Trains.com

Is it over? CP drops bid for NS?

2195 views
9 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • 1,568 posts
Is it over? CP drops bid for NS?
Posted by CandOforprogress2 on Tuesday, April 12, 2016 12:48 PM

Now can the CP get back to fixing its railroad and its operating ratio.

  • Member since
    February 2003
  • From: Guelph, Ontario
  • 4,819 posts
Posted by Ulrich on Tuesday, April 12, 2016 4:29 PM

In my opinion CP is just posturing.. they're still very interested. It seems a bit strange to me that just a week after NS stated they would at least sit down with CP to discuss, CP suddenly pulls the plug.  It's like the dating game.. if you want to get the girl you play hard to get... works in other situations  as well. If you're too aggessive you repel your object of interest. I wouldn't be a bit surprised now if CP goes after CSX again. Something's cookin, that much is almost certain..

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Tuesday, April 12, 2016 4:45 PM

I don't know Hunter Harrison well enough to even begin to guess what makes him tick, but I suspect the man's determined to build a monument to himself, one way or another.

And the preferred monument's a true transcontinental railroad, which no-one's managed to do in this country.

  • Member since
    September 2013
  • 2,505 posts
Posted by caldreamer on Tuesday, April 12, 2016 4:53 PM

It was not NS or CP.  The justice department killed the deal.  Even if NS and CP they agreed to the deal it was dead.

  • Member since
    December 2009
  • 1,751 posts
Posted by dakotafred on Tuesday, April 12, 2016 5:01 PM

Firelock76

I don't know Hunter Harrison well enough to even begin to guess what makes him tick, but I suspect the man's determined to build a monument to himself, one way or another.

And the preferred monument's a true transcontinental railroad, which no-one's managed to do in this country.

 

Nor would it have been done in either country with a 2-country NS-CP.

To C&O: Hunter has already polished CP's operating ratio to a high sheen. That's why it's time for new worlds.

  • Member since
    February 2016
  • From: Texas
  • 1,552 posts
Posted by PJS1 on Tuesday, April 12, 2016 6:27 PM

CandOforprogress2

Now can the CP get back to fixing its railroad and its operating ratio. 

Business performance is measured by many variables.  And almost every business can improve its performance.  But CP is not doing badly compared to its peers. 

The Twelve Month Operating Margin (OM) for CP as of March 31, 2016, was 38.5 per cent compared to an industry average of 34.9 per cent.  CN topped the list with an OM of 41.6 per cent, while NS was last with an OM of 28.3 per cent.  CP outperformed all of the carriers except CN.

For the same period CP had a Return on Equity (RE) of 36.4 per cent compared to an average for comparable carriers, excluding BNSF, of 23.3 per cent.  It turned in the best RE number while KCS had the worst RE at 12.5 per cent.  CN's RE was 32.4 per cent.

The Return on Investment (RI) for these railroads averaged 8.9 per cent for the period.  CN turned in the best performance with a RI of 14.5 per cent, followed by CP with 11.3 per cent.  NS had the worst performance with an RI of 6.6 per cent. 

 

Rio Grande Valley, CFI,CFII

  • Member since
    January 2015
  • 2,678 posts
Posted by kgbw49 on Tuesday, April 12, 2016 7:24 PM

CSX first quarter 2016 performance tanked big time.

  • Member since
    August 2006
  • From: South Dakota
  • 1,592 posts
Posted by Dakguy201 on Tuesday, April 12, 2016 7:54 PM

In the mail today was a proxy solicitation from CP for the NS annual meeting.  They are taking no position on the reelection of NS directors but urging a "for" vote on the resolution to enter into negotiations.  I think the proxy solicitation company is somewhat behind current developments.

  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: South Central,Ks
  • 7,170 posts
Posted by samfp1943 on Tuesday, April 12, 2016 8:43 PM

caldreamer

"It was not NS or CP.  The justice department killed the deal.  Even if NS and CP they agreed to the deal it was dead."

 

To caldreamer's point:

Start with an article from the TRAINSNewswire of April 8,2016:

"UPDATED: Justice department against CP merger-trust proposal"

"Government lawyer asks Surface Transportation Board to review potential consequences of a merger before CP 'starts scrambling the eggs'" By Bill Stephens  Linked @ http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2016/04/08-justice-department

FTA:"...WASHINGTON — Canadian Pacific’s merger ambitions have been dealt a potentially fatal blow.

The Justice Department today urged the Surface Transportation Board to reject the unusual merger structure CP plans to use for its proposed acquisition of Norfolk Southern.

“Canadian Pacific’s voting trust proposal would compromise Norfolk Southern’s independence and effectively combine the two railroads prior to completion of the STB’s review,” said Assistant Attorney General Bill Baer of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division. “That makes no sense. We urge the STB to preserve its ability to review the impact of the proposal on competition and consumers before Canadian Pacific starts scrambling the eggs.”..."

And then the folowing from a RailwayAge article of March 10,2016:

"CP+NS: STB declaratory order proceedings under way "       Written by 

linked @ http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/regulatory/cp-ns-stb-declaratory-order-proceedings-under-way.htmlhttp://www.railwayage.com/index.php/regulatory/cp-ns-stb-declaratory-order-proceedings-under-way.html

 

FTA:"...On March 7, 2016, the Transportation Communications Union/IAM (TCU/IAM) requested that the Board provide interested parties 45 days to reply to the March 2 petition.[2] Also on March 7, 2016, CSX Corporation requested that the Board deny the March 2 petition, or, should the Board proceed, issue a procedural schedule that would allow parties 30 days from publication to submit comments and 15 days for the simultaneous submission of reply comments. On March 9, 2016, the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes Division/IBT, Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen, and International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers/Mechanical Division jointly submitted a reply requesting until April 1, 2016, to reply to the March 2 petition and that no replies to replies be permitted. By comment filed on March 9, 2016, the Transportation Division of the Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers Union joined in TCU/IAM’s request for at least 45 days to reply to the March 2 petition.

Replies will be due by April 8, 2016, and should address the merits of CPRL’s petition. CPRL will be permitted to file a rebuttal by April 13, 2016. Under the circumstances, this schedule will provide a sufficient opportunity for interested persons to present their views on the issues raised and for CPRL to respond..."

The articles seem to suggest that the involved regulatory authorities were taking a stance against the merger, and the merger was going to face some pretty stiff opposition from the regulators...My 2 Cents

IMHO,EHH was just reading the tea leaves, and will start looking for another 'target of opportunity'.Pirate

 

 


 

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • 1,568 posts
Posted by CandOforprogress2 on Wednesday, April 13, 2016 10:49 AM

I did not see my shares of NS go up as happens during a takeover attempt. Pershing Capital did not get the results they wanted from stirring the pot.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy