Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Mergers?

9479 views
41 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Monday, March 12, 2018 6:57 AM

NWP SWP

I keep hearing about the C&O/B&O "merger" how did that one work?

 

In 1987 the C&O/B&O merged.Then  few months later C&O was merged into CSX Transportation.From 1960 to 1987 C&O controlled the B&O by owning 51% of B&O stock.

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 13,776 posts
Posted by wjstix on Monday, March 12, 2018 9:22 AM

When did the "Chessie System" start, with the engines all having the same decoration but sub-lettering for the different railroad (B&O, WM etc.)? Must have been around 1970?

As far as mergers being difficult in the first half of the 20th century, I'd say that it apparently was easier for one railroad to buy another - or more likely, buy a controlling interest of it's stock - than for two railroads to merge into a new railroad. I think that's where you got the "systems" like the New York Central System, where there was a New York Central railroad which controlled through ownership or lease a number of other railroads like Michigan Central.

Stix
  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Monday, March 12, 2018 10:02 AM

wjstix
When did the "Chessie System" start, with the engines all having the same decoration but sub-lettering for the different railroad (B&O, WM etc.)? Must have been around 1970?

1971 was the first year.

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

  • Member since
    February 2008
  • From: Potomac Yard
  • 2,761 posts
Posted by NittanyLion on Monday, March 12, 2018 1:05 PM

wjstix

As far as mergers being difficult in the first half of the 20th century, I'd say that it apparently was easier for one railroad to buy another - or more likely, buy a controlling interest of it's stock - than for two railroads to merge into a new railroad. I think that's where you got the "systems" like the New York Central System, where there was a New York Central railroad which controlled through ownership or lease a number of other railroads like Michigan Central.

 

You also ended up with things like the B&O being under PRR control, which kept the B&O from becoming a stronger player in the NYC market, or N&W being controlled by the PRR...whose physical plant is now owned by the N&W successor. 

  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Collinwood, Ohio, USA
  • 16,233 posts
Posted by gmpullman on Monday, March 12, 2018 3:45 PM

wjstix
When did the "Chessie System" start, with the engines all having the same decoration but sub-lettering for the different railroad (B&O, WM etc.)? Must have been around 1970?

The C&O annual meeting in Cleveland, Ohio August 31, 1972.

 Chessie_news by Edmund, on Flickr

 

 1977_8-72 by Edmund, on Flickr

 Chessie_news_6 by Edmund, on Flickr

Regards, Ed

  • Member since
    January 2017
  • 2,980 posts
Posted by NWP SWP on Monday, March 12, 2018 4:15 PM

How did Chessie pull that off? They half merged as I understand it?

Steve

If everything seems under control, you're not going fast enough!

  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Collinwood, Ohio, USA
  • 16,233 posts
Posted by gmpullman on Monday, March 12, 2018 4:24 PM

NWP SWP
How did Chessie pull that off? They half merged as I understand it?

It was done through a stock swap by a vote of the board-of-directors in 1963. Not a half-merger. The corporate names of the Baltimore And Ohio and Chesapeake And Ohio Railway Company remained unchanged.

Many corporations have a "Service Mark" to identify them in the public realm. The corporate identity remains the same.

The SOO Line and Cotton Belt pulled off a similar move many years before.

Cheers! Ed

  • Member since
    January 2017
  • 2,980 posts
Posted by NWP SWP on Monday, March 12, 2018 4:58 PM

So could I do something similar to that with my railroad?

Steve

If everything seems under control, you're not going fast enough!

  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Monday, March 12, 2018 6:04 PM

NWP SWP

How did Chessie pull that off? They half merged as I understand it?

 

 

C&O controlled the B&O and the B&O  controlled the WM.. There was no Chessie System until 1971 and the Chessie System was the parent company.

The only  Chessie until 1971 was the cat a mascot of the C&O.

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Collinwood, Ohio, USA
  • 16,233 posts
Posted by gmpullman on Monday, March 12, 2018 6:37 PM

NWP SWP
So could I do something similar to that with my railroad?

There are dozens of ways corporations can choose to structure their ownership.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mergers_and_acquisitions

Entire books have been written (I suggest The Invisible Giants by Herbert H. Harwood, Jr.; The Men Who Loved Trains by Rush Loving, Jr. or The Wreck Of The Penn Central by Joseph R. Daughton) about the various ways that capitalists have re-shuffeled the deck when it comes to finance and Empire Building.

Often times a holding company, which is what Chessie System actually was before the actual "Family-Lines" and CSX corporation came into being.

The formulation of Conrail out of the remains of Penn Central and Erie-Lackawanna is another subject that can be devoted to entire books.

Sometimes a company will buy enough stock to have a "Controlling Interest" in a company. It may take 51% or a majority of the shares. Stock options, LBOs, consolodations or creations of entirely new corporations are just some of the methods.

The Staggers Act of 1980 changed the whole M&A picture for railroads of today.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staggers_Rail_Act

You can choose any way you wish to finance your fictional railroad.

Cheers! Ed

  • Member since
    January 2017
  • 2,980 posts
Posted by NWP SWP on Monday, March 12, 2018 7:01 PM

So I could have it where the NWP-SWP bought majority shares of the 8 roads and thereby had control of them, the NWP-SWP left the roads with their own identities but also had a new unified system wide service the NWP and the SWP. Could that be plausible?

Steve

If everything seems under control, you're not going fast enough!

  • Member since
    November 2006
  • From: Northeast
  • 746 posts
Posted by GraniteRailroader on Monday, March 12, 2018 7:12 PM

Eight railroads?

One thing to consider, is where did the money and substantial investment come from to form this new entity?

Similar to current day NWP operations, I'd consider a "Rail Authority" approach, where the railroads had ceased operations and the new company took over the management and operation of abandoned lines. In the final days of the NWP and SWP gasping for breath, the new authority purchases both corporate entities, and operates the NWP and SWP as their own roads, but the rail authority is the corporate figure head for both.

Both the NWP and SWP retain their own identity, but the "Pacific Railroad Authority" could also have it's own equipment.

Sometimes re-molding history, without completely abandoning the frame work that actually happened can be a good start to having a plausible story.

 

This space reserved for SpaceMouse's future presidential candidacy advertisements

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!