Triumph
Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 15,031
- 14
- 81
Originally posted by: freemanteo
Originally posted by: kami333
And don't tell me you guys pay full fare...
Paid $550 for round trip to Japan.
I'm sorry, please tell us how you got that price??
noone answered my question, you guys mean that a company would rather lose more money without much passengers than dropping prices and increasing passengers?
I mean it is better to have empty cabins in airplanes than to cut prices? If my example is not exaggerated, why is it not feasible to loss less money by dropping prices? It would not only fill the cabins, but increase customer circle!
For example:
Empty cabins= $1billion loss
Full cabins= $300 million loss
Because it just isn't that simple. First of all the airlines don't know the magical formula for calculating how much of a price drop will attract how many customers. Lets simplify it. If the current price, even at a loss to the airlines, is $100, lets say that 10 people will buy the tickets at this price. Gain to airlines is $1,000. Now if they drop the price to $80 per seat, and 11 people now buy the tickets, the airline is only making $880. The underlying principal I'm trying to get across here is the "Invisible Hand" theory. What this means is that no one person can know exactly how the market responds to changes in price (unless you poll every single person in the country and ask them "How much will you pay for this particular flight?) The only thing that really knows is the market itself, as if it were guided by some omnipotent "invisible hand." This would probably be alot more clear if you had had some sort of introduction to economics course. There are alot more factors that go into making price determinations, that's why people have doctoral degrees in economics.
