Trains.com

Canadian Pacific Norfolk Southern Merger

42334 views
557 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Friday, November 13, 2015 7:35 PM

Victrola1

Image

US carriers demonstrated that multiple roads could cooperate in operating long distance trains over multiple carriers (California Zephyr, UP 'City' streamliners etc.).

The question becomes, why they did not cooperate in operating long distance trains transcontinentally over the Mississippi River - with nominally, Chicago, St. Louis, Memphis and New Orleans being terminal gateways between East and West.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: Rhode Island
  • 2,289 posts
Posted by carnej1 on Friday, November 13, 2015 11:14 AM

Victrola1

Image

What would Robert Young say about a freight car crossing the country without changing railroads? 

 

Well;he apparently thought that a freight car that changed railroads was good enough for the hog...

"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Friday, November 13, 2015 10:40 AM

caldreamer

OK, why can't the STB tell the railroads for example the UP/NS interchange at bellbue is better overall so do it? 

 

How would the STB know?  Even if they did, how would it be fair to take money from UP and give it to NS?

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • 1,486 posts
Posted by Victrola1 on Friday, November 13, 2015 10:09 AM

Image

What would Robert Young say about a freight car crossing the country without changing railroads? 

  • Member since
    September 2013
  • 2,505 posts
Posted by caldreamer on Friday, November 13, 2015 8:50 AM

OK, why can't the STB tell the railroads for example the UP/NS interchange at bellbue is better overall so do it? 

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Friday, November 13, 2015 6:44 AM

Paul-

A study would give the magnitude of the benefit, but I can tell you the problem is that the RRs really don't play all that well together.  There's a lot of "we're going to do this our way because that's how we do it and you can just adjust."  Just on the operations side, each RR, to some degree tries to optimize their own network which may be to the detriment of the whole.  On the marketing side. any change to an interchange location means having to split the revenue differently, which always will impact one party's revenue goals.  

Let's say you figure out it would be better overall to have UP give you a North Platte block for Bellevue at Kansas City intead of Chicago and in return, you'd give them a North Platte built at Bellevue.  UP has to figure out what that means in terms of crews and locomotives - and the change in rate split.  If it comes out a wash, they won't do the change.  Only obvious "win-wins" have a chance.  Otherwise there is suspicion the other guy is trying to get one over on you.

A merger would stop all this nonsense.  But, so could some good leadership.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Thursday, November 12, 2015 9:12 PM

From oltmannd above: "I think CP is the worst fit for NS compared to UP, BNSF and CN.  It doesn't fix any interchange issues or smooth traffic flow anywhere that I can think of.

Where I think EHH has a point is that mergers can be beneficial is fixing some of the stupid traffic routes that exist (and help clog up Chicago)."

BaltACD
[snipped- PDN] . . . A number of years ago CSX & UP undertook a routing rationalization program to maximize the operating parameters of the traffic that is handled between the carriers.  Part of the plan was train blocking as well as changing gateways on some traffic to help the overall operations of both carriers.  It is my belief that these kinds of rationalization programs have taken place between all the Class 1 carriers for their mutual benefits.

What I'd like to know - via an unbiased study - is what operating and financial benefits could be achieved by interchange procedure improvements, agreements, and the like without a merger, as compared to those which can't be achieved in any way, shape, or fashion unless a merger happens. 

It's always popular for CEOs and hedge funds to claim that efficiencies can be achieved, etc., as EHH has done in the past.  But without an independent assessment of that, it's not credible.  To me, it's misleading and deceptive and ought to be subject to a "put up or shut up" challenge and burden of proof.  Failure to simultaneously back up those kinds of claims with substantial evidence should lead to heavy civil penalties and jail as securities manipulation and fraud.  Won't see that in my lifetime, though.   

- Paul North.     

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, November 12, 2015 9:02 PM

BaltACD

 

 
oltmannd
BaltACD
oltmannd
zugmann
Paul_D_North_Jr

Schenectady, NY on the east coast.

Yes.  At Mohawk yard.  

Also at Buffalo/Niagara Falls, Detroit, Chicago.

I think CP is the worst fit for NS compared to UP, BNSF and CN.  It doesn't fix any interchange issues or smooth traffic flow anywhere that I can think of.

Where I think EHH has a point is that mergers can be beneficial is fixing some of the stupid traffic routes that exist (and help clog up Chicago).

Traffic flow is generally west to east, and the western road want the longest haul they can get.  That means Chicago, most often, even when KC, StL, or Memphis might make better sense.

Another example would be chemical traffic from Texas to NJ.  Now, most of it goes all the way up to Salem IL, then east through NY and finally down to NJ.  The best route would be to interchange the traffic at New Orleans and run directly to NJ through Atlanta.  But, that doesn't happen because that would short-haul UP or leave the traffic up for grabs between BNSF and UP.

I know UP routes a 'whole bunch' of chemical traffic through NOLA - mostly in run-through trains on CSX - how much chemical traffic NS gets through NOLA I have no idea.  Salem, IL is a CSX connection anyway.

I would bet that none of the chemical traffic over NOLA is headed to the northeast.

Either CSX or NS over NOLA thru Atlanta would be better than UP/CSX over Salem.

 

The runthrough trains received from the UP at NOLA are destined to Waycross and Hamlet.  Where the traffic goes beyond those major classification yards is the 'great unknown' without knowing specifically what traffic is being handled.

A number of years ago CSX & UP undertook a routing rationalization program to maximize the operating parameters of the traffic that is handled between the carriers.  Part of the plan was train blocking as well as changing gateways on some traffic to help the overall operations of both carriers.  It is my belief that these kinds of rationalization programs have taken place between all the Class 1 carriers for their mutual benefits.

 

They make you a Hamlet.  Interesting.  Good chance some of that goes to the Northeast, then.  We get a solid train from the UP each day but I think it's Birminghams and Chattanoogas...  

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Thursday, November 12, 2015 8:33 PM

Quoting BaltACD: "Balt, do these runthroughs go by way of Pensacola and Baldwin and then take what is left of the Baldwin Cutoff up to Callahan?

 

Some do."

How do the others run, especially to Waycross? Up to Montgomery and then either directly to Waycross or via the West Point Route to the junction with the former AB&C and thence to Waycross?

I presume that the line through Pensacola is still dark west of Chattahoochee, and the Montgomery-Waycross line is also dark.

Johnny

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Thursday, November 12, 2015 8:08 PM

Deggesty
BaltACD
oltmannd
BaltACD
oltmannd
zugmann
Paul_D_North_Jr

Schenectady, NY on the east coast.

Yes.  At Mohawk yard.  

Also at Buffalo/Niagara Falls, Detroit, Chicago.

I think CP is the worst fit for NS compared to UP, BNSF and CN.  It doesn't fix any interchange issues or smooth traffic flow anywhere that I can think of.

Where I think EHH has a point is that mergers can be beneficial is fixing some of the stupid traffic routes that exist (and help clog up Chicago).

Traffic flow is generally west to east, and the western road want the longest haul they can get.  That means Chicago, most often, even when KC, StL, or Memphis might make better sense.

Another example would be chemical traffic from Texas to NJ.  Now, most of it goes all the way up to Salem IL, then east through NY and finally down to NJ.  The best route would be to interchange the traffic at New Orleans and run directly to NJ through Atlanta.  But, that doesn't happen because that would short-haul UP or leave the traffic up for grabs between BNSF and UP.

I know UP routes a 'whole bunch' of chemical traffic through NOLA - mostly in run-through trains on CSX - how much chemical traffic NS gets through NOLA I have no idea.  Salem, IL is a CSX connection anyway.

I would bet that none of the chemical traffic over NOLA is headed to the northeast.

Either CSX or NS over NOLA thru Atlanta would be better than UP/CSX over Salem.

 

The runthrough trains received from the UP at NOLA are destined to Waycross and Hamlet.  Where the traffic goes beyond those major classification yards is the 'great unknown' without knowing specifically what traffic is being handled.

A number of years ago CSX & UP undertook a routing rationalization program to maximize the operating parameters of the traffic that is handled between the carriers.  Part of the plan was train blocking as well as changing gateways on some traffic to help the overall operations of both carriers.  It is my belief that these kinds of rationalization programs have taken place between all the Class 1 carriers for their mutual benefits.

Balt, do these runthroughs go by way of Pensacola and Baldwin and then take what is left of the Baldwin Cutoff up to Callahan?

Some do.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Thursday, November 12, 2015 6:43 PM

BaltACD

 

 
oltmannd
BaltACD
oltmannd
zugmann
Paul_D_North_Jr

Schenectady, NY on the east coast.

Yes.  At Mohawk yard.  

Also at Buffalo/Niagara Falls, Detroit, Chicago.

I think CP is the worst fit for NS compared to UP, BNSF and CN.  It doesn't fix any interchange issues or smooth traffic flow anywhere that I can think of.

Where I think EHH has a point is that mergers can be beneficial is fixing some of the stupid traffic routes that exist (and help clog up Chicago).

Traffic flow is generally west to east, and the western road want the longest haul they can get.  That means Chicago, most often, even when KC, StL, or Memphis might make better sense.

Another example would be chemical traffic from Texas to NJ.  Now, most of it goes all the way up to Salem IL, then east through NY and finally down to NJ.  The best route would be to interchange the traffic at New Orleans and run directly to NJ through Atlanta.  But, that doesn't happen because that would short-haul UP or leave the traffic up for grabs between BNSF and UP.

I know UP routes a 'whole bunch' of chemical traffic through NOLA - mostly in run-through trains on CSX - how much chemical traffic NS gets through NOLA I have no idea.  Salem, IL is a CSX connection anyway.

I would bet that none of the chemical traffic over NOLA is headed to the northeast.

Either CSX or NS over NOLA thru Atlanta would be better than UP/CSX over Salem.

 

The runthrough trains received from the UP at NOLA are destined to Waycross and Hamlet.  Where the traffic goes beyond those major classification yards is the 'great unknown' without knowing specifically what traffic is being handled.

A number of years ago CSX & UP undertook a routing rationalization program to maximize the operating parameters of the traffic that is handled between the carriers.  Part of the plan was train blocking as well as changing gateways on some traffic to help the overall operations of both carriers.  It is my belief that these kinds of rationalization programs have taken place between all the Class 1 carriers for their mutual benefits.

 

Balt, do these runthroughs go by way of Pensacola and Baldwin and then take what is left of the Baldwin Cutoff up to Callahan?

Johnny

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Thursday, November 12, 2015 6:32 PM

oltmannd
BaltACD
oltmannd
zugmann
Paul_D_North_Jr

Schenectady, NY on the east coast.

Yes.  At Mohawk yard.  

Also at Buffalo/Niagara Falls, Detroit, Chicago.

I think CP is the worst fit for NS compared to UP, BNSF and CN.  It doesn't fix any interchange issues or smooth traffic flow anywhere that I can think of.

Where I think EHH has a point is that mergers can be beneficial is fixing some of the stupid traffic routes that exist (and help clog up Chicago).

Traffic flow is generally west to east, and the western road want the longest haul they can get.  That means Chicago, most often, even when KC, StL, or Memphis might make better sense.

Another example would be chemical traffic from Texas to NJ.  Now, most of it goes all the way up to Salem IL, then east through NY and finally down to NJ.  The best route would be to interchange the traffic at New Orleans and run directly to NJ through Atlanta.  But, that doesn't happen because that would short-haul UP or leave the traffic up for grabs between BNSF and UP.

I know UP routes a 'whole bunch' of chemical traffic through NOLA - mostly in run-through trains on CSX - how much chemical traffic NS gets through NOLA I have no idea.  Salem, IL is a CSX connection anyway.

I would bet that none of the chemical traffic over NOLA is headed to the northeast.

Either CSX or NS over NOLA thru Atlanta would be better than UP/CSX over Salem.

The runthrough trains received from the UP at NOLA are destined to Waycross and Hamlet.  Where the traffic goes beyond those major classification yards is the 'great unknown' without knowing specifically what traffic is being handled.

A number of years ago CSX & UP undertook a routing rationalization program to maximize the operating parameters of the traffic that is handled between the carriers.  Part of the plan was train blocking as well as changing gateways on some traffic to help the overall operations of both carriers.  It is my belief that these kinds of rationalization programs have taken place between all the Class 1 carriers for their mutual benefits.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, November 12, 2015 6:20 PM

BaltACD

 

 
oltmannd
zugmann
Paul_D_North_Jr

Schenectady, NY on the east coast.

Yes.  At Mohawk yard.  

Also at Buffalo/Niagara Falls, Detroit, Chicago.

I think CP is the worst fit for NS compared to UP, BNSF and CN.  It doesn't fix any interchange issues or smooth traffic flow anywhere that I can think of.

Where I think EHH has a point is that mergers can be beneficial is fixing some of the stupid traffic routes that exist (and help clog up Chicago).

Traffic flow is generally west to east, and the western road want the longest haul they can get.  That means Chicago, most often, even when KC, StL, or Memphis might make better sense.

Another example would be chemical traffic from Texas to NJ.  Now, most of it goes all the way up to Salem IL, then east through NY and finally down to NJ.  The best route would be to interchange the traffic at New Orleans and run directly to NJ through Atlanta.  But, that doesn't happen because that would short-haul UP or leave the traffic up for grabs between BNSF and UP.

 

I know UP routes a 'whole bunch' of chemical traffic through NOLA - mostly in run-through trains on CSX - how much chemical traffic NS gets through NOLA I have no idea.  Salem, IL is a CSX connection anyway.

 

I would bet that none of the chemical traffic over NOLA is headed to the northeast.

Either CSX or NS over NOLA thru Atlanta would be better than UP/CSX over Salem.

 

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Thursday, November 12, 2015 12:37 PM

Also a CP-NS merger would mean the new entity controls at least 33% of the Belt Railway of Chicago.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Thursday, November 12, 2015 9:29 AM

oltmannd
zugmann
Paul_D_North_Jr

Schenectady, NY on the east coast.

Yes.  At Mohawk yard.  

Also at Buffalo/Niagara Falls, Detroit, Chicago.

I think CP is the worst fit for NS compared to UP, BNSF and CN.  It doesn't fix any interchange issues or smooth traffic flow anywhere that I can think of.

Where I think EHH has a point is that mergers can be beneficial is fixing some of the stupid traffic routes that exist (and help clog up Chicago).

Traffic flow is generally west to east, and the western road want the longest haul they can get.  That means Chicago, most often, even when KC, StL, or Memphis might make better sense.

Another example would be chemical traffic from Texas to NJ.  Now, most of it goes all the way up to Salem IL, then east through NY and finally down to NJ.  The best route would be to interchange the traffic at New Orleans and run directly to NJ through Atlanta.  But, that doesn't happen because that would short-haul UP or leave the traffic up for grabs between BNSF and UP.

I know UP routes a 'whole bunch' of chemical traffic through NOLA - mostly in run-through trains on CSX - how much chemical traffic NS gets through NOLA I have no idea.  Salem, IL is a CSX connection anyway.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, November 12, 2015 6:41 AM

zugmann

 

 
Paul_D_North_Jr
Where does NS connect directly with CP - 1) anyplace ?

 

Schenectady, NY on the east coast.

 

Yes.  At Mohawk yard.  

Also at Buffalo/Niagara Falls, Detroit, Chicago.

I think CP is the worst fit for NS compared to UP, BNSF and CN.  It doesn't fix any interchange issues or smooth traffic flow anywhere that I can think of.

Where I think EHH has a point is that mergers can be beneficial is fixing some of the stupid traffic routes that exist (and help clog up Chicago).

Traffic flow is generally west to east, and the western road want the longest haul they can get.  That means Chicago, most often, even when KC, StL, or Memphis might make better sense.

Another example would be chemical traffic from Texas to NJ.  Now, most of it goes all the way up to Salem IL, then east through NY and finally down to NJ.  The best route would be to interchange the traffic at New Orleans and run directly to NJ through Atlanta.  But, that doesn't happen because that would short-haul UP or leave the traffic up for grabs between BNSF and UP.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    May 2013
  • 3,231 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Wednesday, November 11, 2015 11:21 PM

dakotafred
Unfair, Tree. UP kept the "Union" from their road and the "Pacific" from SP.

They also agreed to put gray and red on their locomotives...

Stick out tongue

On a more serious note, I wonder if fixing Chicago and the other East/West interchange points through transcontinental mergers  is worth the costs of mandatory reciprocal switching?

  • Member since
    January 2015
  • 2,678 posts
Posted by kgbw49 on Wednesday, November 11, 2015 11:02 PM

Other CP-NS connecting points besides Schenectady and Chicago are Buffalo, Detroit, and Kansas City.

CN with the J already in hand and Prince Rupert (the closest intermodal terminal to China) might be a better fit with NS. (Gulf, Mobile & Arctic?) That could be the fastest total transit time for a container between Shanghai and New York.

it would seem if this domino tips there will end up being a slicing and dicing of the two eastern roads between the two Canucks and the two western roads because they will all demand an equal piece of the action. No one will want to be left by the wayside.(Does Mr. Buffett's road still have rights to Atlantic & Pacific? If not, how about the Berkshire, Ozark and Sierra Railway - who's the BOS now?)

Intriguing stuff, no doubt.

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Wednesday, November 11, 2015 10:37 PM

zugmann

 

 
caldreamer

It will NEVER happen.  The STB will NOT allow two Class 1 railroads to merge.  It would diminish competition.  Then there is the Anit-Trust division of the Justice Department.

If this happens bring me a super size plate of humble pie!!!

 

 

 

 

Those same words were probably spoken before every other major merger.

 

 To be fair, those same words were probably spoken before every major meger that fell through as well. Mischief

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    November 2005
  • 4,190 posts
Posted by wanswheel on Wednesday, November 11, 2015 9:30 PM

Excerpt from The Globe and Mail, Nov. 9

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/canadian-pacific-said-to-explore-norfolk-southern-takeover/article27176306/

Benoit Poirier, an equities analyst with Desjardins Capital Markets, noted that CN’s superior network was assembled when Mr. Harrison was at the company. Since taking control at CP in 2012 after a boardroom battle led by activist investor Bill Ackman, Mr. Harrison has made strides to improve CP’s efficiency and profitability. Building a better rail network and applying his operational model to the underperforming Norfolk Southern, Mr. Poirier said, could be next on his to-do list.

Railway leaders and observers in the industry have said the U.S. Surface Transportation Board would be reluctant to approve rail mergers at a time when complaints about rail congestion and service are high. After blocking a merger between CN and Burlington Northern Railroad in 2000, the U.S. regulator toughened its rules and said any merger must improve service, not merely preserve it.

However, Mr. Harrison never abandoned his belief that rail mergers would help to relieve the congestion that grips the industry, particularly in Chicago, where the big carriers hand over railcars to each other. He has said a merger would improve service, efficiency and capacity, but “nobody wants to do a deal.”

Mr. Poirier highlighted some of the service improvements a merger could bring, including offering oil shippers in the Bakken and oil sands direct access to refineries on the U.S. East Coast. And the combined companies could offer a “unique” route for intermodal containers to Florida from Vancouver.

 

Excerpt from The Globe and Mail, Nov. 11

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/cp-railways-proposed-takeover-of-norfolk-southern-would-face-scrutiny/article27217277/

Anthony Hatch, a transportation analyst and founder of New York-based ABH Consulting, said support from rail customers will be vital if any merger is to pass the “complicated” approval process involving several jurisdictions.

But he predicted reaction from shippers will range from “neutral and sullen” to “actively opposed” to this and any other proposed union that emerges…

From a railway standpoint, Mr. Hatch sees a few key reasons the merger is a bad idea, including the risk that regulators will impose conditions that will trump any financial gains the takeover will bring.

Norfolk Southern, he said, is known as a “railroader’s railroad” with a strong southern culture that is unlikely to welcome a takeover.

“Norfolk Southern is likely to fight this,” Mr. Hatch said.

He noted CP chief executive officer Hunter Harrison is not known for “diplomacy and tact” in his dealings with regulators and shippers, characteristics that might not help with any approvals.

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Wednesday, November 11, 2015 9:08 PM

Paul_D_North_Jr
Where does NS connect directly with CP - 1) anyplace ?

Schenectady, NY on the east coast.

It's been fun.  But it isn't much fun anymore.   Signing off for now. 


  

The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Wednesday, November 11, 2015 9:01 PM

caldreamer

It will NEVER happen.  The STB will NOT allow two Class 1 railroads to merge.  It would diminish competition.  Then there is the Anit-Trust division of the Justice Department.

If this happens bring me a super size plate of humble pie!!!

 

 

Those same words were probably spoken before every other major merger.

It's been fun.  But it isn't much fun anymore.   Signing off for now. 


  

The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any

  • Member since
    August 2004
  • From: The 17th hole at TPC
  • 2,283 posts
Posted by n012944 on Wednesday, November 11, 2015 9:00 PM

WM7471

  However CSX also brings the old B&OCT to the table with it's parallel and paired track to IHB.  Then there is the stock price, CSX is about 1/3 of NS stock.

 

 

 

Don't get hung up on stock price, look at the market cap for both railroads.  

An "expensive model collector"

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Wednesday, November 11, 2015 8:54 PM

WM7471
[snipped - PDN} . . . I think CPRS still has it's eyes on the prize....Indiana Harbor Belt and a direct route through Chicago.  NS and CSX both own 25.5% of IHB, CPRS has the remaining 49%, so acquiring either NS  or CSX will give control of IHB to CPRS.  . . . Then there is the stock price, CSX is about 1/3 of NS stock. . . .

Where does NS connect directly with CP - 1) anyplace ? and 2) in the Chicago area ?  What is the quality of / volume at those connections ?  Would any of the pending and likely CREATE projects improve those connections ? 

The important number is not the stock price in $ per share, but the total market capitalization of the business = number of shares x their price, and how much would have to be purchased to have effective control of the company.  For example, a company with 1 million shares at $50 = $50 million, but would be less expensive to obtain control (on a percentage of the total shares issued and outstanding) than a company with 5 million shares at $30 = $150 million market capitalizaton.

As someone mentioned above, Ackman's fund has been hammered badly by the Valeant fiasco and some other bad investments (see recent Wall Street Journal article, within the last week).  I too view this rumor as an attempt at market manipulation - by someone - to bump up the value of CP shares, and perhaps enable Ackman recover from some of his losses elsewhere through the railroad's shares.

- Paul North. 

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    September 2013
  • 2,505 posts
Posted by caldreamer on Wednesday, November 11, 2015 8:36 PM

UP already was Union Pacific over a hundred years befor they bought the SP.  How about the "Gored And Defeated Railraod North (GDN)"

  • Member since
    July 2003
  • 62 posts
Posted by WM7471 on Wednesday, November 11, 2015 8:32 PM

I guess it is just my devious nature, but I have to wonder if all of this is just theater to stampede nervous CSX investors into the arms of EHH. 

In spite of a good operating ratio, CSX has suffered from the downturn in coal and a major unplanned management shake up.  Everything seems to be held together by Michael Ward, and while he doesn't appear to going anywhere  soon,  it could make some investors uncomfortable. 

I think CPRS still has it's eyes on the prize....Indiana Harbor Belt and a direct route through Chicago.  NS and CSX both own 25.5% of IHB, CPRS has the remaining 49%, so acquiring either NS  or CSX will give control of IHB to CPRS.  However CSX also brings the old B&OCT to the table with it's parallel and paired track to IHB.  Then there is the stock price, CSX is about 1/3 of NS stock.

It's not that NS is not a well managed operation, that's the problem,  it's too well run, and I would expect them to go eyeball to eyeball with EHH. Then there is a very real chance that BNSF, UP, CN or even KCS could get involved. 

I wonder if some CSX investors might be afraid of missing the big check from CPRS,  and start leaning on Jacksonville to take the deal,  before things can be worked out with NS. 

Game, set and match to Mr. Harrison. 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,023 posts
Posted by tree68 on Wednesday, November 11, 2015 6:48 PM

dakotafred
Unfair, Tree. UP kept the "Union" from their road and the "Pacific" from SP.

Yes

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    December 2009
  • 1,751 posts
Posted by dakotafred on Wednesday, November 11, 2015 5:11 PM

tree68
 
kgbw49
Get ready for the Norfolk & Northwestern, Norfolk, Winnipeg & Western, Norfolk & Pacific or other such name of choice.

 

UP didn't bother with any of that.  Winner take all - CP.

 

Unfair, Tree. UP kept the "Union" from their road and the "Pacific" from SP.

CBT
  • Member since
    February 2015
  • 191 posts
Posted by CBT on Wednesday, November 11, 2015 4:59 PM

kgbw49

Get ready for the Norfolk & Northwestern, Norfolk, Winnipeg & Western, Norfolk & Pacific or other such name of choice.

 

It could be southern pacific the SECOND

  • Member since
    August 2008
  • From: Calgary AB. Canada
  • 2,298 posts
Posted by AgentKid on Wednesday, November 11, 2015 4:58 PM

kgbw49
how about the Dismal Swamp & Moose Jaw?

Now, now. Now! That's funny, but. . .

Ahem.

Bruce

 

So shovel the coal, let this rattler roll.

"A Train is a Place Going Somewhere"  CP Rail Public Timetable

"O. S. Irricana"

. . . __ . ______

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy