Top Banner
1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming
25

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

Dec 22, 2015

Download

Documents

Neal Richards
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

1

EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility?

2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group

Honolulu, Hawaii

Larry Weatherford,PhD

University of Wyoming

Page 2: 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

Page 3: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

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)

Page 4: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

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.

Page 5: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

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 Pi(Si ) = probability that Xi > Si,

where Si is the number of seats made available to class i, Xi is the random demand for class i

Page 6: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

6

EMSR Calculations (cont’d)

• The expected marginal revenue of making the Sth seat available to class i is:EMSRi(Si ) = Ri * Pi(Si ) where Ri is the average

revenue (or fare) from class i

• The optimal protection level, 12, for class 1 from class 2 satisfies:EMSR1(12 ) = R1 * P1(12 ) = R2

• Once 12 is found, set BL2 = Capacity - 12 . Of course, BL1 = Capacity

Page 7: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

7

Example Calculation

• Consider the following flight leg example :

Fare Class Avg. Demand Std. Dev. Fare

Y 40 10 500

B 50 15 300

M 60 20 100

• To find the protection for the Y fare class, we want to find the largest value of Y for which

EMSRY(Y ) = RY * PY(Y ) > RB

Page 8: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

8

Example (cont’d)

EMSRY(Y ) = 500 * PY(Y ) > 300 PY(Y ) > 0.60

where PY (Y ) = probability that XY > 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!

Page 9: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

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:

)Pr()(

**

ˆˆˆ

212,1

2,1

22112,1

22

212,1

212,1

SXXSP

X

XRXRR

XXX

Page 10: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

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

EMSRYB(YB ) =RYB * PYB(YB ) > RM

• Intermediate Calculations:RYB = (40*500 + 50 *300)/ (40+50) = 388.89

03.183251510ˆˆˆ

905040

2222,

,

BYBY

BYBY XXX

Page 11: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

11

Example: Joint Protection

• The protection level for Y+B classes satisfies: 388.89 * PYB(YB ) > 100

PYB(YB ) > .2571

• Again, we can calculate that YB = 101 is the largest integer value of YB that gives a probability > 0.2571 and therefore we will jointly protect 101 seats for Y and B class from class M!

Page 12: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

12

Joint Protection for Y+B

• Suppose we had an aircraft with capacity 150 seats, our Booking Limits would be:

BLY = 150

BLB = 150 - 37 = 113

BLM = 150 - 101 = 49

Page 13: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

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.

Page 14: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

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 50-50 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?

Page 15: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

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.

Page 16: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

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)

Page 17: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

17

Sample curves

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 100 200 300 400 500

Dollar amt

Uti

lity

Riskconstant = 50

Riskconstant =100

Riskconstant =150

Page 18: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

18

EMSU Calculations

• The expected marginal utility of making the Sth seat available to class i is:EMSUi(Si ) = U(Ri) * Pi(Si ) where U(Ri) is the utility of the

average revenue (or fare) from class i

• The optimal protection level, 12, for class 1 from class 2 satisfies:EMSU1(12 ) = U(R1) * P1(12 ) = U(R2)

Once 12 is found, set BL2 = Capacity - 12 . Of course, BL1 = Capacity

Page 19: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

19

Example Calculation

• Consider the same flight leg example from before:

Fare Class Avg. Demand Std. Dev. Fare

Y 40 10 500

B 50 15 300

M 60 20 100

• To find the protection for the Y fare class, we want to find the largest value of Y for which

EMSUY(Y ) = U(RY)* PY(Y ) > U(RB)

• Assume our risk constant is $50

Page 20: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

20

Example (cont’d)

EMSUY(Y ) =U(500)* PY(Y ) > U(300)

= 0.999955 * PY(Y ) > 0.997521

PY(Y ) > 0.99757

where PY (Y ) = probability that XY > 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 > 0.99757 and therefore we will protect 11 seats for Y class!

Page 21: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

21

Probability Calculations

• Using similar joint protection logic as before yields the following:

The protection level for Y+B classes satisfies: U(388.89) * PYB(YB ) > U(100)

0.999581 * PYB(YB ) > 0.864665

PYB(YB ) > .865027

Page 22: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

22

Joint Protection for Y+B

• We can calculate that YB = 70 is the largest integer value of YB that gives a probability > 0.865 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: BLY = 150

BLB = 150 - 11 = 139

BLM = 150 - 70 = 80

Page 23: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

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.

Page 24: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

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 127.26, while EMSU generated an average utility of 132.79, for a 4.17% increase!

Page 25: 1 EMSR vs. EMSU: Revenue or Utility? 2003 Agifors Yield Management Study Group Honolulu, Hawaii Larry Weatherford,PhD University of Wyoming.

25

• The average # booked in each class were:– EMSR EMSU

– Y 38.9 32.5– B 49.2 49.5– M 45.5 58.8

– LF 89.0% 93.9%– Yld $290.01 $264.21