NITL's suggestions to STB for rail policy oversight

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd

Dave-

Are you just ignoring the idea that if OA was a win-win, the capital markets would fund it? Or, is this just an inconvenient fact?

I've put this out there twice, now.

Don,

Is the closed access system getting the funding from the capital markets? $35 billion from the public sector says no. OA also represents significant change, and that doesn't happen outside federal directive, aka energy market deregulation, et al.

Sometimes the federales need to give a "nudge" to make the right thing happen.

No, no, no. You're mixing apples and oranges. The $35B public sector money you say is out there now would not go away if capital markets funded OA. RRs are able to raise money from the capital markets. Big 4 US roads all have bond ratings above junk. Recent stock price says that market believes RR have future. If future is brighter with OA, they would fund it.

Well, if you want the apples and oranges comparison, try this out for size: Do you agree there is a big difference between capital expenditures for rolling stock or the occassional siding, and building whole new segments of ROW from scratch? When you say "if capital markets funded OA" you must be refering to building whole new rail lines from scratch. If you're talking about the current rail network being split up into infrastructure and transporting, that is simply a restructuring, not a capital expenditure, so the capital markets would not necessarily be accessed soley for a shift to OA. The potential increase in private funding for railroads under OA would come from the new entrants and innovators, both of which are effectively barred under closed access.

You are aware of the introduction of OA into the electricity and telecommunications markets. What in your opinion have the capital markets said about those versions of OA? Hasn't investment in telecommunications and energy increased substantially since those sectors were opened up? You are also aware that OA has been adopted by most other rail systems in the world. Have you noticed the increase in private sector investment in those rail systems?

It should also be noted that OA may well be banned under current STB and FRA rules, neither of which has a rule making template for potential OA operations in the US. Why would the capital markets fund something that is not even allowed right now?

[oltmannd]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd

Dave-

Are you just ignoring the idea that if OA was a win-win, the capital markets would fund it? Or, is this just an inconvenient fact?

I've put this out there twice, now.

Don,

Is the closed access system getting the funding from the capital markets? $35 billion from the public sector says no. OA also represents significant change, and that doesn't happen outside federal directive, aka energy market deregulation, et al.

Sometimes the federales need to give a "nudge" to make the right thing happen.

No, no, no. You're mixing apples and oranges. The $35B public sector money you say is out there now would not go away if capital markets funded OA. RRs are able to raise money from the capital markets. Big 4 US roads all have bond ratings above junk. Recent stock price says that market believes RR have future. If future is brighter with OA, they would fund it.

[edblysard]

Guys, guys...
Come on now...
The level and quality of the insults is sinking...we expect better use of the English language here...
Certainly two well read gentlemen such as your selves can come up with much more appropriate and verbose taunts beyond the schoolboy play ground swill here.

LC, I remember something sent to me by a feline fanatic...

"Never argue with an idiot...
They drag you down to their level, then beat you to death with experience..."


Ed[:D]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

Still can't address the topic issue can you? You can only start a flame war, then get defensive when you get burned by it.

As a topic debater, you are impotent.

And I seriously doubt that you voted at all, let alone for Bush. The tone and content of your posts are more indicitive of a King County dumpster-diving captive pawn of the left.

Who is the flamer?

I can see your legal training has kicked in. Aren't lawyers taught to only see (and subsequently defend/prosecute) one side of the arguement? Reread the thread and then tell me when the flaming started, and by whom.

Funny, I don't need to use my legal training to figure out who's rotten around here FM. My nose can sniff you out like the skunk you are...LOL...

LC

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

LC is like cable TV : 57 channels and nothin's on......

Hmmm. Well FM, unlike you, at least I have more than one channel and one show. And from where I sit, there's more going on than you'll ever even comprehend from that pea brain of yours...

LC

[Murphy Siding]

OK Perhaps popcorn would be more appropriate?[xx(]

[Anonymous]

LC is like cable TV : 57 channels and nothin's on......

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe

QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear

QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

Still can't address the topic issue can you? You can only start a flame war, then get defensive when you get burned by it.

As a topic debater, you are impotent.

And I seriously doubt that you voted at all, let alone for Bush. The tone and content of your posts are more indicitive of a King County dumpster-diving captive pawn of the left.

Who is the flamer?

Gabe -

FM is still the original self fulfilling prophecy on this site...lol...

LC

Some things don't change with time

Gabe, just for posterity's sake, also reread LC's various cheap shots over the years before you hitch your moral wagon to him.

Gabe is smart enough to see you are sinking in a morass of your own design and making FM. You have smoked your own for so long you really believe your own lies...

LC

The jury's still out on Gabe. Can't say the same for you. You are a lifer of a loser, you add nothing but scorn to this forum. The only difference between you and BTK is BTK got caught.

No, the difference between me and BTK is that I'm not a low life two bit hood who kills for his own twisted entertainment. Hmmmm. Speaking of twisted, I'm talking to you again FM, what a coincidence. I'd tell you to go and untangle yourself, but that would be pointless. Like a hopelessly tangled longline we should just cut you loose and let you float in the gulfstream....

Your worthless self aggrandizing prattle does nothing but take up space here...

LC

[Murphy Siding]

Dave: Maybe it's time you took a break from forums? Take a walk. Go to the library. Go sit by the railroad tracks. Life's too short to keep your blood pressure at an elevated level.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe

QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear

QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

Still can't address the topic issue can you? You can only start a flame war, then get defensive when you get burned by it.

As a topic debater, you are impotent.

And I seriously doubt that you voted at all, let alone for Bush. The tone and content of your posts are more indicitive of a King County dumpster-diving captive pawn of the left.

Who is the flamer?

Gabe -

FM is still the original self fulfilling prophecy on this site...lol...

LC

Some things don't change with time

Gabe, just for posterity's sake, also reread LC's various cheap shots over the years before you hitch your moral wagon to him.

Gabe is smart enough to see you are sinking in a morass of your own design and making FM. You have smoked your own for so long you really believe your own lies...

LC

The jury's still out on Gabe. Can't say the same for you. You are a lifer of a loser, you add nothing but scorn to this forum. The only difference between you and BTK is BTK got caught.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe

QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear

QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

Still can't address the topic issue can you? You can only start a flame war, then get defensive when you get burned by it.

As a topic debater, you are impotent.

And I seriously doubt that you voted at all, let alone for Bush. The tone and content of your posts are more indicitive of a King County dumpster-diving captive pawn of the left.

Who is the flamer?

Gabe -

FM is still the original self fulfilling prophecy on this site...lol...

LC

Some things don't change with time

Gabe, just for posterity's sake, also reread LC's various cheap shots over the years before you hitch your moral wagon to him.

Gabe is smart enough to see you are sinking in a morass of your own design and making FM. You have smoked your own for so long you really believe your own lies...

LC

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CSSHEGEWISCH

It's interesting to note that FM is probably one of the world's worst salesmen. He has been proselytizing his economic beliefs on several threads for some time now but he doesn't appear to have won any converts. In fact, he appears to have antagonized more people along the way, myself included.
Based on what I have seen from these forums, he has some of the virtues and most of the vices of someone who believes that he has found the one truth that will reform the world.

Pedantic post, very pedantic. I'm curious as to why you think I am trying to sell something. All I've been doing lately is taking news items regarding railroading and bringing them to the attention of the forum. Whether the mass of closed minds you've joined yourself to takes these subjects to heart or not is irrelevent to me. All I enjoy is good debate on the subjects, and it's unfortunate that many on this forum seem to always choose the route of the insult rather than staying on topic. Luckily for the world, the fate of the globe does not depend on the opinions of the various forum members.

However, even you would have to agree that most of those with whom you sympathize have brought little else except insults to the discussion. If that is what you percieve as befitting of your side, then you have little substance with which to put out a post of such crocodile indignation. Or perhaps you think one-sided flame throwing is justified?

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe

QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear

QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

Still can't address the topic issue can you? You can only start a flame war, then get defensive when you get burned by it.

As a topic debater, you are impotent.

And I seriously doubt that you voted at all, let alone for Bush. The tone and content of your posts are more indicitive of a King County dumpster-diving captive pawn of the left.

Who is the flamer?

Gabe -

FM is still the original self fulfilling prophecy on this site...lol...

LC

Some things don't change with time

Gabe, just for posterity's sake, also reread LC's various cheap shots over the years before you hitch your moral wagon to him.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

Still can't address the topic issue can you? You can only start a flame war, then get defensive when you get burned by it.

As a topic debater, you are impotent.

And I seriously doubt that you voted at all, let alone for Bush. The tone and content of your posts are more indicitive of a King County dumpster-diving captive pawn of the left.

Who is the flamer?

I can see your legal training has kicked in. Aren't lawyers taught to only see (and subsequently defend/prosecute) one side of the arguement? Reread the thread and then tell me when the flaming started, and by whom.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd

Dave-

Are you just ignoring the idea that if OA was a win-win, the capital markets would fund it? Or, is this just an inconvenient fact?

I've put this out there twice, now.

Don,

Is the closed access system getting the funding from the capital markets? $35 billion from the public sector says no. OA also represents significant change, and that doesn't happen outside federal directive, aka energy market deregulation, et al.

Sometimes the federales need to give a "nudge" to make the right thing happen.

[edblysard]

Still got it wrong...

We are not the Fraternal Order of Ilk...

We are The Society for Ilk Conservation...SIC.

As for Mr. Thompson....Well, I have met him, and his predecessor...
I doubt the article was penned by him, he isn’t articulate enough to put that many sentences together in any order a person could understand, one of his hacks wrote it, I am certain.
The nicest thing to be said about Mr. Thompson is he would make a bad used car salesman.
The nicest thing to be said about his predecessor is....well, darn it, I was sure there was something....

Ed

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard

Oh my God,
You’re quoting Paul Thompson, President of the UTU, as an unbiased, reliable source of information?

Ha ha ha...I am a UTU dues payer, and I don’t believe a word he says!
Talk about using propaganda as a source reference ....

Ha ha ha haaaa....

Yet another valuable contribution from the Fraternal Order of the Ilks.

BTW, Mr. Thompson may have penned the article, but the sources he cites in the article are independent of UTU. The STB, UPS, Traffic World? Yeah, those are credible sources.

$35 billion in taxpayer money going to prop up U.S. railroad monopolists and Chinese manufacturing! I doubt any of that came in the form of user fees!

[PNWRMNM]

MP 173

For $50 you can purchase the STB's cost model for a PC. I have it, but the name escapes me. If you want the name let me know on list and I will give it to you.

It was fun to play with for 15 minutes or so.

Mac

[bobwilcox]

There are thousands of cars of rail traffic moving from origins served by more than one railroad at rev/lrvc ratios over 1.80. However, with the loss of excess capcity the old marginal pricing assumptions are losing relavance in the market place. Once again the regulatory scheme can not keep pace with changing market conditions.

[MP173]

I read the North Dakota site and found it interesting.

Having been involved in transportation pricing/costing in a previous career (LTL trucking) I always found the process of pricing and marketing very intriguing. It often came down to this...you may know what it costs to move freight, but the competitive nature of the business plus any value added will determine the price.

Dave or Michael, do you have any source I might find for outlining the determination of fixed and variable costing. Having been in the proceedure, I seriously doubt if any of the railroads would openly share their costing methodology. That proceedure usually is based on highly confidential information based on operations and costs, which generally are not public.

So, it would be interesting to see what the STB, or other authorities have determined to be the framework for such analysis.

To use vague information off of annual reports cannot be too accurate. However, that might be all that is available so I do understand that.

I still get back to the fact that without a navigatable river or other forms of transportation, the end rates will be higher....competition has a way of leveling prices, often to the detriment of the carrier. There will be tendancies of corporations and individuals to always maximize their returns, regardless of whether it is BNSF or a wheat farmer.

If I were a wheat farmer I would seriously be looking for alternatives, either in transporation or in career...something that would maximize my return.

Any word yet on that data regarding freight pricing, bushels per car, yields, revenues and values of property?

ed

[oltmannd]

QUOTE: Originally posted by PNWRMNM

Don,

Surely you don't believe that the American Capital Market is effecient do you? If so, you are running with the ilk!!

Mac

Oops! Forgot to disengage brain before posting....

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

It's interesting to note that FM is probably one of the world's worst salesmen. He has been proselytizing his economic beliefs on several threads for some time now but he doesn't appear to have won any converts. In fact, he appears to have antagonized more people along the way, myself included.
Based on what I have seen from these forums, he has some of the virtues and most of the vices of someone who believes that he has found the one truth that will reform the world.

[gabe]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear

QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

Still can't address the topic issue can you? You can only start a flame war, then get defensive when you get burned by it.

As a topic debater, you are impotent.

And I seriously doubt that you voted at all, let alone for Bush. The tone and content of your posts are more indicitive of a King County dumpster-diving captive pawn of the left.

Who is the flamer?

Gabe -

FM is still the original self fulfilling prophecy on this site...lol...

LC

Some things don't change with time

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

Still can't address the topic issue can you? You can only start a flame war, then get defensive when you get burned by it.

As a topic debater, you are impotent.

And I seriously doubt that you voted at all, let alone for Bush. The tone and content of your posts are more indicitive of a King County dumpster-diving captive pawn of the left.

Who is the flamer?

Gabe -

FM is still the original self fulfilling prophecy on this site...lol...

LC

[gabe]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

Still can't address the topic issue can you? You can only start a flame war, then get defensive when you get burned by it.

As a topic debater, you are impotent.

And I seriously doubt that you voted at all, let alone for Bush. The tone and content of your posts are more indicitive of a King County dumpster-diving captive pawn of the left.

Who is the flamer?

[PNWRMNM]

Don,

Surely you don't believe that the American Capital Market is effecient do you? If so, you are running with the ilk!!

Mac

[oltmannd]

Dave-

Are you just ignoring the idea that if OA was a win-win, the capital markets would fund it? Or, is this just an inconvenient fact?

I've put this out there twice, now.

[bobwilcox]

Where is the burden to prove market and product competition? I thought that got put back onto the railroads in the FMC case.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard

Oh my God,
You’re quoting Paul Thompson, President of the UTU, as an unbiased, reliable source of information?

Ha ha ha...I am a UTU dues payer, and I don’t believe a word he says!
Talk about using propaganda as a source reference ....

Ha ha ha haaaa....

Yet another valuable contribution from the Fraternal Order of the Ilks.

BTW, Mr. Thompson may have penned the article, but the sources he cites in the article are independent of UTU. The STB, UPS, Traffic World? Yeah, those are credible sources.

$35 billion in taxpayer money going to prop up U.S. railroad monopolists and Chinese manufacturing! I doubt any of that came in the form of user fees!

[edblysard]

Oh my God,
You’re quoting Paul Thompson, President of the UTU, as an unbiased, reliable source of information?

Ha ha ha...I am a UTU dues payer, and I don’t believe a word he says!
Talk about using propaganda as a source reference ....

Ha ha ha haaaa....

[MichaelSol]

Just a reminder that captive shippers are only part of a larger picture of disturbing trends in the rail industry.

PUBLIC NOT TO BE ***ED . . . . . . .
By Paul C. Thompson
UTU International President
....
Although railroads are reporting their highest profits in two generations, ... railroad CEOs are said to be reducing rail capacity rather than growing it.

Indeed, the more things change, the more they stay the same. Sadly, the status quo in the railroad industry is a scornful echo of 19th century railroad robber baron William Vanderbilt: "The public be ***ed."

Consider that U.S. Surface Transportation Board Chairman Roger Nober observed, "For railroad CEOs in the past, the principle question was how to get more business on their systems. Now the question is how to get the most valuable business on the railroad ..."

This is in spite of Congress providing railroads access to $35 billion in low-interest loans and loan guarantees to expand capacity, which is in the public interest.

Only a monopolist is capable of reducing capacity and increasing price and profit. The purpose of railroad regulation is to prevent railroads from ***ing the public in that manner.

Moreover, railroad safety and railroad service have been heading south faster than snowbirds in January.

The FRA reports train collisions up more than 5 percent since January, and fatalities up almost 2 percent.

"The rail industry's safety image has not been nearly as sparkling as its strong financial performance in the last two years," reports Traffic World magazine. "Several Union Pacific Railroad accidents .... prompted the FRA to place special oversight on the railroad."

United Parcel Service, one of the rail industry's biggest customers -- spending $750 million annually to ship via rail -- aimed a double-barrel shotgun at the railroads' service image and pulled the trigger, saying:

"Regrettably, the railroads have resisted making adequate capital investments, technological enhancements and innovative solutions in responding to new market conditions."

A UPS official told the U.S. Surface Transportation Board in October: "I'd ask you to consider what other mode of transportation in the United States moves slower than it did 30 years ago? Given today's emphasis on streamlined supply chains and speed to market, the railroad time in transit picture puts at risk our worldwide economic competitiveness."

Best regards, Michael Sol