Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="blue streak 1"]  So chance of fewer grade crossing accidents. It also helps NS and CSX make their operations more fluid which may finally translate into more revenue for NS and maybe more lease payments? So your car addicts get some benefit as well. Oltmannd: you are correct about the Lynchburg train. A look at the Jan performance report shows LYNCH has a + $1.3M  operating profit.. 47k riders the  1st five months (+26K).  More importantly is the performance of the Carolinian. For the 5 months of FY 2011 Carolinian had a 0.6M operating profit with 104k riders.  One could expect once the new Raleigh - Richmond line is in place that the Piedmonts or their off spring will do as well. As well the on time of the Piedmonts has already risen due to work already completed with a 89% Ot in Jan and FY of 81%. We must all expect that a numer of riders and probably OT will suffer in Feb - Apr due to the ongoing double tracking work by NS between Greensboro and CLT. The cancellation of trains Monday -  Thursday of each week will effect performance and operating costs as the crews will be paid by AMTRAK whether they operate or not. However how to factor additional riders (if any) onto Carolinian in response to these cancellations is unknown.  [/quote] January is the fourth month of FY11.  I don't see the February report on Amtrak's webpage.  Where are you getting the February numbers? As shown, the Washington-Lynchburg service turned a $1.3 million operating profit before interest and depreciation. The Carolinian shows a loss of $600,000 (2.1 cents per passenger mile) on revenues of $6.4 million. Amtrak does no allocate interest and depreciation by route, claiming that it would be unfair because of the sale and leaseback of presumably significant amounts of its operating equipment.  This is a unique approach.  It suggests the possibility of an unfavorable sale/leaseback contract.  With the improvements in the line from Charlotte to Richmond, it will be interesting to see how the capital charges are allocated.  If the line upgrade is being made primarily to benefit passenger trains,  the bulk of the capital costs should be allocated to passenger operations, which will not make for a good financial picture. I am all for passenger trains.  Contrary to your impressions, I am not a car nut or addict.  In fact, I don't really like them, but in Texas no car means greatly restricted mobility.  Whilst I lived in Australia, I did without a car, primarily because I lived in Melbourne, which has an excellent public transport system.  I wonder how many people who are train buffs have sold their cars?  I suspect not many.  I am an addict, however, when it comes to fiscal responsbiliity.  I would stop all subsidies and allow the chips to fall where they may.  I am to no surprise an enthusiastic competive markets supporter.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag