Bob,
Did you know Jim Snodgrass, Wayne Borg or Sandy Dearden?
I beleve there is a password with people that worked for the CNW when we went employee owned. The question is "Did you buy enough"? The answer is "no". Employees from those days automatically know you are talking about the stock. I to did not buy enough but what I did buy paid off the loans from the Univ. of Tenn., made the downpayment on my first house and furnished that house. The market for the stock was rather informal. Bill Alsop's chief clerk keep tab on things and put you in touch with someone interested in making a deal. I sold my stock to my boss. We did the deal in one of the men's rooms at 400 W. Madison and then went over to Northern Trust at lunch to finish the paperwork.
There was also a difference in the enviroment at work. A significant number of us became financially independent or at least had enough cash on hand to cover expenses if we needed to find a new job. That security did make a difference in people being willing to accept more personal risk when asked for their opinions.
Bob:I have a feeling the CNW people worked harder and smarter, particularly when given the incentives of stock ownership.
ed
MP173 wrote:Bob:Re Rio Grande...were they protected somehow at the Ogden gateway? Or was it a way for Southern Pacific to route freight for St. Louis that they couldnt take all the way to Texas before heading back north?How much of the lumber traffic from Pacific Northwest actually headed down to SoCal then east thru the desert to connect with the Cotton Belt? During regulation no doubt there was quite a bit of that moving that way. De-reg would have squeezed SP/Cotton Belt out of the picture.Also Bob, did most of the CNW to Conrail trains run via the IHB? or did some move east to Western Ave, down to Ashland Yard and then east? Any idea of what the Harbor charged (charges now) for moving a train?ed
Bob:Re Rio Grande...were they protected somehow at the Ogden gateway? Or was it a way for Southern Pacific to route freight for St. Louis that they couldnt take all the way to Texas before heading back north?
How much of the lumber traffic from Pacific Northwest actually headed down to SoCal then east thru the desert to connect with the Cotton Belt? During regulation no doubt there was quite a bit of that moving that way. De-reg would have squeezed SP/Cotton Belt out of the picture.
Also Bob, did most of the CNW to Conrail trains run via the IHB? or did some move east to Western Ave, down to Ashland Yard and then east? Any idea of what the Harbor charged (charges now) for moving a train?
If anything the DRGW was handicapped at Ogden because the UP would not give them routes into the PNW. The SP's postion changed at Ogden with the UP buying the WP. However, while all of this was going on PNW lumber was being forced out of eastern markets by southern pine. When I started in 1982 I think the SP still prefered the ESTL gateway from OR to the Northeast but they were struggling with other demons that impacted on making business decisions.
As I recall all of the CNW/CR run throughs at Chicago went through the IHB. I may be wrong since Chicago is a very complex place and Ed Burkhardt was allways coming up with something new as the joint facility guy. I don't know what the Harbor charged or which carrier they charged.
MichaelSol wrote: MP173 wrote: I have found in most cases there is a correlation between working hard and smart and LUCK. Just my opinion, but often luck is the final (and important) ingredient. Then you haven't witnessed first hand the indvidual, the company, the railroad ... that had all the brains and hard work in the world, and still didn't make it. You've been lucky.
MP173 wrote: I have found in most cases there is a correlation between working hard and smart and LUCK. Just my opinion, but often luck is the final (and important) ingredient.
I have found in most cases there is a correlation between working hard and smart and LUCK. Just my opinion, but often luck is the final (and important) ingredient.
Then you haven't witnessed first hand the indvidual, the company, the railroad ... that had all the brains and hard work in the world, and still didn't make it.
You've been lucky.
I will agree with you insofar as I would certainly rather be lucky than good.
Gabe
On a related note of Chicago interchange...did the PRR and MILW interchange a freight train on a daily basis at Union Station? I seem to recall reading there was a train which ran thru the station...might be wrong on this one.
Imagine seeing that!
MP173 wrote:I have found in most cases there is a correlation between working hard and smart and LUCK. Just my opinion, but often luck is the final (and important) ingredient. We can look at Boeing v Airbus if needed, you wont get many comments from me on it, as I am not much of a airfan. But, take a look at the corporate structures of both companies and it should be evident which company should be the superior company. Airbus is made up of a syndicate of a number of companies, some state owned. To me that would be very cumbersome management. Too many committees. Regarding the Iowa to Oklahoma statement, I read it as meaning Rock would have had a great advantage of handling that freight as it would not have had much competition in that route (ATSF) thru a the southeastern sliver of the state of Iowa. Rock basically went everywhere that many other carriers went and never had the advantage of superior route and little competition. It did between Iowa and Oklahoma. I seriously doubt if there was much traffic moving between the two states other than some farm implements out of the Quad Cities area, hardly enough to justify the duplicity in other routes.ed
We can look at Boeing v Airbus if needed, you wont get many comments from me on it, as I am not much of a airfan. But, take a look at the corporate structures of both companies and it should be evident which company should be the superior company. Airbus is made up of a syndicate of a number of companies, some state owned. To me that would be very cumbersome management. Too many committees.
Regarding the Iowa to Oklahoma statement, I read it as meaning Rock would have had a great advantage of handling that freight as it would not have had much competition in that route (ATSF) thru a the southeastern sliver of the state of Iowa. Rock basically went everywhere that many other carriers went and never had the advantage of superior route and little competition. It did between Iowa and Oklahoma. I seriously doubt if there was much traffic moving between the two states other than some farm implements out of the Quad Cities area, hardly enough to justify the duplicity in other routes.
You are right about luck but a lot of well run railroads made their own luck.
Chris30 wrote:First of all, interesting post. There seems to be a range of opinion on this post in regards to "superior route". Does anybody want to try to clarify what this means? Best engineered (route), best maintined, highest profit, fatest speed, etc. The "superior route" is probably just the right combination of many different factors. Luck also might be one of those factors. The CNW line accross Iowa is a very well engineered route. (Rememer the floods of '93? Who kept their tracks above water while everybody else sank in the mud?) Perhaps, having the "superior" engineered route allows for lower maintenance costs.CC
First of all, interesting post.
There seems to be a range of opinion on this post in regards to "superior route". Does anybody want to try to clarify what this means? Best engineered (route), best maintined, highest profit, fatest speed, etc. The "superior route" is probably just the right combination of many different factors. Luck also might be one of those factors. The CNW line accross Iowa is a very well engineered route. (Rememer the floods of '93? Who kept their tracks above water while everybody else sank in the mud?) Perhaps, having the "superior" engineered route allows for lower maintenance costs.
CC
Its great to have a very favorable route with fewer curves and lower grades than any of your competitors. However, your customers don't care. They only care about your service and price. The Rio Grande between WWII and the BN merger is an example. They were very succesful on the central transcon corridor. However their route, compared to the curves and grades on the UP, was much poorer.
nanaimo73 wrote: MichaelSol wrote: Murphy Siding wrote: MichaelSol wrote: wjstix wrote: If there was a big profit in moving freight from Iowa to Oklahoma the Rock probably would have been in great shape!! How is that different from moving freight from one side of Iowa to the other side of Illinois? (?) How is it the same?? Moving freight from one state to the state two states away is inherently less profitable than moving freight from one state to the state right next door? Oklahoma and Illinois are both states? Is it uphill to Oklahoma but downhill to Illinois? I don't understand the remark. Michael, 7 lines connected Omaha with Chicago, while the RI was the only line connecting central Iowa with central Oklahoma.
MichaelSol wrote: Murphy Siding wrote: MichaelSol wrote: wjstix wrote: If there was a big profit in moving freight from Iowa to Oklahoma the Rock probably would have been in great shape!! How is that different from moving freight from one side of Iowa to the other side of Illinois? (?) How is it the same?? Moving freight from one state to the state two states away is inherently less profitable than moving freight from one state to the state right next door? Oklahoma and Illinois are both states? Is it uphill to Oklahoma but downhill to Illinois? I don't understand the remark.
Murphy Siding wrote: MichaelSol wrote: wjstix wrote: If there was a big profit in moving freight from Iowa to Oklahoma the Rock probably would have been in great shape!! How is that different from moving freight from one side of Iowa to the other side of Illinois? (?) How is it the same?
MichaelSol wrote: wjstix wrote: If there was a big profit in moving freight from Iowa to Oklahoma the Rock probably would have been in great shape!! How is that different from moving freight from one side of Iowa to the other side of Illinois?
wjstix wrote: If there was a big profit in moving freight from Iowa to Oklahoma the Rock probably would have been in great shape!!
If there was a big profit in moving freight from Iowa to Oklahoma the Rock probably would have been in great shape!!
How is that different from moving freight from one side of Iowa to the other side of Illinois?
(?) How is it the same?
? Moving freight from one state to the state two states away is inherently less profitable than moving freight from one state to the state right next door? Oklahoma and Illinois are both states? Is it uphill to Oklahoma but downhill to Illinois? I don't understand the remark.
Michael, 7 lines connected Omaha with Chicago, while the RI was the only line connecting central Iowa with central Oklahoma.
But, how did that hurt Rock Island and help C&NW?
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
MP173 wrote:Lets take a look at the terminal facilities in the Chicago area. Proviso Yard and Bensenville Yard seem to be pretty similar yards. I realize quite a bit of traffic today is run thru. When did that practice begin? Both CNW (Proviso) and Milw (B'ville) had a severe disadvantage by being so far north in the Chicago mess. Both had to get down to the south side to connect with Conrail, NS, or CSX.Not exactly sure how that worked, with the trackage rights over the IHB or BOCT. Of course CSX owned BOCT and Milw owned part of IHB (correct me if I am wrong).Perhaps someone can shed some light on the IHB routing or other routings used thru Chicago.
Lets take a look at the terminal facilities in the Chicago area.
Proviso Yard and Bensenville Yard seem to be pretty similar yards. I realize quite a bit of traffic today is run thru. When did that practice begin? Both CNW (Proviso) and Milw (B'ville) had a severe disadvantage by being so far north in the Chicago mess. Both had to get down to the south side to connect with Conrail, NS, or CSX.
Not exactly sure how that worked, with the trackage rights over the IHB or BOCT. Of course CSX owned BOCT and Milw owned part of IHB (correct me if I am wrong).
Perhaps someone can shed some light on the IHB routing or other routings used thru Chicago.
Notwithstanding the penchant of some to look for heroes and villains, gut and brains, "foresight" and all many of labels that support generally predetermined ideologies, it remains to me an underutilized observation regarding simple luck and even sometimes dumb luck.
Looking back at the "60s" thread -- and yet another capital intensive business -- generally considered well managed:
"Boeing's bad luck continued. The company was hit badly by the 747 crisis, the discontinuation of the supersonic airliner program SST and declining orders. It was initially planned for the profits of the 707's and 727's to keep the 737 and 747 projects afloat. However, the board of directors in Seattle were not able to predict the impending recession. The result was debts amounting to $1 billion. In 1968 Boeing reduced its staff from 100,000 to 38,000. ...At one point early in 1970, Boeing had some 30 planes parked at its plant that could not be delivered until Pratt & Whitney had corrected the deficiencies of its JT-9D engine. It took a year before the engine problems were solved. In the meantime, too little money was coming in, the country was experiencing an economic recession, and new orders were drying up. The company almost went broke."
Does anyone seriously think it was a lack of "brains and guts"? Or the luck of the draw of timing and general economic conditions?
It continues with that huge company:
"Cargo plane sales booming as Airbus stalls," Business Week, 12/29/06. "... a confluence of luck ..." for Boeing due to "marred production of Airbus' A380 ...".
"Boeing's troubles were the result of a number of factors; from their arrogance, a tendency to rest on their laurels, taking their customers for granted, combined with a corporate culture enmeshed in politics." Doesn't sound like any railroad I've ever heard of.
"Overall, the story of Boeing vs. Airbus is a never ending and ever changing battle of pure competition, combined with good timing and good luck."
Boeing Versus Airbus: The Inside Story of the Greatest International Competition in Business (Hardcover) by John Newhouse.
Robert Samuelson, Newsweek: "The story of Boeing's distress comes in three parts: bad luck, bad management and bad government policy."
In 2003, Business Week declared that Boeing was "choking on Airbus' fumes," and warned that Boeing's "slip to No. 2 could become permanent." Is Boeing's current success due to brains and guts, or Airbus' "bad luck" and cross-cultural language difficulties?
Superimposing Horatio Alger explanations on complex business events is simply not valid analysis. Sometimes it is just ... luck.
Well for the Rock Island...a Civil War general once said that a big part of winning a battle was "get there first with the most" (men, supplies etc.). Rock Island tended to get there last with the least - they'd be the 3rd or 4th railroad to enter a city, and usually had to try to squeeze in their yards and pick up business wherever they could, and then being a latecomer their mainline routes tended to be slower and less direct. If there was a big profit in moving freight from Iowa to Oklahoma the Rock probably would have been in great shape!! Plus the "last straw" for the Rock was the strike that started in I think 1978 or 79. Employees really didn't believe the railroad would just fold rather than give in, but I guess they were wrong.
MILW had been in and out of bankruptcy quite often over the years. Some people would argue their pacific extension wasn't really a great idea. They were the third or fourth transcontinental to go thru basically the same area of the northwest, so they picked up very little business between say eastern Montana and the coast.
As mentioned by someone earlier, the fact that CNW/CMO's remote "Cowboy Line" in the west ended up being near the Powder River coal, and that they were able to tap into coal shipping, probably was a huge huge plus for them.
bobwilcox wrote: What the lawyers said to win their then dead merger case did not come up. Lawyers say a lot of things defending their clients interests.
A merger case is not an adversarial proceeding, it is an effort to combine the best features of the applicant companies. The developed record in that case is thorough, and based on actual numbers which both companies jointly developed to present a best case scenario.
Gabe...glad your case is over. Hope you did well. Come on up and fill me in on the details. I will differ with you regarding Rock having the best routing. Sure, the South Chicago issue would have been huge, but the routing thru the Quad Cities was brutal. Did you read the issue in Trains called "The Big Train". Author really covers the problems with the Rock line well.
Of course UP's cash could have made the Rock line work. That is the issue we will never know.
I am starting to dig deeper into Moody's and take a look at the other carriers, particularly the well run lines such as Southern and MoPac. The line that really surprized me was the Rio Grande. After this thread runs its course, perhaps we will turn our attention there.
Gotta get to work.
MP173 wrote: My next question is why didnt the Milw Omaha line get more of the UP's business?
My next question is why didnt the Milw Omaha line get more of the UP's business?
It was my impression they never asked for the traffic. I was working with the Green River soda ash shippers over a 13 year period. I knew my two significant competitors were the BN and IC. As I recall the MILW's service or car supply into Green River was never a factor. I also was working on SK potash off the DWP at Duluth going to Chicago connections. The traffic was handeled by us and the SOO. The BN was out of the picture because of their truck/rail train and the MILW just never got the customers interested in what they had to offer.
greyhounds wrote: MichaelSol wrote: MP173 wrote: CNW seems to have had a feather in their cap with the superior route to the UP. CNW and MILW agreed, during their merger proceedings, that MILW had the superior route by the acknowledgement, in the proceedings, that MILW ran an hour faster, freight, Omaha to Chcago. What constitutes a "feather"? Well vis a vis the Milwuakee the "feather" was the Fremont cutoff that bypassed Omaha on the C&NW. Getting between Chicago and Omaha, in and of itself, without the added benifits provided by the Rock Island route, meant nothing.Saving an hour to Omaha was nothing compared to the benifits of the Fremont cutoff. Rock Island was first choice, Milwaukee Road obviously wasn't second.
MichaelSol wrote: MP173 wrote: CNW seems to have had a feather in their cap with the superior route to the UP. CNW and MILW agreed, during their merger proceedings, that MILW had the superior route by the acknowledgement, in the proceedings, that MILW ran an hour faster, freight, Omaha to Chcago. What constitutes a "feather"?
MP173 wrote: CNW seems to have had a feather in their cap with the superior route to the UP.
CNW seems to have had a feather in their cap with the superior route to the UP.
CNW and MILW agreed, during their merger proceedings, that MILW had the superior route by the acknowledgement, in the proceedings, that MILW ran an hour faster, freight, Omaha to Chcago.
What constitutes a "feather"?
Well vis a vis the Milwuakee the "feather" was the Fremont cutoff that bypassed Omaha on the C&NW. Getting between Chicago and Omaha, in and of itself, without the added benifits provided by the Rock Island route, meant nothing.
Saving an hour to Omaha was nothing compared to the benifits of the Fremont cutoff. Rock Island was first choice, Milwaukee Road obviously wasn't second.
Ed, thanks for starting this thread.
MP173 wrote:SOU $9519/mile, 16.8% 6023 milesAs a percentage, CNW was pretty much in line with the others, however, the real numbers showed the healthy carriers were spending quite a bit more per mile, particularly Southern.
SOU $9519/mile, 16.8% 6023 miles
As a percentage, CNW was pretty much in line with the others, however, the real numbers showed the healthy carriers were spending quite a bit more per mile, particularly Southern.
If the Southern had a major project underway, like the rebuilding of the Rathole Division, would it show up in these numbers, or somewhere else ?
Odd that neither company saw that as a particular advantage accruing to the proposed merger. Perhaps they didn't understand the situation as well as you did.
CNW and MILW agreed, during their merger proceedings, that MILW had the superior route by the acknowledgement, in the proceedings, that MILW ran an hour faster, freight, Omaha to Chicago.
What, exactly, constitutes a "feather"?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.