NKP guy 1). I may be wrong, but I don't think they have a mandate from Congress to do this. 2). If the real aim, as Balt says, is to Kill Amtrak, why not just announce that and see how Congress feels about it? To do it by 1000 cuts instead is cowardly.
1). I may be wrong, but I don't think they have a mandate from Congress to do this.
2). If the real aim, as Balt says, is to Kill Amtrak, why not just announce that and see how Congress feels about it? To do it by 1000 cuts instead is cowardly.
1 I think that the creation of Amtrak stipulated that it become self supporting within a certain time frame, or be eliminated. Anderson et al might counterargue that their predecessors have "weaseled" around that provision, and they are merely making the required correction?
2. I so often feel as though I'm being misled through deception and subterfuge that I can't do your question justice without violating the board's prohibition on political discussion. So, let me just say 'sometimes it takes a weasel to kill a weasel', and let your imagination take it from there?
Convicted OneWhat I'm saying is, maybe "stupid" isn't the right descriptor? Perhaps they are actually smarter than you give them credit for, and are intentionally trying to sour the well BECAUSE THEY ARE LOSING MONEY ON EVERY PASSENGER, and have determined that discouraging ridership is the most effective way to reduce costs?
I can agree with your analysis.
So, instead of describing Amtrak's president & his Board as stupid, let's cut to the chase and more correctly term this sort of behavior as evil. In either case, it's leading to the same end: no LD trains and eventually no Amtrak. I may be wrong, but I don't think they have a mandate from Congress to do this.
If the real aim, as Balt says, is to Kill Amtrak, why not just announce that and see how Congress feels about it? To do it by 1000 cuts instead is cowardly.
So there you have it: Anderson & the Board are, professionally speaking, evil cowards (and self-serving evil cowards, at that).
Now let the predictable replies that in effect say, "No, this all makes good business sense", begin.
Well then, I am more than ready for him to start!
What is a foamer?
Maybe Anderson is trying to fix Amtrak. It does not take much of a business person to see that it is the long-distance trains that are dragging Amtrak down.
If Amtrak could get rid of the long-distance trains and focus on the NEC, with several possible extensions off of it, it might be a viable business enterprise.
Discontinuing the long-distance trains probably is not doable because of the politics. The next best thing would be to scale them to the market.
Approximately 85 percent of the long-distance passengers are coach class. Maybe the best way forward would be to eliminate the dining cars and sleepers, which are costly to buy and staff, and run the long-distance trains with coaches, lounge cars with upgraded food service, and business class cars configured like business class on the overseas airline flights.
blue streak's thread is a textbook case (preceding Anderson) of part what is wrong on Amtrak that is not Amtrak's fault, something you all tend to overlook. Here is a train that is constantly late, "stabbed" by a freight railroad. There are others. Who, other than foamers "looking for an experience," would choose this train for transportation, which BTW, is the purpose of Amtrak as stated in the original law, not for fun.
As I have said before - Anderson was brought to Amtrak to KILL it. Nothing more and nothing less.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
NKP guy It's also a fact that this train has not been advertised in any Ohio newspaper in many years, let alone on social media, or TV and radio. If no one knows about the service it can't be grown. It's a fact that the loss of the dining car is having a negative impact on riders and discourages ridership. It doesn't help that this train, and the Capitol, for that matter, are so frequently late that they have become non-dependable as transportation options.
This reply is directed to everyone, not just NKP guy.
I guess it's time to be blunt. Many of you are acting like "current Amtrak leadership must be stupid because of all the mistakes they are making that discourage ridership"
What I'm saying is, maybe "stupid" isn't the right descriptor? Perhaps they are actually smarter than you give them credit for, and are intentionally trying to sour the well BECAUSE THEY ARE LOSING MONEY ON EVERY PASSENGER, and have determined that discouraging ridership is the most effective way to reduce costs?
The freight railroads used to do all kinds of "dis-service" to their own passenger business when they wanted to discontinue service on a particular line. They wanted to get patronage as low as they could so they could justify their petition for discontinuation with hard data showing a very low patronage for the targeted train.
Why is it so hard to believe that the current group are doing anything different?
n012944 BaltACD n012944 BaltACD If your mode of transportation is no fun, the customer will select some other means of transportation. This whole business model seems to disagree with that statement..... https://www.spirit.com https://www.flyfrontier.com https://www.allegiantair.com Not "fun". Just basic, cheap transportation. Heck airlines in general are blasted for not being a great experiance any more. And yet..... https://www.bts.dot.gov/newsroom/2017-annual-and-december-us-airline-traffic-data "The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) reported today that U.S. airlines carried an all-time high number of passengers during 2017 – 849.3 million systemwide, 741.6 million domestic and 107.7 million international – surpassing the previous high reached in 2016 " All of them provide a service, and fun is not it. We have seen those kinds of carriers come and go over the years. If they still exist in 5 to 10 years I will be amazed. Every year one or more of their ilk go belly up stranding thousands of paid passengers where they don't want to be. The only thing they are selling is price, on the surface, and then they rob you with everything else as a 'added cost option'. You should probably prep yourself to be amazed. https://www.bizjournals.com/chicago/news/2018/06/19/ultra-low-fare-airlines-are-among-most-profitable.html
BaltACD n012944 BaltACD If your mode of transportation is no fun, the customer will select some other means of transportation. This whole business model seems to disagree with that statement..... https://www.spirit.com https://www.flyfrontier.com https://www.allegiantair.com Not "fun". Just basic, cheap transportation. Heck airlines in general are blasted for not being a great experiance any more. And yet..... https://www.bts.dot.gov/newsroom/2017-annual-and-december-us-airline-traffic-data "The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) reported today that U.S. airlines carried an all-time high number of passengers during 2017 – 849.3 million systemwide, 741.6 million domestic and 107.7 million international – surpassing the previous high reached in 2016 " All of them provide a service, and fun is not it. We have seen those kinds of carriers come and go over the years. If they still exist in 5 to 10 years I will be amazed. Every year one or more of their ilk go belly up stranding thousands of paid passengers where they don't want to be. The only thing they are selling is price, on the surface, and then they rob you with everything else as a 'added cost option'.
n012944 BaltACD If your mode of transportation is no fun, the customer will select some other means of transportation. This whole business model seems to disagree with that statement..... https://www.spirit.com https://www.flyfrontier.com https://www.allegiantair.com Not "fun". Just basic, cheap transportation. Heck airlines in general are blasted for not being a great experiance any more. And yet..... https://www.bts.dot.gov/newsroom/2017-annual-and-december-us-airline-traffic-data "The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) reported today that U.S. airlines carried an all-time high number of passengers during 2017 – 849.3 million systemwide, 741.6 million domestic and 107.7 million international – surpassing the previous high reached in 2016 " All of them provide a service, and fun is not it.
BaltACD If your mode of transportation is no fun, the customer will select some other means of transportation.
If your mode of transportation is no fun, the customer will select some other means of transportation.
This whole business model seems to disagree with that statement.....
https://www.spirit.com
https://www.flyfrontier.com
https://www.allegiantair.com
Not "fun". Just basic, cheap transportation. Heck airlines in general are blasted for not being a great experiance any more. And yet.....
https://www.bts.dot.gov/newsroom/2017-annual-and-december-us-airline-traffic-data
"The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) reported today that U.S. airlines carried an all-time high number of passengers during 2017 – 849.3 million systemwide, 741.6 million domestic and 107.7 million international – surpassing the previous high reached in 2016 "
All of them provide a service, and fun is not it.
We have seen those kinds of carriers come and go over the years. If they still exist in 5 to 10 years I will be amazed. Every year one or more of their ilk go belly up stranding thousands of paid passengers where they don't want to be. The only thing they are selling is price, on the surface, and then they rob you with everything else as a 'added cost option'.
You should probably prep yourself to be amazed.
https://www.bizjournals.com/chicago/news/2018/06/19/ultra-low-fare-airlines-are-among-most-profitable.html
Old phart that I am - I have heard and seen it all before - and then came bankruptsys!
An "expensive model collector"
blue streak 1Many of Amtrak's stockholders (* US public ) believe that Amtrak and LD particulary should prevail. In that case you grow the LD revenue passenger miles to reduce the overall loss per passenger. You also take care of the persons living in the boonies who otherwise have no public transportation that they desire. ( a bus will not do )
Blue, I wish that I had a workable solution, I really do. I'm even more disappointed that we once had a workable system like we had with the interurbans, and let those slip through our fingers as well.
But you know? I can recall my mom telling me what a pain interurbans were because of the impact they had on traffic, and that the roadways tended to deteriorate faster near the tracks. She was glad they were gone.
We would probably do well to remember that the greatest minds we have ever known in the railroad business, were only too happy to be rid of long distance passenger service, whenever the opportunity availed itself to them (modern era, when passenger rail no longer had a monopoly on long distance mass transit)
So, maybe they had a point? More objective and less subjective?
I really don't see much of an opportunity for a LD passenger rail system that makes much sense, unless you go around and first eliminate many of the fool hardy programs that the government currently supports (foreign aid to buy alliance, stuff like that), then redirect that money into a passenger rail program having benefits that are both local as well as tangible. Ain't gonna happen, though...too many special interests "spoiling the broth"
NKP guy Convicted One: Previously I compared #49's passenger number that evening to similar evenings in the past two or three years, not with trains young people wouldn't be familiar with.
I'm sorry NKP guy, you're right, my reply was unclear. Please allow me to place additional emphasis where it might be beneficial.
The portion of my reply pertaining specific to your post was the part that stated "if you lose money on every customer, why try and grow the business?"
That is the mindset that the "new team" running Amtrak might be using as rationale in allowing coveted comforts to lapse and disappear altogether.
The rest of my original reply, was in anticipation that you might try and rebutt the above with an "accounting 101" scenario about how the imbalance between cost and revenue might be addressed through expanding volume. I was simply qualifying why I don't think there is sufficient volume to be had, as would be necessary to exceed the break even point.
Good catch on your part, many humble appologies.
NKP guy Does the Postal Service operate only in areas that generate a sizeable profit?
No!
Overall USPS would have earned an operating profit of $3.1 billion in 2018 if it were not saddled with $7.8 billion of retiree health and unfunded retirement benefits.
USPS management argues that strapping it with the retiree benefits that were incurred while the postal service was a government agency is unwarranted.
Many commercial entities run loss leaders. But overall, they earn enough money to offset the losses and earn a profit for the entity. Amtrak does not come close on any score card.
In 2005 the DOT IG recommended that the sleeping cars and dining cars on the long-distance trains be dropped. His rationale was that the subsidy for the sleeping car passengers was considerably higher than that for the coach passengers, who make up 85 percent of the long-distance passengers.
Assuming there is a case for the long-distance trains, why should the taxpayers pay for sleeping rooms and meals for Amtrak’s better healed passengers?
According to Amtrak, the average income of a sleeper class passenger in 2017 was $102,000 compared to $67,000 for a coach passenger. Interestingly, 52 percent of sleeper class passengers were retired compared to 38 percent of coach passengers.
PNWRMNMAutomobiles killed local passenger service in the 1920's and the jet airplane, both with generous govt subsidies for fixed plant, killed the passenger train before 1970. ATK is just another welfare program that we do not need and an thief of freight capacity that we do need. End the madness!
The US Government will never be profitable. End the madness!
ATK will never be profitable, even with a roughly $500 million hidden subsidy from the freight railroads due to far below cost pricing for train slots mandated by congress. Kill every train operated on routes ATK does not own. An arguement can be made for social utility of ATK on the NEC, but since ATK has to pay full costs of capital expenses it will never be profitable there either.
Automobiles killed local passenger service in the 1920's and the jet airplane, both with generous govt subsidies for fixed plant, killed the passenger train before 1970. ATK is just another welfare program that we do not need and an thief of freight capacity that we do need. End the madness!
Going beyond food-service loss reduction, I think Amtrak could be a profitable small segment of a large, and very-well run, hospitality business, that would include interconnected hotels, station restaurants with take-out and home delivery, spas, fitness centers, perhaps an airline and bus system. Large economies of scale, in ticketing, food and bererages, and all kinds of supplies and manpower, even electricity and diesel fuel or its replacemnt, would present opportunities for turning a profit. But would Anti-Trust allow it? Probably not.
Convicted One If you lose money on every passenger, how much sense does it make to try and grow the business? I know in "theory" the idea would be to court more passengers sufficient to start covering your expenses.
If you lose money on every passenger, how much sense does it make to try and grow the business?
I know in "theory" the idea would be to court more passengers sufficient to start covering your expenses.
Does the Postal Service operate only in areas that generate a sizeable profit?
A number of USPS critics think that is exactly what they should do.
BaltACD n012944 NKP guy I'm not the only contributor on this forum for railfans who is lately minimizing his Amtrak LD travels because it just isn't much fun at all any more. Amtrak is not in the business to provide "fun" to foamers. They are in the business to provide transportation. They are still doing that. You cannot differentiate fun and transportation when it comes to attracting customers. If your mode of transportation is no fun, the customer will select some other means of transportation. Amtrak appears to be selling the worst of all possible transportation, at present.
n012944 NKP guy I'm not the only contributor on this forum for railfans who is lately minimizing his Amtrak LD travels because it just isn't much fun at all any more. Amtrak is not in the business to provide "fun" to foamers. They are in the business to provide transportation. They are still doing that.
NKP guy I'm not the only contributor on this forum for railfans who is lately minimizing his Amtrak LD travels because it just isn't much fun at all any more.
I'm not the only contributor on this forum for railfans who is lately minimizing his Amtrak LD travels because it just isn't much fun at all any more.
Amtrak is not in the business to provide "fun" to foamers. They are in the business to provide transportation. They are still doing that.
You cannot differentiate fun and transportation when it comes to attracting customers. If your mode of transportation is no fun, the customer will select some other means of transportation. Amtrak appears to be selling the worst of all possible transportation, at present.
Flying is largely "no fun" yet....Growth of air travel in US in 2017 was 3.4% to an all-time high of 965 million.
https://www.bts.gov/newsroom/2017-traffic-data-us-airlines-and-foreign-airlines-us-flights
Many thanks to n012944 & Convicted One for their thoughtful comments.
First:
n012944Amtrak is not in the business to provide "fun" to foamers. They are in the business to provide transportation. They are still doing that.
I think your term of "foamers" is, in my case, a little heavy-handed. Wouldn't you agree that "rail enthusiast" is a bit more felicitious? As to your other comment, if the mission is simply to provide transportation, why operate sleeping cars or "diners" at all? Why not just operate commuter-like coaches? Yes, Amtrak is "still" providing transportation; the question, regarding the Lake Shore Limited though, is for how much longer?
Convicted One: Previously I compared #49's passenger number that evening to similar evenings in the past two or three years, not with trains young people wouldn't be familiar with. It is a fact that two years and more ago the Lake Shore Limited carried noticeably more passengers and the dining car was often full.
It's also a fact that this train has not been advertised in any Ohio newspaper in many years, let alone on social media, or TV and radio. If no one knows about the service it can't be grown.
It's a fact that the loss of the dining car is having a negative impact on riders and discourages ridership.
It doesn't help that this train, and the Capitol, for that matter, are so frequently late that they have become non-dependable as transportation options.
The solution, as I see it, is to improve the train, the service, and the marketing; not to bleed it to death and then feign surprise and insight. Amtrak needs a champion and a supportive Board, not the current wrecking crew.
Balt is correct.
I used to love to fly, commercial air that is. I haven't in quite a while. Why?
It's no fun anymore, it's a headache. For a variety of reasons. End of story.
NKP guyI'm not the only contributor on this forum for railfans who is lately minimizing his Amtrak LD travels because it just isn't much fun at all any more. No wonder Amtrak has sales on first class rooms when its trains ought to be, as they were for over 40 years, bursting with passengers glad to find space during the busy holiday season. Well done, Mr. Anderson and Board. What brilliant, successful businessmen you are.
I know in "theory" the idea would be to court more passengers sufficient to start covering your expenses, but I really don't believe there is enough headroom in the marketplace to recruit that many passengers.
The "passenger train experience" just doesn't have enough pull for people too young to remember it the the way it was the first time around.
CMStPnP charlie hebdo According to Amtrak ridership for October FY 2019 compared to prior year was as follows: It's comparing October to October. It's not a yearly comparison. However, the same report said year over year ridership is flat even though Amtrak has not released the stats for September yet according to the press which is reporting the Long Distance Train declines in ridership (which I don't know how you could have missed with a Google search). Also we are in December now. I am not sure when gas prices fell below $2 a gallon but I tend to think it was after October........along with the uncertainty with the NYSE.
charlie hebdo According to Amtrak ridership for October FY 2019 compared to prior year was as follows:
It's comparing October to October. It's not a yearly comparison. However, the same report said year over year ridership is flat even though Amtrak has not released the stats for September yet according to the press which is reporting the Long Distance Train declines in ridership (which I don't know how you could have missed with a Google search).
Also we are in December now. I am not sure when gas prices fell below $2 a gallon but I tend to think it was after October........along with the uncertainty with the NYSE.
I am fully aware of the comparisons. FYI: YTY comparisons are very useful because they eliminate the effects of seasonal and other variables. Had you actually looked at the data and not just the text summary, you would have seen that the flat performance (+0.9%) in ridership was due to the 5.5% decline in LD services while NEC service showed a 1,7% gain and State services a 2.0 % gain. While neither of the latter are especially good, almost anyone can discern that the major problems are in the LD segment.
According to Amtrak's September 2018 Monthly Operating Report, 2018 ridership on the Lake Shore Limited was 13.1 percent below the same figure for 2017. The number of riders in 2017 was 29 basis points higher than 2016.
The number of riders on the long-distance trains in 2018 declined 3.9 percent over 2017. For 2017 the number of riders on the long-distance trains had increased 91 basis points.
The Lake Shore Limited shows a higher decline in its ridership than the long-distance trains. The basis for these calculations can be found in the September 2018, 2017 and 2016 Monthly Operating Reports.
charlie hebdoAccording to Amtrak ridership for October FY 2019 compared to prior year was as follows:
NKP guy Well done, Mr. Anderson and Board. What brilliant, successful businessmen you are.
Are you not the person who has argued that Amtrak is not a business but rather a utility or government social agency? If this is true, why would you expect Anderson to be a good business person in an organization that supposedly is not a business?
Based on the unofficial Amtrak numbers, taken from the September 2018 Monthly Operating Report, as noted above, ridership on the Lake Shore Limited is down 13.1 percent. Ridership on the long-distance trains is down 3.94 percent.
The numbers in the September Monthly Operating Report are subject to revision.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.