This video outlines my thoughts about why CP is acquiring KCS.
https://youtu.be/PZd4dm5K6Nw
I'm hearing about a ceremony in Kansas City at 11 AM eastern, does anyone know if this will be live-streamed or recorded?
Harrison
Homeschooler living In upstate NY a.k.a Northern NY.
Modeling the D&H in 1978.
Route of the famous "Montreal Limited"
My YouTube
Nothing on the CPKC website cpkcr.ca or on their YouTube channel cpkc
It was live streamed at 10 am this morning.
Will this be a good or bad thing for the railroad industry?
Also do the paint schemes change?
ATSFGuyWill this be a good or bad thing for the railroad industry? Also does the paint scheme change?
Also does the paint scheme change?
the future decades will tell
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Hard to say...when there's less competition there's less incentive to innovate/hustle/improve. We would have been better off with a dozen or two class 1s..at least two competitors in every market, and ideally three or four. But, that ship has sailed, and there's no going back.
The logo
https://www.trainboard.com/highball/index.php?attachments/upload_2023-4-15_10-32-13-png.267817/
Image looks like a Bayou Beaver and a Maple Leaf getting whacked by the beaver's tail.
https://www.cpkcr.com/en-us
Some potential contact people for greyhounds' meat train development:
https://www.cpkcr.com/en-us/about-cpkc/executive-profiles
Overmod Some potential contact people for greyhounds' meat train development: https://www.cpkcr.com/en-us/about-cpkc/executive-profiles
OK, I'll write a letter to Mr. Brooks. I'll post it on this forum.
We'll see.
As of now, a phone call is out of the question due to my hearing loss. (I'm going to get a cochlear implant.)
Ulrich Hard to say...when there's less competition there's less incentive to innovate/hustle/improve. We would have been better off with a dozen or two class 1s..at least two competitors in every market, and ideally three or four. But, that ship has sailed, and there's no going back.
The thing is, and the reason this was approved (while CN+KCS was rejected), CPKC doesn't reduce competition. The railroads connect at Kansas City and don't overlap at all.
A small quibble I have with the vedio is about the CP selling off the Soo Line. Most of what was sold off was the original ex-WC east of Saint Paul, which was made redundant with the purchase of the shorter (and presumably superior route of the ) Milwaukee Road to Chicago.
As imaginative as the original BNSF logo - the Donut Cross
There ain't no beavers in Mehico!
Perhaps they should have swapped out the maple leaf for a blue agave plant.
Less competition..Prior to the merger a Canadian shipper with freight going into the southwest could choose a CP - KCS routing or CN - KCS routing. Now CP and KCS are merged as one company shippers no longer have the CN - KCS option..hence reduced options i.e. less competition. Same scenario in reverse for American shippers to Canada.
Of course it's about eliminating competition..the same efficiencies that this merger supposedly "unlocks" could have been realized through operating and marketing agreements between said companies, without requiring a merger. Adding no new locomotives and not a mile of new track unlocks so much potential? Somehow I doubt it. I wish them luck, and I hope it works out.
UlrichLess competition..Prior to the merger a Canadian shipper with freight going into the southwest could choose a CP - KCS routing or CN - KCS routing. Now CP and KCS are merged as one company shippers no longer have the CN - KCS option..hence reduced options i.e. less competition. Same scenario in reverse for American shippers to Canada.
What line did KCS have that served the Southwest or did you mean Mexico?
I suppose in theory the former IC intersects the KCS at Vicksburg, and technically the former IC and KCS connect in the greater St. Louis area. Perhaps that is what was being referred to?
And some consider Texas to be the start of the Southwest. Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston are the two biggest population centers and of course KCS reaches both.
(Also in my head as I type I am phonetically pronouncing it correctly as the natives do - TEK-sis.)
I'm glad the merger happened. It's not going to change the industry too much and it doesn't reduce competition. I feel it's a much better outcome than had CN got hold of KCS.
Jeff
jeffhergertI'm glad the merger happened. It's not going to change the industry too much and it doesn't reduce competition. I feel it's a much better outcome than had CN got hold of KCS.
I don't know. While it may not change the industry, I don't know if I'm ever glad to see another RR gone.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
Ulrich Less competition..Prior to the merger a Canadian shipper with freight going into the southwest could choose a CP - KCS routing or CN - KCS routing. Now CP and KCS are merged as one company shippers no longer have the CN - KCS option..hence reduced options i.e. less competition. Same scenario in reverse for American shippers to Canada.
Of course KCS had an incentive to favor CP before the purchase by CP as it gave them a much longer haul rather than turning most of the traffic over to CN at Jackson, MS. East St. Louis no longer offers CN direct access to Chicago, as they sold or abandoned the direct routes to the north. KCS interchanges only with IMRR at Springfield, IL and only once per week.
zugmannI don't know. While it may not change the industry, I don't know if I'm ever glad to see another RR gone.
Let's face it, there are those who would like to see just one railroad nationwide... Not railfans, but...
It would never happen, of course. Monopolies and all that.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
CMStPnP Ulrich Less competition..Prior to the merger a Canadian shipper with freight going into the southwest could choose a CP - KCS routing or CN - KCS routing. Now CP and KCS are merged as one company shippers no longer have the CN - KCS option..hence reduced options i.e. less competition. Same scenario in reverse for American shippers to Canada. What line did KCS have that served the Southwest or did you mean Mexico?
South central US and Mexico would have been more accurate..
tree68 zugmann I don't know. While it may not change the industry, I don't know if I'm ever glad to see another RR gone. Let's face it, there are those who would like to see just one railroad nationwide... Not railfans, but... It would never happen, of course. Monopolies and all that.
zugmann I don't know. While it may not change the industry, I don't know if I'm ever glad to see another RR gone.
Prior to April 14 we had seven class 1 railroads that could interchange freely with one another. After April 14 we have only six class 1s that can interchange freely with one another. End result is fewer options for shippers.. i.e. less competition. If end to end mergers unlock so much potential without inhibiting competition, then why not have UP and CSX/ NS and BNSF merge?
One point to consider is that the CP/KCS merger, aside from being end-to-end, is also primarily a north-south route on a continent where most traffic is east-west.
To remain competitive you must remain efficient. Railroad companies that must maintain their own infrastructure need to combine in ways that make the best use of those assets. Remember most other modes use public infrastructure. Sentimentality is not necessarily a good economic strategy.
No sentimentality..and other modes.. notably trucking..pay for its infrastructure through a variety of taxes..fuel taxes (municipal, state, federal) ton mile tax..and of course road/bridge/tunnel tolls. If all collected road and fuel taxes were directed back to road infrastructure we could rebuild the interstate highway system (or at least repave it) every couple of years..
Of course railroads need to be efficient..we all do....but removing the impetus to innovate and compete doesn't work in that direction. We all work best when the wolf is at the door..human nature..
UlrichNo sentimentality..and other modes..trucking..pays for its infrastructure through a variety of taxes..fuel taxes (municipal, state, federal) ton mile tax..and of course road/bridge/tunnel tolls. If all collected road and fuel taxes were directed back to road infrastructure we could rebuild the interstate highway system (or at least repave it) every couple of years.. Of course railroads need to be efficient..we all do....but removing the impetus to innovate and compete doesn't work in that direction. We all work best when the wolf is at the door..human nature..
My understanding is that despite the various taxes other transportation modes pay for the taxpayer provided facilities they use, those tax payments are far from covering the benefits they receive
Ulrich No sentimentality..and other modes.. notably trucking..pay for its infrastructure through a variety of taxes..fuel taxes (municipal, state, federal) ton mile tax..and of course road/bridge/tunnel tolls. If all collected road and fuel taxes were directed back to road infrastructure we could rebuild the interstate highway system (or at least repave it) every couple of years..
If trucks fully paid for the road use, the highway trust fund wouldn't be about $40 billion short. Nevertheless, the main point I was trying to make is that the rail infrastructure is sunk costs, whereas trucks can rearrange their service area at will.
UlrichOf course railroads need to be efficient..we all do....but removing the impetus to innovate and compete doesn't work in that direction. We all work best when the wolf is at the door..human nature..
The wolf was at the door, which is why all the railroad mergers. As long as there are still two railroads, they will have to innovate/compete between themselves and also trucking, and pipelines, and barges (and hyperloops?)
Harrison a few points of contention here..
1-CN has access to Mexico. It's called the CG Railway and it has 2 railcar ferries that provide service between Mobile, AL and Coatzacoalcos, MX. The ferry offers 2 day transit time which is currently on average faster than going via Laredo, TX which can can delay interchange up to 120H..
2-Most Missouri grain goes via the Mississippi. Any grain by rail on CPKC will not go east to Canada. It will go to the Gulf for export.
CPKC was a defensive merger as CP ran out of options for growth..Nor could they allow KCS to end up with BNSF, CN, UP, or NS? CN will still command a much better network.
CPKC's intermodal franchise will be fairly weak domestically and certainly can't hold a candle to vastly better route options that CN, BNSF, and UP hold between the Gulf and Midwest. CPKC believes Lazaro Cardenas-Chicago is going to jump off at the expense of the less expensive ports of POLA/POLB? No chance.. LC is more expensive to Chicago, 7 day longer sailing time and lacks transload capability.. While adding customs delays. Versus landing boxes stateside for domestic receivers..
Another stickler... CPKC only has exclusive operating concessions for the Mexican portion until 2037.. Anyone's open to bid for open access once it expires. Then 10 years later the concession will be open to bid for a new operator... Also Mexico industrial policy is pretty dicey and can change on a whim...
CPKC has alot of challenges ahead and its route structure will certainly give it a run for its own money..
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.