Is Triple Crown a monopoly yet?

[Junctionfan]

It seems that with Amtrak and CN getting out of the roadrailer business, Triple Crown seems to be the sole roadrailer service; is this true?

What happened to the others like Schneider, Clipper and ICE COLD (Icez) of BNSF?

[espeefoamer]

The Swift train isn't running anymore,either[:(].

[ericsp]

No, railroaders are an intermodal train. All class 1 railroads have intermodal.

[Allen Jenkins]

Yes, at my house, Triple Crown Services rules! Every van(car), means dad will be home tonight. The crew will receive top pay, and hammer-down. Where there is a backhaul, there should be a pair of V16's pinging. If I were trucking, I'd be delivering the empties to the loadout, for cardboard, or whatever, and returning them to the TC terminal...but if I had brains, I'd own a couple of hundred vans, and be finding freight( it's out there).

[UPTRAIN]

Sounds like a weiner to me!

[PNWRMNM]

Tripple Crown is not and never will be a monopoly. NS is competing with thousands of hungry truckers every day.

Mac

[Junctionfan]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

It seems that with Amtrak and CN getting out of the roadrailer business, Triple Crown seems to be the sole roadrailer service; is this true?

What happened to the others like Schneider, Clipper and ICE COLD (Icez) of BNSF?

My question was if Triple Crown had a monopoly on the roadrailer now.

[Overmod]

It isn't a 'monopoly' if nobody else wants to do it. There are few effective barriers to entry, there is plenty of equipment availability (and more coming when Amtrak has the inevitable fire sale), the necessary know-how and wisdom is available -- sometimes for the asking.

What isn't there is the business case... yet. When that is made, for example when critical mass of available vans builds up in key lanes, you can expect to see the idea taken up by others. I assume you are following the RailRunner scenario, and have considered the ways in which this is similar to RoadRailer operations, and the ways in which it is different.

Personally, I think there's money to be made in both types of operation. But I'm doing the same thing FedEx is ... waiting for others to make the mistakes and show where the problems are before dedicating large amounts of capital and time to using the technology.

[k9wrangler]

Seems to me that Triple Crown is the only outfit that has figured out how to make it work. Plenty of opportunity there for someone else to try if they can pull it off.

[Junctionfan]

I'd like to know why Schneider, Swift, Clipper and others stopped the roadrailer service. It can't be because it's not profitable otherwise Triple Crown would be in the poor house.

Why is Triple Crown the only roadrailer business left?

[Overmod]

This has been beaten to death -- when will you get it?

Go back and read the various Amtrak M&E threads. That will explain some of the economics regarding what bottom-line 'profitability' is for a RoadRailer service. Some of the more expert comments there contain some of the more relevant issues for your review.

Triple Crown has intensive railroad backing. If you know anything about six-sigma, you'll recognize the importance of a strong 'champion' in getting acceptance of innovative concepts during the time they're established, and in overcoming obstacles thereafter. For the others, RoadRailers were a niche modality -- and when typical problems, like lane balance and backhaul-by-rail, came up... they figured the results weren't worth the expense.

For better or worse, many managers DO look primarily at short-run rather than long-run results. Since the collapse of the Internet bubble, three-month and six-month targets for opportunity capital have become once again 'significant' to analysts... whether or not this mindset is appropriate for long-term capital or market development. This may change given enough time, or major shifts in some of the factors involved. But right now there's a sweet spot for TOFC, and a different sweet spot for all-truck moves, and there just isn't for bi-modal where there isn't a dedication to the technology and sufficient capitalization in place. I'd be surprised to find any truck line undertaking the necessary steps at 'full equipment price' -- or in fact any shipper not affiliated with a railroad dedicated to the concept making extensive early use of the system.

An important take-home message from Amtrak M&E is that 'profitability' often has to be defined in much more significant terms than 'did we make or lose money on the packages we shipped'. That's fine for someone running an eBay business, but as soon as scaling and operating factors come into play, there are many additional expenses, and reserves, that have to be arranged.

I suggest that you develop a theoretical model of RoadRailer operations in a given set of lanes -- look at what's needed to source and handle your traffic, coordinate loads and scheduling, how many vans and underframes will be needed to handle the service, what you do about demurrage and loading delays, etc., and then figure out what the costs and cash flows will be. Then do a few iterations and recursion analysis to see patterns and trends, and stress the model with a few circumstances (tonnage increases or decreases, seasonal traffic patterns, railroad congestion, and weather being some to use).

It helps to understand Swift if you look at the patterns for the commodities they were transporting, and the destination pairs. It may also help for you to analyze "why is the Tropicana train not a bi-modal operation"?

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Overmod

This has been beaten to death -- when will you get it?

Go back and read the various Amtrak M&E threads. That will explain some of the economics regarding what bottom-line 'profitability' is for a RoadRailer service. Mark Hemphill's comments, in particular, raised some of the more relevant issues for your review.

That wasn't very nice.....Just because a topic has been covered here before is no reason to jump on a guy for asking a question,.....IS IT? Are you trying to say that in order for a person to ask a question (here) they are first required to read every thread here to make sure it hasn't been asked before?....That would be absolutely silly.

[Junctionfan]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Overmod

This has been beaten to death -- when will you get it?

Go back and read the various Amtrak M&E threads. That will explain some of the economics regarding what bottom-line 'profitability' is for a RoadRailer service. Mark Hemphill's comments, in particular, raised some of the more relevant issues for your review.

Triple Crown has intensive railroad backing. If you know anything about six-sigma, you'll recognize the importance of a strong 'champion' in getting acceptance of innovative concepts during the time they're established, and in overcoming obstacles thereafter. For the others, RoadRailers were a niche modality -- and when typical problems, like lane balance and backhaul-by-rail, came up... they figured the results weren't worth the expense.

For better or worse, many managers DO look primarily at short-run rather than long-run results. Since the collapse of the Internet bubble, three-month and six-month targets for opportunity capital have become once again 'significant' to analysts... whether or not this mindset is appropriate for long-term capital or market development. This may change given enough time, or major shifts in some of the factors involved. But right now there's a sweet spot for TOFC, and a different sweet spot for all-truck moves, and there just isn't for bi-modal where there isn't a dedication to the technology and sufficient capitalization in place. I'd be surprised to find any truck line undertaking the necessary steps at 'full equipment price' -- or in fact any shipper not affiliated with a railroad dedicated to the concept making extensive early use of the system.

An important take-home message from Amtrak M&E is that 'profitability' often has to be defined in much more significant terms than 'did we make or lose money on the packages we shipped'. That's fine for someone running an eBay business, but as soon as scaling and operating factors come into play, there are many additional expenses, and reserves, that have to be arranged.

I suggest that you develop a theoretical model of RoadRailer operations in a given set of lanes -- look at what's needed to source and handle your traffic, coordinate loads and scheduling, how many vans and underframes will be needed to handle the service, what you do about demurrage and loading delays, etc., and then figure out what the costs and cash flows will be. Then do a few iterations and recursion analysis to see patterns and trends, and stress the model with a few circumstances (tonnage increases or decreases, seasonal traffic patterns, railroad congestion, and weather being some to use).

It helps to understand Swift if you look at the patterns for the commodities they were transporting, and the destination pairs. It may also help for you to analyze "why is the Tropicana train not a bi-modal operation"?

Couldn't you have at least answered any of the questions I have asked like what happend to the others? I don't have the patience to wade through all those threads; I figured if I asked a nice and polite question, I'd get an answer-boy was I mistaken.

[Overmod]

It's not that it wasn't a nice and polite question -- just that you keep asking the same one over and over. There's no reason to 'wade through all those threads' -- most of them were started by you, and participated in by you rather avidly, so you should remember what was in them.

When I said "beaten to death" I meant within the RoadRailer business threads, not in general. And yes, I responded a bit more intensively to Junctionfan than I would to most other posters, because I KNOW that he's already covered this particular issue with many questions before, and also that I've suggested that he do some of the financial and operational modeling to answer some of the question before he asks it -- repeatedly -- in the forums.

Hopefully, both of you will note that (once again) I provided answers and approaches in my post which do, in fact, address the question Junctionfan asked. And will further support any positive and original thinking on the topic as the thread progresses. I am not privy to internal thinking at Schneider and Swift, so I cannot say exactly why they chose not to continue; in the specific case of Swift I am, in fact, looking forward to finding out whetner they've quit 'for good' or because there are factors that need to change for them to resume. But my point was, and is, that it's possible to figure out some of the problems from first principles, before having to ask for proprietary information (etc.) which will almost certainly not be provided for general postings!

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Overmod

It's not that it wasn't a nice and polite question -- just that you keep asking the same one over and over. There's no reason to 'wade through all those threads' -- most of them were started by you, and participated in by you rather avidly, so you should remember what was in them.

When I said "beaten to death" I meant within the RoadRailer business threads, not in general. And yes, I responded a bit more intensively to Junctionfan than I would to most other posters, because I KNOW that he's already covered this particular issue with many questions before, and also that I've suggested that he do some of the financial and operational modeling to answer some of the question before he asks it -- repeatedly -- in the forums.

Hopefully, both of you will note that (once again) I provided answers and approaches in my post which do, in fact, address the question Junctionfan asked. And will further support any positive and original thinking on the topic as the thread progresses. I am not privy to internal thinking at Schneider and Swift, so I cannot say exactly why they chose not to continue; in the specific case of Swift I am, in fact, looking forward to finding out whetner they've quit 'for good' or because there are factors that need to change for them to resume. But my point was, and is, that it's possible to figure out some of the problems from first principles, before having to ask for proprietary information (etc.) which will almost certainly not be provided for general postings!

Well, that's cool I guess.... After reading into this thread, I was tempted to ask a question, but was afraid someone would bite my head off if the subject had been touched on in the "many" other threads you refer to.

Perhaps you might know the answer. In the context of the other providers of roadrailer service bowing out of the equation, as one living near TC's mainhub (Ft Wayne, IN) I see NS continuing to make significant investment in expansion of TC infastructure. My guess is that these other providers dropped out because the business simply wasn't that lucrative, yet here is NS marching to the beat of a different drummer entirely.

Any idea what NS's CLAIMED profit/loss is on the TC business as an entity?

I tried to nose around the TC website looking for investor information, AND FOUND NONE, which is either curiously telling,...or I simply was not looking in the right place....Either way, I'm curious....

[widave]

One of Schneider's main problems was the limited availablity of RoadRailer equipment, to my understanding. When they needed trailers in a given area, and all that was available for a highway move far off rails was a RoadRailer, it was a waste of capital. Then, when the only available trailer for a potential RoadRailer move ended up being a highway van, it again defeated the purpose. It would work well in dedicated service lanes such as Swift had, but we can now see that it is somewhat problematic for them, too, other issues (scheduling, transit times, and train costs, etc.) notwithstanding.

Schneider is going to try containers now. There are about 150 brand spankin' new orange 53' containers sitting outside the Stoughton Trailers plant in Evansville, WI just waiting to be trucked to Chicago and put in service. And according to my reports, Schneider will be using railroad chassis to haul them, so they have no investment in that, only the cans.

Picture a Schnieder can on a Rail Runner set up. Now that's versatility! If only Railrunner and Triple Crown work together and enough chassis become available.

Dave M
Waterloo, WI

[Junctionfan]

Thankyou guys[:)]

[rrnut282]

TC is currently adding capactiy at Piqua Yard (in Fort Wayne) as I type this. They are reconfiguring the west end switch lead to allow for two trains to simultaneously work 1/2 the yard each and have two more standing by waiting their turn. Obviously, NS and TC expect growth (actually are swamped) and invested accordingly. I can't say if TC is embracing the railrunner concept, but I have seen a few here and there on the back end of a TC train.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

Triple Crown is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Norfolk Southern, so there wouldn't be any investor information available on its website.

[route_rock]

Ok trucking reasons were given to answer the main question.Swift andSchneider wont do it because dispatchers dont understand "Hey thats a road railer trailer not a highway one."Trust me Trucking companies dont like to be told we cant get that hot load cause that trailer isnt for that service.Its a van isnt it?would be the response.Let TC do what its doing they are doing a great job finding their niche.Freight dry up?Where?I wish it would slow down a bit to keep things fluid or better yet maybe this.Managers wake up and increase capacity(this is trucking and rail)before they get swamped to the point they dont know what to do.

[Overmod]

My understanding is that NS is doing quite well on RoadRailer operations, and presumably expansions in key lanes are fully justified by traffic predictions and operating economy.

I have seen repeated Triple Crown trains through Austell, Georgia with over a hundred vans pulled by a single high-horsepower locomotive -- precisely the kind of low-tare-weight operation that Alan Cripe originally indicated as a 'mission' for RoadRailers.

My opinion is that full railroad support and participation is essential to successful RoadRailer operations; many of the best benefits of bimodal operation are achieved in solid blocks, rather than operation 'at the end of conventional trains'. This seems unlikely at current levels for Schneider, Swift... or just about anyone else not capable of sourcing bidirectional traffic on a reasonable (and reasonably frequent) scheduling. As soon as 'conventional' COFC is involved in the traffic mix, it's more convenient to use regular containers and regular underframes; likewise, if there's provision for TOFC it's often more convenient to ship lightweight and common vans rather than specialized trailers.

I think it's true that the RailRunner concept solves some of this problem -- but I'd still want to see predictable return lane traffic for 'sets' of these underframes. So far, it doesn't appear that the underframe logistics are being considered separate from the container flows... the assumption is that the container-on-underframe will move as a unit ("pretending it's a trailer") from the point of initial container loading all the way to destination. This may not be the best use of the technology in many situations, particularly when high revenue use of the underframes, or minimum numbers per rail movement, are involved or desirable.

Now, since RailRunner is a relatively young company, and eager to establish itself as a provider, I'd think polite requests could give you quite a bit of the theory and economics behind their thinking... and perhaps some case analysis (with customer names deleted, of course) of how the technology is panning out in the real world for the early adopters.

[rrnut282]

TC is not a monopoly, but it is certainly unique. IMHO, TC is a convergance of several things: By locating their hub in Fort Wayne, they are a reasonable one-day round trip by truck from major markets like Chicago, Detroit, Toledo, Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, Louisville, Indianapolis, so that they can capture from a large area to consolidate loads onto longer trains or still make their service commitment if a trailer misses a connecting train to those destinations; they located on the ex Wabash main, which serves the most autoplants of any mainline in the U.S. and then marketed and sold the kind of service the automakers needed; they built up the business and let it stabilize before expanding further.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CSSHEGEWISCH

Triple Crown is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Norfolk Southern, so there wouldn't be any investor information available on its website.

Thanks,....I kinda drew that suspicion after not finding anything, but one never knows.. Often I wonder if I'm just not looking in th right place

It would be interesting to know what the actual "bottom line" is for TC at the moment,...probably a closely guarded bit of information.

Gut intuition tells me there is probably a negative cash flow, since they seem to be "growing" the business right now....

As rrnut points out, they are swamped at the Piqua yard right now and adding capacity. The few times I've talked to guys running outside the main yard area to throw switches, they all say that the are working their behinds off.

Thats why it seems ....intriguing....to see others bailing out of the business entirely while NS is headed the opposite direction like gangbusters....Must be that "thouroughbred" blood...[;)]

[widave]

The new Triple Crown service on NS/UP (C&NW) from Fort Wayne to Minneapolis has seen trains of 85 RoadRailers a few times, though averages about 70. This is up from the start-up train length of about 40 trailers just two months ago. The trains run three days a week.

I wonder how much of it is stuff Amtrak used to haul. It wasn't uncommon to see the Empire Builder with at least 3 and frequently as many as 6 RoadRailers, though some of it was US Mail.

Do you guys that see the RoadRailers in other lanes ever see any of the Clipper reefers, Ice Cold Express or any of the other ReeferRailers at all? I was wondering if TC pursued that freight in any other lanes? Never seen one up here in WI other than on the road so far. They were very rare on Amtrak, too.

Thanks,
Dave

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by widave



Do you guys that see the RoadRailers in other lanes ever see any of the Clipper reefers, Ice Cold Express or any of the other ReeferRailers at all? I was wondering if TC pursued that freight in any other lanes? Never seen one up here in WI other than on the road so far. They were very rare on Amtrak, too.

Thanks,
Dave

I'm not sure if I follow you due to my lack of knowledge of the various trade names mentioned, but if your question can be boiled down to: Do we on other parts of the TC network see reefer boxes in rail side transit,...yes often,....but not alot percentage wise

Thinking about that,...I would hope that the units in use have some type of radio linked alarm to announce "low fuel" etc, otherwise the few scattered among the many in yards would be (I would think) hard to keep track of

[oltmannd]

Triple Crown is a door-to-door truckload product. They sell directly to shippers ala JB Hunt, Schneider, etc. Most other RR intermodal business is "wholesale" and is purchased by the trucking companies and IMCs (intermodal marketing companies like HUB). So, Triple Crown is in competition with the truck load guys for some traffic and is probably why Triple Crown is a wholy owned subsidiary rather than just part of NS's intermodal group. It also probably explains why Triple Crown service hasn't expanded more than it has outside of NS territory.

Triple Crown typically anchors a lane with low volume auto parts where the volume is too low for timely carload train service. They build volume in the lane from there.

NS has another door-to-door product called Thoroughbred Direct, which typcially uses traditional intermodal service to deliver catalogs and flyers on a timed schedule from printers direct to bulk mail centers so you get you this week's sale flyer for Penney's in you mail box on Monday.