CSX could care less about public relations, let alone a heritage/steam program. Better leave that to the big boys, i.e. NS and UP!
Let's be fair here. CSX is in the business of moving stuff from point A to point B in the most efficient and profitable manner possible. They're not in business to entertain railfans, or the general public for that matter. It's their road and their decision and I can live with that.
That being said, we don't know what the future may bring. Some good, good years with massive profits and we may see a change in corporate attitude. A hard-core railfan in the CEO's seat may bring a change. As far as I'm concerned never say never, but don't hold your breath either.
By the same token, a change in management at NS or UP, say someone who doesn't get the publicity and good will a dynamic steam program generates, who can't see past a profit-and-loss statement, could bring those programs crashing down overnight. The moral of the story is enjoy what you've got when you've got it, and let those roads know how much you enjoy what they do.
NS
There is no positive purpose to your rant. If you want to do something positive, I suggest that you write CSX a pleasant, positive letter thanking them for underwriting the B&O Museum in Baltimore. It is the real deal, on perhaps the most historic rail site in the country. Virtually everything in the place is original, as opposed to replica. It is a treasure of incalculable worth and CSX is supporting it. I would rather have the museum than a CSX steam program.
Mac McCulloch
+1 Firelock
The value of the public good will and the cost to get it are the things that have to be balanced.
If you talk to the NS transportation supervisors who were around for the "old" steam program, they'll tell you it was a huge pain when the excursions were in their territory. It took them away from their families even more than they already were - but it wasn't all bad.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
How does one quantify the value of a steam program's contribution to the bottom line? At the end of the day results need to be measurable.
In the late sixties and early seventies, I lived near Birmingham, and took part in most of the steam excursions out of Birmingham on the Southern that the Heart of Dixie Club sponsored, and I enjoyed all that I took. When the Norfolk Southern announced that it would no longer have such excursions, I was sorry to learn of this decision.
But, I realized that it was the railroad's prerogative to make this decision, and it was not my place to complain, or to say, "They can't do this."
Johnny
Firelock76 Let's be fair here. CSX is in the business of moving stuff from point A to point B in the most efficient and profitable manner possible. They're not in business to entertain railfans, or the general public for that matter. It's their road and their decision and I can live with that.
So is the UP but they get a fantastic amount of good will and positive media coverage out of their steam program. These are invaluable assets to any corporation and the UP is smart enough to recognize that. I don't doubt for a minute that some shippers favor the UP over other comparable transportation alternatives as a result of the steam program.
Mark
Mark,
You are living in an alternate universe. How many traffic managers do you think are railfans? I suggest no more than the general population which is what, one in 10,000?So maybe there are two railfan traffic managers.
Who gets a particular piece of business is determined by lots of things, like where both parties physically are, rates, contracts, customer's service requirements, the service offerings of all competing carriers including truck and rail. The last, and least important, factor is whim of the guy who pays the bill or arranges the shipment.
There is no factual basis to assume that UP's steam program generates a single dollar of revenue. It is good PR, in some circles, which can not hurt but assigning a dollar benefit to it is very difficult.
I am a UP stockholder and am fine with management spending a few million dollars per year on the steam program. That said, dwell time in Houston is far more important to the value of my stock than whether or not the company has a steam program.
Lets see
A transportation manager of a large company ships a variety of carloads every week on the Class 1s and some short lines. The manager understands how RRs work and their current financial state. As a rule he does not have any problem with any of the class 1s.
Does the manager believe that if UP & NS have assets to put on a good heritage and steam program they may be able to deal more quickly with a major problem that would delay his traffic??. Does that tip him to choose UP & NS over other lines with other metrics being about the same ? OTOH he may think CSX & CN may be spread too thin ?
As a fan I love the steam programs, but as someone who works in the transportation industry I can see the expenditure as being hard to defend. I'm in the trucking industry, I get traffic managers who complain about non aerodynamic trucks and chrome fuel tanks. They question me on the fairness of fuel surcharges when the truck that has come in to pickup their load doesn't have full aerodynamic fairings. I can just see me rolling in with a vintage B model Mack... I'm very careful to look poor too, or more appropriately, frugal. It's hard to justify a rate increase when you're suited up and show up at the shipper in a Cadillac. Ditto for steam programs... hard to justify rate increases when you're plowing money into running a steam program. In business there's much to be said for appearing frugal.
To the average Joe, they have no idea what the cost of running something like the 3985 is. So I doubt there's any concern there about appearing to be extravagant since they're not going to be aware of such things as insurance costs for excursions and such, how much it costs per hour of operation, costs of mandated overhauls, etc.
Extravagance when they're asking for rate increases across the board would be something like flying the latest 747 from Boeing painted up in Union Pacific colors with the shield on the side to a conference somewhere. Something like that might draw some ire from shippers since the general public can appreciate that it's a very expensive proposition and if they can afford a business jet on that scale, things can't be all that bad off for them.
But I don't think that's a concern for a steam program. What matters is if the value the railroad gleans from it (Which obviously can be hard to make a rough estimate of) justifies the expenditure. It's a happy day for us when it does and an equally sad day when the day comes that it doesn't.
NS and UP seem to have the right idea. They have outside partners sharing the costs (Union Pacific isn't going it alone with the Big Boy project it seems) and they're not in the business just to give railfans rides. Hopefully both programs will grow and earn their keep for many more years.
PNWRMNM Mark, You are living in an alternate universe. How many traffic managers do you think are railfans? I suggest no more than the general population which is what, one in 10,000?So maybe there are two railfan traffic managers. Who gets a particular piece of business is determined by lots of things, like where both parties physically are, rates, contracts, customer's service requirements, the service offerings of all competing carriers including truck and rail. The last, and least important, factor is whim of the guy who pays the bill or arranges the shipment. There is no factual basis to assume that UP's steam program generates a single dollar of revenue. It is good PR, in some circles, which can not hurt but assigning a dollar benefit to it is very difficult. Mac McCulloch
Apparently you failed to note that I said "other comparable transportation alternatives". In my book that equates to other factors that enter into the decision making process being at least relatively equal. If you think activities that create positive opinions about a company are not worth the money then you are living in an alternate universe. Just ask anyone in the advertising industry.
Ulrich How does one quantify the value of a steam program's contribution to the bottom line? At the end of the day results need to be measurable.
Not really. There are lots of RR project that don't have measurable returns. Sometimes it's difficult, if not impossible to measure the input and output of step in a process.
An example is storing data for use in analysis. You don't know what you will find until you have the data to analyze. You might find nothing. You might find some pretty big "ahas!".
Another example is links on a chain What is the value of each link? If one fails, what is the value of the remaining links?
In this case, you are "storing up" good will . You know the steam program gets your name in the press in a good way and also spreads by work-of-mouth/social media. How much? You might be able to find out by surveying, but that will still just leave you with qualitative information.
What are you going to spend the good will on? I'd say, the RRs are focused on beating back re-reg. So, probably that. But, that is a multipronged effort using public opinion, direct lobbying and lots of lawyers. What's the value of each prong?
The RRs have been doing advertising at a great rate. Everyone has seen the commercials and heard the tag lines. These ads are not focused even a little bit on getting more freight. They are straight-up going after positive public opinion. NS just supplements this effort with steam. CSX does not - but they can "move a ton of freight nearly 500 miles on a gallon of fuel"...
KCSfan PNWRMNM Mark, Who gets a particular piece of business is determined by lots of things, like where both parties physically are, rates, contracts, customer's service requirements, the service offerings of all competing carriers including truck and rail. The last, and least important, factor is whim of the guy who pays the bill or arranges the shipment. There is no factual basis to assume that UP's steam program generates a single dollar of revenue. Mac McCulloch Apparently you failed to note that I said "other comparable transportation alternatives". In my book that equates to other factors that enter into the decision making process being at least relatively equal. If you think activities that create positive opinions about a company are not worth the money then you are living in an alternate universe. Just ask anyone in the advertising industry. Mark
PNWRMNM Mark, Who gets a particular piece of business is determined by lots of things, like where both parties physically are, rates, contracts, customer's service requirements, the service offerings of all competing carriers including truck and rail. The last, and least important, factor is whim of the guy who pays the bill or arranges the shipment. There is no factual basis to assume that UP's steam program generates a single dollar of revenue. Mac McCulloch
There is no factual basis to assume that UP's steam program generates a single dollar of revenue.
I addressed comparable in my first post, but evidently in such a summary fashion that you did not understand my point, which is that there is very little traffic, or even rail dominant traffic, that is so comparable as to leave room for non-economic selection of a carrier; that is to favor UP over BNSF, or NS over CSX based on which has a steam program.
You can take it as an article of faith that the shipper will ALWAYS do what he perceives as being in his best interest. In the case of traffic like grain or coal it will come down to price. I know of grain merchants who would kill their own grandmother for 2 cents a bushell.
Perhaps one of the most "comparable" traffic segments is Powder River Basin coal, since both UP and BNSF have equal access to the source. Most of it moves to "captive" (their word) customers, that is a plant served by only one railroad. In this case only one carrier is physically able to provide service, so is clearly not comparable. I imagine that there are one or two cases where a power plant is served by both BNSF and UP, and some coal moves offline to an eastern connection. Lets call these comparable. The power plant will put its traffic up for bid from time to time and whichever bids lowest will get the business. In this case, the last point of comparison is price.
Now lets assume that the decision maker is a railfan who is enamored with UP's steam program. If UP bids low all is well. If BNSF bids low your hypothesis is that he will spend more of his employer's money than he has to because UP's steam program "advertising" (your word) convinced him to pay more. If he had no boss, I would have a hard time buying your hypothesis. He has a boss, the chances of him too being enamored with UP's steam program are the same 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 100,000 as the general population. If the boss finds out, our decision maker will be unemployed.
In a business to business market the ability of the buyer to knowingly make non-economic choices is severly limited; first by the decision maker's fiduciary duty to his employer, and second by the fact that his decision is subject to review.
If our buyer and his boss are buying pickups, a personal decision, then taste, less than perfect knowledge, bias, and favoriteism have almost free rein. This is the market segment in which advertising for market share; think Chev/Ford/Dodge/Toyota, makes sense from the seller's perspective.
Mac
CSX seems to be trying to get the publics attention, they recent spent some money on TV commercials. Plus CSX didn't get any steam locomotives, UP and NS had the steam locomotives.
".... UP and NS had the steam locomotives."
?
UP had 844 and 3985. NS got rid of all of theirs. Then NS decided to open a new steam program with locos from preservation groups, and UP is expanding its steam program with a Big Boy from Pomona; not from its own collection.
It's true "CSX didn't get any steam locomotives," but that has been their choice. Earlier I posted a list of preserved locos that MIGHT be available, and whose histories are related to CSX predecessors. C&O 4-8-4 614, C&O 4-6-4 491, several C&O 2-8-4's, B&O 4-6-2 5300, B&O 2-8-2 4500, ACL 4-6-2 1504, WM 4-6-2 202, two PM 2-8-4's, and possibly others, could be made available for a CSX steam program.
Whether they do it or not is a business decision that has little to do with availability of locomotives. Money is a much bigger issue.
Kyle CSX seems to be trying to get the publics attention, they recent spent some money on TV commercials. Plus CSX didn't get any steam locomotives, UP and NS had the steam locomotives.
Kyle,
CSX
"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock
Concerning CSX and steam...
If you check page 62 of the January 2014 issue of "Trains" you'll see CSX is making a contribution to the preservation of Atlantic Coast Line Pacific 1504, on outdoor static display in Jacksonville, Fl.
Everyone should say a heartfelt "Thank You!" to CSX. Remember, they don't have to do this.
Thank you CSX! She was looking pretty rough, and lonely. A very pretty locomotive.
ACL YEAH!
The CSX website (www.csx.com) has an option on the top of the screen where you can e-mail comments. Look for "Contact Us." It's a bit confusing to use but not too bad. I've already sent them a "Thank You!" on this subject, it'd be nice iif everyone else did as well.
If you'd like to see CSX run historic equipment on their lines this could very well be how it starts.
After the various happenings involving The Children's Fund, CSX is going to be understandably cautious about spending money on anything that doesn't make a positive contribution to the bottom line. Consequently, it's going to be a long time (if ever) before CSX does something similar to NS or UP.
I understand if CSX dose not want to run Steam on their busy main lines like the Chicago line, but what about smaller less important lines like the New Rock Sub. I think Iowa Interstate would allow them to turn the train in Bureau Junction the only proble would be dealing with Metra but I think they would work around it.
Could it be that with coal revenues continuing to decline and lay offs at it is corporate headquarters that this might be a difficult time to reinstate a steam program.
KCSfan Remember, years ago, when American President Lines requested a steam hauled double stack train on the U.P. railroad? You bet corporate america is at least aware of the great p.r. generated and they will use it when appropriate. Firelock76 Let's be fair here. CSX is in the business of moving stuff from point A to point B in the most efficient and profitable manner possible. They're not in business to entertain railfans, or the general public for that matter. It's their road and their decision and I can live with that. So is the UP but they get a fantastic amount of good will and positive media coverage out of their steam program. These are invaluable assets to any corporation and the UP is smart enough to recognize that. I don't doubt for a minute that some shippers favor the UP over other comparable transportation alternatives as a result of the steam program. Mark
Remember, years ago, when American President Lines requested a steam hauled double stack train on the U.P. railroad? You bet corporate america is at least aware of the great p.r. generated and they will use it when appropriate.
Let's be honest. UP has a steam program, but how often do the Northern and the Challenger actually operate? I won't argue that the program generates a lot of favorable publicity and corporate goodwill, but as mentioned previously, it is doubtful that it has much of an effect on the decisions of traffic managers.
When looking for a transportation stock to add to my portfolio; I looked at several railroads. At the time CSX and UP were about equal in my analysis. Their PE's were similar as was their dividend. I chose UP because of their support of steam.
Good choice either way, well done.
Well the rate that csx is crashing oil trains, they may want to consider starting a good will steam program so they can be in the news for a positive reason
I wonder if the CSX derailments are the work of, for lack of a better term, the "ghost of John Snow" and all those years of deferred maintnance on CSX infrastructure? I know CSX MOW people have been working valiantly the past several years to put it all right, but they can't do everything at once.
Some CSX people have said the years the accountants were running the company were an absolute disaster, "professionals know that sometimes you have to spend money to make money, accountants think you make money by NOT spending money!"
Just speculating.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.