1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 The Impact of Buy-Down on Sell Up, Unconstraining, and Spiral-Down Edward Kambour, Senior Scientist E. Andrew Boyd, SVP and Senior Scientist Joseph Tama,
Advertisements

Presented to AGIFORS YM Study Group Bangkok, Thailand May 2001 Larry Weatherford University of Wyoming Dispersed Fares within a Fare Class: How Can We.
AGIFORS--RM Study Group New York City, March 2000 Lawrence R. Weatherford, PhD University of Wyoming Unconstraining Methods.
Utility Theory.
© copyright Amadeus GTD S.A. / all rights reserved / unauthorized use and disclosure strictly forbidden New Generation Inventory Jean-Michel Sauvage.
1 Decision Making and Utility Introduction –The expected value criterion may not be appropriate if the decision is a one-time opportunity with substantial.
Chapter 15: Decisions Under Risk and Uncertainty McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2011 by the McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2013 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Chapter 15 Decisions under Risk and Uncertainty.
Oligopoly and Monopolistic Competition
Improving Forecast Accuracy by Unconstraining Censored Demand Data Rick Zeni AGIFORS Reservations and Yield Management Study Group May, 2001.
Chapter 10 Section 2 Hypothesis Tests for a Population Mean
Decision-Making under Uncertainty – Part I Topic 4.
Propagation of Error Ch En 475 Unit Operations. Quantifying variables (i.e. answering a question with a number) 1. Directly measure the variable. - referred.
1 Utility Theory. 2 Option 1: bet that pays $5,000,000 if a coin flipped comes up tails you get $0 if the coin comes up heads. Option 2: get $2,000,000.
P.V. VISWANATH FOR A FIRST COURSE IN INVESTMENTS.
Risk a situation in which there is a probability that an event will occur. People tend to prefer greater certainty and less risk.
Judgment and Decision Making in Information Systems Utility Functions, Utility Elicitation, and Risk Attitudes Yuval Shahar, M.D., Ph.D.
Uncertainty and Consumer Behavior
© 2003 All Rights Reserved, Robi Polikar, Rowan University, Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering Lecture 8 Engineering Statistics Part II: Estimation.
Notes – Theory of Choice
© Michael O. Ball Competitive Analysis of Online Booking: Dynamic Policies Michael Ball, Huina Gao, Itir Karaesman R. H. Smith School of Business University.
in the Binomial Distribution
Risk and Return (Ch. 5) 04/24/06. How Investors View Risk and Return Investors like return. They seek to maximize return. Investors like return. They.
Introducing Information into RM to Model Market Behavior INFORMS 6th RM and Pricing Conference, Columbia University, NY Darius Walczak June 5, 2006.
Airline Revenue Management
REVENUE THEORY IB Business & Management A Course Companion 2009 THE THEORY OF THE FIRM: COSTS, REVENUES AND PROFITS.
Capital Allocation Between The Risky And The Risk-Free Asset
Airline Schedule Optimization (Fleet Assignment II) Saba Neyshabouri.
Standard Error of the Mean
Equilibrium problems with equilibrium constraints: A new modelling paradigm for revenue management Houyuan Jiang Danny Ralph Stefan Scholtes The Judge.
Science of Hotel Optimization Rooms Revenue Workshop Day 1: Data Day 2: Analysis Day 3: Optimization.
Copyright © 2005 by the McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill/Irwin Managerial Economics Thomas Maurice eighth edition Chapter 15.
Pricing Examples. Bundling In marketing, product bundling offers several products for sale as one combined product. This is common in the software business.
Backup Contracts under Supply Risks and Stochastic Demand Jing Hou.
H oppersta d C onsultin g Market/Airline/Class (MAC) Revenue Management RM2003 Hopperstad May 03.
Laws of Logic and Rules of Evidence Larry Knop Hamilton College.
Chapter 5 Decision Making Under Uncertainty Dr. Ayham Jaaron.
Making decisions about distributions: Introduction to the Null Hypothesis 47:269: Research Methods I Dr. Leonard April 14, 2010.
Robert Hernandez, Hotel Data Science
Stat 13, Tue 5/8/ Collect HW Central limit theorem. 3. CLT for 0-1 events. 4. Examples. 5.  versus  /√n. 6. Assumptions. Read ch. 5 and 6.
TOPIC THREE Chapter 4: Understanding Risk and Return By Diana Beal and Michelle Goyen.
Lecture 17 Revenue Management I – Overbooking 1. What is the expected revenue of selling S tickets? NO shows Revenue # of tickets sold
Inventory Management MD707 Operations Management Professor Joy Field.
Population distribution VS Sampling distribution
The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2006McGraw-Hill/Irwin 12 Financial and Cost- Volume-Profit Models.
1 Chapter 7 Applying Simulation to Decision Problems.
Chapter 5 Uncertainty and Consumer Behavior. ©2005 Pearson Education, Inc.Chapter 52 Q: Value of Stock Investment in offshore drilling exploration: Two.
Chapter 5 Choice Under Uncertainty. Chapter 5Slide 2 Topics to be Discussed Describing Risk Preferences Toward Risk Reducing Risk The Demand for Risky.
RM Coordination and Bid Price Sharing in Airline Alliances: PODS Simulation Results Peter Belobaba Jeremy Darot Massachusetts Institute of Technology AGIFORS.
1 Chapter 7 Sampling Distributions. 2 Chapter Outline  Selecting A Sample  Point Estimation  Introduction to Sampling Distributions  Sampling Distribution.
Propagation of Error Ch En 475 Unit Operations. Quantifying variables (i.e. answering a question with a number) 1. Directly measure the variable. - referred.
Decision theory under uncertainty
Auctions serve the dual purpose of eliciting preferences and allocating resources between competing uses. A less fundamental but more practical reason.
© 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc Chapter 17 Choice Making Under Uncertainty.
1 Optimizing Decisions over the Long-term in the Presence of Uncertain Response Edward Kambour.
Managerial Economics Uncertainty Aalto University School of Science Department of Industrial Engineering and Management January 12 – 28, 2016 Dr. Arto.
Hypothesis Tests. An Hypothesis is a guess about a situation that can be tested, and the test outcome can be either true or false. –The Null Hypothesis.
Calculate Economic Order Quantity © What do you think? Corporal O’Reilly, the supply clerk, knows that it costs the Army money to generate a purchase.
Towards Robust Revenue Management: Capacity Control Using Limited Demand Information Michael Ball, Huina Gao, Yingjie Lan & Itir Karaesmen Robert H Smith.
IB Business & Management A Course Companion 2009
Introducing Information into RM to Model Market Behavior INFORMS 6th RM and Pricing Conference, Columbia University, NY Darius Walczak June 5, 2006.
Chapter 15: Decisions Under Risk and Uncertainty
Decisions Under Risk and Uncertainty
IB Economics A Course Companion 2009
Sampling Distributions and Estimation
Statistical Process Control
Chapter 8 Confidence Intervals.
Chapter 15 Decisions under Risk and Uncertainty
Behavioral Finance Economics 437.
Chapter 15: Decisions Under Risk and Uncertainty
Presentation transcript:

1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming

2 Outline of Presentation Classic EMSR Model for Seat Protection –Example Calculations New Utility Model (EMSU) –Example Calculations Comparison of Decision Rules

3 EMSR Model for Seat Protection: Assumptions Basic modeling assumptions for serially nested classes: a) demand for each class is separate and independent of demand in other classes. b) demand for each class is stochastic and can be represented by a probability distribution c) lowest class books first, in its entirety, followed by the next lowest class, etc. d) all demands arrive in a single booking period (i.e., static optimization model)

4 EMSR Model for Seat Protection: Assumptions Another key assumption: e) your company is risk-neutral (that is, you’re indifferent between a sure $100 and a 50% chance of $200 (50% chance of 0). EMSR has been used for over a decade as the industry standard for leg seat control.

5 EMSR Model Calculations Because higher classes have access to unused lower class seats, the problem is to find seat protection levels for higher classes, and booking limits on lower classes To calculate the optimal protection levels: Define P i (S i ) = probability that X i > S i, where S i is the number of seats made available to class i, X i is the random demand for class i

6 EMSR Calculations (cont’d) The expected marginal revenue of making the Sth seat available to class i is: EMSR i (S i ) = R i * P i (S i ) where R i is the average revenue (or fare) from class i The optimal protection level,  12, for class 1 from class 2 satisfies: EMSR 1 (  12 ) = R 1 * P 1 (  12 ) = R 2 Once  12 is found, set BL 2 = Capacity -  12. Of course, BL 1 = Capacity

7 Example Calculation Consider the following flight leg example : Fare Class Avg. Demand Std. Dev.Fare Y B M To find the protection for the Y fare class, we want to find the largest value of  Y for which EMSR Y (  Y ) = R Y * P Y (  Y ) > R B

8 Example (cont’d) EMSR Y (  Y ) = 500 * P Y (  Y ) > 300 P Y (  Y ) > 0.60 where P Y (  Y ) = probability that X Y >  Y. If we assume demand in Y class is normally distributed with mean, std. dev. given earlier, then we can calculate that  Y = 37 is the largest integer value of  Y that gives a probability > 0.6 and therefore we will protect 37 seats for Y class!

9 Joint Protection for Classes 1 and 2 How many seats to protect jointly for classes 1 and 2 from class 3? The following calculations are necessary:

10 Protection for Y+B Classes To find the protection for the Y and B fare classes from M, we want to find the largest value of  YB that makes EMSR YB (  YB ) =R YB * P YB (  YB ) > R M Intermediate Calculations: R YB = (40* *300)/ (40+50) =

11 Example: Joint Protection The protection level for Y+B classes satisfies: * P YB (  YB ) > 100 P YB (  YB ) >.2571 Again, we can calculate that  YB = 101 is the largest integer value of  YB that gives a probability > and therefore we will jointly protect 101 seats for Y and B class from class M!

12 Joint Protection for Y+B Suppose we had an aircraft with capacity 150 seats, our Booking Limits would be: BL Y = 150 BL B = = 113 BL M = = 49

13 New Utility Model (EMSU) What if you’re a smaller company and not willing to take as many risks? That is, instead of being risk-neutral, you are actually risk-averse. First step is to quantify how risk averse you are.

14 There are several ways to do this, but one pretty simple way is to look at the following gamble: –Situation 1: You have a chance of winning either $100 or $0. –Situation 2: A certain cash payoff of $x. –How big would x have to be to make you indifferent between the 2 situations?

15 Risk neutral vs. Risk averse If you said x would have to be $50, then you are risk-neutral. If you picked a value for x that is less than $50 (e.g., $40), then you a risk-averse. Obviously, the lower the value for x, the more risk-averse you are. If you picked a value for x that is more than $50, you are risk-seeking.

16 Utility Calculation One of the easiest ways to convert from a $ amount to a utility is to use an exponential curve U(x) = 1 - exp (-x/riskconstant)

17 Sample curves

18 EMSU Calculations The expected marginal utility of making the Sth seat available to class i is: EMSU i (S i ) = U(R i ) * P i (S i ) where U(R i ) is the utility of the average revenue (or fare) from class i The optimal protection level,  12, for class 1 from class 2 satisfies: EMSU 1 (  12 ) = U(R 1 ) * P 1 (  12 ) = U(R 2 ) Once  12 is found, set BL 2 = Capacity -  12. Of course, BL 1 = Capacity

19 Example Calculation Consider the same flight leg example from before: Fare Class Avg. Demand Std. Dev.Fare Y B M To find the protection for the Y fare class, we want to find the largest value of  Y for which EMSU Y (  Y ) = U(R Y )* P Y (  Y ) > U(R B ) Assume our risk constant is $50

20 Example (cont’d) EMSU Y (  Y ) =U(500)* P Y (  Y ) > U(300) = * P Y (  Y ) > P Y (  Y ) > where P Y (  Y ) = probability that X Y >  Y. If we assume demand in Y class is normally distributed with mean, std. dev. given earlier, then we can calculate that  Y = 11 is the largest integer value of  Y that gives a probability > and therefore we will protect 11 seats for Y class!

21 Probability Calculations Using similar joint protection logic as before yields the following: The protection level for Y+B classes satisfies: U(388.89) * P YB (  YB ) > U(100) * P YB (  YB ) > P YB (  YB ) >

22 Joint Protection for Y+B We can calculate that  YB = 70 is the largest integer value of  YB that gives a probability > and therefore we will jointly protect 70 seats for Y and B class from class M! Suppose we had an aircraft with capacity 150 seats, our Booking Limits would be: BL Y = 150 BL B = = 139 BL M = = 80

23 As you can see, these seat allocation decisions are much more conservative (more risk-averse) in that they protect many fewer seats for the upper classes and allow more to be sold to the more “sure” lower fare class.

24 Comparison of Decision Rules Now, what revenue and utility impact does this decision have? Using the 3 fare class example (data already shown), assume a plane with capacity = 150 In 10,000 iterations (random draws of demand), EMSR generated an average utility of , while EMSU generated an average utility of , for a 4.17% increase!

25 The average # booked in each class were: –EMSREMSU –Y –B –M –LF89.0%93.9% –Yld$290.01$264.21