I hope Michael Barron succeeds.
If the passenger train service mentioned by the UP representative is the Las Vegas "X-Train" then read this story
OCRegister X-Train
It comes as no surprise to learn that the Union Pacific is in business to make money and they are willing to rent track usage to a passenger carrier.
henry6 D.Carleton The Amtrak reauthorization of 1996 removed the monopoly status of Amtrak. Anyone may negotiate with any railroad to operate a passenger train over their route. If your bag-o-money is large enough the railroad will allow it. When the representative of one of the Las Vegas ventures was speaking to a group of us I leaned over to the UP rep sitting next to me an said "looks like you're getting a passenger train." He said, "No, we're getting a customer." This is a business, we do this to make money. This is a revelation...that a railroader looked at a passenger train as a potential customer instead of a pain in the operating butt. However, it should be noted that the railroad in this case will only provide the right of way and crew and not the equipment nor marketing.
D.Carleton The Amtrak reauthorization of 1996 removed the monopoly status of Amtrak. Anyone may negotiate with any railroad to operate a passenger train over their route. If your bag-o-money is large enough the railroad will allow it. When the representative of one of the Las Vegas ventures was speaking to a group of us I leaned over to the UP rep sitting next to me an said "looks like you're getting a passenger train." He said, "No, we're getting a customer." This is a business, we do this to make money.
The Amtrak reauthorization of 1996 removed the monopoly status of Amtrak. Anyone may negotiate with any railroad to operate a passenger train over their route. If your bag-o-money is large enough the railroad will allow it. When the representative of one of the Las Vegas ventures was speaking to a group of us I leaned over to the UP rep sitting next to me an said "looks like you're getting a passenger train." He said, "No, we're getting a customer." This is a business, we do this to make money.
This is a revelation...that a railroader looked at a passenger train as a potential customer instead of a pain in the operating butt. However, it should be noted that the railroad in this case will only provide the right of way and crew and not the equipment nor marketing.
Editor Emeritus, This Week at Amtrak
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.
Yes,,,Amtrak has the right of first refusal on any route of those railroads who participated in its creation. But I don't think there is any "cherry picking" of routes anymore. What there are, however, are opportunities in some and between some markets and special services.
My experance with CSX in trying to start a new passenger route was that it has to go to Amtrak first and then Amtrak has to reject the proposal. The Class ones who are part of Amtrak can not run there own service in compitition from Amtrak. Otherwise railroads could cherry pick routes like service to florida that make money and take away revenue from Amtrak..The Auto Train as one example did make a profit as a independent corp for a while untill it started its Chicago-Florida route.
Yes, the NJT Casino trains were the result of the Casinos' contracting with NJT...And why not? It was NJT equipment riding solely on NJT authorized rail routes. Besides, Amtrak had already given up their rights to the traffic by pulling out of Atlantic City. Amtrak knows that it cannot furnish all the services and routes that may want a train because they don't have the crews or the equipment. So, they will work with or allow private and public agencies to operate trains and services but usually where there would be no conflict with current Amtrak operations. So, no could say they wanted to run a passenger train on the Corridor, for instance, between NYP and Washington, DC. And it is doubtful CSX would accept the traffic as their lines are full.
All Aboard Florida and those two Las Vegas casino trains seem to be moving forward as private ventures and I don't see them complaining about Amtrak trying to protect a monopoly on intercity passenger rail service. The recently failed Atlantic City Express was a private venture that contracted with NJTransit without Amtrak putting up a fuss about it. I guess if Amtrak is a monopoly, then commuter rail authorities must be considered regional monopolies that prevent private corporations from starting their own commuter passenger lines.
I don't believe so. All new passenger services are on lines and routes without Amtrak services and not necessarily on Class I or II common carrier railroad companies. And for the most part, since there are fewer rail line routes between same cities, there aren't competitive routes either. So, in effect, it is a moot question. However, Amtrak can work with any group, private or public, for new routes and services..
Do you know of any railroad or other corporation that wants to run service in competition with Amtrak and cannot now do so?
I don't believe Amtrak can be sued for anti trust. First, it was formed by the Federal Government with the consent and aid of private railroads who had the option of not joining but carrying on their own passenger service instead (Southern and Rio Grande both opted for their own services). Second, the Amtrak law has been amended to allow other inter city services to exist but, I think, with the aid or under the auspices or permission of Amtrak and or state agencies (several exist today including Maine Eastern services, Lake George to North Creek, NY for example). Third, as has been pointed out, freight railroads really don't want passenger timetables interfering with their unscheduled freight nor do they want the cost of operating and insuring, And fourth, there are fewer rail lines between markets so that a competing route may not exist; i.e. Amtrak doesn't have any real competition in the passenger train market. Fifth, competition is automobile, bus and airplanes which are also provided for by government funded rights of way and traffic control (i.e., same owner). The concept of Amtrak being sued for anti trust or monopolistic practices is at least not practical.
Any entity can be sued by anyone for any thing at any time. Most lawyers like to have a client and a case. I can imagine neither.
Mac McCulloch
Who is the offended railroad who wants to run passenger service but is being squeezed out by Amtrak?
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
ontheBNSFAmtrak is technically a private corporation I wonder could it be sued for antitrust? It is a monopoly and should be treated as such. The government would probably rule in favor of Amtrak but I think it is an interesting idea.
Railroads are not covered by antitrust laws. They are regulated by the STB instead. The STB is the functional remnant of the old ICC.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Railroad to Freedom
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.