MONTREAL — Canadian National moved record volumes in the first quarter and reported improved financial results despite the impact of prolonged extremely cold temperatures that restricted operations across its system in Western Canada and the Mi...
http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2019/04/30-canadian-national-reports-improved-financial-results-as-volume-and-revenue-rise
Brian Schmidt, Editor, Classic Trains magazine
Quote from a post by williamsb on Wednesday, May 01, 2019 at 8:09 PM on the thread "CN Rail Expansion Projects" at http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/267452.aspx?page=5 (emphasis added) - I think JJ means Jean Jacque Ruest (sp?):
"The 1st question asked was by Chris Wetherbee from Citigroup was about OR.
Turan Quettawalla from Scotia Bank asked about CapEx, JJ said work done in yards in Edmonton and Winnipeg last year helped alot. CN was the best in the industry in volume growth in the 1st quarter.
Seldon Clarke asked about OR and PSR. JJ said CN is not a one trick pony of OR and asked where is the floor and made quite a few comments on this. Seldon pressed on about OR and I liked JJ's answer saying "we're not going to get drawn into the PSR discussion and how low can you go in the limbo contest. We'll leave that for the others."
RailsMBSK reported today 75 conductors have been laid off in Winnipeg."
Good to see that at least one high-up rail official - here, a CEO, no less - has the guts to push back against the alleged "analysts". It would be interesting to find the transcript of the earnings call and see all of the actual words.
Time for the CEOs to realize it's the shareholders who own the company - most are in it for the long term - not the analysts. Ironically, this is from the company where EHH supposedly* did such great things with the OR . . .
*Myth - it was already pretty good before he came to CN. Go look it up in the late 1990's Annual Reports to shareholders, when Paul Tellier was the CEO. Also documented in the book "The Pig That Flew: The Battle to Privatize Canadian National", which was reviewed on a thread about it here -
http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/220120.aspx
Note that MP173/ Ed says the OR was down to 80% in 1996, long before EHH came onto the CN scene.
https://www.amazon.com/pig-that-flew-privatize-Canadian/dp/1550546090
https://books.google.com/books/about/The_pig_that_flew.html?id=2Li3AAAAIAAJ
- PDN.
Paul_D_North_Jr Note that MP173/ Ed says the OR was down to 80% in 1996, long before EHH came onto the CN scene.
Which is not very good, or true. Looks more like 85%
http://ctrf.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/CTRF2016CairnsRailTransport.pdf
Also 1996 was two years before EHH became COO at the CN, hardly "long before".
An "expensive model collector"
n012944 Paul_D_North_Jr Note that MP173/ Ed says the OR was down to 80% in 1996, long before EHH came onto the CN scene. Which is not very good, or true. Looks more like 85% http://ctrf.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/CTRF2016CairnsRailTransport.pdf Also 1996 was two years before EHH became COO at the CN, hardly "long before".
But still before he arrived. And according to your graph the OR in the last full year before EHH arrived was about 81.5, almost the same as CP on the graph. That happened without him, regardless of how long before it was.
The old CN management (from the time it was a Crown Corporation) had the OR going down at a steady rate of several points per year, while not alienating customers and employees.
I am tired of people claiming or implying that EHH had to save CN.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
n012944, thanks for sharing that info - saves me the trouble of digging into my archives of annual reports.
From elsewhere in that document, it says the ICG acquisition happened in 1998, but EHH didn't become Chief Operating Officer until 1999. So let's look at it in a little more detail, esp. Fig. 1.
In 1998, CN's OR was about 75%. In 1999 - how much effect could he have had in just 1 year? - it was about 72%. Then it floated from 70% in 2000 down to 68% in 2001, then crept back up to 70% in 2003 before starting a pretty dramatic declaine to 62% in 2006. The it crept back up again to 67.5% in 2009.
My point remains: CN was not struggling when he came aboard, and he didn't do a whole lot better in his first several years there. A cynic could argue that if he was so damn good, why did it rise 2 points from 2001 to 2003? Why the 5.5 point rise from 2006 to 2009? Didn't he really know what he was doing, or was he just lucky enough to have a good economy as a tailwind?
As I said, peforming miracles when he came to CN is a myth. Like Paul Bunyan, he just had a good PR agent.
I was quite surprised to read in that report that CP in 1995 actually had MORE miles of track than CN. I had always thought CN was larger. CN had slightly more revenue $3.9B to $3.5B.
Statistics can be made to look better also. EHH was know to do this. He did not conform to the parameters of thr AAR in Railroad Performance Measures for the 7 Class 1's and they kicked CN out until he changed. It was always fun to compare the different RR's, I enjoyed watching CN kick butt, (except for BNSF I/M train speed, nobody has ever come close to them)having been called down for being a crown corp. with lazy no good employees. When EHH took over CP they were not included in the RPM, then the same at CSX and CN dropped out again, so not much to compare to anymore.
EHH also did what he wanted reguardless of contracts or honesty. He had an agreement with CN to not go to another RR for 3 years after his CN retirement (forced). He poached people from CN, even to having CN employees bring confidential info to CP. I believe that got Settled out of court. I think he did similar things when he left CP for CSX.
I worked 2 yrs in CP's office in 1961-62 and CN from 1963-96. CN treated me better and was a good place to work and I always felt CN was a progressive and good compant to work for.
williamsb I was quite surprised to read in that report that CP in 1995 actually had MORE miles of track than CN. I had always thought CN was larger. CN had slightly more revenue $3.9B to $3.5B.
Are Soo Line and Delaware & Hudson counted into the CP mileage total?
Yes, I believe Soo Line and D&H are included, some of the other statistics show CN adding IC and WC and BCR, EJ&E etc. CP adding the line towards the Powder River basin.
SD70Dude I am tired of people claiming or implying that EHH had to save CN.
It seems like every railroad that has adopted PSR, whether EHH was involved or not, talk like they were at death's door. They made it seem like bankruptcy was just around the corner. Maybe to short term activist investors that was how things looked, but in reality those type of investors smelled money that could be squeezed out of the companies and put in their pockets.
Jeff
CN was on the upswing long before EHH came along... even before privatization in 1995. IMHO CN has generally gotten an unfair bad rap since its inception 100 years ago. Sure, it had its hand in the public purse while a crown corporation, but it was also saddled with almost every line that proved to be untenable on its own..Grand Truck, Intercolonial, Newfoundland Railway, PEI Railway etc.... alot of them lightly used and lightly built, requiring special ordered locomotives and rolling stock. By 1978 CN was at last turning a profit. CN was also a pioneer on many fronts.. among them: first diesel locomotive in regular service in the 1920s.. radio communication (which lead to the creation of the CBC).. and of course the North American locomotive cab.. made standard on CN in 1973 and adopted by the industry in 1989 to replace the spartan cab. No doubt EHH made an important contribution, but his was only one among many that make the company what it is today..
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.