A little update on this topic. According to the article ”Super Streamliners: Dazzling passenger trains from the classic era of rail travel" by Joe Welsh from Classic Trains Magazine, the author mentioned Milwaukee Road Hiawatha "Carrying over 800 passengers a day for three years, the Hiawathas by 1938 had become some of the most famous and successful trains in the world. They consistently ranked second in earnings among all U.S. passenger trains, behind only Southern Pacific’s beautiful Coast Daylight between Los Angeles and San Francisco, also steam-powered."
Although the author didn't provide too many detailed figures; "second in earning" could have different meanings, but I inclined to believe it means net income. It is an important info as reference at least. It is a little bit surprise for me to know that the NYC's 20th Century wasn't the top ranked trains in this case, but It is not hard to understand a short distance coach trains earned more money than a long-distance all-Pullman train.
The full article can be downloaded from the Classic Trains "Free Download" section:
http://ctr.trains.com/rapid/2017/08/super-streamliners
http://ctr.trains.com/photo-of-the-day/2008/11/profile-in-speed#45
Jones 3D Modeling Club https://www.youtube.com/Jones3DModelingClub
Another reference about the grossing of the 20th Century Limited by Classic Trains:
http://ctr.trains.com/railroad-reference/great-passenger-trains/2013/05/nyc-articles
In the articles "The Twentieth Century", from July 1942 Trains magazine, the first subheader says "40-year-old first class extra fare train has earned 150 million dollars for New York Central” In the article, it stated that the 150 million dollars was gross revenue, exclusive of dining-car receipts. This imply the average annual gross revenue of the trump card of NYC by 1942 was $3,750,000 per year which would cost $57,342,666.42 in 2017. The demise of this named train in early 50s probably didn't change the fact that Century was the highest grossing train IN America or maybe even in the world.
Searching of the 2nd highest grossing train will continue.
CSSHEGEWISCH In a similar fashion, it was determined that the "California Zephyr" would show red ink on its balance sheet even with a full load.
In a similar fashion, it was determined that the "California Zephyr" would show red ink on its balance sheet even with a full load.
Not sure about the "California Zephyr" but I have data of SP's Morning Daylight in hand: total gross revenues was $ 2,973,930 (1948) , expense was $1,182,275, operation loss of Dining Car was $191,625, thus net revenues was $1,600,030 (53.8% of gross revenues) which was $4.65 per train-mile.
The 1968 Trains article on the Chessie mentioned that the load factor would have to have been 125% for the train to break even. This was ca 1948.
Thanks for the suggestion, Overmod. Title updated.
Jones1945 Would you mind providing a meaningful title for this post?
Needs nothing more than to substitute something like 'highest grossing' for that word 'profitable' that means something different from what you mean it to mean.
Overmod You need to change the title a little more. Profit and 'gross revenue' are only peripherally linked ... and some of the expenses of the Twentieth Century Limited (as Beebe indicated*, always spell out The Name, just like this, even if some of its own drumheads abbreviated it) were known to be more extravagant than other Steel Fleet trains ... take the flower bill as a case in point.
You need to change the title a little more. Profit and 'gross revenue' are only peripherally linked ... and some of the expenses of the Twentieth Century Limited (as Beebe indicated*, always spell out The Name, just like this, even if some of its own drumheads abbreviated it) were known to be more extravagant than other Steel Fleet trains ... take the flower bill as a case in point.
Thank you for the suggestion, Overmod. Would you mind providing a meaningful title for this post? What I am trying is to find out is if there was another single named train's gross revenue ever beaten the record set by the 20th Century in 1928 or any other years.
If I replace it to "net income", this post will probably sink to a place even deeper than the wreck of the RMS Titanic. If I replace ’gross revenue' to “2nd most popular train”, every forum member would have a different answer mainly base on personal preference……
What you're asking is how much money the railroad made off the train, not how much it spent to create buzz in general at a cost that didn't have to be justified to stakeholders or whatever. And I suspect that even in 1928 that number might have been higher for less extravagant trains, perhaps including some on the NYC itself.
Reminds me of what William H. Vanderbilt said surrounding the 'public be damned' quote -- he'd really prefer operating nothing but relatively slow trains, and not compete with other roads just to go faster, to maximize the revenue to the stockholders. Just a little while later Daniels came into his own and revolutionized how things were done...
CSSHEGEWISCH You provided us with the gross revenues, please provide us with the gross expenses, solely related expenses will do.
You provided us with the gross revenues, please provide us with the gross expenses, solely related expenses will do.
BaltACD Are we actually speaking profit or gross revenues?
Are we actually speaking profit or gross revenues?
cx500And how many fully allocated costs were considered?
With life and Tax codes being simpler - I suspect, but don't know that the accountings used in those days were much more straight forward than such accounting is today.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
And how many fully allocated costs were considered?
Thank you, rcdrye. I do believe the 2nd most profitable train would be a train of Santa Fe or the most popular train serving Chicago to Westcoast. Without years of studies, it is quite difficult for me to determine which one was the #2 though. I guess If I ask this question 40 years ago in a Railroad Club, I might got the answer more easily.
Source: Streamliner Memories
Santa Fe's El Capitan was a contender, running full during most seasons (though combined with the Super Chief) and running as a separate train in peak seasons. It was important enough to rate new equipment (hi-level coaches) in 1964.
Miningman Well somebody was #2 but it may never be known. UP's City of Los Angeles had its moment in the light as did Santa Fe's Hollywood star filled Super Chief. The California Zephyer briefly. Hiawatha's definitely very popular and had their day. The Panama?, but not sustained.
Well somebody was #2 but it may never be known. UP's City of Los Angeles had its moment in the light as did Santa Fe's Hollywood star filled Super Chief. The California Zephyer briefly. Hiawatha's definitely very popular and had their day. The Panama?, but not sustained.
BaltACD Don't have the answer. Would be interesting to see the most profitable trains from the Pullman Company perspective.
Don't have the answer.
Would be interesting to see the most profitable trains from the Pullman Company perspective.
Even something obscure as Canadian Pacific's Chicago Express Montreal/Toronto -Chicago was always packed with businessmen, never tailed off and huge howls of protest when CPR cancelled it in 1960. It always ran with 2 full sections minimum, sometimes 4 or 5...lots of parlour cars! CN/GT never had the panache to match and replace the alternative competitive service, it remained pedestrian.
Nothing matched the 20th Century with its red carpet, mystique and legends. Perhaps the Super Chief but only for a brief time.
Probably 6 of the top 10 revenue producers were NYC trains.
...then came the airlines, Interstate highway system, and Amtrak...?
(Wiki)
TOOL: The Inflation Calculator https://westegg.com/inflation/
Potential Candidates ( will update constantly) :
(To be continue)
Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!
Get the Classic Trains twice-monthly newsletter