schlimm daveklepper With existing services, what are the nearest Amtrak ral stations to Casper, Wyoming, and Nashville, TN, and what are the driving times by car? Dave: Not a good picture. For Caspar, the closest station would be Denver, about four hours by car. For Nashville, looks like Atlanta, about 3.5-4.0 hours by car.
daveklepper With existing services, what are the nearest Amtrak ral stations to Casper, Wyoming, and Nashville, TN, and what are the driving times by car?
With existing services, what are the nearest Amtrak ral stations to Casper, Wyoming, and Nashville, TN, and what are the driving times by car?
Dave: Not a good picture. For Caspar, the closest station would be Denver, about four hours by car. For Nashville, looks like Atlanta, about 3.5-4.0 hours by car.
Carbondale IL is closer than Atlanta - and sorta kinda in the "right" direction. It's about a 3 hour drive. Denver to Casper is about four hours. To drive the whole thing is 19 hours, so the train would "save" about 12 hours of driving.
Depart Carbondale at 3 AM, arrive Denver 8 AM of following day. 30 hours of train.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
From Trains Blog
http://cs.trains.com/trn/b/observation-tower/archive/2014/10/24/amtrak-food-service-doesn-t-make-money-on-its-own-but-that-s-not-its-purpose.aspx
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
"Most hotel and cruise line managers understand the concept of a loss leader, and realize that food & beverage service is meant to enhance overall revenue by making for an attractive package of accommodations — not to serve as a profit center in and of itself. But for whatever reason, those in Congress who hold Amtrak’s purse strings don’t seem to understand this."
Apparently the author of this blog piece does not understand loss leader, either. A loss leader (to gain or enhance the other lines) is only applicable when the service as a whole is profitable. Otherwise the loss from that component only adds to the overall loss.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Quite true. You do not sell an item for less than your cost unless you are confident that the buyer will buy something else that will provide more profit than the loss. Else, in real life, you will go out of business.
Johnny
Two comments:
One, the blog misses the whole point about Amtrak and food service. Amtrak is a LOUSY food service provider in terms of quality vs. cost. The hospitality industry does a much better job. The trick is to get that expertise into Amtrak. It should improve quality and lower costs at the same time.
Two, cruise ships don't make any real money selling rooms and food. The entire ship is a "loss leader" of sorts. The whole profit comes from selling alcohol and port activities.
In October I took the Lake Shore Lmtd, City of New Orleans, and the Crescent. Had a Roomette on all three Trips. Thirteen meals of which 10 were very good, three good. The service was excellent. The trips were my first in a roomette, It was a pleasant & relaxing way to travel. I hope to do more trips in the future.
Probably means the crew had a bad day. Amtrak might be dieing but it has little to do with your meal.
oltmannd Two comments: Two, cruise ships don't make any real money selling rooms and food. The entire ship is a "loss leader" of sorts. The whole profit comes from selling alcohol and port activities.
blue streak 1 oltmannd Two comments: Two, cruise ships don't make any real money selling rooms and food. The entire ship is a "loss leader" of sorts. The whole profit comes from selling alcohol and port activities. Don: +++ Gambling
So....maybe lounge cars need to become "casino cars"! (except Amtrak would probably figure out a way to lose money doing that, too.)
What about food service companies, such as restraunt chains, or fast-food chains for that matter? These could consider leasing dining cars or retrofitting others as a 'vehicle' per se, for their product services, and including them in those LD trainsets as an arrangement. Any of these would necessarily KEEP the standards high, or it would reflect badly on the CORPORATE name!
oltmannd Two comments: One, the blog misses the whole point about Amtrak and food service. Amtrak is a LOUSY food service provider in terms of quality vs. cost. The hospitality industry does a much better job. The trick is to get that expertise into Amtrak. It should improve quality and lower costs at the same time. Two, cruise ships don't make any real money selling rooms and food. The entire ship is a "loss leader" of sorts. The whole profit comes from selling alcohol and port activities.
How do you know that the whole profit comes from selling alcohol and port activities. Unless one has access to the cruise line books, he would not know that.
Its hard to imagine that's thier not some profitability in cruise ships other than in liquior and shore excursions. The average ship with 2000 to 4000 passengers. Most businesse depend on thier core business to make a profit.
Agree with Sam1 and Robert. Would like to see some figures.
The NYNH&H dining car department actually made a profit during WWII and years after, into the McGinnis period, through the very high prices charged in its popular commuter-train bar cars.
When coaches were added to the Mercchants Limited, the end-of-train round-end obs had doors cut into the ends with diaphragms and became commuter train bar cars!
Sam1 oltmannd Two comments: One, the blog misses the whole point about Amtrak and food service. Amtrak is a LOUSY food service provider in terms of quality vs. cost. The hospitality industry does a much better job. The trick is to get that expertise into Amtrak. It should improve quality and lower costs at the same time. Two, cruise ships don't make any real money selling rooms and food. The entire ship is a "loss leader" of sorts. The whole profit comes from selling alcohol and port activities. How do you know that the whole profit comes from selling alcohol and port activities. Unless one has access to the cruise line books, he would not know that.
All very true. However, the original point was that "loss leaders" are relevant only when the total enterprise or at least that niche or division is turning a profit. With Amtrak, the LD trains lose money on every train, so having "loss leader" amenities only increases the loss (and expense to the taxpayers).
Documentary on cruise ship operations I watched a while ago. I think is was this one http://www.cnbc.com/id/29139914
ROBERT WILLISON Its hard to imagine that's thier not some profitability in cruise ships other than in liquior and shore excursions. The average ship with 2000 to 4000 passengers. Most businesse depend on thier core business to make a profit.
I thought so, too, but it turns out not to be the case.
The reference to CNBC took me to a dead page, i.e. the video is not available. However, even if it were, I would be suspect. It is a made for TV news special. I have found that most of these productions are devoid of any serious financial analysis.
Carnival PLC is the largest cruise ship company in the world. It operates several brands, and I am a frequent customer. It generates a profit on its ship operations, but the returns are paltry compared to those generated by booze, shore excursions, spas, speciality restaurants, personal trainers, art auctions, etc.
In 2013 ship operations generated $405 million of net income, excluding on board and other revenues and expenses, on revenues of $11.6 billion.
Other revenues and expenses returned $3.1 billion on $3.6 billion of revenues, for an operating margin of 85.1 per cent, which makes the operating margin for ship operations - 10.29 per cent - look weak.
It is unclear how much of other ship operating expenses, payroll, etc. should be allocated to other revenues and expenses. So I took the best case scenario for other revenues and expenses and the worst case scenario for operations excluding other revenues and expenses.
Clearly, other revenues and expenses generate a higher return than carrying folks around on the high seas, but to say that the carriers don't realize a profit on general operations is not supported by Carnival's financial data.
Carnivals returns for carrying people in its ships are not great. In 2013 its total return on investment was 4.13 per cent, whilst its return on equity was 5.73 per cent.
The returns include the other revenues and expenses. If they were backed out of the numbers, the return on ship operations would be very poor, but that does not translate into not making any money on ship operations. Clearly the big profit generators are the other revenues.
For comparative purposes, over the past 12 months the Class I railroads had an average return on investment of 8.22 per cent and an average return on equity of 18.24 per cent. Clearly, investing in companies that haul freight, as opposed to people, is a better option.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.