Dakguy201 PNWRMNM: I am not a computer expert, but this is part of yield management which the airlines have been doing for decades. It should not be dificult to write a routine that captures inquiries that could not be fulfilled due to being sold out. One could argue that this would overstate lost sales and I would agree since to capture degree of interest would be difficult. Amtrak is already using a yield management computer software to administer their bucket pricing system. I would think that a byproduct of that system is insight into the point in time at which a long distance train is substantially sold out. From that knowledge is should be a short step to adding accomodations to existing consists on an incremental basis and observing ridership data. Of course, that depends upon having an adequate equipment pool, which is not presently the case. Asking the rest of the country to pony up for multibillion projects in the Corridor, such as the new Hudson River tunnels (can you say "son of Big Dig?"), while starving Amtrak of the equipment necessary to operate the LD trains is not a political strategy that is going to be viable in the long run.
PNWRMNM: I am not a computer expert, but this is part of yield management which the airlines have been doing for decades. It should not be dificult to write a routine that captures inquiries that could not be fulfilled due to being sold out. One could argue that this would overstate lost sales and I would agree since to capture degree of interest would be difficult.
I am not a computer expert, but this is part of yield management which the airlines have been doing for decades. It should not be dificult to write a routine that captures inquiries that could not be fulfilled due to being sold out. One could argue that this would overstate lost sales and I would agree since to capture degree of interest would be difficult.
Amtrak is already using a yield management computer software to administer their bucket pricing system. I would think that a byproduct of that system is insight into the point in time at which a long distance train is substantially sold out. From that knowledge is should be a short step to adding accomodations to existing consists on an incremental basis and observing ridership data. Of course, that depends upon having an adequate equipment pool, which is not presently the case.
Asking the rest of the country to pony up for multibillion projects in the Corridor, such as the new Hudson River tunnels (can you say "son of Big Dig?"), while starving Amtrak of the equipment necessary to operate the LD trains is not a political strategy that is going to be viable in the long run.
Lets suppose that I call Amtrak's reservation center and inquire about sleeper space from Austin to Chicago for date X. It is sold out because the last space is taken between Little Rock and St. Louis. OK, I say. I am retired. How about a roomette on X+1. OK, you got it. Amtrak lost a passenger on X because of a first class space constraint, but not for X+1. Doesn't sound like a good reason to add extra space on X, especially if a significant percentage of passengers would flop over to another date. Based on my observations (I always travel in a sleeper when the trip is overnight), a significant portion of the folks traveling in a sleeper are retired or have flexible travel schedules. So Amtrak loses a passenger for a given date but not forever.
In scene two I call the reservation center and inquire about the cost of sleeper space to Chicago from Austin. The clerk tells me that there is no space on X, but there is space on X+1. I decide that the price is too high, irrespective of the space constraint, and I hang up. I would not have bought the space irrespective of its availability. How do you classify this situation, given the unlikelihood that you would know the real reason for my failure to pursue the reservation?
In scene three I go on-line and check the sleeper space from Austin to Chicago on X as well as multiple future Xs. X is sold out. But I decide that sleeping car accommodations are too pricey for my budget, and I book a coach ticket. The system can determine that I opened the room dialogue box, but it does not know whether I considered a roomette, family room, or bedroom. Or whether I was seriously interested in booking sleeper space or just checking it out. Since the system shows upon opening the dialogue box whether sleeper space is sold out, it does not now appear to have any way to determine whether I am serious about getting sleeper space or just looking. It would not know whether I was serious unless it asked me to click on the accommodation and then told me that the space was sold out. Which would not make for a very friendly site experience.
I worked for a large electric utility. We have a call center. And we were concerned about dropped calls. Based on the nature of the successful calls, we use statistical models to draw conclusions about the dropped calls, but that was all they were. We did not know what the callers who hung up before being served wanted. We could only assume. Unless there was a massive power failure due to one of the ice storms that slams north Texas from time to time. Then we had a pretty good idea why they were calling.
First, long-distance trains and pricing should be re-thought before any more money is thrown into it in the form of new equipment. This should be done before we wonder at how many potential riders are left behind and whether that would justify the capital outlay for additional equipment for occasional use.
For the moment, let's just acknowledge that fare rates decrease with distance where Amtrak strives to attract riders going the entire distance reaping the greatest subsidy for coach and sleeper travel.
I have asked before why not rebuild existing equipment to current FRA specifications with tilt suspension so Regional and long-distance trains can keep up on the NEC? With only 3-4 trains an hour in one direction, I don't see how this can be such a problem. Furthermore, Amtrak still must deal with tenant commuter operations that share in the cost of maintaining the Corridor or even Acela would not be profitable.
I also agree that there will be no national support for the NEC and new Hudson River tunnels without long-distance and state-supported trains; and both of these are under separate attacks and vulnerable in the current political and economic landscape. Just how important state and long-distance trains are in secondary local benefits (sales tax revenues, traffic congestion, etc.) and in rural access to big-city attractions has not been fully addressed.
I agree with Sam1 and others that the focus should go to regional short and medium-distance rail passenger services in high travel corridors where road and air congestion (and parking costs) are factors. This has some impact on national travel as well, sharing the same local infrastructure that I think warrants national support for Amtrak as an umbrella agency and partially sharing revenue shortfalls under existing legislation.
The argument that sleepers and LD trains, in general, are not needed is silly considering that sleeping accommodations are often sold out months in advance. This is from my personal, consumer experience! If anything, Amtrak needs more sleepers to bring the prices down. Also, the price for the Roomettes is pretty reasonable considering accommodations and full dining. Full bedrooms are expensive, but it's expected for the top tier first class.
trainsBuddy The argument that sleepers and LD trains, in general, are not needed is silly considering that sleeping accommodations are often sold out months in advance. This is from my personal, consumer experience! If anything, Amtrak needs more sleepers to bring the prices down. Also, the price for the Roomettes is pretty reasonable considering accommodations and full dining. Full bedrooms are expensive, but it's expected for the top tier first class.
Long-distance trains are not so much a question of need as it is of costs and fares. An extra sleeper and coach doesn't seem to add that much revenue to substantially offset costs and many times may be unnecessary.
How much need would there be if long-distance fares were higher? And could the costs be reduced or re-applied to expanded corridor services not requiring as much subsidy per passenger or passenger-mile? Posters comment that Amtrak isn't run as a business, but that's not true. The political reality is that government keeps an eye on the cost of Amtrak and in the end periodically reviews the costs and benefits as with any other business. A large Congressional faction is calling for both zeroing out Amtrak and eliminating support for state trains for the next Federal budget.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.