News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Amount spent by private renters is approaching parity wit... by oceanswave on Monday June 18, 2018 @07:07AM (#17337256)
Should an airline let a seat fly empty, or accept a price that’s less than the cost plus profit of the seat?
Re:Amount spent by private renters is approaching parity wit... by beagle3 on Monday June 18, 2018 @07:20AM (#17337320)
That's a slightly different game, because the SAME airline sells hundreds (usually thousands) of seats per day, and there's a lot of signaling involved.

A route I (used to) fly frequently has two competing airlines, one of which raises the price towards the flight date even if they have free seats (they bank on you willing to pay a premium for a next-day unplanned flight), the other lowers the price towards the flight date if they still have free seats (they don't want to fly empty). The former does much better financially than the latter, although I cannot tell if that's the only reason.

But a house owner sells/rents out once in 5-10 years, and never to a repeat audience; So money is all that matters, signaling doesn't.

Re:Amount spent by private renters is approaching parity wit... by abtinf on Monday June 18, 2018 @08:26AM (#17337679)
The general principle here is that, everything else being equal, if the marginal revenue exceeds marginal cost (i.e. revenue is greater than variable costs), you should make the sale. This is because you will lose less money than if you hadn’t made the sale.

Note however that airline pricing is notoriously difficult. There is no single price at which an airline may be flown profitably. It is an astounding achievement that the industry functions at all.