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.
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
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
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?
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.
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
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
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.
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal LC is like cable TV : 57 channels and nothin's on......
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.
23 17 46 11
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.
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 (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
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.
QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd [Did you read Don Phillips column in Dec Trains? The top three frt RR countries are US, Russia and China. None of these have open access. What does that say to you?
QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd No, again. You don't understand capital markets very well. It's not my area of expertise, but I'll try to explain anyway. Any RR, right now, could operate as a "toll road" for all comers. All it would take is mgt will to make it happen. If it's such a great idea, capital mkts would fund the purchase of the RR to install mgt to make it happen. Stock would go for a premium and no board would refuse to sell under those conditions.
QUOTE: Did you read Don Phillips column in Dec Trains? The top three frt RR countries are US, Russia and China. None of these have open access. What does that say to you?
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal ...networks do not experience anything close to differential pricing...
QUOTE: Originally posted by bobwilcox The last time I was in China(2003) they were using differental pricing. The first time I was in China(1985) they had no concept of pricing as a way to control demand. It appears sometime during this 18 year gap they thought about differental pricing and decided they liked what the could acheive.
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd No, again. You don't understand capital markets very well. It's not my area of expertise, but I'll try to explain anyway. Any RR, right now, could operate as a "toll road" for all comers. All it would take is mgt will to make it happen. If it's such a great idea, capital mkts would fund the purchase of the RR to install mgt to make it happen. Stock would go for a premium and no board would refuse to sell under those conditions. Hmmm, I don't understand capital markets? My econ degree says differently. What you don't yet understand, though I've explained it to you twice, is that capital markets will not jump into an enterprise for which there is no legal parameters yet set up. OA can take on any number of forms, varying degrees of regulation, FRA and STB requirements, etc. As of yet, there is no such groundwork in place to define what OA in the USA would even look like. Even if one of the railroads decided to try out the OA concept, what guidance regarding government oversight would be needed? What you are suggesting is something better left to the venture capitalists, and even they would have to wait for a set of parameters before they would jump in. The markets hate uncertainty, you should know that.
QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd No, again. You don't understand capital markets very well. It's not my area of expertise, but I'll try to explain anyway. Any RR, right now, could operate as a "toll road" for all comers. All it would take is mgt will to make it happen. If it's such a great idea, capital mkts would fund the purchase of the RR to install mgt to make it happen. Stock would go for a premium and no board would refuse to sell under those conditions. Hmmm, I don't understand capital markets? My econ degree says differently. What you don't yet understand, though I've explained it to you twice, is that capital markets will not jump into an enterprise for which there is no legal parameters yet set up. OA can take on any number of forms, varying degrees of regulation, FRA and STB requirements, etc. As of yet, there is no such groundwork in place to define what OA in the USA would even look like. Even if one of the railroads decided to try out the OA concept, what guidance regarding government oversight would be needed? What you are suggesting is something better left to the venture capitalists, and even they would have to wait for a set of parameters before they would jump in. The markets hate uncertainty, you should know that. Marketers and train operators would fall under existing STB regs. ROW owners wouldn't need any more regulation than the owner of an office building. I don't see any real uncertainty or need for regulation. The REAL issue here is that OA would convert the RRs into the highly unprofitable airline service model. Isn't that obvious?
QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd This just in! OA a smashing success in Europe! http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/10/19/business/transcol20.php NOT!
QUOTE: Originally posted by MP173 3. Productivity gains took most of the 80's to realize as crew sizes reduced from four to two over the 10 year period.
QUOTE: Originally posted by piouslion In short: it seems that the railroads had to do some 1. housekeeping 2. some personell adjustments 3. some real estate adjustments and 4 some real hard work. The thing that is most impressive about the 80's though is that the railroads fianlly decided to start being a business and not a public utility. How close am I?
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd This just in! OA a smashing success in Europe! http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/10/19/business/transcol20.php NOT! LSHMCOOMN! Of all the crap that Don Phillips has put out there, this article was probably the worst (and given the fact that he was a Washington Post hack, that's saying alot!) This was commentary at best, with no references for comparison. It is fantasy, the way AAR wishes the real world was instead of facing the world as it really is. Tell me oltmannd, where are his references? his statistics of comparison? None? Hmmm, not suprising at all. He quotes one so-called "British Rail consultant" as saying things in Europe are a mess all due to OA, yet he reluctantly admits the varying governments' foot dragging has effectively delayed things. The entire (and disparate)European rail system was formerly government run railroads, with all the inherent inefficencies of government run railroading (aka: Amtrak). I guess you thing the Europeans should have sold the entire system to one of the US Class I's, since of course they are such great contributors to the societal welfare here in the US! Not! God help the Iraqis if Hemphill and company turn that system into the closed access nightmare of captive shippers, bottleneck rate gouging, paper barriers to shortlines, et al! Then for sure they'd all want Saddam back! If you had even bothered to read the "British Rail Operations" thread on this very forum, you would know that the predominance of passenger trains is the main reason freight cannot be transfered from road to rail. That is Europe's Achilles Heel when it comes to freight railroading, capacity is maxed with too many passenger trains. However, even with that inherent drawback, railroad freight marktet share in Britiain has increased 40% since OA was established (source: The "British Rail Operations" thread). Read the Italian OA thread I started, you will see yet another new business utilizing rail for intermodal movements, a business that would be on the roads right now if European railroads had remained nationalized or gone North American-style closed access. The fact is this: Business opportunities are being explored and develped under OA in Europe, despite the fact that passenger services hog the mainlines, and it's something that would NEVER had happened under a closed access regime. Even you would have to admit to that. Closed acces is an anachronism that should rightly go the way of the buggy whip.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.