Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
Possible RailRunner app in North Dakota
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: <i>Originally posted by O.S.</i> <br /><br />[quote]QUOTE: <i>Originally posted by futuremodal</i> <br /> <br />It may be that this particular Minot to Twin Cities move will go by way of Grand Forks rather than the busy Surrey line. If that's the case, then there is available capacity and incremental costing would therefore be appropriate. This was kind of the same approach we used when trying to get BNSF to run RailRunners over Stampede Pass in Washington, there was excess capacity available so why not price the move at a rate where everyone wins? <br />[/quote] <br /> <br />You wanted a discount and didn't get it!!! Or, should I say, you thought you should be rewarded because you arrived behind all those chumps who are actually paying for their service. I'm almost made speechless by your bald-faced confession. You actually expected the railroad to charge everyone but you the full rate, and now you're pouting because they didn't want to slice their throat to make you happy. Any luck trying this incremental-pricing strategy with your local gas station, or the grocery store, or the city sewer bill? No? Gee, I wonder why. <br /> <br />Thanks! I finally understand the immense conceit behind every one of your 422 posts to date. Your real self has just been laid bare: you think the world owes you a deal. <br /> <br />OS <br />[/quote] <br /> <br />OS, <br /> <br />Why are you such a bitter vetch? Explain to us all how providing a service at a <b>profit for all </b>is "cutting" BNSF's or anyone's throat? BNSF gained nothing by turning down the Stampede Pass proposal. The fact is that BNSF's marginal cost for maintaining the Stampede Pass line is exceeding the marginal revenue they are deriving from using the line, that's usually what you get when you have excess capacity available. For reasons that I don't even want to guess at, they are deliberately choosing not to maximize their profits on that line. Okay, I'll venture a guess - they are banking the line for some future use, and don't want to get saddled with a profitable venture now that might interfere with an even more profitable venture later. Twisted? Yes, but apparently consistent with today's Class I mentality, which is why some managerial punk at BNSF's Minot division will find a way to screw up this RailRunner proposal in North Dakota. <br /> <br />
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
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
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
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy