Trains.com

DM&E in the twilight zone...

1880 views
9 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Saturday, January 8, 2022 1:27 PM

MidlandMike

 

 
Murphy Siding
...Would Uncle Sam be out $2.3B?

 

They might have gotten a bike path out of it.

 

Laugh Yes

As a South Dakota resident, who once lived in the Powder River Basin of Wyoming, I can say that would be a really boring bike path.

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Saturday, January 8, 2022 1:24 PM

CSSHEGEWISCH

If my memory serves me right, a former member of this forum was really big on the idea of DM&E getting to the Powder River Basin.  His thought was that you needed a "triopoly" to provide real competition in the PRB.  I'm not sure what the economic justification (if any) was for this concept.

 



That was futuremodal. His theory was that two railroads in a market could conspire to keep rates high, but somehow three railroads could not. Huh?

I sent him a DM&E hat that I found at a rummage sale. We agreed he could give me back the hat when he rolled into my state on an Amtrak train running on the DM&E line. I'm not holding my breath.

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • 4,557 posts
Posted by Convicted One on Saturday, January 8, 2022 11:54 AM

The way I recall it,  Trains  magazine ran a blurb or a newswire story hyping Schieffer's gambit as "the birth of a class one" for the first time in decades...and consequently a lot of railfans picked up the torch, out of a  (IMO) desire to reverse the status quo of consolidation and rationalization.

I was in that group too, at first.  But the more I learned about it, the more skeptical I became. Initially it  made a good story, but I don't think there was much genuine potential. Reminded me in many ways of the zero-sum nuisance railroads that were created in already overbuilt corridors during the late 19th century, mostly to be a strategic thorn in the sides of the established players.

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Saturday, January 8, 2022 10:03 AM

If my memory serves me right, a former member of this forum was really big on the idea of DM&E getting to the Powder River Basin.  His thought was that you needed a "triopoly" to provide real competition in the PRB.  I'm not sure what the economic justification (if any) was for this concept.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Friday, January 7, 2022 9:13 PM

Murphy Siding
...Would Uncle Sam be out $2.3B?

They might have gotten a bike path out of it.

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Friday, January 7, 2022 4:25 PM

     If DM&E had found investors,I think they would basically have lost everything they had invested by now. In 2007, the FRA decided not to loan DM&E  $2.3 billion. If the FRA had made the loan, how would that have played out, given the way things turned out? Would Uncle Sam be out $2.3B?

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 2,593 posts
Posted by PNWRMNM on Friday, January 7, 2022 11:59 AM

Murphy,

Think MILW Pacific Coast extension. Late to the market. Only traffic would be what the STB forced UP and BNSF to give up.

BNSF and UP weakened. Stranded asset to owner, shareholders damaged, bankruptcy pending? Bondholders getting a big haircut??

CP was wise to withdraw when they did.

Mac

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • 4,557 posts
Posted by Convicted One on Friday, January 7, 2022 11:22 AM

I believe that if Schieffer's plan truly had merit, there is no good reason why CP could not have made it work.

Note that when CP eventually sold the property, they  did not convey* the rights to build into the Wyoming Coal fields. And in view of the fact that CP has never pursued those rights, I'd conclude it didn't appear worth the while?

 

*https://www.argusleader.com/story/news/2014/01/06/railroads-new-owners-reassure-sd/4335337/

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Sterling Heights, Michigan
  • 1,691 posts
Posted by SD60MAC9500 on Thursday, January 6, 2022 11:29 PM

More than likely abandoned today. Not sure what a 3rd player would get out of operating excess capacity. Which would not pay the cost of operation or financing of the lines construction. Not to mention BNSF and UP already serve the same region with existing capacity.

Rahhhhhhhhh!!!!
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
DM&E in the twilight zone...
Posted by Murphy Siding on Thursday, January 6, 2022 10:45 PM

     Imagine if you will...

     That the Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Raiload had succeeded in 2007 in getting the $2.3 billion loan to build into Wyoming's Powder River Basin to haul coal. In hindsight, how would that have played out and where would things be today?

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

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