What happen to Milwaukee Road?

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by bobwilcox

These MILW threads are unmiformally bizare.

I guess no one wants a nonconfrontational Milwaukee Road thread?[:0][B)]

[MichaelSol]

Well, there are people who had nothing to do with Milwaukee Road, plainly know nothing about it and show up, thread after thread, with their same mendacious remarks about it. It's pathological, it doesn't happen with any other railroad. And it's the same two or three people, time after time. One of them, it seems, has used the same tactics elsewhere.

For me, I have to go write a foreward to an upcoming Milwaukee Road history this weekend, so ce' la vie.

[MP173]

cant wait to read it. Be sure and inform us the book title and the publisher.

Glad i withdrew from this discussion.

ed

[rrandb]

I do not think most people mind the confrontational part, but the operative word is Milwaukee Road? [?]

[nsconcord]

QUOTE: Originally posted by nanaimo73

Most of the Milwaukie Road's track is still in use. BNSF and IC&E each have over 1100 miles of it. CN (200 miles), CP (600 miles) and Wisconsin and Southern (500 miles) and about 20 other railroads use CMSP&P track as well.

The Milwaukee Road east from Butte used Pipestone Pass and the rails are gone. The NP used Homestake and the rails are still in place and the line is railbanked.

Milwaukee Road thread-
http://www.trains.com/community/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=22066

The other one-
http://www.trains.com/community/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=22188

Milwaukee remains in Montana-
http://webhome.idirect.com/~helmutw/milwrd/xmont/montmain/montmain.html

Coast Division-
http://www.wwvrailway.com/milwauke.htm

This is a 16 page booklet of CMSP&P history. http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=102049
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=102051
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=102052
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=102053
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=102054
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=102056
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=102057
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=102058
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=102059
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=102060
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=102061
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=102062
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=102063
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=102064
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=102065
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=102066
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=102067
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=102068
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=102050
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=102048


http://www.trains.com/community/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=44086

[NW_611]

I don't know from dog racing, aside from a trip to the West Virginia facility a while back, of which I understood little. Furthermore, none of my education's in math, so most of the economic arguments zip right past me as if I were a lowly local stop on the route of the Broadway Limited. Thus, my MILW-related question:

"Can it be unequivocally stated that the actions of the Chicago Milwaukee Corporation in the late 1970s were bad for, if not fatal to, the operational survival of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad as a going concern?"

Detailed economic analyses will probably be wasted on me, since I'm not Milton Friedman. I appreciate their production but they might as well be kabuki for all I can derive from them. Thanks for any replies.

[rrandb]

After 25 pages I'm more confused than when I started. That said its hard to embargo a railroad and blame it on exemplery managment. [B)] [%-)]

[kenneo]

QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe

greyhound,

It is somewhat easy to be confused when a Yahoo search leads to this:

http://www.gra-america.org/b_kstrawbridge.html

How come I get a 404 error on that link.

Ken --- you got an answer there?[oops][tdn]

[kenneo]

QUOTE: Originally posted by greyhounds

QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe

greyhound,

It is somewhat easy to be confused when a Yahoo search leads to this:

http://www.gra-america.org/b_kstrawbridge.html

I want the *** apology. The GRA was (is?) basically a group of racing fans. It had (has?)(has?) absolutely no official status vis a vis racing and neither did I. (other than as a licensed owner.) I haven't belonged for quite some time. Do you understand verb tense?

I think it's a nice picture of me though.

But, next time you want to get into my personal life you better GD have the facts right.

Ken Strawbridge

Temper temper watch your language and ***'s

[rrandb]

QUOTE: Originally posted by kenneo

QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe

greyhound,

It is somewhat easy to be confused when a Yahoo search leads to this:

http://www.gra-america.org/b_kstrawbridge.html

How come I get a 404 error on that link.

Ken --- you got an answer there?[oops][tdn]

Why not ask arbfbe? He's the one who posted the bad link not Ken. [?] [%-)] The only thing it means when it is highlighted in red is that it begins with http://www. not that it works? [?]

[kenneo]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb

QUOTE: Originally posted by kenneo

QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe

greyhound,

It is somewhat easy to be confused when a Yahoo search leads to this:

http://www.gra-america.org/b_kstrawbridge.html

How come I get a 404 error on that link.

Ken --- you got an answer there?[oops][tdn]

Why not ask arbfbe? He's the one who posted the bad link not Ken. [?] [%-)] The only thing it means when it is highlighted in red is that it begins with http://www. not that it works? [?]

The page was removed. Others were able to access it for a time after it was posted.

Ken's articles are still there, but attribution has been removed.

[MichaelSol]

QUOTE: Originally posted by NW_611
"Can it be unequivocally stated that the actions of the Chicago Milwaukee Corporation in the late 1970s were bad for, if not fatal to, the operational survival of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad as a going concern?"

The ICC did a study on holding companies and their effect on their railroad subsidiaries, and while the study was not an exemplary example of such a study [on the Milwaukee, their investigation completely missed a couple of key transactions], they did find that in general, railroads owned by holding companies had a lower rate of return than independent railroads.

That being said, when the general rate of return for railroads got down into the 1 and 2% range, naturally the railroads owned by holding companies were certainly the first to "go".

The Milwaukee Road bankruptcy filing was unnecessary. It's CEO at the time has specifically told me: "if certain board members had done their jobs, we could have avoided that bankruptcy." The CMC Board at that point included very powerful ownerships that saw the liquidation value of the railroad as being extraordinary compared to the operating value of any railroad property. However, the only way to get there was through a court proceeding -- no regulatory proceeding would yield the results they wanted.

When the ICC considered the first reorganization plans, both the Trustee and the NewMil group presented their plans. The Trustee's plan [the so-called Milwaukee II] was unsupported. The NewMil (transcontinental) plan was supported by Milwaukee creditors, the Milwaukee's bankers, and shippers in general. The ICC also preferred it.

CMC jumped in and offered its own preferred alternative: complete liquidation of the railroad. It became clear what they had been looking for.

[kenneo]

QUOTE: Originally posted by MichaelSol
The Milwaukee Road bankruptcy filing was unnecessary. It's CEO at the time has specifically told me: "if certain board members had done their jobs, we could have avoided that bankruptcy." The CMC Board at that point included very powerful ownerships that saw the liquidation value of the railroad as being extraordinary compared to the operating value of any railroad property. However, the only way to get there was through a court proceeding -- no regulatory proceeding would yield the results they wanted.

When the ICC considered the first reorganization plans, both the Trustee and the NewMil group presented their plans. The Trustee's plan [the so-called Milwaukee II] was unsupported. The NewMil (transcontinental) plan was supported by Milwaukee creditors, the Milwaukee's bankers, and shippers in general. The ICC also preferred it.

CMC jumped in and offered its own preferred alternative: complete liquidation of the railroad. It became clear what they had been looking for.

Michael -- since the CMC could have sold the railroad for the same net as the bankruptcy and abandonment, why did they insist on pushing the course that they did. Money is money and $5 of my US money is the same value as $5 of your US printed money.

[Kevin C. Smith]

Michael-wandering off topic (or at least going back several pages). If you have current Port of Seattle & Tacoma traffic figures not too far away, I was curious (in a "what might have been" way): assuming that the MILW had survived and maintained their share of the traffic from those ports, what kind of traffic/tonnage would we have over the PCE today?

[greyhounds]

North American Ports 2005 container business

www.aapa-ports.org/pdf/2005_NORTH_AMERICAN_CONTAINER_TRAFFIC.pdf

[MichaelSol]

QUOTE: Originally posted by kenneo

QUOTE: Originally posted by MichaelSol
The Milwaukee Road bankruptcy filing was unnecessary. It's CEO at the time has specifically told me: "if certain board members had done their jobs, we could have avoided that bankruptcy." The CMC Board at that point included very powerful ownerships that saw the liquidation value of the railroad as being extraordinary compared to the operating value of any railroad property. However, the only way to get there was through a court proceeding -- no regulatory proceeding would yield the results they wanted.

When the ICC considered the first reorganization plans, both the Trustee and the NewMil group presented their plans. The Trustee's plan [the so-called Milwaukee II] was unsupported. The NewMil (transcontinental) plan was supported by Milwaukee creditors, the Milwaukee's bankers, and shippers in general. The ICC also preferred it.

CMC jumped in and offered its own preferred alternative: complete liquidation of the railroad. It became clear what they had been looking for.

Michael -- since the CMC could have sold the railroad for the same net as the bankruptcy and abandonment, why did they insist on pushing the course that they did. Money is money and $5 of my US money is the same value as $5 of your US printed money.

In 1975, they were willing to sell the whole shebang to the BN for about $90 million, then demanded the "fair market value" of $360 million appealing from Judge McMillen's decision to approve a sale to the lower bidder Soo Line in 1984. Without the bankruptcy, they were under the jurisdiction of the ICC, and the ICC was incredibly unlikely to approve liquidation of over half the system without the provocation of a bankruptcy proceeding.

The 800 lb gorilla was the "New York Dock" conditions available for terminated employees.

[kenneo]

QUOTE: Originally posted by MichaelSol

The 800 lb gorilla was the "New York Dock" conditions available for terminated employees.

I understand about the "New York Dock" decision. I have delt with it both from Labor and Management. I also know that there are methods of satisfying its requirements and still get done what needs to be done. Was the MILW's management so dense to its workings that they couldn't chart a way through it?

The "Transcontinental Group" which comprised all of those having a significant financial or service intrest in the MILW, by the general provisions of bankruptcy law, should have prevailed. They were the ones owed the money, and that is the group that almost always controls such doings. I guess I am having a hard time understanding just how this group could or would permit the railroad going to anyone else but themselves. What in the world were they thinking?

[martin.knoepfel]

If the Milwaukee had a superior alignment, why did BN (not BNSF) not buy it and close down its own lines into the PNW? After all, if BN is such a greedy company as depicted here, it should run for profit and nothing else.

[n012944]

QUOTE: Originally posted by martin.knoepfel

If the Milwaukee had a superior alignment, why did BN (not BNSF) not buy it and close down its own lines into the PNW? After all, if BN is such a greedy company as depicted here, it should run for profit and nothing else.

Because its a fanatsy created by the conspiracy theorist on this board, and people trying to hold on to something that was not there in the first place.


Bert

[MichaelSol]

QUOTE: Originally posted by kenneo

QUOTE: Originally posted by MichaelSol

The 800 lb gorilla was the "New York Dock" conditions available for terminated employees.

I understand about the "New York Dock" decision. I have delt with it both from Labor and Management. I also know that there are methods of satisfying its requirements and still get done what needs to be done. Was the MILW's management so dense to its workings that they couldn't chart a way through it?

That too was where the bankruptcy court came in, although I got the distinct impression that the management that was planning its way through the bankrupcy was caught by surprise. I've got the memo that came over the company teletype that basically says, "oops, we just noticed that under the New York Dock conditions, Milwaukee Road will owe approximately $1.0 billion to its laid off workers on Lines West." The whole railroad was worth about $900 million at the time. This was the irony of the situation, they took a railroad company with a cash shortfall, and created an insurmountable "debt".

The labor protective conditions of this settlement also applied to the employee's of The Milwaukee Road who had lost their jobs due to the abandonment of the various segments of the railroad. For anyone who maybe interested in it, it is
covered by the I.C.C. decision Finance Docket No. 28250 - New York Dock Railway - Control - Brooklyn Eastern District Terminal - decided February 9, 1979 - Appendix lll Labor Protective Conditions. It provided the formula, with reference to the Washington Job Protection Agreement of May 1936, for the payment of the dismissal allowance.

Approximately 66 Milwaukee Road employees opted for the New York Dock protections, which ultimately were paid. The highest I am aware of paid out about $200,000 including interest. The remainder of the 8,000 employees ultimately laid off were made an offer from Congress in the form of the Milwaukee Railroad Restructuring Act which offered up to $25,000 (I think it was $2,000 per year of service up to the limit), which was payable now, from federal funds, rather than until the money was freed up by the bankruptcy court which ultimately took a while. People with 20, 30, 40 years of seniority got $25,000.

The New York Dock recipients also kept other union benefits as well.

The potential under the New York Dock provisions were devastating and yet it was almost an afterthought to the Lines West abandonment proposal that the Milwaukee might be liable for that payout.

[MichaelSol]

From an NP list. Excerpts of an interal memo at the Northern Pacific Railroad regarding UP, MILW and GN competition. Interesting take on things.

Howard Elliott, Chairman, New York, to Charles Donnelly,
President,
St. Paul, December 11, 1920
...
The Union Pacific is now a most active and aggressive competitor in all the valuable territory, Portland to Seattle inclusive and in the productive lumber regions of Gray's Harbor and South Bend; also all through the fertile Yakima Valley, the Walla Walla country; the Clearwater region, the Camas Prairie, the Palouse country, at Spokane, the Coeur d'Alene mining district, Butte, and the Yellowstone Park. Much of this territory, not so many years ago, was served almost exclusively by the Northern Pacific. The Union Pacific, with its very unusual earnings has a definite and announced policy of liberality to the shipping and traveling public in the way of good service, adequate supply of modern equipment, both freight and passenger, fast time and very active solicitation and adverting. The class of passenger equipment furnished by that company between Chicago and the Missouri River and Portland and Puget Sound is superior to that furnished by the Northern Pacific. It is generally understood that this company will put on improved passenger trains between Chicago and Puget Sound in the spring of 1921.

The St. Paul road, in making its extension to the coast, introduced a most active competitive force in Northern Pacific territory all the way from the Montana-South Dakota state line to Puget Sound. This line divides the business in the Yellowstone and Gallatin valleys, at Butte, the lumber territory of northern Idaho, at Spokane, in the Palouse and Big Bend wheat country, in the Kittitas Valley, in the Puget Sound country and in the Gray's Harbor and South Bend territory. Their line to the coast is shorter than that of the Northern Pacific, and considerable of it is electrified, attracting thereby much attention of the traveler and the shipper.

Their passenger equipment on the through trains between Chicago and the North Pacific Coast is today superior to that of the Northern Pacific, and in any competitive struggle, better time can be made by the St. Paul road than by the Northern Pacific, because of the shorter distance. They are very aggressive as to all features of commercial development and in catering to the public, and with their own line to Chicago and a large mileage in Wisconsin, Minnesota and South Dakota, they are formidable competitors on all westbound business to Montana, Idaho and Washington points and for products of those states moving east to the consuming territory of the Missouri and Mississippi valleys.

The Great Northern, by some of its alternate lines in North Dakota, is cutting the earnings of some of the Northern Pacific branch lines in that state; through the building of the SP&S, competition is increased to the Northern Pacific in some of the Palouse territory and in Portland. By use of the Northern Pacific line between Seattle and Portland, the Great Northern also subdivides the business of the fertile Puyallup Valley and of the territory Tacoma to Portland, inclusive.

North of Seattle to Vancouver, B.C., inclusive, the territory is sharply competitive all or in part with the Great Northern, [St. Paul], and the Canadian Pacific.
...

[MichaelSol]

QUOTE: Originally posted by martin.knoepfel

If the Milwaukee had a superior alignment, why did BN (not BNSF) not buy it and close down its own lines into the PNW? After all, if BN is such a greedy company as depicted here, it should run for profit and nothing else.

If you are familiar with the BN at the time, it wasn't doing too well. Not like there was extra cash laying around to buy anything; Operating Ratios exceeding 90%, and then trying to accomplish/digest the Frisco Merger (or the other way around depending on your point of view).

[Anonymous]

Hi,
I traveled on the I-90 west from Livingston, MT to Seattle in 2003, and saw many stretches of what I believe used to be Milwaukee Road Right of Way used as Bicycle paths, what a shame. I also saw some abandoned ( and obviously Railroad ) bridges in the distance with what looked like supports for the former catenary wires still on them. I travel a lot and always look for abandoned rail lines, since there are a lot of them, and just about want to cry. I guess the next major bike path project is going to be Tennessee Pass. I was lucky to see that in 1996 or 1997 with trains still going over it, just before they ceased operations. In my humble opinion the abandonment of Tennessee Pass was a stupid idea by S.P., as was the abandonment of the Valley Line in the San Fernando Valley of Los Angeles.
Harry Kutzbach, Train Nut
Simi Valley, CA , [e-mail]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by MichaelSol
From an NP list.

Not sure why the poster is protecting the source. I know that NP list and the poster is not a member of it. [xx(]

[greyhounds]

QUOTE: Originally posted by kenneo

QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe

greyhound,

It is somewhat easy to be confused when a Yahoo search leads to this:

http://www.gra-america.org/b_kstrawbridge.html

How come I get a 404 error on that link.

Ken --- you got an answer there?[oops][tdn]

I don't know about the 404 error, but it's from the past. I was, past tense, affilitated as "National Spokesman" with a Greyhound racing fan organization.

I love Greyhounds, I think they're the most magnificent animal on the planet and that racing is a wonderful showcase for these magnificent animals. When my X told me she was leaving she said: "I'm leaving and I'm taking the dogs". My reply: "Why do you have to take the dogs?"

I was in racing for 13 years as an owner and breeder. I can't think of any other doemsticated animal that enjoys the care and protection of a racing Greyhound. I'll stand by my often repeated statement that Greyhound racing is fun, exciting and humane.

Sol is using my past involvement with Greyhound racing as a way to attack me. It has nothing to do with our discussions of railroading. But I think he's so desperate that he'll stoop to using the false propaganda of animal rights activists against me.

Ken Strawbridge

[kenneo]

QUOTE: Originally posted by cornmaze

QUOTE: Originally posted by MichaelSol
From an NP list.

Not sure why the poster is protecting the source. I know that NP list and the poster is not a member of it. [xx(]

A member of both the NP list and the MILW list reposted this letter from the NP list to the MILW list. Not being a member of the NP list, I do not know who the original poster was or who or where the original letter came from (repository).

I have no knowledge of why this letter was published in the first place and other than it mentioned the MILW, why it was reposted onto the MILW list.

I know of only the obvious reason for its reposting here - "Evidence" of the sort that Ken Strawbridge has been saying he is looking for. Interesting part of it is, this letter as well as much more information about these subjects are available to any one who has a legitmate interest in them.

Many historians have delved into these archives and repositories and published their thoughts and conclusions in several different books. It is, mostly, from these books that our beliefs and opinions have come as well as our own personal experiences had with working for the MILW or from working with the MILW. Also, several of us have had similar experiences with the NP and after the merger with the BN.

Personally, when I saw this on the MILW list, it was the first time for me to have seen or have any direct knowledge of this letter. However, it matches quite well what I know of the NP during that time. My family lived in the Yellowstone Valley for about 20-25 years up to 1931, owned a lumber yard chain, a bank and several ranches - one of which is now a big whole in the ground which PRB coal is removed. My family had close connection with the NP, the GN and also the MILW. What my father and grandfather have told me about these companies matches the information contained in this letter.

[n012944]

QUOTE: Originally posted by MichaelSol

From and NP list. Excerpts of an interal memo at the Northern Pacific Railroad regarding UP, MILW and GN competition. Interesting take on things.

Howard Elliott, Chairman, New York, to Charles Donnelly,
President,
St. Paul, December 11, 1920
...

The St. Paul road, in making its extension to the coast, introduced a most active competitive force in Northern Pacific territory all the way from the Montana-South Dakota state line to Puget Sound. This line divides the business in the Yellowstone and Gallatin valleys, at Butte, the lumber territory of northern Idaho, at Spokane, in the Palouse and Big Bend wheat country, in the Kittitas Valley, in the Puget Sound country and in the Gray's Harbor and South Bend territory. Their line to the coast is shorter than that of the Northern Pacific, and considerable of it is electrified, attracting thereby much attention of the traveler and the shipper.

Their passenger equipment on the through trains between Chicago and the North Pacific Coast is today superior to that of the Northern Pacific, and in any competitive struggle, better time can be made by the St. Paul road than by the Northern Pacific, because of the shorter distance. They are very aggressive as to all features of commercial development and in catering to the public, and with their own line to Chicago and a large mileage in Wisconsin, Minnesota and South Dakota, they are formidable competitors on all westbound business to Montana, Idaho and Washington points and for products of those states moving east to the consuming territory of the Missouri and Mississippi valleys.

Funny how times change. The letter states how wonderful MILW passenger service was, but the MILW was the first of the transcons to give it up. Same could be said for the PCE itself, great in the booming twenties, redundant by the sixties/seventies.


Bert

[kenneo]

QUOTE: Originally posted by MichaelSol

QUOTE: Originally posted by martin.knoepfel

If the Milwaukee had a superior alignment, why did BN (not BNSF) not buy it and close down its own lines into the PNW? After all, if BN is such a greedy company as depicted here, it should run for profit and nothing else.

If you are familiar with the BN at the time, it wasn't doing too well. Not like there was extra cash laying around to buy anything; Operating Ratios exceeding 90%, and then trying to accomplish/digest the Frisco Merger (or the other way around depending on your point of view).

Yes, depending upon your opinion. Legally, the BN merged or purchased ( your choice of how to view it) with the Frisco. Operationally and corporate managemently, the Frisco devoured the BN, these men were the ones that built the reputation and operating philosophy of the BN hat has been so vilified here. The BNSF currently operates largely with that attitude in the Lines North that were originally NP, GN and SPS.

Interestingly, the BN did end up with quite a bit of the PCE. And during the MILW shedding itself of the PCE, it could have taken over the line for Net Salvage Value, but I am not aware of it ever having tried to do so.

[MichaelSol]

QUOTE: Originally posted by cornmaze

QUOTE: Originally posted by MichaelSol
From an NP list.

Not sure why the poster is protecting the source. I know that NP list and the poster is not a member of it. [xx(]

The original poster was either John Phillips, who allegedly retyped it, or Jerry Masters, whose name happened to be at the bottom. He's a good friend of mine. Does a lot of historical research. Retired civil engineer, NP, BN. We're working on some projects together. Not "protecting" anyone, just happened to be an interesting comment that came up. I imagine Jerry got it from the NP archives; he's done a lot of good work there, finding a good deal of MILW history, from the perspective of its competitors. He usually visits during the summer, I'll ask him.

[kenneo]

QUOTE: Originally posted by MichaelSol

QUOTE: Originally posted by cornmaze

QUOTE: Originally posted by MichaelSol
From an NP list.

Not sure why the poster is protecting the source. I know that NP list and the poster is not a member of it. [xx(]

The original poster was Jerry Masters. He's a good friend of mine. Does a lot of historical research. Retired civil engineer, NP, BN. We're working on some projects together. Not "protecting" anyone, just happened to be an interesting comment that came up. I imagine Jerry got it from the NP archives; he's done a lot of good work there, finding a good deal of MILW history, from the perspective of its competitors. He usually visits during the summer, I'll ask him.

Thanks, Michael. I, for one, will be looking forward to what you may learn.