain that way.

Im any case the cost would be 1.33x depreciation, not 1.3 as the increase is 33.3% not 30%.

The actual formula would be"

1+ [1- (100-autorenwe%)/((100-autorenew%)+20)]

This is not correct.

Let's say I have a plane that costs $100 million new with a lifetime of 25 years. Let's say I have autorenew at 60%.

We'll work with annual instead of weekly depreciation to make the numbers a little cleaner.

The game's listed annual depreciation on this plane will be $100 / 25 = $4 million.

After 10 years, it will have a condition of 60%, and we will renew it. In order to renew it, the game essentially sells the plane and buys a new one. It sells for $100m * (60% condition) * (80% sale discount) = $48 million. This means we are taking a loss of $12 million, since on our books we were valuing the plane at $60 million.

If you take that $12 million and amortize it over the 10 year owned lifetime of the plane, that's an extra $1.2 million annual depreciation - i.e. a 30% increase.

I need sleep and my brain is not functioning well enough right now so we can take this up again tomorrow, but something seems wrong in this calculation as you loose 20% of the value when you buy the plane so renewal starts at 20% + any depreciation accumulated. Thus your renewal price-tag starts at 20 mil + whatever was depreciated. Anyway time for me to sleep, see you all tomorrow.
Like Like x 1 View List

alex

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 198
    • View Profile
Re: TripleA alliance thread
« Reply #59 on: October 11, 2018, 12:16:23 am »
No problem.

What I think you are missing is that you don't really lose 20% of the value when you buy the plane; rather, when you sell the plane, either directly or implicitly (via renewal), it sells for only 80% of the value as reduced by condition. So if you buy a plane for $100 million and then immediately sell it (maybe you bought it by mistake), you only get $80 million back, and lose $20 million; but if you sell it at 50% condition, you get back $40 million, and lose only $10 million.