Airline Mogul Forum

Airline Mogul => Game Data => Topic started by: MrOrange on April 06, 2009, 09:46:01 pm

Title: PAX Updates AMS,EIN,RTM,AUA,BNE and some more
Post by: MrOrange on April 06, 2009, 09:46:01 pm

Source: Yearly Report 2008 Schiphol Airport Group (http://www.schipholgroup.com/InvestorRelations/Financin/FinancileResultaten/Jaarverslag2008.htm)
Note: Haven't bothered to cross-check the non-Schiphol Airport data.

Amsterdam Schiphol: 47.391.711 (cargo: 1.567.711)
Rotterdam: 1.013.671 (cargo: 15, yes, 15)
Eindhoven: 1.629.893
Brisbane: 18.779.855
Aruba Queen Beatrix: 1.919.374

And with data probably not 100% correct, since the numbers for December are estimated, listed for a top-10 comparison:
London LHR: 66.909.932 (cargo: 1.400.569)
Paris CDG: 60.677.555 (cargo: 2.039.460)
Frankfurt: 53.233.889 (cargo: 2.021.344)
Madrid: 50.846.104 (cargo: 328.985)
Rome FCO: 35.132.882 (cargo: not listed)
Munchen: 34.447.433 (cargo: not listed)
London LGW: 34.178.580 (cargo: not listed)
Barcelona: 30.208.134 (cargo: not listed)
Paris ORY: 26.206.283 (cargo: not listed)

Title: Re: PAX Updates AMS,EIN,RTM,AUA,BNE and some more
Post by: pseudoswede on April 06, 2009, 10:14:34 pm

Here is a nice resource for the Top 30 airports.

http://www.airports.org/cda/aci_common/display/main/aci_content07_c.jsp?zn=aci&cp=1-5-212-218-224_666_2__

Title: Re: PAX Updates AMS,EIN,RTM,AUA,BNE and some more
Post by: MrOrange on April 07, 2009, 10:51:46 am

Which does indeed prove the Schiphol Group Report wrong. Thanks for that link.

Title: Re: PAX Updates AMS,EIN,RTM,AUA,BNE and some more
Post by: CHR on April 07, 2009, 01:46:19 pm

Surely the Schiphol Groups data for their own airports would be more accurate than another website?

Title: Re: PAX Updates AMS,EIN,RTM,AUA,BNE and some more
Post by: MrOrange on April 07, 2009, 02:05:06 pm

For their own data, yes. Not for the data they provide on other airports, such as LHR and CDG. Which they say in the report, BTW, as they mention the data for these airports have been guesstimated as they didn't know the December passenger numbers.

Title: Re: PAX Updates AMS,EIN,RTM,AUA,BNE and some more
Post by: AirHanoverInternational on April 13, 2009, 06:26:56 pm

Seems someone started to update those already. Updated the remaining airports from the ACI list.

Title: Re: PAX Updates AMS,EIN,RTM,AUA,BNE and some more
Post by: dktc on April 13, 2009, 06:47:35 pm

Quote from: AirHanoverInternational on April 13, 2009, 06:26:56 pm

Seems someone started to update those already.

I did some... until I reached PEK, where I realized that the list is not accurate. The number is different than the one CAAC publicated.

Title: Re: PAX Updates AMS,EIN,RTM,AUA,BNE and some more
Post by: AirHanoverInternational on April 14, 2009, 07:13:09 am

I also noticed differences compared to other sources. But the variation was about 1 or 2%.

Title: Re: PAX Updates AMS,EIN,RTM,AUA,BNE and some more
Post by: dktc on April 14, 2009, 07:30:31 am

I would tend to trust the official ones ;)

Title: Re: PAX Updates AMS,EIN,RTM,AUA,BNE and some more
Post by: Cheung Airlines on April 14, 2009, 07:46:27 am

Just one question:

Which source will be better: Official ones or those published by others? ???

Official ones may exaggerate the data theyve got, while the unofficial ones may be inaccurate.

So, which one is better? :-\


Edit: typo

Title: Re: PAX Updates AMS,EIN,RTM,AUA,BNE and some more
Post by: AirHanoverInternational on April 14, 2009, 10:21:57 am

Quote from: dktc on April 14, 2009, 07:30:31 am

I would tend to trust the official ones ;)

What do you say is an official one? I remember reading articles where airport directors have added some extra daily pax to the results. Those were published on the airport's homepage. Would you call them official?

I doubt that some pax more or less affecting the gameplay a lot - except for when they move around limits such as 1M pax which affects fees. Having 32,233,222 pax or 32,228,988 pax should not be a big difference.

Title: Re: PAX Updates AMS,EIN,RTM,AUA,BNE and some more
Post by: dktc on April 14, 2009, 12:23:53 pm

By official ones, I mean airport authorities, CAA's, and government statistic offices.

Even if they were exaggerated, you cannot argue with them...
Frankly, it is not about right or wrong. As long as the organization is powerful and reputable, it would be the source we use. It is just like those claims that says "salt leads to high blood pressure", which is also repeated by medical doctors, but at the same time is not conclusive. As long as we percept that doctor as expert, we would believe them.