Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by PNWRMNM Dave, Clearly the BNSF did not think the traffic was "good money" for them. Your third party logistic outfit probably used some sort of standard cost estimation program. I suspect it grossly underestimated terminal costs, which as I tried to illustrate dominate the economics of this move. If you were running the terminals at the Port, and were anywhere near capacity, you would sure want to be paid well for your lifts. Remember you are competing for space with transcontinental traffic. Not taking low paying short haul business to keep capacity for the transcontinental traffic makes all kinds of sense to me. When you are capacity constrained, you must be very careful about what business you handle. I suspect that and the drays is what killed your deal, not the line haul costs. How much detail did your logistics outfit share and did you sit in on talks with railroad? "Thank you" to the several others who corrected your misstatements about crew issues. I could have but wanted to concentrate on more basic issues. Mac [/quote] Mac, The third part company I refer to also runs other short haul lanes with BNSF. It is shortsighted to say they underestimated terminal costs since they have current experience with those issues. Also, the ports supported the plan so I don't think terminal space was an issue at the time.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag