QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe QUOTE: Originally posted by tree68 QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe P.S. Something I always wondered, why can’t Class 1s have excursions without public passengers. I realize that isn’t as profitable. But, people still come out to see them and it creates a positive image for the railroad. $$$$$$$$$$$$ No revenue, no happen. I don't think "good will" is on the balance sheet anymore. I don't know Larry. You may very well be right. But, for the sake of argument, does UP really run that many revenue excursions with its steam any more? I think they keep it around as a means of public good will and for company morale. Corporations routinely sponsor these kind of historical projects. Railroads are inextricably linked to the public. If Tide, Johnson & Johnson, Boeing, spend several millions on non-revenue projects designed to improve the public immage, why not railroads. Can you imagine the good will created if each Class 1 would run a steam locomotive the month before Christmas on a toy drive and stop in towns on the system on the drive. Maybe even call it the Polar Express or something like that? The good will would be overwhelming. That is not to say I completely disagree with your position though. Gabe
QUOTE: Originally posted by tree68 QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe P.S. Something I always wondered, why can’t Class 1s have excursions without public passengers. I realize that isn’t as profitable. But, people still come out to see them and it creates a positive image for the railroad. $$$$$$$$$$$$ No revenue, no happen. I don't think "good will" is on the balance sheet anymore.
QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe P.S. Something I always wondered, why can’t Class 1s have excursions without public passengers. I realize that isn’t as profitable. But, people still come out to see them and it creates a positive image for the railroad.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe QUOTE: Originally posted by tree68 QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe P.S. Something I always wondered, why can#8217;t Class 1s have excursions without public passengers. I realize that isn#8217;t as profitable. But, people still come out to see them and it creates a positive image for the railroad. $$$$$$$$$$$$ No revenue, no happen. I don't think "good will" is on the balance sheet anymore. I don't know Larry. You may very well be right. But, for the sake of argument, does UP really run that many revenue excursions with its steam any more? I think they keep it around as a means of public good will and for company morale. Corporations routinely sponsor these kind of historical projects. Railroads are inextricably linked to the public. If Tide, Johnson & Johnson, Boeing, spend several millions on non-revenue projects designed to improve the public immage, why not railroads. Can you imagine the good will created if each Class 1 would run a steam locomotive the month before Christmas on a toy drive and stop in towns on the system on the drive. Maybe even call it the Polar Express or something like that? The good will would be overwhelming. That is not to say I completely disagree with your position though. Gabe
QUOTE: Originally posted by tree68 QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe P.S. Something I always wondered, why can#8217;t Class 1s have excursions without public passengers. I realize that isn#8217;t as profitable. But, people still come out to see them and it creates a positive image for the railroad. $$$$$$$$$$$$ No revenue, no happen. I don't think "good will" is on the balance sheet anymore.
QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe P.S. Something I always wondered, why can#8217;t Class 1s have excursions without public passengers. I realize that isn#8217;t as profitable. But, people still come out to see them and it creates a positive image for the railroad.
QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe First, Junctionfan, I try so hard to not be too hard on you. But, if you are going to make such bombastic statements, try to make your subject agree with your verb. I will be the first to admit, I have a grammatical mistake every now and then, because I do not have enough time to properly edit my post. But, if I am going to say an X billion-dollar industry and the voting populous of a nation have it all wrong, I think I should at least make sure my subject agrees with my verb while I am doing so. Secondly, and on point, Larry has a valid argument about John Q. Public's desire to sue. Even as a lawyer, I will readily admit litigation/lawsuit recovery is more expensive than it needs to be in this country in order to serve the goal of making the victims of negligence “whole.” However, lest not forget, accidents really do cost money. If a train carrying 200-300 passengers goes in the bayou, there are going to be 600 people who sustain a REAL economic loss. There are real/legitimate losses that are dealt with in such lawsuits, and if such a tragedy should happen, there will be victims in need of medical—which is more expensive than ever—and lost wage compensation. If you were NS, why would you undertake this risk without having your bases covered? You are in the business to make a profit, not to play Russian roulette with your stockholders. If we really want regular Class I rail excursions (assuming there is capacity for them) in America, nothing short of a Congressional creation of contractual limitation of liability or indemnification will bring them back. If such an even should occur, I think we will see them back in force. Gabe P.S. Something I always wondered, why can’t Class 1s have excursions without public passengers. I realize that isn’t as profitable. But, people still come out to see them and it creates a positive image for the railroad.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Peterson6868 So who assumes the risk when you have a agency like MARC who runs commuter trains. I asume the state commuter agency because they have bottomless pockets.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Peterson6868 So who assumes the risk when you have a agency like MARC who runs commuter trains. I asume the state commuter agency because they have bottomless pockets. ...(You just had GMAC Insurance say 20% of those currently behind the wheel of motor vehicles should not be there, they cannot pass a driver's license rule exam and have not learned from experience)... Perhaps they should be on public transportation.
She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw
QUOTE: Originally posted by Peterson6868 If there ever was a monopoly this would be it...150 million dollers in covarage needed by NS before they can get on train on there tracks. Who the heck comes up with this number?
QUOTE: Originally posted by mudchicken How many of you folks realize that your insurance company will NOT cover you (or your car) the instant you enter railroad right-of-way? [banghead][banghead][banghead]
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.