UP - NS Merger

[Anonymous]

Seen a ton of CSX Locomotives on BNSF and UP

DOGGY

[Anonymous]

I don't think this will happen . it's too much at stake . you must remember that the STB will not allow UP to go ahead with this deal . because it's what you would call too much competition with orth railroads eventhough there aren't many you still have whats left . and that my friends is the purpose of the SURFACE TRANSPORTION BOARD!!! ..

[Allen Jenkins]

Of the one's left, which road can be called a for-sure global transportation system? Not just loading, at a seaport facility, I mean trans-world? That one isn't gonna disappear. When NS bought into the Conrail, they had ALL the cash, infact not very many others had such large pockets. The merger changed that, the note pays out somthing like the year 2097. A lot of debt, but the business practices and product the Thoroughbred of Transportation has perfected over the years should stand alone. The low-sulfur coal from the dust bowl is the only claim to fame, other than global container thruways, any change in the demand for coal could effectivly kill every duck in the pond, as could the war on terrisim(Did someone say trainsim?). The "players" left to dance are a lean, mean bunch, and no-one wants to "disappear," or take second place, (one in the same). The job that the ICC had, was to prevent what wormed the Pennsy. Then when deregulation occurred, even the truckers hated it. For sure, we need a transtportation overhaul, and if the Right Way is ever re-invented, there would be work applenty, for all. God Bless America! Enjoy Your Hobby! acj (fyi, the end of the hood is an image of all the equine, not just head).

[overall]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Mr. Frank

Hate to add fuel to the rumor mill - my brother lives just a few blocks past the west end of UP's Proviso Yard in Elmhurst, IL - he mentioned last night that he has been seeing a lot more NS power on UP trains lately. I don't want to assume that this means an imminent merger, but it certainly makes you wonder...

I regularly see UP engines on the CSX here in Nashville. About as many UP engines as CSX engines around here or so it seems. I have also started to see NS engines here too. CSX and NS predessesors Southern and L&N did not like each other. Seeing a Southern engine on the "ellen n" or vice versa would have been unheard of. Things change.

George

[rf16a]

Hello Mr. Bill.
Oh, Hi Mr. Hand.
So are you enjoying your trains Mr. Bill?
Yes Mr. Hand.
Mr. Bill, I think we should merge your NS trains with your UP trains.
I don't think that's a good idea Mr. Hand.
Sure it is Mr. Bill, let me help you.
No Mr. Hand, wait, oh no, no, noooooooooooooooooooooooo.

[:p][:p][:p][:p][:p][:p][:p][:p][:p][:p]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by erikthered

Yikes.
Given the rather poor history of rail mergers in the past ten years I think you would see a lot of controversy over this one. Although the ICC no longer exists, I would expect to see some interest from the Department of Justice and probably the Securities and Exchange Commission as well.

If I remember my Managerial Economics, mergers are governed by the Herfendahl-Hirshman Index, or HHI. The HHI is the sum of the squared shares of the market for every firm in a particular market times 10,000. Under the merger guidelines of the DOJ, if the HHI of a merger will be greater than 1,800 or is greater than 1,800 before the merger, the merger is challenged. If the HHI is between 1,000 and 1,800, then the merger is closely examined. Bear in mind these are only guidelines, mergers are often allowed even when the HHI is large, provided certain conditions are met, such as increased efficiency, emerging new technology, or one of the firms has financial problems, or significant foreign competition. I don't believe the DOJ or the FTC would allow this merger to occur.

I know this thread was started in jest, but some are taking this seriously. [:D]

[wallyworld]

You mean SNUP? Or PUNS? A true transcontinental road will face fierce opposition from the same folks who were promised benefits and ended up with a extended operational capability worthy of the Penn Central snafu.. Unless the logistical realities of cross continental operations are rethought in a innovational manner with the empathasis on speed, you'll have the whole thing in reality become a only a preperation for a future retrenchment.This calls for an expansion into premium services if you can sort out the huge issue of crew hours, scheduled versus bundled runs. Operational economies, less transfers etc are all no brainers as far as benefits. This is a shake out to reduce overhead not a expansion of potential market unless you count existing shippers increasing their loads from truck based transcontental loads but this is already tapped in intermodal, is'nt it? . This is subject to trade policy which could radically change in light of the currennt political situation with unemployment, overseas jobs etc. A case can be made that bigger does not necessarily mean better service. Ask a short line customer versus a Class 1 customer who is the more flexible, responsive and reachable...in most cases-smaller is better. Lets face it, how many roads have merged because both were strong as far as revenue? Southern Pacific? Rio Grande? Northern Pacific? Western Maryland? etc, etc.
I think most mergers are grasping for survival. If two strong roads merge it will be a very interesting clash of meshing giants if history proves repeatable.

[cpbloom]

It would seem that the 2 RRs with the deepest pockets would not try and merge with each other, but gobble up other RRs: (UP+CSX) and (NS+BNSF). Say goodbye to Dark Future and Great Pumpkins.

[Rick Gates]

Gee Zach, I was kidding! I guess a job with NS is out of the Question????[B)]

[espeefoamer]

Originally posted by GRANTSHAW

If the Norfolk Southern and the Union Pacific merge will they call the results
Southern Pacific and paint their locomotives crimson and gray??? If so,
I am for it.
[/quote
I vote for this one![:)][:)][:)]

Ride Amtrak. Cats Rule, Dogs Drool.

• Reply