Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
Passenger
»
AMTRAK, LONG-DISTANCE TRAINS, AND CONGRESSIONAL FUNDING

Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="schlimm"] [quote user="V.Payne"]Financially, the first test might be for the Long Distance route’s financial Short-Term Avoidable Operating Loss to be equal to or less than the financial Non-User Automobile Accident Costs ($0.036/VM) on an average per equivalent passenger mile. As it stands now, those that are using the Long Distance routes have already self-selected to not use another common carrier, so their most likely alternative is an automobile. However, they might only drive during the daytime, in shorter segments, take on more financial risk of accidents, or put up with a loss of productive time. In other words, the alternative for those users would increase their disutility of time.[/quote] I have to ask, and no insult is intended, as you obviously are very knowledgeable.  However, do you seriously think that is the sort of argument that will convince anyone to increase/improve passenger rail services in the US, whether LD or corridors? [/quote] Good point!   Another question pertains to the PRIIA exercises for the long distance trains. If the studies are as sound as we are to believe, how come none of the key recommendations, as far as I know, have been implemented?  As per the company's 2012 Annual Report, Amtrak will spend money when there is a high probability of a payoff.  It spent millions in 2012 to upgrade its reservations, ticketing, and customer service capabilities. E-ticketing and scanning, WiFi upgrades, etc. are some of the technological improvements made by the company. This suggests that Amtrak can get the funds it needs, within reason, for worthwhile spends. According to the authors of the Crescent, etc. study, implementation of their recommendations for the Crescent would have generated 69,500 new riders (train and Thruway bus), on an investment of $1.4 million, and generate a return of $3.7 million.  Unfortunately, the study does not have a robust section on methodology, thereby leaving one wondering what methods (regression analysis, moving averages, etc.) were used to generate the numbers. In any case, if the numbers were properly supported, Jamie Dimon (Chase Chairman) would love to have that kind of return. If executive management and the board were comfortable with the pro-forma numbers, they could have taken their case to the market place and obtained the money to fund the improvements.  As noted Amtrak does not need to go to Congress for every equipment acquisition. My guess is that management and the board did not find the output compelling.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag