Railroads Struggle to Deliver Coal to Utilities

[Murphy Siding]

So.......final score: Dave 1, "Us people" 99. Dave wins by a landslide.[;)][(-D][(-D]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Character

Originally posted by Futuremodal:

"Mudchicken - what was your college degree? Or did you have one?"

Dave, where did you get your college degree from?? You are so busy criticizing the questions and ideas of others, what is YOUR basis of knowledge???

Or is there NONE??

Throwing rocks in a glass house, eh Biff?

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by n012944

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard

Lets see if I got this right...
The thread title, which you typed, some how confirms the details in the posts you write?

How, because you wrote it, or just because you said it does?
The thread's title confirms nothing more that you know how to type.

Ed

Ed.....um....just to point out to Dave that I'm not *piling on, like the other usual suspects*......I should probably point out, that someone else started the tread, and gave it the title. Dave simply made the thread his own, so he could continue having the same arguement that he seems to enjoy having.[;)]

Actually, the thread title is straight from the original news item posted by the thread starter. I added a complimentary news item a few pages later. These news reports regarding the railroads' inability to keep up with contractual commitments are now fairly commonplace.

And no, I haven't penned ANY of them! I have simply commented on them. If it seems I have made this thread "my own" as Murphy claims, it may be in truth that I'm the only one left who is actually discussing the topic in question rather than hurling the usual volley of insults.

Too bad the rest of you can't keep to the topic in question, prefering character assassination instead. It's almost as if this is how this forum was set up by Bergie - someone posts a topic unflatterring to railroads, others such as myself comment on these unflatterring characteristics of the railroads, and instantly the *rail professionals* and trolling wannabes start ad hominem attacks on the ones who add the observations, instead of offering their counterarguments..

Is this your idea of keeping to the topic and not hurling insults? From page 2,


"Mudchicken - what was your college degree? Or did you have one?

Stick to what you know - rotten ties, rusty spikes, and weedy ballast. Leave the economics to those who have the degree.
--------------------
Dave

The Milwaukee & Northwestern.
Now that would have been something to see!

Go Zags!"


I didn't realize that the topic was Mudchickens college degree, my bad.[:D] From what I have seen on this board Dave, it is usually you who starts the name calling/insult once someone shows how foolish your posts are. So why the new attitude? Did you realize that your insults made you look foolish? Did you get a warning from someone on this board to knock it off?


Bert

Check Mudchicken's previous post in which he throws out an unnecessary insult at me. Then tell me if you still think I started the mud slinging.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb

I take it you(FM) are a big proponent of the DME proposal to open an aditional route to the PRB coal? And with the monopolistic ability of RR's to control there customers even though there are 2, count them 2 RR's delivering PRB coal. How is two (duo) the same as 1 (mono)polistic. In your mind anything that is routinely shipped by rail is "captive" to the railroads.

1. Yes, I am a proponent of the DM&E PRB expansion, and any other railroad that wants to expand out West. The more the merrier, which is the sentiment of a true railfan.

2. "Railroad monopoly" refers to the degree of control a railroad has over a customer. Remember, the coal mines are worthless without a customer to buy the coal. So even though both UP and BNSF serve some of the same mines in the PRB, they do not deliver that coal to the same customers, ergo a monopolistic situation. It would only be a true duopoly if UP and BNSF served both the same mines AND the same coal utilities. And a duopoly is nothing to write home about if you crave intramodal competition.

3. A rail shipper who has access to only one Class I rail services offering is a captive shipper. If that rail shipper has ongoing access to two or more Class I's, he/she is not captive. In the PRB, many of the mines are not captive, but their customers are. Contrast that with overseas importers to the US, who have access to multiples of Class I's and shipping lines. They are not captive in anyway shape or form, thus they get the benefits of competitive rates

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal
If someone can simply tell us why the monopolistic characteristics of US railroads is NOT the reason that most succinctly explains their actions, well, post it here.

OK I'll take a shot at that question. In the capitalistic/consumer/investor type of system that we all live and operate under,most every thing is done for a profit motive. Whatever type of scenario you can find in the railroad industry, you can find nearly the same thing, in one form or another, in every other industry. If you read what everyone has given you for examples just on this thread, you'll see what I mean. To make out like the railroads are big and evil for doing whatever they do, or did in the past, is simply your opinion. An opinion that most on here don't agree with.[:)]

You're right AND you avoided the more distinct question. Quite an accomplishment![;)] I am not arguing against the profit motive, I am arguing against the monopolistic model in favor of the competitive model. If we really had a competitive rail situation in this nation, threads such as this would not even exist. And BTW, I HAVE NEVER EVER SAID THAT RAILROADS ARE "EVIL". Sorry to shout like that, but certain trolls have put words in my mouth that I never said or implied. I have always extolled that corporations are amoral, neither good nor evil.

And no, the *examples* given on this thread are not germaine to the rail situation and the loss of rail capacity. Remember Mr. Sol's admonishment regarding property-bound assets vs mobile assets? If the USA had no auto plants, we'd still have autos, just not US made autos. If the USA had no steel mills, we'd still have steel, just not US manufactured steel. But when we lose rail lines, we lose rail service, which by the way is the product that railroads are selling. A foreign railroad cannot replace our loss of rail service, because it requires that property-bound asset known as the tracks. If it ain't on our shores, we cannot use it.

And we also remember Mr. Sol's admonishment about trying to compare manufacturing models to transportation models.

PS: Even though it says Honda or Toyota on the outside, it was most likely built in the USA.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal
If someone can simply tell us why the monopolistic characteristics of US railroads is NOT the reason that most succinctly explains their actions, well, post it here.

OK I'll take a shot at that question. In the capitalistic/consumer/investor type of system that we all live and operate under,most every thing is done for a profit motive. Whatever type of scenario you can find in the railroad industry, you can find nearly the same thing, in one form or another, in every other industry. If you read what everyone has given you for examples just on this thread, you'll see what I mean. To make out like the railroads are big and evil for doing whatever they do, or did in the past, is simply your opinion. An opinion that most on here don't agree with.[:)]

You're right AND you avoided the more distinct question. Quite an accomplishment![;)] I am not arguing against the profit motive, I am arguing against the monopolistic model in favor of the competitive model. If we really had a competitive rail situation in this nation, threads such as this would not even exist. And BTW, I HAVE NEVER EVER SAID THAT RAILROADS ARE "EVIL". Sorry to shout like that, but certain trolls have put words in my mouth that I never said or implied. I have always extolled that corporations are amoral, neither good nor evil.

And no, the *examples* given on this thread are not germaine to the rail situation and the loss of rail capacity. Remember Mr. Sol's admonishment regarding property-bound assets vs mobile assets? If the USA had no auto plants, we'd still have autos, just not US made autos. If the USA had no steel mills, we'd still have steel, just not US manufactured steel. But when we lose rail lines, we lose rail service, which by the way is the product that railroads are selling. A foreign railroad cannot replace our loss of rail service, because it requires that property-bound asset known as the tracks. If it ain't on our shores, we cannot use it.

[Anonymous]

Originally posted by Futuremodal:

"Mudchicken - what was your college degree? Or did you have one?"

Dave, where did you get your college degree from?? You are so busy criticizing the questions and ideas of others, what is YOUR basis of knowledge???

Or is there NONE??

[Mookie]

Dave - the UP only does some local switching and otherwise passes by Lincoln. BNSF has had a couple of derailments on the local tracks, but it always amazes me that they can clean up a pretty good sized mess within a few hours. We have 6 sets of tracks in and out of Lincoln on the east end. Not to shabby for a state no one wants to live in. Granted I have my moments, but can't come up with anything better - especially in the train watching department.

But back to derailments - we wouldn't have a problem within the city area. We have enough backup to get the trains out on the road without a big delay. And the derailments that do happen on both UP and BNSF out west - well, they are out of commission for a few hours, but those crews stationed throughout the state do a bang-up job of cleaning and restoring service.

Actually, the more I think about it, Nebraska is a very good railroad state for both UP and BNSF.

Hmmm - you "did good". You made me think and I finally arrived at a good conclusion!

Mooks

[n012944]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard

Lets see if I got this right...
The thread title, which you typed, some how confirms the details in the posts you write?

How, because you wrote it, or just because you said it does?
The thread's title confirms nothing more that you know how to type.

Ed

Ed.....um....just to point out to Dave that I'm not *piling on, like the other usual suspects*......I should probably point out, that someone else started the tread, and gave it the title. Dave simply made the thread his own, so he could continue having the same arguement that he seems to enjoy having.[;)]

Actually, the thread title is straight from the original news item posted by the thread starter. I added a complimentary news item a few pages later. These news reports regarding the railroads' inability to keep up with contractual commitments are now fairly commonplace.

And no, I haven't penned ANY of them! I have simply commented on them. If it seems I have made this thread "my own" as Murphy claims, it may be in truth that I'm the only one left who is actually discussing the topic in question rather than hurling the usual volley of insults.

Too bad the rest of you can't keep to the topic in question, prefering character assassination instead. It's almost as if this is how this forum was set up by Bergie - someone posts a topic unflatterring to railroads, others such as myself comment on these unflatterring characteristics of the railroads, and instantly the *rail professionals* and trolling wannabes start ad hominem attacks on the ones who add the observations, instead of offering their counterarguments..

Is this your idea of keeping to the topic and not hurling insults? From page 2,


"Mudchicken - what was your college degree? Or did you have one?

Stick to what you know - rotten ties, rusty spikes, and weedy ballast. Leave the economics to those who have the degree.
--------------------
Dave

The Milwaukee & Northwestern.
Now that would have been something to see!

Go Zags!"


I didn't realize that the topic was Mudchickens college degree, my bad.[:D] From what I have seen on this board Dave, it is usually you who starts the name calling/insult once someone shows how foolish your posts are. So why the new attitude? Did you realize that your insults made you look foolish? Did you get a warning from someone on this board to knock it off?


Bert

[rrandb]

I take it you(FM) are a big proponent of the DME proposal to open an aditional route to the PRB coal? And with the monopolistic ability of RR's to control there customers even though there are 2, count them 2 RR's delivering PRB coal. How is two (duo) the same as 1 (mono)polistic. In your mind anything that is routinely shipped by rail is "captive" to the railroads.

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal
If someone can simply tell us why the monopolistic characteristics of US railroads is NOT the reason that most succinctly explains their actions, well, post it here.

OK I'll take a shot at that question. In the capitalistic/consumer/investor type of system that we all live and operate under,most every thing is done for a profit motive. Whatever type of scenario you can find in the railroad industry, you can find nearly the same thing, in one form or another, in every other industry. If you read what everyone has given you for examples just on this thread, you'll see what I mean. To make out like the railroads are big and evil for doing whatever they do, or did in the past, is simply your opinion. An opinion that most on here don't agree with.[:)]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Mookie

Well, I am back and really struggling trying to follow this. Maybe Dave will welcome me with open arms because I ask such simple questions.

I know he is miffed because the railroads didn't keep all that line they abandoned, but I still can't put my ends together with a regularly run coal/freight line through Nebraska and all that abandon line that was/is still in the middle of nowhere.

What would they do with it now or even in the future? And did we really need to keep all lines right through the heart of Lincoln when those lines closed? (I can count 4 for sure)

I am sure there is an explanation for all this simple thinking.

Mookie

I think you're confusing "simple" with "vague". Are you specifically asking about Nebraska's rail situation? All I know about Nebraska is that folks who used to live in Nebraska thank their lucky stars they got out![;)]

As for the 4 lines through Lincoln, what is it now? Doesn't UP have a triple track line through Lincoln and BNSF a double track? If so, ask yourself this: Comparing 4 separate lines to one or two consolidated lines, which setup would assure a better continuity of rail traffic flow in case of a derailment? Consolidating lines into a single rail corridor, while less costly in many respects to operate, also makes those lines vunerable to shutdown of all three lines in case of derailment and such, while a more dispersed set up would allow rail traffic to continue while the one line is cleaned up.

Remember the PRB problems? One derailment took out both tracks out of the basin, which is why coal deliveries suffered. If the lines were farther apart, such an accident would still have allowed the coal to flow, and maybe there'd be less complainin' from the utilities (and less chance of reregulation!)

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard

Lets see if I got this right...
The thread title, which you typed, some how confirms the details in the posts you write?

How, because you wrote it, or just because you said it does?
The thread's title confirms nothing more that you know how to type.

Ed

Ed.....um....just to point out to Dave that I'm not *piling on, like the other usual suspects*......I should probably point out, that someone else started the tread, and gave it the title. Dave simply made the thread his own, so he could continue having the same arguement that he seems to enjoy having.[;)]

Actually, the thread title is straight from the original news item posted by the thread starter. I added a complimentary news item a few pages later. These news reports regarding the railroads' inability to keep up with contractual commitments are now fairly commonplace.

And no, I haven't penned ANY of them! I have simply commented on them. If it seems I have made this thread "my own" as Murphy claims, it may be in truth that I'm the only one left who is actually discussing the topic in question rather than hurling the usual volley of insults.

Too bad the rest of you can't keep to the topic in question, prefering character assassination instead. It's almost as if this is how this forum was set up by Bergie - someone posts a topic unflatterring to railroads, others such as myself comment on these unflatterring characteristics of the railroads, and instantly the *rail professionals* and trolling wannabes start ad hominem attacks on the ones who add the observations, instead of offering their counterarguments.

If someone can simply tell us why the monopolistic characteristics of US railroads is NOT the reason that most succinctly explains their actions, well, post it here.

[Mookie]

Well, I am back and really struggling trying to follow this. Maybe Dave will welcome me with open arms because I ask such simple questions.

I know he is miffed because the railroads didn't keep all that line they abandoned, but I still can't put my ends together with a regularly run coal/freight line through Nebraska and all that abandon line that was/is still in the middle of nowhere.

What would they do with it now or even in the future? And did we really need to keep all lines right through the heart of Lincoln when those lines closed? (I can count 4 for sure)

I am sure there is an explanation for all this simple thinking.

Mookie

[jeaton]

futuremodal operates under the mistaken impression that a high markup of "price" over variable cost on a segment of business automaticly means that that segment will produce a higher rate of return than a business where price is closer to cost.

Typical of someone who is missing the ability for logical thinking.

[n012944]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

Bert,

The BNSF guy Robb is blowing smoke, hoping that his audience of coal entities are too dumb to do their own fact checking. He knows perfectly well his line's highest rates of return are in the captive areas - coal, ag, domestic manufacturing. And the funny thing is, BNSF IS taking cash from the captives and subsidizing the "consumer goods" from Asia. They are NOT getting the best rate of return from consumer goods, rather they get a marginal rate of return but also a growing business segment. Coal and ag are BNSF's real money makers. Which makes the Robb statement nothing short of twisted.

Conspiracy theorys again?


Bert

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard

Oh,
I'm sorry.
I guess that means Dave can't really type original titles?

Ed[:D]

The word "original" immediately removes Dave from consideration...

[edblysard]

Oh,
I'm sorry.
I guess that means Dave can't really type original titles?

Ed[:D]

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard

Lets see if I got this right...
The thread title, which you typed, some how confirms the details in the posts you write?

How, because you wrote it, or just because you said it does?
The thread's title confirms nothing more that you know how to type.

Ed

Ed.....um....just to point out to Dave that I'm not *piling on, like the other usual suspects*......I should probably point out, that someone else started the tread, and gave it the title. Dave simply made the thread his own, so he could continue having the same arguement that he seems to enjoy having.[;)]

[edblysard]

You got part of it right...
Ed[:D]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard

Dave doesn’t work for a railroad?
Seriously?
Wow....then where can I buy the books he gets all his railroad knowledge and facts from?
Walden’s or the Readers Digest Select "Condensed Railroad Management" series?
Or was it "Coal, the Black Diamonds to Die for"

That is a "must have" edition for the serious armchair railroader...
Maybe he borrowed some of Mickey’s books?

Ed

I think you hit it right when you said "Mickey's books."

Mickey Mouse.

Of course, if he were real, he'd be one rich rodent. [:D]

[edblysard]

Lets see if I got this right...
The thread title, which you typed, some how confirms the details in the posts you write?

How, because you wrote it, or just because you said it does?
The thread's title confirms nothing more that you know how to type.

Ed

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard

Dave doesn’t work for a railroad?
Seriously?
Wow....then where can I buy the books he gets all his railroad knowledge and facts from?
Walden’s or the Readers Digest Select "Condensed Railroad Management" series?
Or was it "Coal, the Black Diamonds to Die for"

That is a "must have" edition for the serious armchair railroader...
Maybe he borrowed some of Mickey’s books?

Ed

I think you hit it right when you said "Mickey's books."

Mickey Mouse.

Of course, if he were real, he'd be one rich rodent. [:D]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CrazyDiamond

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by CrazyDiamond

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by CrazyDiamond

Futuremodal, what RR do you work for, and have they implemented your expertise?

Hmmm, changing the subject already? Or is this a Murtha-esque exercise in personal criticism?

Nope....just a blunt question.

Then unless you can specify why the change-of-subject question is relevent to the topic we're discussing, I would suggest you start another topic regarding forum participants railroading experience or the lack thereof.

Its not a change-of-subject question. You accuse RRs of being stupid and cannibals and that they are now suffering because of it. Yet clearly your solutions are the answer, so I am curious to learn what RR you work for so we can all learn that indeed your wisdom is the answer. CN has done all the bad you speak of, little or none of what you recommend, they have their own strategies so clearly you don't work for them, and yet they are doing fine without you.....hmmmm ...as Homer Simpson would say "Amazing!!!".

Speaking of change-of-subject the topic is about a certain coal utility complaning about irregular deliveries yet somehow you turned this thread (like many you do) into a 'crap on the RR management day' for all they've done. You challege others and when they give you the answer you asked for you spin off onto another tangent. You are trying to create intelligent logic to support your emotions and ......well.... R/R.

Anyway I'm done with your posts....just gonna read what others have to say to others.

Well, this is a thread about the relationship between railroads and coal using utilities. The railroads have been having a hard time keeping up with coal transport demand (see topic title to confirm this statement), yet have no problem keeping up with the import demands of the overseas producers. It is now widely known (at least on this forum) that railroad R/VC ratios are often three times higher for captive shippers such as the coal using utilities than non captive shippers such as Asian importers, and those non captive shippers are getting rates that are more often than not below the STB's R/VC standard of 180%, which is considered to be an indicator of adequate profit for the railroads to cover their incremental costs and still make a decent profit.

Which brings the Robb threat back to square one. What he is threatening to do is already being done by his railroad, namely cross subsidizing the <180% R/VC rail shippers with the >180% R/VC captive shippers. Look at the track maintenance expenditures for BNSF this year - most of it is in the SoCal-Chicago ex AT&SF corridor, with a token amount being directed toward addressing the lack of capacity on the coal and ag corridors. No doubt BNSF would like nothing more than to not have to spend one extra dime on the coal and ag routes since those customers are in the captive category thus will still be there whether the trackage is improved or not. The overseas importers can easily shift to other railroads or Panama Canal ships if BNSF neglects that trackage to the point of causing an inordinate amount of derailments (such as occured in the PRB recently).

The overseas importers have the advantage of competition, the US captive rail shippers do not.

[edblysard]

Dave doesn’t work for a railroad?
Seriously?
Wow....then where can I buy the books he gets all his railroad knowledge and facts from?
Walden’s or the Readers Digest Select "Condensed Railroad Management" series?
Or was it "Coal, the Black Diamonds to Die for"

That is a "must have" edition for the serious armchair railroader...
Maybe he borrowed some of Mickey’s books?

Ed

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by CrazyDiamond

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by CrazyDiamond

Futuremodal, what RR do you work for, and have they implemented your expertise?

Hmmm, changing the subject already? Or is this a Murtha-esque exercise in personal criticism?

Nope....just a blunt question.

Then unless you can specify why the change-of-subject question is relevent to the topic we're discussing, I would suggest you start another topic regarding forum participants railroading experience or the lack thereof.

Dave doesn't work for a railroad and what RR in it's right mind would listen to anything he says???

[CrazyDiamond]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by CrazyDiamond

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by CrazyDiamond

Futuremodal, what RR do you work for, and have they implemented your expertise?

Hmmm, changing the subject already? Or is this a Murtha-esque exercise in personal criticism?

Nope....just a blunt question.

Then unless you can specify why the change-of-subject question is relevent to the topic we're discussing, I would suggest you start another topic regarding forum participants railroading experience or the lack thereof.

Its not a change-of-subject question. You accuse RRs of being stupid and cannibals and that they are now suffering because of it. Yet clearly your solutions are the answer, so I am curious to learn what RR you work for so we can all learn that indeed your wisdom is the answer. CN has done all the bad you speak of, little or none of what you recommend, they have their own strategies so clearly you don't work for them, and yet they are doing fine without you.....hmmmm ...as Homer Simpson would say "Amazing!!!".

Speaking of change-of-subject the topic is about a certain coal utility complaning about irregular deliveries yet somehow you turned this thread (like many you do) into a 'crap on the RR management day' for all they've done. You challege others and when they give you the answer you asked for you spin off onto another tangent. You are trying to create intelligent logic to support your emotions and ......well.... R/R.

Anyway I'm done with your posts....just gonna read what others have to say to others.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CrazyDiamond

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by CrazyDiamond

Futuremodal, what RR do you work for, and have they implemented your expertise?

Hmmm, changing the subject already? Or is this a Murtha-esque exercise in personal criticism?

Nope....just a blunt question.

Then unless you can specify why the change-of-subject question is relevent to the topic we're discussing, I would suggest you start another topic regarding forum participants railroading experience or the lack thereof.

[CrazyDiamond]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by CrazyDiamond

Futuremodal, what RR do you work for, and have they implemented your expertise?

Hmmm, changing the subject already? Or is this a Murtha-esque exercise in personal criticism?

Nope....just a blunt question.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CrazyDiamond

Futuremodal, what RR do you work for, and have they implemented your expertise?

Hmmm, changing the subject already? Or is this a Murtha-esque exercise in personal criticism?

[CrazyDiamond]

Futuremodal, what RR do you work for, and have they implemented your expertise?