Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
Don, Thank you for bothering to prepare a detailed rebuttal to my post, I was hoping someone would. I feel you've come up with rationale very similar to that of Amtrak in many of these areas. And in my response, first, and formost, I want to assure you that while you may detect contempt in some of my words, the contempt is not for you, but rather, for Amtrak's logic. I'll begin by saying, you are absolutely right, and I was wrong, I don't know what could have gotten into me. Trouble is, it is not "I" who soon will be in a battle to save my very existance. Amtrak needs ridership, and the only way they are going to get it is through becoming more attuned to the needs of their customers, not by reasoning them away. Amtrak is a big deal, it's nationwide, not some little "mom-n-pop" outfit. It is absolutely incompetant for a responsible organization of that magnitude to not have SOME "touch down" services at destinations it serves, at the time of calling. That ststion is at Waterloo for one reason only, it is the nearest point of call to Ft Wayne. Amtrak has, or rather HAD a station in Ft. wayne, that it abandoned when it ceased operations on the old Pennsey line, and OFFICIALLY made the point of connection Waterloo. That was their decision, fine, but if it's Ft wayne they think they are serving THEN THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SOME WAY FOR ME TO GET THERE. (i was going to visit my 76 year old mother, and wasn't about to make her drive all the way out there, would you?) I know of no nation wide transportation "expert" that dumps it's cargo (customers) in a dead cell, the way they would heve dumped me. Public Airports have taxicabs, if you ever find one that doesn't, you let me know!! The real issue worthy of debate here is Amtraks misguided belief that Waterloo is destination "good enough" for it's customers. (watch the Ft. Wayne customers come flooding in, they'll be here anytime) The story in the new issue of Classic trains regarding "The 20th Century Limited" and "The Broadway Limited" is a perfect example of where Amtrak is screwing up. Look at the elaboration on where lowering the farebox price feeds into an increase in revenue per passenger mile. It's a classic lesson in economic's, one that certain "rule makers" would be well advised to take into consideration. And as for the wonderful "vista's" you mention? yeah, *that* is why I was gonna take rail. But to this end, Rail corridors seldom go through the scenic parts of town, You go through dilapidated industrial districts, "old towne" like slum areas and past abandoned breweries....should I get a credit for all those "unworthy vistas's? And, the "rate" for the sleeper? it was the mandatory coach seat rate, added onto the sleeper cost that I object to. Why should I have to pay for two "seats" in the same train? No, wait, following your logic, make that "three" seats in the same train (since as you point out, the sleeper seats two) I want to thank you for proving my point for me, there is no reason on god's green earth why anyone would want to pay a "triple fare" if they can avoid it. And "avoid it" they will... In fact, "avoid" it is probably what this entire absurd exercise is all about. The columnist Don Phillips is a wise man. He has written how Amtrak was created to keep the railroads from getting a black eye from terminating passenger rail. He's right. At *that* time, passenger rail still mattered to a heck of a lot more people than it does now. What Amtrak is, in actuality, is a 20 year "fuse" designed to allow the crap"y policy of Amtrak to drive customers away, so that in the end, as few people are really left when things go "boom". And that is what we are seeing right now, the fuse is near the end.
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