Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by greyhounds [quote]QUOTE: From FM but for some reason BNSF has an aversion to making money from bi-modal innovation. I know this from personal experience. Perhaps they were afraid that the RoadRailer operations might be too successful, causing a supply chain shift away from newly ordered boxcars and well cars. Hmmmm, it is interesting to note that a truly integrated transportation company would never behave thus, but unfortunately for the USA our rail system is closed access, and such irrational behaviour is the result. But I am open for other excuses besides tried and true monopolists theory. [/quote] This just doesn't make sense. If the BNSF was "adverse" to making money using bi-modal equipment: 1) Why did they invest heavily in refrigerated RoadRailers and start the Ice Cold Express 2) Why do they operate a Tripple Crown RoadRailer train between Kansas City and Dallas/Ft. Worth The fact is, they aren't. If they could make money running an all-Pullman streamliner between Chicago and Los Angeles, they'd do it. (Although the Government would probably get in the way there.) If they could have made money running the Swift trains, those trains would still operate. They're in business to make money, however they legally can. They're not going to turn down profits. If a corporate honcho did that, he/she would be in big legal trouble. Corporations (including railroads) aren't run on whims. They don't get everything right, but they make reasoned decisons. Now sometimes their reasoning is wrong - but then our (you and me) reasoning is sometimes wrong. Ken [/quote] Ken, You're right, it doesn't make sense, but there it is as plain as day. I spoke with a Swift rep a while back about BNSF pulling the rug from the I-5 RoadRailer service, and his opinion was that both BNSF and Swift profited from the service, but for some reason that has never been explained BNSF management suddenly turned cold to bi-modal. Speaking of investment, not only did BNSF shortchange their own investment in the service, they also hurt Swift's investment in the project as well, and basically left Swift holding the bag. Perhaps that was BNSF's strategy all along - sucker the "enemy" into an ostensible partnership, then yank the rug out from under them after the check clears. At least that explanation is as good as any other. If I heard the rep correctly, Swift has vowed never again to waste time trying to work with the UP/BNSF duopoly on new concepts. The impression I got is that Swift dearly wishes it could run it's own trains without having to deal with the railroads.
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