QUOTE: Originally posted by MP173 So, with rail prices roughly doubling in 32 years, you are saying those rates are the only ones that have doubled?
QUOTE: Originally posted by MP173 Look, you slipped up when you made the comparison of 1974 wheat prices to today's. We all know that a number of factors in 1974 cause wheat prices to spike
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe I Greyhounds. What a piece of work. You demand more and more figures and when they are provided you trip over them, kick them around and then come to the conclusion that everyone and I mean everyone else is wrong. Stick with your directorship of the greyhound racing group. Now there is an industry with a bright future. Stick around long enough and you will get a feeling of how the thousands of MILW employees felt as their livelihoods slipped away.
QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe Bert, We are talking about today's issue here. Coulda, woulda, shoula won't cut it today. The state of Montana, as opposed to the state of Iowa would have had to purchase the MILW line within Montana, Idaho and Washington or entice those states to form a compact to purchase everything west of Aberdeen, SD. That did not happen. One of the results of that not happening is the rate structure in effect now. Rebuilding the MILW trackage would cost billions of dollars. Guess who would own the trackage connection on the east end? Besides, that is not what the farmers are asking for at this point. The farmers might be forced to purchase branchline to serve elevator but who will own the mainlines the branch lines will connect with? Who will set the rate for shipping off the branch lines now owned by the ranchers and/or the state of Montana? Who is encouraging agricultural conglomerates to locate flood loading elevators along their mainlines rather than along branch llines? Who sets the freight rates from flood load elevators at about $300/car less than the rate for loads from older elevators? Who will likely charge an 'interchange' or switching charge for any car received loaded from a co-op owned branchline? Shippers were promised better under deregulation.
An "expensive model collector"
QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe I come back to check out this forum after a few months of self imposed exile and I note nothing has changed concerning the MILW or Montana threads here. Michael Sol is doing his best to enlighten the unwashed for which he is berated, called a liar and attacked for nearly every post. n012944, ever been to Montana, ever looked at a railroad map of the state? Obviously not. Please do about 5 minutes of research and tell me which branchline the Montana grain growers can purchase to move their grain to their markets at Seattle, Tacoma or Kalama. Right, that imaginary branch line simply does not exist. Your proposed solution is nosensical. While pulling such an idea out of your rectal area may prove self satisfactory to you it adds absolutely nothing to the solution to the question and only proves you have failed to read closely any of the 22 pages of this thread as well as more than 40 pages of earlier threads.
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by n012944 As I said before, don't wait for goverment hadouts, don't complain about the lack of service, go out, buy the branch lines, buy and rebuild the PCE, and all the problems will be "solved." The Iowa Interstate was bought from the Rock Island estate buy a group of online shippers, the Heartland Corp, if I recall and was run for the online shippers. However I think that these shippers will soon find out that rates that they think are "fair" to them will not pay the bills on the railroad. You know I think that gas should cost $1.00 a gallon, it doesn't meen the oil companies will make money off selling it, but I think that that is a "fair" price. Bert I'm curious Bert, do you consider enforcement of the law a "government handout"?
QUOTE: Originally posted by n012944 As I said before, don't wait for goverment hadouts, don't complain about the lack of service, go out, buy the branch lines, buy and rebuild the PCE, and all the problems will be "solved." The Iowa Interstate was bought from the Rock Island estate buy a group of online shippers, the Heartland Corp, if I recall and was run for the online shippers. However I think that these shippers will soon find out that rates that they think are "fair" to them will not pay the bills on the railroad. You know I think that gas should cost $1.00 a gallon, it doesn't meen the oil companies will make money off selling it, but I think that that is a "fair" price. Bert
QUOTE: Originally posted by MichaelSol For those that were compellingly interested in the year 1974, here are specific figures for Moore, Montana. Both MILW and BN served that area. MILW was the rate-maker and BN charged whatever Milwaukee charged. Moore is useful as it has a rate on BNSF today. MILW carried Moore wheat to Pier 86 in Seattle, and BNSF has a rate cite to King Street. So, we have very good data. I designed a nifty PPI Rail Cost Inflation Calculator (Excel), if anyone wants it, send me an email. I input the data and an interesting result showed up. The data is this: 1974 actual carload rate: $1,488. 2005 PPI inflation adjusted rate: $2,970. Actual BNSF 2005 tariff (April 25, 2005): $3,156 A average rate for a comparable shipping distance elsewhere on the BNSF system: $2,550. The lowest rate charged for a carload of wheat the comparable shipping distance: $2,150. I agree rates have gone "way, way" down for most shippers, and down some for ag shippers, but they have specifically gone up for Montana wheat shippers. Hopefully that specific data puts to rest Strawbridge's phony argument that rates have gone "way, way" down, the baloney that BNSF has been "generous" with anyone in Montana, or ... that he knows anything about what he is talking about.
QUOTE: Originally posted by MichaelSol Didn't change much between 1974 and 1977. By 1980, the last year the Milwaukee was in place, started inching up to about $1600 per carload, but that is just recollection. I seem to be the only one here who even attempts to offer data. There were huge volume increases, however, in those years. Fleet utilization alone was much higher. In order for a carload cost in 1980 to equal the equivalent cost in 2003 (the general PPI index with the handy calculator stops there) according to the PPI, the rate in 1980 would have to be $2,026.2. A 1980 figure less than that means that rates have gone up since 1980, not down. Several of the inflation indexes don't go back beyond 1980 so, for reasons I again reiterate, I am picking a 1980 figure as that represents the last year of Milwaukee in Montana, and fits with available rail rate data as well as available index data. Rail rates for shippers in Montana, as a special case, have increased significantly over the past 25 years in real terms, in constant terms, in actual terms, however you want to phrase it, using either a rail rate index, a GDP Deflator Index, or the most closely related PPI index. Rates of other wheat shippers have, in fact declined by those indexes.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.