Experiments in Economy and Balance: Stands Edition

Airport CEO Support
1

EDIT August 28

Confirming that there is a performance bonus paid out each time you send off a plane on-time. Because it isn’t presented in the economy window, I didn’t notice it nor factor it into my calculations. New calculations on the way :slight_smile:

EDIT August 29

The game-play theory the below analysis is based off of is that “The game economy allows slow progress through the small stand phase, then, upon reaching mediums, allows for an almost unlimited expansion rate.” Calculations were made. It seemed that the game’s ballance really was tipped strongly in favor of medium stands, and that this could be proven empirically.

Airport CEO, it turns out, is really bad at giving accurate and holistic financial data in the various places one might look for it. The calculations were very wrong, due to the omission of a “performance bonus” that the player receives for every on-time turnaround. (this bonus is not shown on hourly reports, even though it can constitute more than half the income of a small stand).

I’m frankly rather demoralized: I thought I’d done a good job relating the numbers to the experiences, and that having done so would enable me to have useful feedback and perspective on the game’s ballance. That is certainly not true of the work that has been done and here presented.

I’m continuing to try to model enough of the game to generate useful numbers, but I’m very uncertain about my odds. I really, really, want to contribute something, especially in light of the work and occasional frustration I’ve now accumulated on the task.

What I’ve got right now is this:

  • There are several places in game where presented economic data is wrong or vital data is missing. This should really be addressed. Three specifics are the omission of performance bonuses from hourly reports, the inconsistent purported upkeep costs of the runway (when selecting it to build, and when clicking on a built one — both are unique and wrong.), and the upkeep cost of grass taxiway. Given the number of errors, I would at minimum do a double check pass over whatever file these values are defined in, and probably develop a function that auto-populates the cost and upkeep fields directly from the definition the game uses internally.
  • The ballance of the game is… weird… inconsistent. For example, a 10x10 pad of taxiway costs more to operate than a medium stand with jetway…
  • The economy works even more simply than I’d postulated. A couple stands pay for infrastructure. Your 3rd or 4th small stand is profitable. Once you’re profitable, you gain capital exponentially. The reason small to medium feels slow is because you’re low on the exponential curve, and you’re squirreling away money for the 1-1.5M investment required for your first medium, as opposed to immediately investing that money in expansion. This sounds like economics 101, and it’ll be an intresting and fun task to ballance.

I’m working on making stand ballance more sensible. I still think that some of the changes I suggested, along with the introduction of sub-medium stands, would smooth the game considerably. As I try to hone in on ballance however, I’m confronted by more and more systems that are not stands that need to be better balanced too. Its complicated. That’s what we love about the genre eh? :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

End of Edits

I grew up playing tycoon games and loving aviation. This game is very special to me and I really want to see it go great places.

I’ve played through the game a few times now, up to the point of having a medium airport. I lose interest once the money is coming in faster than I can spend it. In my first airports, I started with small stands, and basically maxed out on offered flights with these stands before building my first medium. That was the form I most enjoyed the game in. More recently, I’ve figured out that with a loan, I can get a two-medium-stand operation off the ground and profitable pretty easily. I’ve kindof gotten tired of that though, becasue as soon as the nail-biting of “will I build all the things and get my airport open before I’m in the red” is over, my income grows to humongous and there is no more challenge. I could go back to harder difficulty setting that force small stands first, but those early times are long and slow, and the thing I’m striving to be able to afford: the medium stand and all it requires, will basically end my fun once I’ve obtained it.

The progression through the game needs some love.

I’ve put a lot of thought into the problem, ultimately creating a spreadsheet to pull figures from. The solution to a balance problem is an adjustment of numbers, so a conversion between qualitative “this feels wrong” and quantitative methods is essential.

I calculated three figures of merit for a stand:

  • Profit per Day
  • Days to Repay
  • Profit per Day per Million

Profit per Day sums landing fees, parking fees, and passenger handling fees for an average flight, then multiplies by the number of flights in a day given 30 minute spacing: decimals are allowed. The difference between this sum and the daily operating cost is the profit per day. Support infrastructure is deliberately ignored.

Days to Repay divides the stand’s construction cost by its daily profit. My airport building typically happens in waves: build stands, wait to have money for more stands, repeat. In a crude check, a given save game of mine had gone through 4 waves of medium stand construction over 31 game days, so about 8 days between waves. The calculated days to repay for medium stands is 6. Crude, but gets you to the right ballpark. (It will pretty much always miss low, seeing as no account is made of support infrastructure) This figure has been a pretty good predictor of the reality of most of my playthroughs. It becomes most meaningful in the context of comparing different stand types though.

Profit per Day per Million is simply Profit per Day multiplied by the number of stands you could build with 1 mil. The gameplay implication is that if you have 1 million to invest in plopping down stands, you’ll earn Profit per Day per Million by investing it in the given stand type. If one type of stand has a much higher Profit per Day per Million than the others, then you would always choose that stand over a competing stand.

So. Where are we currently?

Base Cost Profit per Day Days to Repay Profit per Day per Million
Small Stand (Grass) 20,000 5,329 3.8 266,429
Small Stand 60,000 5,329 11.3 88,810
Medium Stand 150,000 24,067 6.2 160,444

This confirms pretty much all of our suspicions. Grass stands, with no disadvantages and coming in at 1/3 the cost of their alternatives, are pretty great. People like me who can’t stand grass have a longgg early game, with the concrete under a small stand struggling to pay itself off. Then we hit medium stands, and even before considering the operational perks, find ourselves with a stand almost twice as cost effective as small stands. This means that growth explodes when we hit mediums, and that once we get there, there is absolutely no reason to continue to have small stands at all. Not Ideal.

The nice thing is that now all of our gripes are expressed numerically, which means we can set targets and try to achieve them with the glory of instant calculations in a spreadsheet. In this experiment, I wanted to find a balance point game-pace wise somewhere between the small concrete and medium stand. I also wanted all stand types to be relevant at all points in the game, with no one type being inherently superior to the others. I set a target of 9 days to repay and 110,000 profit per day per million.

I took the liberty of aspirationally road-mapping stats for five stand sizes, if nothing else for added context. These sizes are small, submedium, medium, large, and extra large. I also mapped jetway and non-jetway variants of each. Small stands don’t have a jetway variant and large and extra large can be largely disregarded in their non-jetway form. I first mapped for medium quality, and then used those values to create low (grass) and high quality variants with different ballance goals.

A quick peek at the results for the core of the progression:

Base Cost Profit per Day Days to Repay Profit per Day per Million
Small - Ground 52,500 6,148 8.5 117,102
Sub Medium - Ground 110,000 12,910 8.5 117,364
Medium - Ground 145,000 16,696 8.7 115,145
Medium - Jetway 175,000 19,863 8.8 113,505
Large- Jetway 350,000 37,506 9.3 107,159
Extra Large- Jetway 600,000 62,573 9.6 104,288

I’m very happy with this. The game starts with somewhat more manageable small stands, and progresses smoothly into the sub medium size I want so dearly. From there, one can push a little further to medium ground based stands, or push hard for the jetways, or viably combine the approaches. Medium to large is significant but not monumental, and the extra-larges are no joke. The progression slowly yields slightly longer sober-ups between building sprees, and big aircraft are operationally easier with less flights in total, but have a slightly lower theoretical profitability ceiling.

This is one of many ways to set up the progression, and its play testing that would determine if its a good way. The obvious counter point to this progression is one where each tier is significantly harder to reach than the last. I’m not saying that this is the end all way to ballance a game, just that this seems like one good thing to try.

This is the conclusion of the post. The remainder is a deeper dive into the numbers.

Figures for the game in its current state

Base Cost Upkeep/Day Turnaround Time Parking Fee Landing Fee Average PAX PAX Fee
Small - Grass 20,000 500 3 hours 100 400 5 15
Small 60,000 500 3 hours 100 400 5 15
Medium 150,000 1000 4 hours 200 1500 80 15

Proposed Figures

SMALL Base Cost Upkeep/Day Turnaround Time Parking Fee Landing Fee Average PAX PAX Fee
LQ, Ground 15,750 1200 4 hours 60 500 5 10
MQ, Ground 52,500 435 3 hours 120 500 5 10
HQ, Ground 67,500 365 3 hours 120 500 5 10
SUB-MEDIUM Base Cost Upkeep/Day Turnaround Time Parking Fee Landing Fee Average PAX PAX Fee
LQ, Ground 35,000 2250 4 hours 15 minutes 80 1000 25 10
MQ, Ground 110,000 650 3 hours 30 minutes 160 1000 35 10
HQ, Ground 145,000 525 3 hours 30 minutes 160 1000 35 10
MQ, Jetway 135,000 800 3 hours 160 1000 40 10
HQ, Jetway 170,000 700 3 hours 160 1000 40 10
MEDIUM Base Cost Upkeep/Day Turnaround Time Parking Fee Landing Fee Average PAX PAX Fee
LQ, Ground 60,000 3250 5 hours 30 minutes 105 1500 50 10
MQ, Ground 145,000 800 4 hours 30 minutes 210 1500 60 10
HQ, Ground 185,000 725 4 hours 30 minutes 210 1500 60 10
MQ, Jetway 175,000 1150 4 hours 210 1500 80 10
HQ, Jetway 220,000 945 4 hours 210 1500 80 10
LARGE Base Cost Upkeep/Day Turnaround Time Parking Fee Landing Fee Average PAX PAX Fee
MQ, Jetway 350,000 2700 4 hours 45 minutes 420 3500 165 10
HQ, Jetway 435,000 2100 4 hours 45 minutes 420 3500 165 10
EXTRA-LARGE Base Cost Upkeep/Day Turnaround Time Parking Fee Landing Fee Average PAX PAX Fee
MQ, Jetway 600,000 5500 5 hours 600 5000 380 10
HQ, Jetway 750,000 4500 5 hours 600 5000 380 10

Extended Results of Proposal

SMALL Base Cost Profit/Day Days to Repay Profit per Day per Million
LQ, Ground 15,750 3,280 4.8 208,254
MQ, Ground 52,500 6,148 8.5 117,102
HQ, Ground 67,500 6,218 10.9 92,116
SUB-MEDIUM Base Cost Profit/Day Days to Repay Profit per Day per Million
LQ, Ground 35,000 7,047 5.0 201,338
MQ, Ground 110,000 12,910 8.5 117,364
HQ, Ground 145,000 13,035 11.1 89,897
MQ, Jetway 135,000 14,834 9.1 109,884
HQ, Jetway 170,000 14,934 11.4 87,849
MEDIUM Base Cost Profit/Day Days to Repay Profit per Day per Million
LQ, Ground 60,000 9,060 6.6 151,000
MQ, Ground 145,000 16,696 8.7 115,145
HQ, Ground 185,000 16,771 11.0 90,654
MQ, Jetway 175,000 19,863 8.8 113,505
HQ, Jetway 220,000 20,068 11.0 91,220
LARGE Base Cost Profit/Day Days to Repay Profit per Day per Million
MQ, Jetway 350,000 37,506 9.3 107,159
HQ, Jetway 435,000 38,106 11.4 87,599
EXTRA-LARGE Base Cost Profit/Day Days to Repay Profit per Day per Million
MQ, Jetway 600,000 62,573 9.6 104,288
HQ, Jetway 750,000 63,573 11.8 84,764

Extended Discussion

I took a lot of liberties designing this quiver of stand types. I also assumed some functionality that doesn’t explicitly exist yet.

I reduced the passenger handling fee to $10 and increased small plane landing and parking fees to help smooth the early game when you have some planes landing with 4 PAX and others with 90+.

I tried to give each quality tier a niche. Grass stands are dirt cheap (heh) and can multiply themselves quickly, but perform strikingly poorly compared to tarmac: costs a lot to maintain and you can’t charge much to park there. Medium quality is optimal for an airport seeking to build a stable income for expansion-funding. High quality is a serious investment with a slow enough return that using it isn’t just a given. A flaw: an under-utilized grass stand is going to suck the life out of an airport. realistically it wouldn’t cost so much to maintain the grass if there weren’t so darn many airplanes rolling all over it. A system that adjusts operating costs based on utilization would really help keep players who intuit their way through from getting wrecked by maintenance costs that don’t make sense when they don’t have flights yet.

I made turnaround times stand-type dependent: a 737 on the grass turns slower than one with a jetway. Helped me balance the numbers a little better. This is itself a feature not yet implemented. Could be a 30-minute project or a 30-hour project for all I know, so theres a call to be made there.

You’ll notice that within a stand size I have variable “average pax” values. A flight offer can already veto a certain stand, but currently they only veto wrong-sized ones. In my perfect world, airline and aircraft influence the requirement for tarmac and jetway. A prestigious airline won’t park their 757 in the mud, but you can probably send the budget 737 flight there. Hopefully other systems are refined such that I can’t just build a sprawling empire of 50 remote grass 737 stands and fill them all… supply and demand something something.

Resting thoughts

I could have done some napkin math and simply suggested some tweaks to the default fees and upkeeps. I was comprehensive because I’ve designed a game before, and napkin math only really works the first time. As soon as you add or modify anything you mess your napkin math up, but you’ve long tossed that napkin, so you put a band-aid on the imbalance and move on and after 50 repetitions you can’t even remember how the game was supposed to play in the first place. Context, big picture, matters a lot. Will we even have these 5 stand tiers one day? I have no idea! but I can’t design anything with any meaning without some sort of context.

This is obviously a first draft set of numbers. If there’s real interest I’ll happily polish the thing up a bit, taking feedback of course.

17 Likes
2

Wow, must’ve taken some time to figure this all out! :smiley: I think the devs should really take a look at this.
Just a question: are things like fuel revenue and shops included? GA aircraft on grass stands probably don’t spend much on fuel and they don’t give any sort of customers for the shops.

1 Like
3

Nope; these are excluded as they typically make up less than 15% of my net income and their relation to any particular stand is hard to pin down. :slight_smile:

Edit:

Worth noting that the upkeep and construction for the other bits is also not included… so the runway, the terminal, the atc… There’s a lot that those “profit margins” have to cover for. The values are meaningful in that they compare the margins on a bare stand if you assume you’ve got the infrastructure to support it, so you can make an apples to apples comparison of different stand types. The “Days to Repay” stat also happens to follow my building patterns pretty closely, which is cool but incidental.

What I can’t easily quantify are practicality things. Sure, if you sink a million into small grass stands you’ll be bringing in that 200k per day… if you can effectively manage the 63 stands you just built…

1 Like
4

Great read, and definitely not napkin math heh! I too wonder what the devs think about it…

The tiered progression of the stands could be perfectly combined with your financial stand adjustments when taking procurement/research into account, or other prerequirements (such as x number of stands, check ins, staff, airport terminal area). However, that’d also slow down the game, don’t you think?

5

Seem’s I’m not the only one that does time and motion evaluations on the simulations.

Some really interesting aspects in here, and aircraft are divided in to six categorise A–F based on wingspan. ICAO Aerodrome Reference Code | SKYbrary Aviation Safety that then dictate stand sizes. I hope all six sizes will eventually get implemented.

My only other though is that small stands should not be able to generate nearly as much as something with 150 PAX on it. But yes, very interesting read.

6

Thanks for this extensive overview and your time an effort you’ve put into it! :+1: I assume personnel and vehicle cost is also not taken into account.

Worth noting that the upkeep and construction for the other bits is also not included… so the runway, the terminal, the atc… There’s a lot that those “profit margins” have to cover for. The values are meaningful in that they compare the margins on a bare stand if you assume you’ve got the infrastructure to support it, so you can make an apples to apples comparison of different stand types. The “Days to Repay” stat also happens to follow my building patterns pretty closely, which is cool but incidental.

Would also be interesting to see how remote stands will ‘compete’ with terminal stands as they do not need terminal space, but then the ‘external stand’ cost also need to be calculated as described above.

Could be an interesting spreadsheet in the end! :relaxed:

1 Like
7

757 is a Code D plane and ACEO crams it into Code C, something I’ve complained about on Discord many times. And by the looks of it the 767 is going to be a “large” plane.

Although OP’s Average Passengers stats seems to cut Code E into half - lower capacity Code E planes like the A330 and 787-8 would belong in a large stand, while the 787-10, 777, A350-1000 would go to an extra large stand, so there’s already a difference within the same family.

And it seems to me that a problem with the approach used here is that different airlines can request different turnaround times, with a factor in the payment you get being how quickly your airport can turnaround the plane and get it in the air again, wheels down to wheels up. Jetway usage would be an additional surcharge.

To maximize the amount of cash you get, since landing fees and jetway fees are constant, you’d need to find ways to keep stand utilization high and upkeep costs low (upkeep being a linear function of stand utilization), thus presenting a challenge. Basically, something like this:

(BasePayment * TimeOnStand) + JetwayCharge + LandingFee + HandlingFees + PerfBonus

Should be self explanatory, but anyway:

  • BasePayment would be the parking fee per hour for a given size of stand
  • TimeOnStand would be the amount of time the plane actually is on the stand, from when chocks are applied to pushback
  • JetwayCharge and LandingFee are surcharges for using jetways and runways, respectively, and differ according to type of plane
  • HandlingFees are fees charged for baggage handling, stair trucks, air conditioning, etc. Airlines like Ryanair use both front and back doors, so they might want a jetway to the front door and stairs to the back door, for example
  • PerfBonus could be a performance bonus paid for ensuring ontime/early departures, or short layovers, or a better quality stand, etc.

A possible solution for high quality stands would be that they’re the only ones with fuel pits, which would be a much more significant investment (double the cost of medium quality stands? triple?) since you don’t need to wait for the fuel truck - a ramp agent can operate the fuel hydrant cart much like the current air-conditioning/cleaning trucks. Thus, while you no longer earn the fuel truck fee, the time saved should allow you to schedule shorter layovers and thus process more planes, earning more LandingFee and PerfBonus.

4 Likes
8

I haven’t had time to read it all yet, but definitely an interesting read so far.

Since Olof and Fredrik are at Gamescom this week (and I’ll be there tomorrow) I’m not sure if they can reply this week, but I have atleast made them aware of this topic, I’m sure it will interest them as well :wink:

4 Likes
9

Will give this a proper read next week, seems like a really good effort! :slight_smile:

4 Likes
10

Its worth it believe me haha :slight_smile:

1 Like
11

Not sure if you got what I was trying to say in my reply to rubble, but oh well.

The game starts with somewhat more manageable small stands, and progresses smoothly into the sub medium size I want so dearly. From there, one can push a little further to medium ground based stands, or push hard for the jetways, or viably combine the approaches. Medium to large is significant but not monumental, and the extra-larges are no joke. The progression slowly yields slightly longer sober-ups between building sprees, and big aircraft are operationally easier with less flights in total, but have a slightly lower theoretical profitability ceiling.

I don’t get what you mean by this. A small stand is 5 by 5, a medium stand 10 by 10. So to decide when to “upgrade” if I read you correctly, you’d need to decide when you can afford to have 2 small gates (since 5 x 2 = 10) out of service while you demolish it and replace with a single medium stand. And also, whether there’s enough space to extend the stand into the taxiway area behind it, or into the terminal area in front. That opportunity cost would basically add on to where your breakeven point is.

More often than not this usually means people build new extensions designed around medium stands, while keeping the already-existing small stands in operation. Taken to its logical conclusion, a typical player’s airport would start looking like a golden spiral, with a tiny little terminal for small stands, a bigger one for medium, so on and so forth.

This usually leads to inefficient airfield designs, which brings me on to my second point -

Profit per Day multiplied by the number of stands you could build with 1 mil. The gameplay implication is that if you have 1 million to invest in plopping down stands, you’ll earn Profit per Day per Million by investing it in the given stand type. If one type of stand has a much higher Profit per Day per Million than the others, then you would always choose that stand over a competing stand.

The way I see it, no two stands are equal. Stand A, located right next to the runway entrance is going to be more efficient than Stand B, located at the end of a cul-de-sac. Thus, you may be able to schedule more planes into Stand A, but lesser into Stand B since you have longer taxi times by virtue of it being less convenient to access. Or even given the same 4-hour on-ground time which would otherwise pay the same, you run a higher risk of being penalized by the airline for late departures when using Stand B compared to stand A for the same reason. Consequently, your Profit per Day can already differ across two stands, everything else equal but location.

This thus means you can’t ignore the effect supporting infrastructure has when comparing two different stands in two different locations. The only fair comparison would be across stand types (grass, concrete, asphalt) and whether the stand has an attached jetway. But size and location have to remain constants.

(of course, you could compare a cul de sac of 8 small stands to a large one with a “Profit per Tile” mechanism, but that’s really dependent on terminal design again)

The gameplay challenge you’re looking for, to me, would be to how to most effectively design your terminal and airfield to move as much people as possible in the shortest time, factoring in the kind of planes you get, and whether you’re willing to eat the opportunity cost of also having to substantially modify your terminal and airfield to accommodate larger stand sizes.

I really think ACEO is far too situation-dependent to be able to process things in terms of absolute numbers, which is why I proposed a dynamic system of multipliers. While there would be nothing stopping you from building a field of 50 grass medium stands, it depends on how you serve it. A single taxiway, with planes pushing back into the takeoff queue? At peak hours that’ll hurt your performance bonuses and ratings. Or parking lot style? That might earn you more…

1 Like
12

“This means that growth explodes when we hit mediums, and that once we get there, there is absolutely no reason to continue to have small stands at all.”

Your calculations occurred to me too, I have run a Hard game with 2 medium stands as a start and got the airport going without small stands at all. So, consider this confirmed! :slight_smile:.

Secondly, just create a lot of shops that print money ;).

When booting a game up in a new game version, I used to build a bunch of small stands (20 or something), then let the game run for a few hours; and then I could build any airport I wanted.

13

I’ve been reading the responses I’ve been getting here and continuing to refine my numbers. Most significantly, I caved and accepted that only having two sizes above medium was insufficient… I now am road-mapping a 6 stand baseline… not that it matters too much - speculation and all.

Anyhoo…

Input:

Stands%20Input
Stands%20Input623×740 34.5 KB

Output:

Stands%20Results
Stands%20Results622×737 39.9 KB

Given:

PAX
PAX Handling Fee $10
PARKING Grass Tarmac
Small $60 $120
Sub-Medium $80 $160
Medium $105 $210
Sub-Large $210 $420
Large $275 $550
Extra-Large $375 $750
LANDING Any
Small $500
Sub-Medium $1000
Medium $1500
Sub-Large $3500
Large $4500
Extra-Large $6750

The most common sentiment in the responses I’ve been getting has been that I fail to account for enough factors, some even arguing that modeling is impossible. Real world decisions in real airports are made based on models, just far better ones than mine. I could improve my model, but to do so meaningfully would require statistical analysis: my intuition is not going to be able to tell you how retail sales are effected by stand type or how the difficulty of placing a big stand weighs against the additional traffic put on the airport by delivering an equivalent number of PAX to a smaller stand. I want to be 100% clear that I do not think my model is perfect. I think it is good in a relative sense, but not an absolute one. If 4 new stand types were released tomorrow and the 6 types updated to use my ballance calculations I would have every expectation that these would need later refinement. Starting with a model though, even a crude one, is better than having no starting point at all.

P.S. — A year from now when there are a couple more stand types I’d be really interested in the statistics needed to make conclusions about ballance. This would involve collecting a statistically significant sample of user made airports to compare profitability and income sources. Big job.

P.P.S. — Hey devs, I’m happy to have created some interest in this discussion from your team, look forward to continuing this conversation. Great work so far!

4 Likes
14

The formula you express here is the exact formula already used, save for the jetway charge being baked into the landing fee. I overlooked the perf bonus in my calculations: only ten minutes ago I found it while playing ACEO. (green number in the flight planner by each flight; gets reduced if delays occur). Otherwise though, we’re suggesting the same thing. I’m simply trying to model the very basic behavior of the system in a first order approximation. I’m doing so successfully it would seem; my numbers bear a strong relationship with the kinds of qualitative experiences you’re describing, given the precondition that the player has handled the logistics well (stands fully utilized, flights on-time).

The jetway charge is a substantive difference in our approaches… really this is a situation where, if the game is developed so that different airlines have jetway preferences, then a jetway charge needs to be implemented, while if the decision is left to the player (obviously within limits: airlines don’t like unloading 777’s via airstairs) then the incentives of faster turnaround and higher satisfaction with a jetway ballance the system sufficiently without adding another fee layer. I like the second option for gameplay purposes, but I get it if realism wins out and we take first option. either way, not too difficult to adjust the model.

Also, thanks for the thoughts on stand sizes: I’ve reassessed and come to the conclusion that six stand sized are necessitated.

Edit: After taking some time to figure out how the feature worked; I did a quick re run of the numbers given the performance bonus currently attached to each flight. Oye. My carefully balanced… thing… becomes quite a mess. The current performance bonus has a lot of things it doesn’t factor in, so assessing how best to adjust this bonus in parallel with a stand re-ballance would be a worthy endeavor. To put some numbers out there, on a small stand, up to ~60% of the stand’s income is the performance bonus. On a medium: 12%. like I said. oye.

15

This topic was automatically closed 31 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.