warren wilson The report is available here: http://www.amtrakoig.gov/sites/default/files/reports/08022012____amtrak_oig_food__beverage_testimony.pdf
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
You're right, they shouldn't. But it is one way of spreading the cost of the service (in this case the operting of the train with dining services) rather than take a huge loss or have to charge such a high price for food that no one would buy. From a business point it makes sense to get as much from the gate to support the whole as possible. Again, all the questions and opinions here are just conjecture....there will be no decision here which all will accept nor which would fit every situation.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
Why should travelers in coach be forced to pay for a food service they may not want in order to get a reserved seat?
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
I like and understand what you are saying, Dave, but wonder about the total number of passengers in each class being enough for doing it this way. I have a feeling it would have to be rationalized by train and by route.
Here is a thought for Mr. Boardman if pushed to the wall. Where coach only service is now provided, let there be two classes, business class, always all reserved on all trains, and regular coach which can remain non-reerved where it is currently non-reserved. The business class has the standard amenities that business class travelers enjoy now. But the price should be raised and meals included and the additional price should cover the cost of meals. The third level sleeping car, should cover both the cost of meals and the costs of the addiitonal service. And every attempt should continue to be made to increase quality and variety and lower costs. For those traveling basic coach, upgrades to business should be sold on train as available, box lunches available at stations, etc. The only problem is for business class and sleeper passengers who pay for a meal they don't want. Probalby a minority.
To follow this "discussion" it's as though nobody can ask questions, pose rational options, or say anything if it doesn't fit into some vague and shifting notion of service, whether food service or passenger train service.
henry6 Only people in food services or transportation services can accurately answer any of these questions as has been demonstrated by the answers and discussion. The discussion does miss the point of what constitutes food service and for who. Some people wouldn't be caught dead in a fast food restaurant (and some claim there are deaths because of it!) while others look at the cost of a meal before deciding to eat out. How universal and broad should or does a dining car menue have to be? Again, as I've noted, it depends on the train, the markets served, the schedule, and the geography. Not everyone will be satisfied with any menu. Some demand a steak dinner like from a fine restaurant or hotel, some can only afford something from the dollar menu from their favorite fast food drive through, We here, apparenlty not going to come up with an answer that satisfies: non business and non food service experts; those of varyhing political pursuasions; nostalgic rail buffs; rail oerators; and most following this post. I think we are at a point where we must agree to disagree pending a real move by Amtrak to do something,
Only people in food services or transportation services can accurately answer any of these questions as has been demonstrated by the answers and discussion. The discussion does miss the point of what constitutes food service and for who. Some people wouldn't be caught dead in a fast food restaurant (and some claim there are deaths because of it!) while others look at the cost of a meal before deciding to eat out. How universal and broad should or does a dining car menue have to be? Again, as I've noted, it depends on the train, the markets served, the schedule, and the geography. Not everyone will be satisfied with any menu. Some demand a steak dinner like from a fine restaurant or hotel, some can only afford something from the dollar menu from their favorite fast food drive through, We here, apparenlty not going to come up with an answer that satisfies: non business and non food service experts; those of varyhing political pursuasions; nostalgic rail buffs; rail oerators; and most following this post. I think we are at a point where we must agree to disagree pending a real move by Amtrak to do something,
CMStPnP So let me take a quick poll among the readers here. It costs Amtrak $16 to make a hamburger and deliver it on one of their LD trains (their stats). How many people here think they can do it for less and make a profit at it. Remember there are microwaves on the train as well as a full kitchen.
So let me take a quick poll among the readers here. It costs Amtrak $16 to make a hamburger and deliver it on one of their LD trains (their stats). How many people here think they can do it for less and make a profit at it. Remember there are microwaves on the train as well as a full kitchen.
I think I can get that same burger out of a vending machine and zap it myself. And, I can get a can of soda out of a vending machine, too! Bet I can find company to stock the machines for less than $16 a burger.
And what will that prove? Few here are involved enough in food service to give an honest answer and few are professional railroad managers to give an honest answer. A poll here is noting more than fanati's exuberance for beloved trains or political POV. McDonald pocketbooks will vote one way, gourmonds will vote another way, Libertarians will say flat no, Republicans will say privatize,and Democrats will say yes. And it still will mean nothing. I'll vote yes from a nostalgic standpoint but side with the Republican viewpoint if it were truley researched and planned and well executed if privatized and yes also from a business service point of vew, too, if that's what a Democrat stands for here. No, this poll will prove nothing, I'm afraid. The arguements have been made and heard,minds have been made up. Those with points of view political or othewise, are dug in and holding their forts. This merry-go-round has run its many circles and the machine is out of brass rings.
Food service on trains is basically fast food in the cafe/lounge and a restaurant in the diner. Food service isn't one of Amtrak's core competencies, so why not contract it out to outfits where it is a core competency?
That is occurs on a train in a more constrained space is more of a detail than show-stopper.
There are big, national restaurant conglomerates that are uber-knowledgable about what people want to eat, when they want to eat it, how they want it served, and how much they have to spend...and they know how to make a buck feeding them. Hire them!
In railroading, nothing is automatic except doors and couplers. But overall marketing and managing would disagree with your statement. Cable TV and sattellite dish program distributors offer how many hundreds of channels? And how many do you actually watch? You watch an average of about 3 channels on a regular basis, up to six tops across a month. But you buy the service because there are so, so many choices. That's part of marketing. Realistically, I would think it is cheaper to have a dining car on a long distance train than to add three or more hours a day to the schedule plus the crew costs for those three hours, and the possiblity of either blocking the railroad or having to build a siding to accommodate the train. Plus the cost of setting up the locations and services for food stops, the problem of being late, etc. Keep it aboard the train and keep the train moving and you have control. If you don't want to run a passenger train with what it takes to make it work, then quit the business and go make pizzas or whatever will make you happy. I don't think Joe Boardman and the rest of Amtrak are ready to do that. Congress? well...maybe they should to make pizzas anyway.
You can't just throw out things like "most folks" because you have no evidence for this. My own anecdotal evidence says the opposite. The Capitol Limited's diner is always crowded for dinner and the Palmetto's lounge is an absolute zoo.
Cutting food service would not automatically mean no passengers, as you so quickly state as a fact. Since the food is so poor, most folks bring their own onboard, even on the LD trains. The main users are sleeper car passengers, for whom food is included in the ticket.
Sam, freight railroads used to be able to discount the dining car on the grounds that if Mr. Shipper liked the meal and service, he will ship via your railroad, a rationalization for having dining cars. Amtrak doesn't' have that luxury to fall on. So, what is the answer. On this thread it seems to be either that Amtrak cut out the food service entirely and suffer the consequences of no passengers or supply food service to satisfy customer needs. But Congress has to admit to themselves the Federal Government is a Hell of a Way to Run a Railroad! If the COngress wants Amtrak to succeed, then it must cut it loose of petty politics and let Amtrak managment manage it as a railroad and business and not a Lionel set for some spoiled kids who have to have their way at any cost.
Let's agree that Amtrak is not a business. However, there is no reason why decisions made about services cannot be rational. Having a miserable food service that pleases few and wastes money that could otherwise be used to advance Amtrak's primary mission, providing passenger transportation, makes no sense.
If it were a business decision, i.e. made by a competitive business, management would price it so that it covered its costs. They might run it as a lose leader if the other product lines, i.e. the general service, covered its fully allocated costs and provided a return to the shareholders. Neither fits Amtrak. It is a political creature that bows to the political winds.
Ultimately a business has to recover its costs or go out of business. If its customers won't cover the cost of its services, it is game, set, match.
Food service has to be considered on trains. You can drive a car and stop wherever or whenever you want; on a bus you comply with their stop schedules. You cannot return train services back to pre Civil War era stops...next thing we know someone will steal an engine and take off up the line while the crew and crowd are stuffing themselves at the McDonald's Thomas The Tank Engine kiosk in the waiting room of a station. No, food service is part of travel, rail or otherwise....lengthening a schedule to accommodate 30 to 60 minute feeding stops every four hours detracts from the value of the ride. A business decision has to be made, politics be damned: provide food service based on the train's clients. time of day, and volume, and need.;
You are correct. Most of Amtrak's passenger don't travel in the NEC, although a significant percentage of them do. And most of the others travel in the other short corridors, i.e. California and Chicago. The long distance trains with their dinning and lounge cars carry only 14.9 per cent of Amtrak's passengers.
As stated in many postings, I would do away with the long distance trains. That would leave only the corridor trains, where passenger rail makes sense, and where a different food service model, if any, would be more appropriate.
As an aside, the Arizona Department of Transportation, in conjunction with Phoenix and Tucson, is planning a commuter rail operation between Arizona's two largest cities. The distance between the two is approximately 110 miles. I doubt on-board food service will be an issue. This is the type of corridor that makes sense.
You still need food service on the long distance trains and I am not sure the cost of food service should be a reason to eliminate them. I would raise the price of Sleeping Car rates to cover the food service deficit on each long distance train as much as possible without impacting the occupancy of the Sleeping Cars. I think Amtrak can afford to bump up the sleeper cost on most runs by $200-300. Likewise I think they should charge for passengers 2-3 in the Sleepers for at least the additional cost to wash the linens and cover the additional trash / towels. Maybe a $15-20 a head per day surcharge there.
While we are on the topic, really think Amtrak should introduce a third class of service on long distance trains. They pay extra to maintain those long distance coaches, they should charge more to occupy them vs a short distance coach BUT......they don't.
but sam most people don't travel bos - wash.
so sam when I want to board the crescent at picayune and plan to get off at Danville, va what do I do?? oute 128 - new brunswick. Or worse still pontiac, Il - maricopa, / yuma az ?probably not travel AMTRAK. At least on greyhound they do stop for meals however the greyhound restaurants are terrible. had to eat at one on a christmas eve---you figure my disgust ???
These small stations ( anyone have an idea how many do not have an food service close by ?) if small stations lost would sink the long distance trains but maybe that is what mica and you want ??
42 years and 9 heads of Amtrak (2 interim heads with very short terms 1 year or less). Name just one "private business with the same virtual management for 40 years." For most endeavors these days, e4+ years for a corporate CEO, political leader or university president, is pretty typical. Figuring out how to run a food service is something that gets worked out many other places, including where it is designed to simply be a service (university food services, corporation cafeterias) or even loss leader, rather than a profit center (casino food, even Las Vegas. I really don't think the expectation that Amtrak could figure out food service or discontinue it in 41 years is asking too much.
But Schlimm...while Amtrak is 40 years old it has been a different orginization virtually every 4 to 8 years. As the Presidency of the country changed, as different Congresses sat, and different caretakers were assigned, it was not a straight line for 40 years but a zig zag and stop and reverse and change direction again line. No one philosophy or strategy has taken hold for more than a political footnote in terms of time. Boardman, in fact, has lasted the longest, I believe, and even at that he was named until late in the lasting moments of the Bush II regime (I mean that in the nicest way) and entered the unknown waters of Obama's first administration; he was kept on but I think it was like holding on to a boat in rought waters before Boardman could get hold of what was happening and what he actually could and couldn't do, what was expected of him. Unlike a private business with the same virtual managment for 40 years, Amtrak is more day to day, apt to need to change at the whim of Congress and politics than anything.
Sam1 Now to my perspective. Passenger trains only make sense in relatively short, high density corridors where the cost of expanding the highways and airways is prohibitive. I have held this position since joining these forums approximately five years ago. The ideal corridor is roughly 100 to 300 miles and can be (ultimately will be) traversed in three hours max. New York to Washington is one of the best examples. My model eliminates the long distance trains and most of the so-called other or short corridor trains. That takes care of the dinning and lounge car problem. Corridor passengers could buy something to eat at a good station restaurant, like those in Washington, before departure and, if desired, buy something else when they get to New York or most of the stations in between the end points. The food service vendors in the stations cover their costs. And they do a heck of a better job serving eats and drinks than what one gets on the train. Starbuck's coffee beats anything that I have had to force down on the train. Very few of Amtrak's NEC passengers travel from Boston to Washington. Most of them probably are on the train for two to three hours. Who cannot go without food and drink for three hours, especially if they can buy it in the station before or after their trip? Air shuttle passengers seem to do without food on the plane; so too do bus travelers. On my last trip to Washington I did not see any emaciated passengers stumble off the Bolt bus because of caloric deficiencies. For those passengers who want to travel from Washington to Boston, which means more than three hours on the train, cart vendors could meet the train in Penn Station and sell light fare. Use to work pretty well in Harrisburg when I rode the train from Altoona to New York.
Now to my perspective.
Passenger trains only make sense in relatively short, high density corridors where the cost of expanding the highways and airways is prohibitive. I have held this position since joining these forums approximately five years ago. The ideal corridor is roughly 100 to 300 miles and can be (ultimately will be) traversed in three hours max. New York to Washington is one of the best examples.
My model eliminates the long distance trains and most of the so-called other or short corridor trains. That takes care of the dinning and lounge car problem.
Corridor passengers could buy something to eat at a good station restaurant, like those in Washington, before departure and, if desired, buy something else when they get to New York or most of the stations in between the end points. The food service vendors in the stations cover their costs. And they do a heck of a better job serving eats and drinks than what one gets on the train. Starbuck's coffee beats anything that I have had to force down on the train.
Very few of Amtrak's NEC passengers travel from Boston to Washington. Most of them probably are on the train for two to three hours. Who cannot go without food and drink for three hours, especially if they can buy it in the station before or after their trip? Air shuttle passengers seem to do without food on the plane; so too do bus travelers. On my last trip to Washington I did not see any emaciated passengers stumble off the Bolt bus because of caloric deficiencies.
For those passengers who want to travel from Washington to Boston, which means more than three hours on the train, cart vendors could meet the train in Penn Station and sell light fare. Use to work pretty well in Harrisburg when I rode the train from Altoona to New York.
I pretty much agree with all you said, especially the overall model. As to food service, it seems to me if you are going to say you have food and beverage service on trains, then either do it right or discontinue. Given that Amtrak has had 40 years to work out the kinks, it looks like they should call it quits on food cars and save some money for better transportation services.
Several things have to be put in perspective. First, Amtrak management is a caretaker management serving at the whim of the President and Congress...he can be named and un-named in an instant at any given moment. Therefore, the problem of long term managment decisions of operation and philosophies are constantly changing and are good only for as long as the present managment is there. So, why bother doing too much or something that is going to be changed, vetoed, or eliminated with the next breath. Congress either has to set Amtrak up as a permanent entity seperate and apart from all government and political intervention or do what any given management says it wants to do without interference. Do you believe in Santa Clause? Yeah.
Therefore you cannot expect any firm answers to food service other than what has already been presented. As a tax payer, you have a right to feel the way you do. But, do you have any business experience which told you you had to keep a particular product or service going at cost or a loss in order that the whole product or product line could succeed? Did you ever have to decide what color something should be so as to be appealing enough to garner attention and sales, despite the extra cost of adding the color or whatever to the product?
The other factor is the American public having been shieded from actual cost of services. The farmers upset with railroad tariffs so much they formed The Grange which brought pressure to bear so that Congress formed the Interstate Commerce Commission. A New York City city council and a New York State Legislature that demanded the subway operators not charge more than a nickle leading the taxpayers and residents using mass transit from 1885 to 1950 something that it only costs five cents to ride anywhere while the City was foreced to takeover the bankrupt lines. Farm subisidies to keep the farmer happy selling his crops at what the public would pay and not what it cost him to grow with a little profit on top. Americans know the price of everything, dwell on it all the time, manipulate it to their advantage. But they know little of the value of products, services, and the money it takes. Government subsidies are in virtually everything we do, make, use, sell, buy, eat, drink, drive, see. As a taxpayer I too, view theft and mishandling of government money as unacceptable. So stop subsidizing huge agricultural corporations instead of the small farmer; stop giving oil companies subsdies and breaks to drill when they are reporting record profits...that's profits, not just revenues. The list is probably endless as is this discussion and will not be resolved but just keep on revolving.
From my perspective as a taxpayer, Henry, I think the theft, even though it is just a small part of the losses, is unacceptable. The reports indicated management has known about the theft for several years and has done nothing. If I were an anti Amtrak Congressman I would hammer away on the theft.
As far as your comments about food service itself I can only wish you were in charge. These days I rarely ride long distance trains but last November I rode the Crescent from New Orleans to Newark, NJ. And the only meal I eat in the diner is breakfast; I don't want a lot of food when I'm just sitting down. Paper coffee cups are unacceptable in a sit down dining care. Plastic is at best only marginally acceptable. I had a simple 2 egg and sausage breakfast. The two rolls were tiny; simple toast would have been much more adequate. Other than that the food was OK. But Amtrak dining car food leaves a lot to be desired. My usual trip is from New York Penn Station to Providence on a morning train but Northeast Regional Service, never Acela.. Why in the world anyone would buy anything on board amazes me when you can easily get food that is so much better at the station. Au Bon Pain, Zaro's and other places are much better for coffee and a roll which is what I get. If I want a second cup of coffee I'll get that at the snack bar but that is all.
But on the whole Amtrak is a great improvement. I remember riding the New Haven Railroad from Providence and standing until the train got to New Haven. I remember young men walking through the cars with baskets of food and a clanking coffee pot hanging down. But some New Haven trains ran dining cars to New York and they were better than the dinner on the Crescent I ate in last November. If you ever ride a Northwest Regional train I recommend that you buy your food at the station and, before you sit down, be sure the overhead reading light is working. Other than that Amtrac is a real improvement.
Taxpayer waste is the term that blows my mind here. Taxpayers know nothing about business nor about government in the same breath. Amtrak is a business and can and should not be held up to politcal philosophies and idiosyncracies. Food service is a marketing tool, like advertising and public relations, a non tangable that few, very few in both business and politics can understand and deal with. Only those who deal with such intangables on a regular basis can cope with it, understand it, manipulate it, and work it. All others can just complain because they don't understand why it has be be a line item but not a bottom line item. Nobody, but nobody, here is going to have an answer that will satisfy more than 20% of any given segment of this audience at any given time. It will just go round and round and round and round and roun....
I have dealt with advertising, background music, and the concept of service in several areas...add ons which CPA's and CEO's never understand. Take away advertising and your sales go down; not use the right color in the right place and you may lose shelf impact and sales. Sell a hamburger like McDonalds or a steak sandwich at the Waldorf...ambiance, costs, audience, clientle, marketing, why somebody shows up at your door or somebody else's for the same product...intangables which are not understood by most here. The arguement will go on forever with no resolve because the questions asked have no answers for those who don't understand service and intangible additions ot products and services. CPA's will kill anything that cannot be tangibally traced to value added or that doesn't add to the bottom line. It is part of the risk of capitaism that takes a tough gut and a belief in oneself and one's product.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.