Amtrak's record year

[blue streak 1]

Here is the link to the report.

http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/730/658/FY13-Record-Ridership-ATK-13-122.pdf

For the year I really expected the NEC, Acela, & downeaster to loose riders for the year due to "Sandy" and the Boston Marathon. The loss of a large ridership base and the need to stay home for many certainly decreased those numbers which did not recover until about Thanksgiving ?

As an analysis that may mean nothing total ridership up 1% and revenue up 4.2%.  So maybe any route that increased revenue by more than 3.2% over ridership may mean longer distances travelled ? OTOH any route that decrased in revnue does not look good.

 Some routes that may meet this measurement are NEC regionals, Pennsylvanian, Lincoln, Wolverine, Surfliner, Hoosier  ( interesting ) , Norfork/ NPN combined, Piedmots, Cal Z Sunset, Eagle, 

Until the annual performance report comes out in NOV for the FY this is all speculation.  Total change in average RPMs is very important. Unfortunately Amtrak has not released the number for each route in the past..

  

[oltmannd]

Another tidbit.  If you "net out" the Norfolk train by adding it to Newport News (certainly, there is some cannibalism...), you still get that new Norfolk train representing about 1/4 of the short-haul/NEC ridership growth.

The silliest train has to be the Ethan Allen.  It averages 68 passengers (I suppose this is the net north of Albany-Renss.  or Schenectady.  If the bulk were from Schenectady, then it's worse than silly.) .  How about  Thruway buses from Rutland (23 per train) and Saratoga  instead?  You could make a couple round trips a day from Albany-Renss. and provide faster trips for the passengers.

The three California corridors add up to about 1/2 the NEC rider, but only a bit more than 10% of the revenue.  If you exclude Acela, it's 70% of the ridership and 23% of the revenue.  Looks like California might have some leverage on pricing.

[schlimm]

A nice attempt and changing the dynamics.   In the past (and with several LD advocates on here) it has been reactive to, "Run these LD trains if you want votes in Congress."  And Amtrak caved.  Now Boardman is sounding proactive, "You want LD trains?  Pay for them as an "Essentail Rail Service" or we drop them."

[McKey]

Interesting news, maybe you could provide a link to the original report here?

I'm especially looking for cause of the rising revenues.

[oltmannd]

Some interesting tidbits:

Revenue increased much faster than ridership.  This is a good sign that there is at least some attempt being made at, cost control, yield management, or both.  It may be small, but at least it's in the right direction.

Short haul and NEC were where the action was.  LD trains pretty much static, except revenue gains were multiples of ridership gains (also good news)

Acela ridership down 1.5% but revenue up 4.5%.  Those 20 trainsets are still providing 1/4 of all Amtrak's revenue.  Interesting Boardman quote, “Acela Express trains are usually sold out after noon Wednesday through Friday and again on Sunday, and we are severely restricted in the number of trains that can use New York’s Penn Station,”   He said they are starting the process of purchasing more "next gen" Acelas, but not more NEC coaches.  State equipment will push some Amfleet/Horizon back to the NEC.

W.r.t. LD trains, Boardman said, “there has to be a contract in Congress for the national mobility that the long-distance train (network) provides.”  What I read into this is, "Hey, Congress!  You want'em?  You better ante up!"