Trains.com

Sleeping Car Fares

2463 views
4 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 40 posts
Sleeping Car Fares
Posted by Dixie Flyer on Wednesday, October 24, 2012 9:46 AM

I realize sleeping car rates are high because there are a shortage of sleeping cars but my question is what is a fair sleeper rate if car supply was not the issue?  It appears on single level long distance trains the coaches are sit up for 60 passengers instead of 80 ( short haul) so what is the ocuppancy goal?  I assume 40 to 50 on like the Silver Service since these trains  tend to empty out and fill up between NY-Washington and Jacksonville-Miami.  We know for a fact a slumbercoach held 40.  To me the 40 should pay what 50 are paying in coaches for the first class fare.  The accomidation fare covers additional maintainance for all the lights, switches, tolets and sinks and beds, linen  the difference in salary of a coach attendant vs a sleeping car attendant, additional fuel if a sleeper is heavier than a coach etc.  I am not including how much more a sleeper costs than a coach ( if you do you just reintroduced the PULLMAN COMPANY). To make the occupancy rate 100% sleepers on the east coast would run like from Washington to Jacksonville and the passengers would be in coach to the north of Washington and south of Jacksonville.  Anybody boarding a sleeper at intermiditate stations between Washington and Jacksonville (like Rickmond or Charleston S.C.) would pay the end to end rate.  Finally a 16 section sleeper which did exist or a 20 section (which could) would be cheaper than current coach fares with 3 tiers.   I not suggesting it but in some countries you can ride on the roof for free but it seems we accept the fact a coach passenger covers about 80 per cent of variable costs so why can't a sleeping car passenger do the same? 

I had the pleasure of riding from Kentucky to Boston this summer and KY to LA in October.  The crews, food, service and time keeping were excellent.  Load factors great, sleepers full.  My wife and I paid over two thousand for the KY-LA.  The things I mention above in my thoughts would cut that figure 40-60%.

 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • 8,156 posts
Posted by henry6 on Wednesday, October 24, 2012 9:53 AM

Don't confuse cost of the sleeping car fare based on cost of providing the service vs. cost of fare by demand.  But it does cost a lot to maintain and service a sleeping car in both manpower and hardware.  Point in fact: it costs to provide services to human beings.  So what is a fair mark up?  Since the space is limited no matter how you consider it, it has to be marked up as much as possible and still be marketable. As long as people will pay the rate, then it's not too high.  You've got to think that way or you lose.

RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Wednesday, October 24, 2012 12:15 PM

Mark up?  What is this mark up you speak of?

Yeah, yeah, accounting formulas, but my understanding is that sleeper operations require subsidy, so the fares, high as they are, are not fully reflecting costs.

If this were not the case, why not charge for the service what it costs, and pile on sleeper cars on the consists of the long-distance trains until the demand is met?

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • From: East Coast
  • 1,199 posts
Posted by D.Carleton on Wednesday, October 24, 2012 1:29 PM

Some time ago I crunched the numbers (I don't have the data in front of me right now) and basically the fares for sleeper space, when corrected for inflation, have not changed in over 50 years.

Editor Emeritus, This Week at Amtrak

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, October 24, 2012 9:12 PM

D.Carleton

Some time ago I crunched the numbers (I don't have the data in front of me right now) and basically the fares for sleeper space, when corrected for inflation, have not changed in over 50 years. 

It would take a lot of work to get a comprehensive view of 50 year or older fare comparisons. Having said that, I took a look at what it cost to get a roomette from New York to Dallas in 1957 via the PRR.  The cost was $123.87. Adjusted for inflation as per the Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation calculator, which measures CPI, the fare would be $1,021 in 2012 dollars.  

A roomette on Amtrak from New York to Dallas for December 12th via the Lake Shore Limited and The Texas Eagle would be $784. If one opted to go via Washington on a NE Regional (business class), then to Chicago on the Capitol Limited and down to Dallas on the Texas Eagle, the price would be $566.

In 1957 travelers would have been responsible for their own meals, whereas today meals are included in the price of sleeping car accommodations.  Also, Amtrak's fares change significantly depending on the yield demand model calculations. When demand is high, the current fares could be significantly higher than those spot checked for December 12th.  As far as I know the fares charged in 1957 were fixed, i.e. they were posted in the timetable subject to periodic revision with the issuance of new timetables.  

A historical comparison is made more difficult by several other factors.  In 1957 a significant percentage of the sleeping car passengers were business travelers. Their travel was covered by an expense account.  Today most sleeping car passengers are retirees, vacationers, and overseas visitors. They don't have the deep pockets that most business travelers had in 1957 or have today. This may be a major driver in the lower fares today than in 1957, albeit my very limited survey.

Some have argued that the long distance trains are in the public good or public interest. Lets stipulate for a moment that this is a valid argument. Is it then in the public interest to offer premium accommodations on a taxpayer supported service that most of them cannot afford?  

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