schlimm I would suggest you re-read my post. You are confounding variables. The key is a type of business the rails have largely put on the shelf. If you look at this presentation, you will see that though profitable, non-bulk and non-intermodal carloadings are declining by 167,278 per year since 2007. http://www.transportation.northwestern.edu/docs/2008/2008.01.28.Blaszak.Presentation.pdf
I would suggest you re-read my post. You are confounding variables. The key is a type of business the rails have largely put on the shelf.
If you look at this presentation, you will see that though profitable, non-bulk and non-intermodal carloadings are declining by 167,278 per year since 2007. http://www.transportation.northwestern.edu/docs/2008/2008.01.28.Blaszak.Presentation.pdf
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
schlimmIf you look at this presentation, you will see that though profitable, non-bulk and non-intermodal carloadings are declining by 167,278 per year since 2007.
I would opine that said decline has less to do with graffiti (far less) than it does with the changing nature of the business.
Just because a given commodity isn't being loaded in a box car doesn't mean it isn't travelling by rail.
And we know that the railroads generally prefer to eschew loose car railroading.
The fact that a single 53' semi-trailer can probably haul about the same cubes as a 40' boxcar of old doesn't help much, either. And there's the "go anywhere" nature of the Interstate highway system.
The connection between a fall in individual carloadings and graffiti is nebulous at best.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Larry, be careful in using the word "eschew." You reminded me of a passage in a book I read when I was in high school (several years ago, I saw a copy of it in a second hand book store--and failed, regrettably now, to buy it). One of the characters remarked that he eschewed tobacco in all forms, and another character quite misunderstood what he said.
Johnny
Please.....Lets put this notion to rest that the railroads don't own enough freight cars and the private owners do regarding graffiti.
I just witnessed a Norfolk Southern train through Huntsville, Alabama. Its not the numerous identity less private owner tanks and covered hoppers that are the eyesores. It the numerous NS, CSX and CN owned boxcars which carry the graffiti eyesores.
'
There is enough railroad owned equipment covered in graffiti to support the argument. As stated earlier, its the identity less private owned equipment which shows efforts of combating graffiti. Not the Class Ones with their public recognition through numerous TV and Radio commercials. They look great on TV.....but its a totally different story trackside!
Jim Norton
Huntsville, AL
Often the point has been made that graffiti does not matter to railroads because they don’t own most of the cars. So what? Strictly in terms of defacement damage, graffiti matters to whoever owns the cars. But in terms of liability, graffiti is a problem for the railroads no matter who owns the cars.
Also, graffiti on private cars in a freight train causes just as much damage to the host railroad as graffiti on the host railroad’s own cars in the train.
So I would say that both the railroads and the private car owners are stakeholders in a shared problem.
Euclid So I would say that both the railroads and the private car owners are stakeholders in a shared problem.
And if we followed that logic, freight rates over this conceptualized "liability" would go through the roof.
Perhaps you should look as Chairman Mao did in the 1950s:
"It doesn't matter whether the cat is black or white....as long as it catches mice."
How much revenue tonnage does the nuisance of graffiti prevent the carriers from getting paid for? How much car utilization does the nuisance of graffiti rob from the revenue stream of the private car owners? The only way to negatively affect either of these metrics is to shop the cars.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Murray Euclid So I would say that both the railroads and the private car owners are stakeholders in a shared problem. And if we followed that logic, freight rates over this conceptualized "liability" would go through the roof. Perhaps you should look as Chairman Mao did in the 1950s: "It doesn't matter whether the cat is black or white....as long as it catches mice."
I am not sure what you mean, but what I meant was that no matter who owns the car being tagged, the taggers are on the property of the railroad upon which the car stands. And the risk of their injury while on that property is a liability to that railroad. So the fact that a tagged car is privately owned does not completely shield a railroad from the burden of the tagging.
Or to put it another way, it doesn’t matter whether the cat is black or white, but it matters if it bites the neighbor.
Not necessarily,…On my carrier, the PTRA’s ownership and responsibility ends, often a few feet past the switch leading into the industry proper or their siding, from that point on, the cars ore on the industries property.
In fact, it is that way on almost every railroad out there.
23 17 46 11
Murray Perhaps you should look as Chairman Mao did in the 1950s: "It doesn't matter whether the cat is black or white....as long as it catches mice."
Not Mao, but Deng Xiaoping, 1962. This may have been taken/paraphrased from an old Polish proverb.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
dehusman The link doesn't work for me, but you are assuming that the business was lost. I would propose that it wasn't lost, it was converted to intermodal. They stopped shipping in boxcars and went to containers. You can argue that business is down all you want, but I know that the number of car loadings is up. I work for a railroad. We track that. Its in charts and graphs all over the place. Where we would consider 150,000 carloadings a week in 2007as heavy and an overload, that would be considered a huge downturn today. A normal week is inching upward of 190,000 carloadings. Business is good. Believe it or not, but those are the facts.
Carloadings tells you nothing about opportunity/new business lost. If you don't care what the Sandhouse Gang say, consider what some say on the thread: 'Cold Train' intermodal reefer suspends service.
schlimm Murray Perhaps you should look as Chairman Mao did in the 1950s: "It doesn't matter whether the cat is black or white....as long as it catches mice." Not Mao, but Deng Xiaoping, 1962. This may have been taken/paraphrased from an old Polish proverb.
Well played!!!!
Murray schlimm Murray: In your own, inimitable manner, you want the thread locked? What would be the basis for that? Schlimm...I sense that the thread is spinning, and not gaining any traction. In other words, we are really splitting hairs over how things are worded.
schlimm Murray: In your own, inimitable manner, you want the thread locked? What would be the basis for that?
Murray: In your own, inimitable manner, you want the thread locked? What would be the basis for that?
Schlimm...I sense that the thread is spinning, and not gaining any traction. In other words, we are really splitting hairs over how things are worded.
Then please say so instead of asking that the thread get locked. Just because you don't enjoy reading about splitting hairs over how things are worded please don't ask to lock the thread and try to take away my right to decide for myself if I want to read about it.
Patrick Boylan
Free yacht rides, 27' sailboat, zip code 19114 Delaware River, get great Delair bridge photos from the river. Send me a private message
gardendance Murray schlimm Murray: In your own, inimitable manner, you want the thread locked? What would be the basis for that? Schlimm...I sense that the thread is spinning, and not gaining any traction. In other words, we are really splitting hairs over how things are worded. Then please say so instead of asking that the thread get locked. Just because you don't enjoy reading about splitting hairs over how things are worded please don't ask to lock the thread and try to take away my right to decide for myself if I want to read about it.
As you have an opinion Mr. Boylan...so do I.
schlimm Carloadings tells you nothing about opportunity/new business lost. If you don't care what the Sandhouse Gang say, consider what some say on the thread: 'Cold Train' intermodal reefer suspends service.
'"By the way, excellent example for the actual topic. How much of the Cold Train business was lost because of graffiti (and reefers get hit pretty hard)?"
The post regarding Fed Ex's nicely painted jets makes a good point. As stated, Fed Ex is not putting colorful graphics on its planes for aviation buffs. When I, the customer, send a package I don't even see their jets! And, (paralleling the argument presented here) do not care how their jets are painted. So why do they do it?
Answer: They have pride in the service they provide. Few can move a jet full of packages and they want everyone to know they can.
A few years back, Railpace News Magazine editor Tom Nemeth featured the graffiti problem in an editorial. He made mention that carriers like Fed Ex and even the container companies do not tolerate the defacement of their equipment. Also, he mentioned the fact that at that time, WalMart was selling little diecast boxcars tagged with graffiti which included a trading card of the artist! Talk about no regard for the railroad industry. But I digress.
Mr. Nemeth's mention of the container companies illustrates a point. These international containers spend most of their life hidden in the hold of a ship. The public is absolutely clueless about container shipping companies. Yet, these bright colored full graphic containers put today's rail equipment to shame. Why do they care about how their containers look? Answer: Pride.
I believe a case can be made that just about every mode of moving freight, except for the railroads, takes pride in their service and in turn their equipment. They want to take credit for what they do!
dehusman By the way, excellent example for the actual topic. How much of the Cold Train business was lost because of graffiti (and reefers get hit pretty hard)? None. Zippo. Nada. Grafitti played no part in the decision. It was all based on service because THAT is what matters.
Of course, obviously. That is not why Ii mentioned it. Let me restate my point more clearly. You (or I or anyone else) cannot easily measure business you never had. The Cold Train is an example of future business considerations being deterred by BNSF's inability to deliver service. It is quite possible other potential customers for other railroads beside BNSF will decide the rails are unreliable.
Grafitti may have no impact on the image railroads have with potential customers. Then again, some business folks will see the equipment the rails use versus that of truckers and UPS and FedEx and walk away. In case you still don't get it, corporate image is important to the bottom line, even though hard to quantify. Many companies, including the rails, spend big bucks on that.
The biggest way you can quantify the impact graffiti has on railroads is the public still believes its an ailing and outdated industry. Therefore, graffiti covered equipment only reinforces this.
I have been in situations where local government (i.e. the public) is working to locate industry. In so many cases the railroad is not even considered. The public believes everything moves by truck. Shiny new trucks look like part of the solution. Graffiti laden railroads do not.
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that the OP is using graffiti issues as the point man to suggest that things were better in days gone by.
Based on what I've read here, I would also assume that the only sure cure for graffiti on freight cars (or anywhere else) is the establishment of a police state or an unlimited maintenance budget to paint over the graffiti.
jimnorton The post regarding Fed Ex's nicely painted jets makes a good point. As stated, Fed Ex is not putting colorful graphics on its planes for aviation buffs. When I, the customer, send a package I don't even see their jets! And, (paralleling the argument presented here) do not care how their jets are painted. So why do they do it? Answer: They have pride in the service they provide. Few can move a jet full of packages and they want everyone to know they can. I
I
Nope, they're placing the logo there for corporate recognition. Ever see a Ford sans the blue oval logo? Ain't gonna happen.
That said, a coat of white paint with nothing more than the required registration markings would suffice to protect the airplane. You won't see graffiti on an airplane because there is no way you are going to get by security at a class b airport. That security costs big money.
Norm
Along the lines of what Jim Norton and Schlimm said; every business has a brand, and that is not the same as a trademark or logo. Those are part of the brand, but the brand is less tangible, and more like a reputation. How a business presents itself affects its brand just like how a job seeker presents himself or herself. How a business treats is customers will affect its brand. Run down or shabby looking equipment hurts the brand. Obviously graffiti on equipment damages the brand.
Less obvious is the fact that ignoring graffiti on equipment and letting it accumulate without concern sends a powerful message that damages the brand. The message of nearly every car in a train helplessly suffering the graphic insanity applied by vandals in the night says a lot about the corporate victim of the attack. It is like a disease of the brand.
We have talked about freight trains being functional and not pretty. Form follows function. But there is a difference between looking functional and looking trashy. Industrial designers put a lot of care and talent into the appearance of functional equipment such as highway trucks, bulldozers, agricultural equipment, and locomotives. It is not expressed as the pizazz of automotive streamlining style, but they carefully arrange the details and round off corners. It is a powerful artistic statement that makes the difference between equipment looking well thought out, confident, and reliable, versus looking homemade.
Graffiti destroys that artistic statement made by the industrial design work. If the railroad companies did not want to spend the considerable money on industrial design, you can bet it would not be there. You would have more of a Russian looking design. And the graffiti on the rolling stock alone transfers its deleterious effect to the entire train and the institution that hosts it.
The effects of brand damage may be hard to quantify, but businesses know it matters. Just because a business is making a profit and otherwise successful does not prove that it is not suffering brand damage. If it is suffering brand damage, it would be more profitable if that brand damage were eliminated.
CSSHEGEWISCH I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that the OP is using graffiti issues as the point man to suggest that things were better in days gone by.
Be careful. On this forum we're not allowed to try to say what we think someone was trying to say. Your limb may break :)
But isn't it hard to deny that there wasn't less graffiti on railroad cars in days o yore? And there was much more graffiti on public transit vehicles, at least in New York and my hometown Philadelphia in the 1960's through the early 1980's, which has thankfully for the most part disappeared, it's successor scratchiti is still unwholesome, but no where near as bad as the paint variety was.
Norm48327 You won't see graffiti on an airplane because there is no way you are going to get by security at a class b airport. That security costs big money.
You won't see graffiti on an airplane because there is no way you are going to get by security at a class b airport. That security costs big money.
Never say never. However when someone DOES wind up getting into the airport's 'secure' area it causes relatively big headlines
9 Jul 2014 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-08/car-driven-on-to-brisbane-airport-runway/5582916 "An investigation is underway into a security incident that brought Brisbane's domestic airport to a standstill last night."
Oct 21, 2013 http://www.kswo.com/story/23742357/driver-crashes-on-to-runway-at-lawton-airport "Man Jailed for Driving Onto Lawton Airport Runway
Once inside, Crull took full advantage of the airports runway, driving all over it. He eventually made his way to the airport's terminal, and that's when he was noticed by an airport employee. Crull got out of his vehicle and attempted to make entry into the airport's terminal, even pushing on the doors.
When his attempt failed, he got back into his car and continued to drive around on the runway."
I have no idea if Lawton is class B, I don't even know what class B is. It sounds like Crull had plenty of time to have painted, or done anything he wanted even before he was noticed by an airport employee, and yet more time after that before anybody caught him. I'm amazed, and worried they'll read this as a challenge, that vandals haven't painted a few planes in their careers.
So where are the headlines "security incident that brought railroad to a standstill" because somebody was driving around a freight yard looking for cars to tag?
A key question: What percentage of the freight car fleet is graffiti-ridden boxcars, reefers, and autoracks?
And what percentage is the pristine containers and tank cars?
The railroad's ad campaigns are to point out that railroads do haul a large portion of America's freight. Still, a significant number of people have no idea. They think that pair of "made overseas" sneakers they're wearing probably got from the ship to the store by truck, because that's what they see, day in and day out.
The only time the vast majority of folks notice railroads is when they get hung up at a crossing (which delays their visit to the coffee shop).
I think it's safe to believe that the car owners (railroad and private) dislike graffiti. It represents a non-productive expense for them. And I'm sure that they deal with it (ie, remove it) when they can.
But I don't believe it's having a significant effect on their bottom line. As noted in the "Cold" thread, service is what counts.
My aunt worked for a wholesale lumber firm some years ago, dealing mostly in carload lots. They didn't care what a car looked like, as long as it got delivered to the promised location at the promised time.
This thread is having "anthropomorphic" tendencies. Instead of assigning human qualities to animals, railfan points of view are being assigned to the railroads - and we should already know that the railfan POV and the railroad POV are very often two different animals.
As much as some would like the railroads (and car owners) to be saying "graffiti is bad and we must eradicate all evidence of it at the earliest opportunity," it ain't happenin'. The railroads (and car owners) have more important things to spend their money on.
tree68 Still, a significant number of people have no idea. They think that pair of "made overseas" sneakers they're wearing probably got from the ship to the store by truck, because that's what they see, day in and day out.
Still, a significant number of people have no idea. They think that pair of "made overseas" sneakers they're wearing probably got from the ship to the store by truck, because that's what they see, day in and day out.
There's also an Ikea warehouse in Westhampton, NJ, very close to an I-295 interchange, with nary a rail in sight.
Do you have any figures to back up what I think is your implied idea that rail plays an important role in retail clothing and sporting goods finished product distribution?
tree68As much as some would like the railroads (and car owners) to be saying "graffiti is bad and we must eradicate all evidence of it at the earliest opportunity," it ain't happenin'. The railroads (and car owners) have more important things to spend their money on.
I think it is just the opposite. I think the railroads and car owners do believe that graffiti is an important problem, and are willing to spend money fixing it if they can figure out a way to do that. It is most of the fans that are saying that graffiti is not a problem, using every contortion possible. By insisting that graffiti is not a problem, the fans are defending the railroads for their failure to fight graffiti.
I expect that we will soon see the launching of a major effort to eradicate the train graffiti problem. I am not sure what that effort will comprise, but it will be something “outside the box.” I think the railroads could hire an independent contract security service to target graffiti as it happens. The service would learn where graffiti is likely to happen, and patrol those areas. Pay them by the arrest, and they will end the problem in short order, and at a reasonable cost.
CSSHEGEWISCH I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that the OP is using graffiti issues as the point man to suggest that things were better in days gone by. Based on what I've read here, I would also assume that the only sure cure for graffiti on freight cars (or anywhere else) is the establishment of a police state or an unlimited maintenance budget to paint over the graffiti.
The only cure is to somehow impress upon the public that defacing other people's property is not the thing to do. This show of disrespect will continue as long as there are people who have been led to believe that if you are not caught in the act you have not done anything wrong.
Euclid tree68As much as some would like the railroads (and car owners) to be saying "graffiti is bad and we must eradicate all evidence of it at the earliest opportunity," it ain't happenin'. The railroads (and car owners) have more important things to spend their money on. I think it is just the opposite. I think the railroads and car owners do believe that graffiti is an important problem, and are willing to spend money fixing it if they can figure out a way to do that. It is most of the fans that are saying that graffiti is not a problem, using every contortion possible. By insisting that graffiti is not a problem, the fans are defending the railroads for their failure to fight graffiti. I expect that we will soon see the launching of a major effort to eradicate the train graffiti problem. I am not sure what that effort will comprise, but it will be something “outside the box.” I think the railroads could hire an independent contract security service to target graffiti as it happens. The service would learn where graffiti is likely to happen, and patrol those areas. Pay them by the arrest, and they will end the problem in short order, and at a reasonable cost.
The Railroad industry cares, they just haven't cared to spend money to fix it for umpteen years now? A solution that won't cost more than it's worth is just around the corner? Really?
And some of the people on this forum that think the least of the OP's point of view are, in fact, Railroad employees. Perhaps not upper management, but none the less. This forum is filled with actual railroad employees, current and former.
Last Friday I was driving up from Roseville to Oroville and I caught a northbound Mixed freight on the Valley sub. Almost all the boxcars had graffiti on them with the exception of some rather new looking TBOX cars. The lumber and tank cars were, for the most part graffiti free. Of those Graffiti ridden cars, not one of them sported a paint job more recent than the Old Golden State service blue.
Boxcars are the primary target (with non-unit train Covered hoppers being a secondary target) The bulk of that boxcar fleet is old and the owners have largely not seen fit to even repaint the cars in at least 20 years. Heck, some cars were in old Per Diem schemes from the 70s and 80s with only new reporting marks as an update.
If the Railroads aren't even willing to paint the cars to keep up their image...in the first place, why in the world would anyone expect them to do something about the graffiti. From a branding perspective, both are a blight.
As for retail clothing travelling by rail. Almost every item of clothing that is made new in the far east comes into the port of LA/Long Beach or, less likely into the Port of Oakland or SeaTAC. From there it is loaded on a Train, probably BNSF, maybe UP and sent east. That container doesn't get put on a truck until it is at a major terminal in the east. For Ikea, since much of it is made in Europe, it probably comes into an East Coast port, so it is possible that it moves only by truck to east coast warehouses. But I guarantee the Ikea Warehouse off of I5 in Tejon ranch north of LA had most of it's stuff trucked from Hobart or some other local Ca Intermodal yard.
Burlington Coat Factory deals largely in discount major clothing. Last years styles and factory seconds. If it's coming from the clothing maker direct, than it most assuredly moved by rail at some point. If it came into the distribution center as left overs from major retailers then that is not as likely. At least not right now.
If you need a source on that, please read any article on intermodal railroading from at least the past 10 years. This is not some sort of shock. It is the way it works and has been for a while. If you read Trains magazine, you should know this.
gardendance Perhaps from ship to somewhere there was a train, but certainly a truck took over for the end of those sneakers' trip to the warehouse, and ABSOLUTELY a truck took them from warehouse to retail store.
The highlighted text is exactly my point. Thanks for restating it.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.