# Amtrak long distance fares 2021-2023



## Sidney

The low bucket price on the Southwest Chief from Chicago to Los Angeles for one is $899,up from $623 last week. The other Western trains,the California Zephyr and the Empire Builder are still at $563 and $529 to their end points from Chicago.

Is there any logical explanation for the huge spike in prices? The Texas Eagle also has the same prices from Chi-Lax,but if you leave from Bloomington or ride to Palm Springs,two stations that are three and a half hours from Chicago and LA,the roomette price drops almost $250

I find it hard to believe the demand for sleepers on the Chief is that high,that it would warrant such an outrageous price. I really think Amtrak is pricing it that high to discourage ridership and eliminate it. No way would I even consider paying $900 for a roomette


----------



## Ryan

The lowest price that you can find doesn't not mean that the low bucket has gone up that much.

How do you know that the low bucket price has increased by this amount?

Significantly cheaper prices from stations near (but not at) the end of the line has been standard practice for the decade-plus that I've been following prices.


----------



## Amtrakfflyer

Exact same increase on the TE from CHI to LAX. Very curious now to see if full service dining does indeed return to the SWC. Management has made it clear in the past they don’t want to operate the SWC or TE. Perhaps Flynn has learned from Anderson’s failed tactics. While Flynn is saying the right things Amtrak’s actions aren’t backing up his words.

These increases over the long term will decimate ridership. Sure now people MAY be paying the high prices I don’t really believe that though. Telling is Amtrak isn’t even offering roomettes for sale on the second sleeper on the TE, only the bedrooms. How can that be defended?


----------



## Sidney

I have been checking prices just about every day on the SW Chief and that $899 comes up from Chi to Lax. That price comes up next April as well,so I would assume that is low bucket


----------



## Ryan

That assumption is almost certainly flawed.

Edit to add: LAX-CHI, 2/8/22 is still $623. Your opening premise, and thus every conclusion you draw from it is wrong.


----------



## TheVig

Some of this is demand. Lot’s a folks spent the last year living under a rock. Now they are coming out and traveling again. Booking before someone else does. Amtrak is also probably trying to see what the market is willing to pay because of it.

Me personally, I’ve got roomettes and coach seats booked for weeks and months out on various trains. When I go in and do dummy bookings, I’m seeing prices tick up across the board on the dates I’ve already booked.


----------



## Sidney

Ryan said:


> That assumption is almost certainly flawed.
> 
> Edit to add: LAX-CHI, 2/8/22 is still $623. Your opening premise, and thus every conclusion you draw from it is wrong.



I have not found any $623 price from Chi-Lax. I checked pretty thoroughly
Even April 1 2022 is $899.


----------



## Amtrakfflyer

That’s great you found a fare 7-8 months out that’s affordable.
Regardless there seems to be some shenanigans going on with certain trains pricing and amenities. If it’s truly revenue management it won’t work long term.




Ryan said:


> That assumption is almost certainly flawed.
> 
> Edit to add: LAX-CHI, 2/8/22 is still $623. Your opening premise, and thus every conclusion you draw from it is wrong.


----------



## Ryan

Sidney said:


> I have not found any $623 price from Chi-Lax. I checked pretty thoroughly
> Even April 1 2022 is $899.



There are not different buckets in different directions. The $623 low bucket still exists. The fact that you can't find it isn't a signal of a nefarious plot to destroy long distance service, but in fact perfectly normal revenue management that has been going on for years.


----------



## jruff001

Sidney said:


> Is there any logical explanation for the huge spike in prices?


Pent up demand for travel, and people willing to pay a premium for private space during (or at the end of) a pandemic.

If the high fares don't sell, they will be lowered.


----------



## Sidney

OK. My question is,why that $899 price on almost all the SW Chief trains and $529 to $563 on the other LD trains? Why the huge discrepancy?


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Sidney said:


> OK. My question is,why that $899 price on almost all the SW Chief trains and $529 to $563 on the other LD trains? Why the huge discrepancy?


More people want to travel to destinations that the SWC covers?


----------



## Sidney

More people want to go to Albuquerque than Denver or Whitefish? Maybe $100 more on the SW Chief but almost $300?


----------



## Ryan

You can find the low price on the SWC heading the other direction, too.

I'm going to go ahead and say that the revenue managers at Amtrak have more data at their disposal and more experience in doing this than a random person on the internet.


----------



## Sidney

Point taken,Ryan,but my original question was why the $276 jump in prices in the last week on the Chief/Eagle and not the EB or CZ? Granted $623 is still low bucket but maybe 50 different dates from September to April comes up $899. Isn't that a bit steep?


----------



## Amtrakfflyer

Who’s not to say the EB and CZ fares won’t increase this coming week. Amtrak is known to phase things in a couple trains at a time. Regardless I don’t think any of this bodes well and they know it. Time will tell.


----------



## Ryan

Sidney said:


> Isn't that a bit steep?


Obviously not to the people that are buying the tickets (and given that there's a single roomette at $1200 tomorrow and no roomettes for the rest of the week, people are actually buying them at that price and greater).


----------



## jis

Sidney said:


> Point taken,Ryan,but my original question was why the $276 jump in prices in the last week on the Chief/Eagle and not the EB or CZ? Granted $623 is still low bucket but maybe 50 different dates from September to April comes up $899. Isn't that a bit steep?


Without condoning any of this, it is pretty obvious why the jump. The revenue manager thinks that s/he can possibly sell it for that price and if it doesn't pan out they will possibly drop down to a lower bucket at some point. One general change I see is that they have started the common airline practice of opening up reservations at a second or third from the bottom bucket, i.e. pretty high, and then adjust down from there (maybe) if needed, rather than starting at the lowest bucket. Airlines have been doing this for a while and there is quite a guessing industry as to when one can expect the lowest price For most international carriers it seems to be between four and six months out. That of course does not mean that Amtrak will be similar.

Or were you just asking the question rhetorically?


----------



## Sidney

Simply put $899 for a one person roomette on a two night trip is outrageous. I would never pay it,but obviously other people would. To me it seems they are pricing sleepers on the SW Chief beyond what most people are willing to pay but as I said,some people will. 

Another poster stated that the EB and CZ could be next for a steep increase. It would be nice to know when that would happen,so I can plan accordingly but of course that won't happen.


----------



## Ryan

The price for any train can change on any given day as people buy tickets.

That's how the system works, and it's worked that way for years.

Even the "new reservations 11 months out don't open at low bucket" isn't a new phenomenon - people were complaining about it in the pre-COVID times.

There is literally nothing new happening here.


----------



## neroden

If this shows anything it shows that many people are willing to pay a lot to travel in private rooms. Meaning that Amtrak, if it were operated in a for-profit fashion, would focus on acquiring more cars with private rooms ASAP!


----------



## flitcraft

Unfortunately, Amtrak is not in the business of pricing its scarce commodity--private sleeping rooms--at prices that most travelers will find acceptable, but instead at what price they can guarantee that most of them won't leave empty. And jis and Ryan are right--this has been going on forever with Amtrak. It's a form of what economists have called the Dutch auction (after the way traditionally Dutch bulbs were sold): You start at a high price, and only if you can't get buyers at that price do you drop to a lower price, till you've sold your inventory. 

And, as also has been pointed out, airlines have long priced this way. I wonder if we'll see another airline tactic come to Amtrak--that is, if there are business class seats going unsold on an international flight, there will be last minute offers to 'upgrade' to business class made to existing passengers on lower fared tickets for less than the full business price would have been. That way, the airline maximizes its revenue--selling initially to those willing to pay the high price of business class, then if there are empty seats remaining near to take-off, they'll be sold at a discount to capture that revenue. Some airlines don't do this for fear of angering full fare business class passengers--but most do because the full fare business class is largely folks traveling on their employer or client's dime, so they don't care. The question for Amtrak is whether this pricing model will anger enough potential travelers who will stop traveling Amtrak to offset the higher revenue capture. Myself, I think it probably nets out for them.

Actually, this might be a pricing strategy that in the end is good for LD riders--the higher the revenue that Amtrak can get for its LD trains, the more valuable they look and the easier to justify keeping them and maybe even improving the amenities. Now, if only we still had Amsnag, those in the know could ferret out the lower bucket fares easily and beat the process. (RIP Amsnag...)


----------



## BoulderCO

I haven't been on Amtrak since before Covid, but find it interesting to compare how Amtrak and the Airlines are coping during this recovery period.

Obviously, as much as I like the train, I would never pay the kind of prices being reported here.

I'm sure there is a lot of variation among the airlines, but here is one data point that I find interesting. My wife is presently in the middle of a trip from Denver to Portland, OR for a Mother's day visit. We usually fly on United. Since it was a short trip, she decided to try their bare-bones coach service that doesn't even allow a full-sized bag to be stowed overhead. Her round trip fare was $60.

On the outbound trip on Thursday, she was surprised when they notified her the day before that she actually would be allowed to bring and stow a full-sized bag. It was still a coach seat toward the rear of the plane, but a very pleasant trip with an unexpected accommodation that put a smile on her face.

Today she downloaded her boarding pass for the return flight tomorrow. They moved her up to row 12 - either business or first class. She spent a total of $60 and yet United went out of their way to give her some unexpected perks. That is how you win and maintain customers!!

The point here is that at least some airlines are doing things to please customers. Amtrak isn't. Instead, we get HIGHER THAN NORMAL fares and no traditional dining. I am disappointed - they should and must do better.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

BoulderCO said:


> I haven't been on Amtrak since before Covid, but find it interesting to compare how Amtrak and the Airlines are coping during this recovery period.
> 
> Obviously, as much as I like the train, I would never pay the kind of prices being reported here.
> 
> I'm sure there is a lot of variation among the airlines, but here is one data point that I find interesting. My wife is presently in the middle of a trip from Denver to Portland, OR for a Mother's day visit. We usually fly on United. Since it was a short trip, she decided to try their bare-bones coach service that doesn't even allow a full-sized bag to be stowed overhead. Her round trip fare was $60.
> 
> On the outbound trip on Thursday, she was surprised when they notified her the day before that she actually would be allowed to bring and stow a full-sized bag. It was still a coach seat toward the rear of the plane, but a very pleasant trip with an unexpected accommodation that put a smile on her face.
> 
> Today she downloaded her boarding pass for the return flight tomorrow. They moved her up to row 12 - either business or first class. She spent a total of $60 and yet United went out of their way to give her some unexpected perks. That is how you win and maintain customers!!
> 
> The point here is that at least some airlines are doing things to please customers. Amtrak isn't. Instead, we get HIGHER THAN NORMAL fares and no traditional dining. I am disappointed - they should and must do better.


I wonder if those “perks” were given as a way to balance the load. . (Just speculation)


----------



## railiner

I am wondering about these so-called Amtrak "buckets"....why aren't the fares infinitely adjustable?


----------



## Amtrakfflyer

That’s a great point. My mom came out and visited us last week on AA San Diego to Ohare nonstop. 38 bucks nonstop each way. Both ways at check in 24 hours before they offered a first class upgrade for 111 dollars. Long story short SAN to ORD first class for under $300 RT. Both flights were close to full.

We haven’t paid over $50 OW ORD to LAX or SAN in a couple years now. At least two of our trips would have been on Amtrak had prices at least been at 2018 levels for sleepers. Granted airfares are rising by the day but you are right Amtrak went in the exact opposite direction of the airlines in response to covid. 



BoulderCO said:


> I haven't been on Amtrak since before Covid, but find it interesting to compare how Amtrak and the Airlines are coping during this recovery period.
> 
> Obviously, as much as I like the train, I would never pay the kind of prices being reported here.
> 
> I'm sure there is a lot of variation among the airlines, but here is one data point that I find interesting. My wife is presently in the middle of a trip from Denver to Portland, OR for a Mother's day visit. We usually fly on United. Since it was a short trip, she decided to try their bare-bones coach service that doesn't even allow a full-sized bag to be stowed overhead. Her round trip fare was $60.
> 
> On the outbound trip on Thursday, she was surprised when they notified her the day before that she actually would be allowed to bring and stow a full-sized bag. It was still a coach seat toward the rear of the plane, but a very pleasant trip with an unexpected accommodation that put a smile on her face.
> 
> Today she downloaded her boarding pass for the return flight tomorrow. They moved her up to row 12 - either business or first class. She spent a total of $60 and yet United went out of their way to give her some unexpected perks. That is how you win and maintain customers!!
> 
> The point here is that at least some airlines are doing things to please customers. Amtrak isn't. Instead, we get HIGHER THAN NORMAL fares and no traditional dining. I am disappointed - they should and must do better.


----------



## jis

railiner said:


> I am wondering about these so-called Amtrak "buckets"....why aren't the fares infinitely adjustable?


I don't fully understand the details but in a conversation many moons ago when the bucket fares were being introduced, someone who was implementing the technical aspects of it explained to me that this was caused by the limitations of the Arrow system. I am afraid I don't remember the details that were then explained to me.


----------



## Ryan




----------



## neroden

railiner said:


> I am wondering about these so-called Amtrak "buckets"....why aren't the fares infinitely adjustable?


Amtrak's underlying reservations system (ARROW) dates from the 1970s, and is written in machine language which is very hard to upgrade or alter.

Amtrak has been trying to slowly migrate to something modern but apparently the funding for the IT project has not been consistent.


----------



## MIrailfan

Amtrakfflyer said:


> Exact same increase on the TE from CHI to LAX. Very curious now to see if full service dining does indeed return to the SWC. Management has made it clear in the past they don’t want to operate the SWC or TE. Perhaps Flynn has learned from Anderson’s failed tactics. While Flynn is saying the right things Amtrak’s actions aren’t backing up his words.
> 
> These increases over the long term will decimate ridership. Sure now people MAY be paying the high prices I don’t really believe that though. Telling is Amtrak isn’t even offering roomettes for sale on the second sleeper on the TE, only the bedrooms. How can that be defended?


DEMAND IS HIgh so price is high.


----------



## fdaley

neroden said:


> If this shows anything it shows that many people are willing to pay a lot to travel in private rooms. Meaning that Amtrak, if it were operated in a for-profit fashion, would focus on acquiring more cars with private rooms ASAP!



The demand is high, but that's partly because the supply is extremely limited. I can't fault Amtrak for trying to maximize revenue from the skeletal fleet of sleeper cars it has. But it would have a better public image -- and be useful to a lot more travelers -- if it had double the number of sleeper rooms available. That likely would mean that on some trips and at certain seasons, lower sleeper prices would become available. It might also mean that Amtrak management would care a little bit about retaining its high-revenue sleeper customers, rather than treating us like something disposable and easily replaced, as it often does now.


----------



## Asher

Sounds like Amtrak is replacing us cheapies with some high rollers for the time being. I’ve been paying $5:00 a gallon for diesel for awhile so I’m not surprised at the price for a roomette. if one wants to dance to the music you have to pay the piper. It is what it is.
What happened to Amsnag, Now that does upset me.


----------



## Amtrakfflyer

Then why is Amtrak blocking roomettes sales on the Eagle? One sleeper is only having its bedrooms sold, roomettes are not for sale.



MIRAILFAN said:


> DEMAND IS HIgh so price is high.


----------



## Ferroequinologist

The Administration in Washington has changed but Amtrak management seems to be acting as though their ex CEO is still in charge. By the way, is Anderson on the Amtrak board now?


----------



## OBS

Amtrakfflyer said:


> Then why is Amtrak blocking roomettes sales on the Eagle? One sleeper is only having its bedrooms sold, roomettes are not for sale.


My guess would be that they are not staffing a second attendant, just using the attendant from the other car. Subsequently there is only so many rooms one attendant can take care of. Thus they are just selling most expensive rooms...


----------



## Cal

Ferroequinologist said:


> The Administration in Washington has changed but Amtrak management seems to be acting as though their ex CEO is still in charge. By the way, is Anderson on the Amtrak board now?


I believe so


----------



## dlagrua

We support Amtrak and prefer train travel. As such we will gladly pay more for it than air travel but we must draw the line when we see bedroom fares 3x -5x that of first class air. This is the first year in about 17 that we will not be taking a LD Amtrak vacation due to prices that do not make sense. We are flying to Phoenix for $800 per ticket, R/T First Class. We just got our TSA Pre-Checks to make things easier.
If passengers can spend $6,500+ for a coast to coast trip and Amtak sells out, then I accept that BUT if the sleepers remain unsold at those price levels then its obvious that this is part of a bigger plan. From what I see in checking fares there are no more buckets but a single high fare that is cemented in place. If the plan is to turn away long time LD customers, Amtrak has succeeded. We can only hope that this changes.


----------



## Ryan

dlagrua said:


> From what I see in checking fares there are no more buckets but a single high fare that is cemented in place.


This is demonstrably false.


----------



## jis

Cal said:


> Ferroequinologist said:
> 
> 
> 
> By the way, is Anderson on the Amtrak board now?
> 
> 
> 
> I believe so
Click to expand...

Based exactly on what?

Look it up for yourself...









Amtrak Board of Directors


Members of the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) Board of Directors.




www.amtrak.com





Anderson is not on the Amtrak Board. He was on it ex-officio, only as long as he was the CEO.


----------



## lordsigma

High prices does not a conspiracy make. Low prices were available for this summer when they first went on sale - I got low buckets for SWC when I rebooked from last year (At risk - before it was clear what the vaccine situation would be this year). Prices have gone way up. This summer is going to be a high demand travel period. Not surprised to see high prices. As for unsold rooms it has been mentioned that they will be eventually rolling out the Bid Upgrade program to sleeping cars.


----------



## lrh442

Once Amtrak returns to daily LD service then they will once again be equipment-constrained, and it's logical to use pricing to balance supply and demand.

BUT... with current tri-weekly service they are presumably NOT nearly as equipment-constrained and they could balance supply and demand by increasing the supply (i.e. add more cars). Yet, the western LD consists continue to run short, and roomettes on the SWC are often sold out or selling at very high buckets. Amtrak clearly has no desire to capture more of the market by increasing the supply. They are either incompetent, or are deliberately undermining the LD trains. (and, if they claim that they don't yet have the personnel to staff longer trains then that falls into the incompetence category).


----------



## AmtrakBlue

lrh442 said:


> Once Amtrak returns to daily LD service then they will once again be equipment-constrained, and it's logical to use pricing to balance supply and demand.
> 
> BUT... with current tri-weekly service they are presumably NOT nearly as equipment-constrained and they could balance supply and demand by increasing the supply (i.e. add more cars). Yet, the western LD consists continue to run short, and roomettes on the SWC are often sold out or selling at very high buckets. Amtrak clearly has no desire to capture more of the market by increasing the supply. They are either incompetent, or are deliberately undermining the LD trains. (and, if they claim that they don't yet have the personnel to staff longer trains then that falls into the incompetence category).


Or maybe they're using the tri-weekly schedule to do maintenance on the excess cars.


----------



## Cal

AmtrakBlue said:


> Or maybe they're using the tri-weekly schedule to do maintenance on the excess cars.


I think they have been doing that with Surfliner cars, as I've seen quite a few tagging along on the Chief towards Beech Grove.


----------



## jis

AmtrakBlue said:


> Or maybe they're using the tri-weekly schedule to do maintenance on the excess cars.


That is unlikely given the financial hole they were in until the latest round of rescue package became available. They have managed to keep ahead of regular servicing required for cars that were in service and possiblye done some imminent major service on cars that were getting close. Beyond that I doubt it very much. Even in regular times they seem to underspend on their maintenance budgets.


----------



## Michigan Mom

Traditional airline pricing tends to favor those who book ahead, and in today's world, who monitors fare sites like Kayak or similar, where you can get data on when to book, what the lowest fare is likely to be, and so on. Walk up coach fares on airlines were always exorbitant, generally booked by business flyers who would double and triple book, and as a result airlines routinely oversold the cabin, to account for the no-shows that resulted from this flexibility offered to the full fare payers. Soliciting for a volunteer or even bumping someone who didn't volunteer were part of the equation, although airlines hate kicking people off a plane and will generally try and manage revenue so that doesn't happen. Let me just offer from personal experience, though, that nothing is perfect, and I don't want to veer off into that discussion. 
Train pricing is a whole different story, Amtrak passengers, it seems, are far more willing to book as far in advance as possible, and Amtrak does not, to my knowledge, overbook either coach or rooms. Therefore, if there is demand on a train 11 months out, there's not much reason to sell that room at a lower fare. This is true regardless of how many walk-up, full fare coach customers they might have. The fare differential is significant, far more than the fare difference between coach and business/first on a domestic flight. They've got time to wait for people to buy, and a clientele that is more stable, so the revenue management process is not the same. Amtrak isn't trying to kill the service by overpricing the sleepers, I think they are trying to forecast how many people will pay that much for the room. At best they could try and maximize the revenue by offering upgrade options, and it seems, that is already happening.


----------



## Ferroequinologist

dlagrua said:


> We support Amtrak and prefer train travel. As such we will gladly pay more for it than air travel but we must draw the line when we see bedroom fares 3x -5x that of first class air. This is the first year in about 17 that we will not be taking a LD Amtrak vacation due to prices that do not make sense. We are flying to Phoenix for $800 per ticket, R/T First Class. We just got our TSA Pre-Checks to make things easier.
> If passengers can spend $6,500+ for a coast to coast trip and Amtak sells out, then I accept that BUT if the sleepers remain unsold at those price levels then its obvious that this is part of a bigger plan. From what I see in checking fares there are no more buckets but a single high fare that is cemented in place. If the plan is to turn away long time LD customers, Amtrak has succeeded. We can only hope that this changes.



I don't accept it. Amtrak is subsidized by taxpayers and provides a public service. It should be accessible to everyone, not to 5% or less of the population. This policy is totally contrary to the Biden Administration's stated belief in 'equity'.


----------



## Ferroequinologist

jis said:


> Based exactly on what?
> 
> Look it up for yourself...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amtrak Board of Directors
> 
> 
> Members of the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) Board of Directors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.amtrak.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anderson is not on the Amtrak Board. He was on it ex-officio, only as long as he was the CEO.



Thanks for the list. Maybe we should write to them.


----------



## Ferroequinologist

Michigan Mom said:


> Traditional airline pricing tends to favor those who book ahead, and in today's world, who monitors fare sites like Kayak or similar, where you can get data on when to book, what the lowest fare is likely to be, and so on. Walk up coach fares on airlines were always exorbitant, generally booked by business flyers who would double and triple book, and as a result airlines routinely oversold the cabin, to account for the no-shows that resulted from this flexibility offered to the full fare payers. Soliciting for a volunteer or even bumping someone who didn't volunteer were part of the equation, although airlines hate kicking people off a plane and will generally try and manage revenue so that doesn't happen. Let me just offer from personal experience, though, that nothing is perfect, and I don't want to veer off into that discussion.
> Train pricing is a whole different story, Amtrak passengers, it seems, are far more willing to book as far in advance as possible, and Amtrak does not, to my knowledge, overbook either coach or rooms. Therefore, if there is demand on a train 11 months out, there's not much reason to sell that room at a lower fare. This is true regardless of how many walk-up, full fare coach customers they might have. The fare differential is significant, far more than the fare difference between coach and business/first on a domestic flight. They've got time to wait for people to buy, and a clientele that is more stable, so the revenue management process is not the same. Amtrak isn't trying to kill the service by overpricing the sleepers, I think they are trying to forecast how many people will pay that much for the room. At best they could try and maximize the revenue by offering upgrade options, and it seems, that is already happening.



As I said, this is a discriminatory policy that contradicts the Biden Administration's policy of 'equity' and access to everyone, not just the elite.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Ferroequinologist said:


> I don't accept it. Amtrak is subsidized by taxpayers and provides a public service. It should be accessible to everyone, not to 5% or less of the population. This policy is totally contrary to the Biden Administration's stated belief in 'equity'.


Then tell Congress to give Amtrak more money - like equal to what they give the highways and air service.


----------



## tricia

Ferroequinologist said:


> I don't accept it. Amtrak is subsidized by taxpayers and provides a public service. It should be accessible to everyone, not to 5% or less of the population. This policy is totally contrary to the Biden Administration's stated belief in 'equity'.



Thanks for posting this. Whether this "public service" angle fits one's ideology or not (it fits mine), in the long run taxpayer resistance to funding Amtrak will surely grow if the vast majority of taxpayers can't afford Amtrak services.

A related problem with very high pricing: Prospective passengers trying to book a trip will see costs so out of line with what they can afford, that they'll decide Amtrak's out of reach for them, and never come back to book future travel if/when the fares drop. High pricing, even when some tickets do sell, might be pennywise and pound foolish.


----------



## Ryan

Ferroequinologist said:


> I don't accept it. Amtrak is subsidized by taxpayers and provides a public service. It should be accessible to everyone, not to 5% or less of the population. This policy is totally contrary to the Biden Administration's stated belief in 'equity'.


Accept it or not, that's the reality of the situation. The law says manage as a for-profit corporation. As Betty said, get the law changed, and get Amtrak the funding to double or quadruple the amount of rolling stock and trains so that supply can be increased sufficiently that prices can fall. As another poster is fond of saying (and I feel bad about not remembering who, and probably butchering the quote), the best cure for Amtrak is more Amtrak.


----------



## Sidney

tricia said:


> Thanks for posting this. Whether this "public service" angle fits one's ideology or not (it fits mine), in the long run taxpayer resistance to funding Amtrak will surely grow if the vast majority of taxpayers can't afford Amtrak services.
> 
> A related problem with very high pricing: Prospective passengers trying to book a trip will see costs so out of line with what they can afford, that they'll decide Amtrak's out of reach for them, and never come back to book future travel if/when the fares drop. High pricing, even when some tickets do sell, might be pennywise and pound foolish.


Indeed. The price of a roomette on many trains is getting out of reach of the average customer.I cite the SW Chief from Chi to LA. $899 one person roomette. Yes,there are still reasonably priced roomettes going from LA at $623,but at $900 driving and flying are cheaper between those cities and people who would consider Amtrak will compare different ways of travel and balk at that high price. 

I would and have paid the $623 on the Chief and Texas Eagle. No way would I pay $899. Yes of course some people would and that's why they charge such sky high prices.


----------



## Qapla

When a coach ticket for an overnight train is $121 and a single roomette for the same overnight is in excess of $500 - it doesn't matter if that is high bucket or low bucket ... anything more than $300 is not "reasonable" for a taxpayer supported service.

I realize some think that, if you're going to lower the prices like that, why not let eryonid ride free? as an argument for keeping the prices high. Well, recently Amtrak ran a "sale" where a coach ticket from MIA to NYP was $50. If they could do that for a "sale", why not make that the standard price and properly support a Gov't operated service. - Then price the sleepers accordingly with fares more inline with the $50 coach ticket.

Our local bus system is operated by the city. Most who live here drive cars and their taxes support the buses. The busses cost quite a bit to operate on a daily basis. However, an adult fare is only $1.50 and and seniors, students and children ride for 50¢ while ADA and some others ride free. The fares don't come anywhere near covering the operating costs - taxes do. The same could be done for Amtrak.


----------



## jruff001

Ferroequinologist said:


> I don't accept it. Amtrak is subsidized by taxpayers and provides a public service. It should be accessible to everyone, not to 5% or less of the population.


The "public service" is the transportation from A to B. You can go in coach to access the public service.

Or are you saying all Amtrak service should be free? That would be a good way to make sure all sleeping cars disappear pretty quickly so they won't be available at any price.



> This policy is totally contrary to the Biden Administration's stated belief in 'equity'.


You are seriously misunderstanding (or intentionally mis-stating) Biden's policies advancing racial equity if you think it should mean free (or reduced price) Amtrak sleeping car service for all Americans.


----------



## tricia

jruff001 said:


> The "public service" is the transportation from A to B. You can go in coach to access the public service.
> 
> Or are you saying all Amtrak service should be free? That would be a good way to make sure all sleeping cars disappear pretty quickly so they won't be available at any price.
> 
> 
> You are seriously misunderstanding (or intentionally mis-stating) Biden's policies advancing racial equity if you think it should mean free (or reduced price) Amtrak sleeping car service for all Americans.



There is a large gap between "free" and "as high as the wealthiest customer is willing to pay."


----------



## jruff001

tricia said:


> There is a large gap between "free" and "as high as the wealthiest customer is willing to pay."


If the goal is unlimited access for all, it would have to be pretty much "free" or at least extremely cheap so very poor, jobless, homeless, etc. people can ride, no? And why should people going from (say) Minot to Spokane get very cheap or free travel from the government when people going from (say) Louisville to Tulsa get nothing?

Also, pricing based on demand is a very basic concept. Commuter railroads often charge more for trips during rush hours, for example. Should they be required to only charge off-peak fares 24/7, which then would make them require more taxpayer $?

Anyway I think Amtrak has an obligation to maximize its revenues. Certainly it would be good to actually have a profitable system that can use money to expand? Or at least one that isn't as dependent on the whims of Congress?


----------



## Sidney

For example,the cheapest one.person roomette is $691 from Chicago to Albuquerque on the Southwest Chief. One overnight,three meals. A little excessive? As a 30 year plus Amtrak rider I have never seen prices this steep. Sadly,people would pay this price so Amtrak will charge it.

Knock off $300 and we'll talk


----------



## tricia

jruff001 said:


> If the goal is unlimited access for all, it would have to be pretty much "free" or at least extremely cheap so very poor, jobless, homeless, etc. people can ride, no? And why should people going from (say) Minot to Spokane get very cheap or free travel from the government when people going from (say) Louisville to Tulsa get nothing?
> 
> Also, pricing based on demand is a very basic concept. Commuter railroads often charge more for trips during rush hours, for example. Should they be required to only charge off-peak fares 24/7, which then would make them require more taxpayer $?
> 
> Anyway I think Amtrak has an obligation to maximize its revenues. Certainly it would be good to actually have a profitable system that can use money to expand? Or at least one that isn't as dependent on the whims of Congress?



Do we expect the military to make a profit? Public schools? Local fire departments?

Amtrak has an obligation, as a taxpayer-supported service, to provide a reasonable bang for the buck--but to account for that solely in terms of ticket revenue is to be blind to the benefits such infrastructure brings to the economy as a whole.


----------



## PaTrainFan

tricia said:


> Do we expect the military to make a profit? Public schools? Local fire departments?
> 
> Amtrak has an obligation, as a taxpayer-supported service, to provide a reasonable bang for the buck--but to account for that solely in terms of ticket revenue is to be blind to the benefits such infrastructure brings to the economy as a whole.



Add to your list: parks, highways and roads. Tolls are used on a small fraction of highways, tunnels and bridges. User fees are rare in parks.


----------



## jruff001

tricia said:


> Amtrak has an obligation, as a taxpayer-supported service, to provide a reasonable bang for the buck[.]


That is what coach is for.

And I am not familiar with this obligation you are speaking of. Can you point to something in Amtrak's legislation that requires it to keep its fares low? That's a serious question; maybe it is there but I just don't know about it. My understanding is that Congress expects Amtrak to try to get as close as it can to breaking even, but I could be wrong.

And who decides what is "reasonable"? Someone above mentioned something about $300. Seems kind of arbitrary. Reasonable for whom? Decided by whom? Compared to what? When or by what benchmarks should they be changed, and changed to what?


----------



## Ferroequinologist

I repeat, why should the government be running a service that is so expensive that it serves only a small fraction of the population?


----------



## OBS

Ferroequinologist said:


> I repeat, why should the government be running a service that is so expensive that it serves only a small fraction of the population?


I worry that this logic will lead to the solution being "we will eliminate sleeper service". Then the service is equal and accessible to all


----------



## rrdude

Cal said:


> I believe so


*HE IS NOT*


----------



## rrdude

I'm in a bit of a dilemma. Booked the Chief from LAX to CHI on July 4th, "_WHEW.... just made the new cut-off for Flex Dining..." _But am wondering what the chances of *another push-back* from Flex to Traditional might be ???

However, I got what appears to be a half-way decent fare, (but WAY more than I wanted) but doubt that I could get another fare like this?

To ride or not to ride?


----------



## jruff001

OBS said:


> I worry that this logic will lead to the solution being "we will eliminate sleeper service". Then the service is equal and accessible to all


Yep, I already made this point. If Amtrak is forced to have even BIGGER losses by cutting sleeping car fares, it would make sense for them to just get rid of sleeping car service completely.


----------



## jruff001

Ferroequinologist said:


> I repeat, why should the government be running a service that is so expensive that it serves only a small fraction of the population?


Amtrak's long distance network only serves a small fraction of the population, period, when you look at their share of intercity traffic compared to other transportation modes. So does that mean the government shouldn't be running the service at all?

And perhaps you could address my above point about what in the Amtrak legislation (or some other similar source) obligates it to keep fares - especially SLEEPING CAR fares - low?


----------



## Ryan

jruff001 said:


> And I am not familiar with this obligation you are speaking of. *Can you point to something in Amtrak's legislation that requires it to keep its fares low? * That's a serious question; maybe it is there but I just don't know about it. My understanding is that Congress expects Amtrak to try to get as close as it can to breaking even, but I could be wrong.



Quite the opposite:


Congress said:


> § 700.2 Organization and functioning of Amtrak.
> The creation of the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (“Amtrak”) was authorized by the Rail Passenger Service Act, as amended, 84 Stat. 1327, 45 U.S.C. 541 et seq. (“the Act”). *The Act requires that Amtrak be operated and managed as a for-profit corporation*, that it be incorporated under the District of Columbia Business Corporation Act, and subject to the provisions of that statute to the extent not inconsistent with the Act, and that it provide a balanced transportation system by developing, operating, and improving intercity rail passenger service. *The Act also states that Amtrak will not be an agency or establishment of the United States Government.* Amtrak thus is a corporation created by Congress to compete for the transportation business of the intercity traveller, to the end that the travelling public will have a choice of travel modes.











49 CFR § 700.2 - Organization and functioning of Amtrak.







www.law.cornell.edu


----------



## Sidney

jruff001 said:


> That is what coach is for.
> 
> And I am not familiar with this obligation you are speaking of. Can you point to something in Amtrak's legislation that requires it to keep its fares low? That's a serious question; maybe it is there but I just don't know about it. My understanding is that Congress expects Amtrak to try to get as close as it can to breaking even, but I could be wrong.
> 
> And who decides what is "reasonable"? Someone above mentioned something about $300. Seems kind of arbitrary. Reasonable for whom? Decided by whom? Compared to what? When or by what benchmarks should they be changed, and changed to what?


Of course it's arbitrary. Paying $391 instead of $691 on a one night trip from Chi to Abq in a roomette is a lot more reasonable,and in line with alternate ways of getting from Chicago to New Mexico. My only point was that $691 fare seemed very high. I may be in the minority but no way I would ever pay that gouged fair...Amtrak is raising sleeper fares to the point that the average person can't afford them,but as I said if someone is willing to pay close to $700 on a one night trip with few amenities,more power to them.


----------



## Qapla

Pricing the sleeper at $300 is no more arbitrary than pricing it at $600 or $900 ... so, if we are going to criticize the low arbitrary price - what's wrong with criticizing the high arbitrary prices??


----------



## jruff001

Ryan said:


> Quite the opposite:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 49 CFR § 700.2 - Organization and functioning of Amtrak.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.law.cornell.edu


Thanks, that is consistent with my understanding.


----------



## Ryan

Sidney said:


> if someone is willing to pay close to $700 on a one night trip with few amenities,more power to them.


Given that you can't buy a roomette on the next two departures of the SWC (and you can't buy a bedroom on the one after that), it's a safe bet that there are people willing to pay that.


----------



## jruff001

Qapla said:


> Pricing the sleeper at $300 is no more arbitrary than pricing it at $600 or $900 ... so, if we are going to criticize the low arbitrary price - what's wrong with criticizing the high arbitrary prices??


That's not arbitrary though. I am sure Amtrak has a whole revenue management department trying to find the highest price points that will still attract customers based on the historical data they have plus certain other assumptions and algorithms. If fares are selling faster than expected, they will be raised; if slower than expected, they will be lowered (or as lower buckets sell out, only higher ones will be available, etc.).

I realize that is a huge over-simplification of the process for the sake of a big-picture discussion, but it certainly is not what I would call arbitrary. Edited to add: What WOULD be arbitrary is picking a price for a fare way below what the data suggest the seat or room should sell for at a certain point in time, based on nothing other than someone's feeling that things should be "more affordable," however that person is defining it.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

tricia said:


> Do we expect the military to make a profit? Public schools? Local fire departments?
> 
> Amtrak has an obligation, as a taxpayer-supported service, to provide a reasonable bang for the buck--but to account for that solely in terms of ticket revenue is to be blind to the benefits such infrastructure brings to the economy as a whole.


Then tell CONGRESS that. They made up the "for profit" rule.


----------



## Cal

rrdude said:


> *HE IS NOT*


Which is why I said I believe so, not he is. 

He is an advisor of some-sort however, right?


----------



## jis

Cal said:


> Which is why I said I believe so, not he is.
> 
> He is an advisor of some-sort however, right?


I don't think he has anything to do with Amtrak anymore. It has been quite a while. While he may be masochistic, I don;t think he is that masochistic


----------



## Cal

jis said:


> I don't think he has anything to do with Amtrak anymore. It has been quite a while. While he may be masochistic, I don;t think he is that masochistic


Oh, I thought I saw some posts on AU saying he was. Guess I'm mistaken


----------



## Ferroequinologist

jruff001 said:


> Amtrak's long distance network only serves a small fraction of the population, period, when you look at their share of intercity traffic compared to other transportation modes. So does that mean the government shouldn't be running the service at all?
> 
> And perhaps you could address my above point about what in the Amtrak legislation (or some other similar source) obligates it to keep fares - especially SLEEPING CAR fares - low?



About 13% of Americans receive food stamps. I'm sure there are many other programs that serve far fewer people. Amtrak's percentage of users is much less but only because Congress has not been willing to fund its expansion. So what if the number of people is small? The subsidy has also been small. And I did not propose low fares, rather more accessible fares that can be afforded by more than a tiny elite of the population.


----------



## Ryan

You are still ducking the only question that matters. The law says one thing, and you're arguing that they should do something different. How do you explain that disconnect and what would you do about it?


----------



## Qapla

Change the law/charter and quit requiring them to "make a profit" ... (or, you could always change the law/charter the other way and require the Interstate Road System to make a profit)


----------



## Barb Stout

tricia said:


> There is a large gap between "free" and "as high as the wealthiest customer is willing to pay."


Yeah, that reminds me of the college tuition argument. 'Nother story, of course, but I am so glad I graduated when I did.


----------



## jis

Qapla said:


> Change the law/charter and quit requiring them to "make a profit" ... (or, you could always change the law/charter the other way and require the Interstate Road System to make a profit)


Here is how I see the current situation. I don't think there is any law or charter to change absent a change in actual consensus of what we are trying to achieve. If we really wanted to develop the LD network there is everything already there to do so as far as the legal framework is concerned.

The law requires Amtrak to be "operated and managed like a for profit corporation" which does not mean that it necessarily has to make a profit (Plenty of "for profit" corporations run for many years without making a profit). In any case whether Amtrak makes a profit or not is principally determined by whether the federal funding to Amtrak is characterized as a subsidy or as a contract price. The latter moves the amount to the earnings side of the ledger. It is a deliberate act to characterize it the way it is.

In any case, that is not Amtrak's primary mission. Its primary mission is to "provide a balanced transportation system by developing, operating, and improving intercity rail passenger service". Like in all planning and execution what needs to happen is using something like a balanced scorecard where you trade off various forces pulling in opposite directions so as to deliver on your mission. At present it could be argued that Amtrak is failing to deliver on its primary mission while focusing exclusively on one single other parameter. That is a sign of poor management decision making, or alternatively a collective desire in the corridors of power for whatever reason, to ignore part of the primary mission, and it can only be set straight by the incorporators and paymasters, who unfortunately, if anything, are even worse at strategically operating anything. Or maybe they are actually really good and are getting the results that they really want. Who knows? So here we are.

The federal DOT which holds all the preferred shares of Amtrak, in principle could probably use their voting power to fire the Board and reconstitute it. While I am sure that there is some legal catch that makes that impossible, I don't think they will do it even if they could, because they are not really bothered enough about how things are going. There at present is close to a tacit consensus as far as I can tell on the principle that the focus of development is corridors, and the LD network is at best in maintenance mode. Every concrete act indicates that this is the case. I don't see that changing easily. It is a position that has been carefully built with tacit agreement across the aisle. There are occasional loud complaints when some vocal group's ox gets gored in the process (example SWC), but other than that there is no consistent tidal wave of support and action on that front.

If there really was sufficient support it would be a different story. You can micromanage an outfit by writing reams of legalese only so far when there is actual lack of willingness among those entrusted to execute to do the needful.

Sorry for being the bearer of bad news. But to paraphrase Walter Cronkite as he used to say to end his daily news - "And that's the way it is, on this day".


----------



## Sidney

I have been riding Amtrak for over thirty years doing annual cross country and circle trips,first in Coach and later in roomettes I have traveled hundreds of thousands of miles. Simply put,as a retiree without unlimited funds,there is no way I would pay $900 or more for a two night trip in a roomette. I have always found cheaper fares by taking Coach to a station down the line,like Bloomington Il on the TE to save some money or combining coach and roomette

I have a trip next week and one in September. I'm hoping prices will ease somewhat,so I can continue to enjoy my passion..a sleeper on a long distance train.

Amtrak is obviously doing well with sleepers sold out or close to it the next few months. Some people will pay $899 to $1189 for a roomette on the SW Chief. I won't.


----------



## Amtrakfflyer

People talk about a new Superliner order or at least a refresh for the western long distance network. Look what management has done with the V2 order so far. It’s obvious they don’t want to run the network. It’s a moot point for now.


----------



## lrh442

Ryan said:


> Given that you can't buy a roomette on the next two departures of the SWC (and you can't buy a bedroom on the one after that), it's a safe bet that there are people willing to pay that.


But why, in these waning days of tri-weekly service when there are (or should be) extra Superliners available to deploy, aren't trains lengthened to accommodate the demand? That is one of the key operational advantages that trains possess over airlines. And there is zero evidence that Superliners are being held back because they are receiving long-overdue refreshing. These high-bucket and sold-out trains have persisted for months now, and it's not just a function of last-minute demand. These conditions exist weeks in advance of departure. Plenty of time to add capacity and soak up additional demand.

I sure would love to know what revenue Amtrak thinks they need to break-even to add an additional sleeper, both with and without a third motor on the front.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

lrh442 said:


> But why, in these waning days of tri-weekly service when there are (or should be) extra Superliners available to deploy, aren't trains lengthened to accommodate the demand? That is one of the key operational advantages that trains possess over airlines. And there is zero evidence that Superliners are being held back because they are receiving long-overdue refreshing. These high-bucket and sold-out trains have persisted for months now, and it's not just a function of last-minute demand. These conditions exist weeks in advance of departure. Plenty of time to add capacity and soak up additional demand.
> 
> I sure would love to know what revenue Amtrak thinks they need to break-even to add an additional sleeper, both with and without a third motor on the front.


Maybe because the "extra" OBS needed for those extra cars have been furloughed. Do you expect the current SCA's to take on the extra car (yes, I know sometimes they do, but I don't think it's a daily requirement).


----------



## Ferroequinologist

Ryan said:


> Accept it or not, that's the reality of the situation. The law says manage as a for-profit corporation. As Betty said, get the law changed, and get Amtrak the funding to double or quadruple the amount of rolling stock and trains so that supply can be increased sufficiently that prices can fall. As another poster is fond of saying (and I feel bad about not remembering who, and probably butchering the quote), the best cure for Amtrak is more Amtrak.



Amtrak will never make a profit. They can only try to live within a too low budget. Do they really have to charge exorbitant sleeping-car fares? By doing so they aren't making a profit, are they? Perhaps there are other cost cutting measures that will not price the great majority of the population out of the sleeping-car travel market.


----------



## NEPATrainTraveler

One thing I notice when reading trip reports is that those who ride in sleeper tend to have the better experience compared to those who do LD coach. So, from what I can tell, it seems that if you want to have a good Amtrak LD experience you need to shell out for a roomette/bedroom. This is frustrating due to the ever rising cost of a sleeper room. A round trip in sleeper to Chicago where I would get off the LSL/CL in the morning and then take the LSL/CL back east at night would cost me more than the 4 night hotel stay I had in Milwaukee back in 2018.

I would love to ride more LD Amtrak, but it is hard to justify the high costs of a sleeper to myself when I know flying would be cheaper and would give me more money for whatever trip it is I would be taking. After my last LD Coach experience, I am weary of riding LD Coach again for fear of having another rough experience.


----------



## Ryan

Ferroequinologist said:


> Amtrak will never make a profit. They can only try to live within a too low budget. Do they really have to charge exorbitant sleeping-car fares? By doing so they aren't making a profit, are they? Perhaps there are other cost cutting measures that will not price the great majority of the population out of the sleeping-car travel market.


Go back and re-read Jishnu's post. Slowly. You're focusing on the wrong thing by saying they won't make a profit.

If you have actionable, concrete ideas for other cost cutting, I'd love to hear them.


----------



## Ferroequinologist

Qapla said:


> Change the law/charter and quit requiring them to "make a profit" ... (or, you could always change the law/charter the other way and require the Interstate Road System to make a profit)



It seems there are seventeen government owned corporations that are supposed to make a profit. The Post Office is the best known. They lose a vast amount of money. I doubt that universal postal service could be made profitable but I think it could be made more efficient and less costly. I don't know how the other fifteen (excluding Amtrak) corporations fare. It seems to me that the "for profit" aspect is a difficult to achieve ideal for some services. This clause of course gives Congress an excuse to reduce or eliminate subsidies if they want. Here is the list:

*Appendix. Federal Government Corporations*

1. Commodity Credit Corporation(15 U.S.C. 714)2. Export-Import Bank(12 U.S.C. 635)3. Federal Crop Insurance Corporation(7 U.S.C. 1501)4. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation(12 U.S.C. 1811)5. Federal Financing Bank(12 U.S.C. 2281)6. Federal Prison Industries (UNICOR)(18 U.S.C. 4121)7. Financing Corporation(12 U.S.C. 1441)8. Government National Mortgage Corporation(12 U.S.C. 1717)9. National Railroad Passenger Corporation (AMTRAK)(49 U.S.C. 241)10. Overseas Private Investment Corporation(22 U.S.C. 2191)11. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation(29 U.S.C. 1301)12. Presidio Trust of San Francisco(16 U.S.C. 460bb)13. Resolution Funding Corporation(12 U.S.C. 1441(b))14. St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation(33 U.S.C. 981)15. Tennessee Valley Authority(16 U.S.C. 831)16. U.S. Postal Service(39 U.S.C. 101)17. Valles Caldera Trust(16 U.S.C. 698-v4)


----------



## Ferroequinologist

NEPATrainTraveler said:


> One thing I notice when reading trip reports is that those who ride in sleeper tend to have the better experience compared to those who do LD coach. So, from what I can tell, it seems that if you want to have a good Amtrak LD experience you need to shell out for a roomette/bedroom. This is frustrating due to the ever rising cost of a sleeper room. A round trip in sleeper to Chicago where I would get off the LSL/CL in the morning and then take the LSL/CL back east at night would cost me more than the 4 night hotel stay I had in Milwaukee back in 2018.
> 
> I would love to ride more LD Amtrak, but it is hard to justify the high costs of a sleeper to myself when I know flying would be cheaper and would give me more money for whatever trip it is I would be taking. After my last LD Coach experience, I am weary of riding LD Coach again for fear of having another rough experience.



The irony is that you get so little for your money. It's not exctly like riding the Orient Express tourist train.


----------



## SanDiegan

Looks like I'll be going to Chicago via Little Rock ....


----------



## Bob Dylan

SanDiegan said:


> Looks like I'll be going to Chicago via Little Rock ....


Or Denver!!!


----------



## AmtrakBlue

SanDiegan said:


> Looks like I'll be going to Chicago via Little Rock ....


Pick up Jim on your way....


----------



## SanDiegan

Or Portland ...


----------



## AmtrakBlue

SanDiegan said:


> Or Portland ...


Then pick up ....


----------



## AmtrakBlue

SanDiegan said:


> Or Portland ...


I’m going via New Orleans.


----------



## Cal

Ferroequinologist said:


> Amtrak will never make a profit. They can only try to live within a too low budget. Do they really have to charge exorbitant sleeping-car fares? By doing so they aren't making a profit, are they? Perhaps there are other cost cutting measures that will not price the great majority of the population out of the sleeping-car travel market.


Never is a stretch, they weren't too far off before COVID. 

And there is speculation on here on how accurate Amtrak accounting is regarding LD trains...


----------



## Barb Stout

NEPATrainTraveler said:


> I would love to ride more LD Amtrak, but it is hard to justify the high costs of a sleeper to myself when I know flying would be cheaper and would give me more money for whatever trip it is I would be taking. After my last LD Coach experience, I am weary of riding LD Coach again for fear of having another rough experience.


What made your LD coach ride rough?


----------



## Barb Stout

Ferroequinologist said:


> *Appendix. Federal Government Corporations*
> 
> 1. Commodity Credit Corporation(15 U.S.C. 714)2. Export-Import Bank(12 U.S.C. 635)3. Federal Crop Insurance Corporation(7 U.S.C. 1501)4. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation(12 U.S.C. 1811)5. Federal Financing Bank(12 U.S.C. 2281)6. Federal Prison Industries (UNICOR)(18 U.S.C. 4121)7. Financing Corporation(12 U.S.C. 1441)8. Government National Mortgage Corporation(12 U.S.C. 1717)9. National Railroad Passenger Corporation (AMTRAK)(49 U.S.C. 241)10. Overseas Private Investment Corporation(22 U.S.C. 2191)11. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation(29 U.S.C. 1301)12. Presidio Trust of San Francisco(16 U.S.C. 460bb)13. Resolution Funding Corporation(12 U.S.C. 1441(b))14. St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation(33 U.S.C. 981)15. Tennessee Valley Authority(16 U.S.C. 831)16. U.S. Postal Service(39 U.S.C. 101)17. Valles Caldera Trust(16 U.S.C. 698-v4)


The Valles Caldera Trust, #17 on the above list, has been folded into the National Park Service probably back in 2013, the last date of its report to Congress. I wonder if some of the others on the above list have likewise been modified. I happen to know about the Valles Caldera Trust because Valles Caldera is in NM where I live and they made a big deal of it in the news during that time when it became part of NPS and for a few years prior. I have been there twice and it is beautiful. And big.


----------



## NEPATrainTraveler

Barb Stout said:


> What made your LD coach ride rough?



Basically, I had trouble sleeping. Part of this was due to the seats having no neck support, part of it being me not used to sleeping sitting up, part of it was due to the car being hot (this trip happened in late October 2018, so the heat was jacked up), and part of it was due to me getting motion sick about 7-8 hours into the journey. I only got about 2 hours of sleep if you paste all my attempts at sleep together. I can function on less than 8 hours of sleep (getting 5 or 6 hours of sleep is my usual), but 2 hours was apparently not enough. I spent the next day sleeping in my hotel room instead of exploring Milwaukee like I originally intended to. I was fully recovered the next day though. Looking back there are things I probably could do to make things better (neck pillow, Dramamine, change into summer time clothes, etc.). I know the only way to find out is to try it again, but I don't know if I want to take the risk or not. I didn't have a seatmate when I took my trip, but I know I may not be so lucky next time and will have to deal with the awkwardness of sleeping next to a stranger.

I would love to be able to do coach because it is so much cheaper than a sleeper and I like the cafe car food. I also like that Amtrak (depending on the city in question) drops you off in the downtown area instead of the outskirts like airplanes do. Don't have to deal with the airline luggage restrictions and TSA stuff with Amtrak either. And of course, much better scenery than flying.


----------



## jis

Cal said:


> Never is a stretch, they weren't too far off before COVID.


Only above the rail operating basis. Not as a corporation overall.


> And there is speculation on here on how accurate Amtrak accounting is regarding LD trains...


The Amtrak audited corporate account is as good as any other company's corporate accounts, all of which probably leave something to be desired in detaild disclosures of capital cost allocations to each individual year. There is no reason to believe that there is huge hanky panky there in the Amtrak account. So their overall top and bottom line are probably not too far off.

The LD train accounting is a different matter. It has to do with how shared costs are allocated among the several business units incurring those costs and that would have no effect on the overall corporate P&L statement. It is an internal matter of financial gymnastics which possibly could be used in internal strategizing on which BU to favore etc., as is alleged by the afficionados of the LD service, who also hold a fantasy of LD profitability some day near and dear to their hearts, which, if the private railroads had managed to achieve in a hundred years, they would not have dumped passenger service as soon as possible anyway.


----------



## Sidney

I wish Amtrak would let solo travelers have both seats. If there was any positive about the pandemic it was the 50% capacity in Coach. Knowing I would have the seat next to me free was incentive to book a few overnights in Coach the past year. Now the possibility of sleeping next to a stranger in close proximity had deterred me from booking overnight coach. God,I wish roomette prices would drop!


----------



## Barb Stout

NEPATrainTraveler said:


> Basically, I had trouble sleeping. Part of this was due to the seats having no neck support, part of it being me not used to sleeping sitting up, part of it was due to the car being hot (this trip happened in late October 2018, so the heat was jacked up), and part of it was due to me getting motion sick about 7-8 hours into the journey. I only got about 2 hours of sleep if you paste all my attempts at sleep together. I can function on less than 8 hours of sleep (getting 5 or 6 hours of sleep is my usual), but 2 hours was apparently not enough. I spent the next day sleeping in my hotel room instead of exploring Milwaukee like I originally intended to. I was fully recovered the next day though. Looking back there are things I probably could do to make things better (neck pillow, Dramamine, change into summer time clothes, etc.). I know the only way to find out is to try it again, but I don't know if I want to take the risk or not. I didn't have a seatmate when I took my trip, but I know I may not be so lucky next time and will have to deal with the awkwardness of sleeping next to a stranger.
> 
> I would love to be able to do coach because it is so much cheaper than a sleeper and I like the cafe car food. I also like that Amtrak (depending on the city in question) drops you off in the downtown area instead of the outskirts like airplanes do. Don't have to deal with the airline luggage restrictions and TSA stuff with Amtrak either. And of course, much better scenery than flying.


I have done both coach and the sleeper, but now that the sleeper prices are so high, I'll be going back to coach. I thought I had solved all my sleeping upright issues, but found a new one the last time I did coach: I kept slipping down off the seat. I guess my clothes were too slippery, so I'll have to experiment with different fabrics to prevent that.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Barb Stout said:


> I have done both coach and the sleeper, but now that the sleeper prices are so high, I'll be going back to coach. I thought I had solved all my sleeping upright issues, but found a new one the last time I did coach: I kept slipping down off the seat. I guess my clothes were too slippery, so I'll have to experiment with different fabrics to prevent that.


It really helps if you have something behind your back to provide support and a neck pillow.


----------



## neroden

jis said:


> The Amtrak audited corporate account is as good as any other company's corporate accounts, all of which probably leave something to be desired in detaild disclosures of capital cost allocations to each individual year. There is no reason to believe that there is huge hanky panky there in the Amtrak account. So their overall top and bottom line are probably not too far off.


Yes, the overall sum-total-for-Amtrak numbers are OK. It's the allocation to individual routes which is nonsense. It's used as the basis of extremely bad business decisions.

I consider it equivalent to the Milwaukee Road's historical misallocation of costs which made them abandon the only profitable part of their business (because they thought it was unprofitable) while keeping the unprofitable part (because they thought it was profitable).

The proper basis for business decisions, as they will tell you in any business school, is marginal costs (aka avoidable costs) and marginal revenues -- but Amtrak management is looking at these hinky nonsense-based "allocated costs" and seems to not be estimating marginal revenues at all. Just incompetent.

Because railroads are an economies-of-scale business, the best bang-for-the-buck is generally, in this order:
(1) filling seats or raising prices at same occupancy levels on existing train (raising demand -- for instance, with amenities or by publishing the timetables as advertising)
(2) lengthening existing train (accomodating raised demand)
(3) more trains per day on the same route (accomodating and generating demand)
(4) more trains sharing a trunk route with branches (accomodating and generating demand)
(Though the vital importance of connecting train routes to one another should also be mentioned.)

Allocated-cost accounting fails to account for any of these key things and so is worse than useless from a business-decision point of view. The fact that Amtrak's allocated-cost accounting is also actual garbage with clear errors is an extra problem on top of that.

The massive demand for Amtrak despite Amtrak's aggressive mismanagement and attempts to drive away customers, and despite the freight railroads' sabotage of on-time performance, shows how huge the underlying demand for passenger rail in the US is.


----------



## Ferroequinologist

NEPATrainTraveler said:


> Basically, I had trouble sleeping. Part of this was due to the seats having no neck support, part of it being me not used to sleeping sitting up, part of it was due to the car being hot (this trip happened in late October 2018, so the heat was jacked up), and part of it was due to me getting motion sick about 7-8 hours into the journey. I only got about 2 hours of sleep if you paste all my attempts at sleep together. I can function on less than 8 hours of sleep (getting 5 or 6 hours of sleep is my usual), but 2 hours was apparently not enough. I spent the next day sleeping in my hotel room instead of exploring Milwaukee like I originally intended to. I was fully recovered the next day though. Looking back there are things I probably could do to make things better (neck pillow, Dramamine, change into summer time clothes, etc.). I know the only way to find out is to try it again, but I don't know if I want to take the risk or not. I didn't have a seatmate when I took my trip, but I know I may not be so lucky next time and will have to deal with the awkwardness of sleeping next to a stranger.
> 
> I would love to be able to do coach because it is so much cheaper than a sleeper and I like the cafe car food. I also like that Amtrak (depending on the city in question) drops you off in the downtown area instead of the outskirts like airplanes do. Don't have to deal with the airline luggage restrictions and TSA stuff with Amtrak either. And of course, much better scenery than flying.



I find it's generally too warm including in the sleepers. I like it 70 F but Amtrak seems to set the temp around 75 F or higher


----------



## railiner

Ferroequinologist said:


> I find it's generally too warm including in the sleepers. I like it 70 F but Amtrak seems to set the temp around 75 F or higher


Probably because most of Amtrak's long distance passenger's tend to be senior's, who seem more sensitive to lower temps, I would guess.
But as they say, you can always add layer(s) of clothing if cold, but can't do much about it being too warm...


----------



## Ferroequinologist

railiner said:


> Probably because most of Amtrak's long distance passenger's tend to be senior's, who seem more sensitive to lower temps, I would guess.
> But as they say, you can always add layer(s) of clothing if cold, but can't do much about it being too warm...



Right about having to suffer if it's too warm. I find many trains in the US overheated but I haven't found that to be nearly so much the case in Europe. I think Americans overheat their homes, offices and public places. It's not healthy. When I see photos of my grandfather at work in a wool suit with a vest I suspect the office was not heated the way most are nowadays.


----------



## caravanman

There have been a lot of A.U. members recently complaining about the high costs of sleeper accommodations, together with the poor meals on offer...

My favourite ride is the Zephyr, and just for fun I checked some fares for later in the year.

I find that a roomette from Chicago to Sacramento is $640 in October, and only $555 in December.

I think those are comparable fares to a few years ago, or is my old age playing tricks on my memory?


----------



## Sidney

The only LD routes that have skyrocketed are the SW Chief and The Texas Eagle to LA. Why?


----------



## Bob Dylan

Supply and demand! Lots of folks want to go to LA and Southern California.

Same thing happens on the Florida Trains in the Winter ( directional in their cases)and the Zephyr and Empire Builder in the Summer.

I agree that the Texas Eagle and Chief Rooms have become to Pricey for what's on offer, I can't afford them, but folks are riding, so that's the way it is!


----------



## Sidney

Yeah,I know,but I can see if the price went up 50 to $75 not$280 for a roomette. You can still find $623 low buckets going East,but none from Chicago. Even booking eleven months out the fares are over $1000. Too rich for my blood. A way to save $300 from Chicago to LA is to take the Zephyr to Sacramento and a San Jouquian to Bakersfield and a bus to LA. Little bit inconvenient but quite a saving.


----------



## caravanman

A lot depends on the dates... Chicago to LA:

Looking once again in December, Tuesday 7th to be accurate, the Texas Eagle roomettes are $899, but if you are prepared to change trains in San Antonio, a fare of $605 is available. Not great to have 5 hours wait during the night, but a good saving.


----------



## niemi24s

Sidney said:


> The only LD routes that have skyrocketed are the SW Chief and The Texas Eagle to LA. Why?


If you search long enough you'll find they can ALL skyrocket because, for Roomettes at least, the ratio between high and low bucket fares ranges from 1.6 to 2.2.


----------



## zephyr17

niemi24s said:


> If you search long enough you'll find they can ALL skyrocket because, for Roomettes at least, the ratio between high and low bucket fares ranges from 1.6 to 2.2.


Low bucket roomette accommodation charge LAX-CHI on the SW Chief is about $100 higher than low bucket on the Builder SEA-CHI per your research. So the SW Chief is notably more expensive in the same yield management bucket. But that isn't a new development, that differential has been present for years.

The trip duration is roughly equivalent.


----------



## Sidney

caravanman said:


> A lot depends on the dates... Chicago to LA:
> 
> Looking once again in December, Tuesday 7th to be accurate, the Texas Eagle roomettes are $899, but if you are prepared to change trains in San Antonio, a fare of $605 is available. Not great to have 5 hours wait during the night, but a good saving.


That $605 fare is Coach to SAS and roomette to LA.


----------



## fillyjonk

I had a roomette on the TE for March 2020, obviously that trip never happened for me. I got a voucher and held on to it, hoping both my mom and I would be fully vaccinated before the voucher expired. I used it just recently to get my tickets for Tuesday's trip, I paid $22 more for the roommette (both ways, $22 total increase) for May 2021 over March 2020. 

I suspect it depends a LOT on when you are traveling, maybe I'd have seen more of a difference if my original ticket weren't for Spring Break Time.


----------



## caravanman

Sidney said:


> That $605 fare is Coach to SAS and roomette to LA.



Gosh, you are quite right! How do Amtrak get away with a column on their booking page that says "Rooms" yet still the unwary traveller ends up getting a coach seat for half the journey? Thats bad!


----------



## Bob Dylan

caravanman said:


> Gosh, you are quite right! How do Amtrak get away with a column on their booking page that says "Rooms" yet still the unwary traveller ends up getting a coach seat for half the journey? Thats bad!


Bait and Switch!!!


----------



## zephyr17

Amtrak's website is awful and gets worse with every modification.

With that said, you have to select "choose rooms" individually for each train in the presented itinerary. Coach is defaulted on all trains automatically.

However, I actually see the point of selecting accommodation by train. Quite a few people prefer to use coach for shorter runs, even overnight. For example, going in coach from New York to Chicago and a sleeper from Chicago to the West Coast. Which makes sense, especially considering the generally outrageous roomette prices on the Lakeshore. Having that option may make the difference between able to make a trip or having it be unaffordable.

The reservation system sees 21 & 1 as two separate trains on one itinerary, no different than, say, 49 and 7. The roomette prices on 421 (the reservation system's version of the through Chicago-LA cars) were too high, so he chose a different option.

That the UI could be better is indisputable, though.


----------



## Sidney

fillyjonk said:


> I had a roomette on the TE for March 2020, obviously that trip never happened for me. I got a voucher and held on to it, hoping both my mom and I would be fully vaccinated before the voucher expired. I used it just recently to get my tickets for Tuesday's trip, I paid $22 more for the roommette (both ways, $22 total increase) for May 2021 over March 2020.
> 
> I suspect it depends a LOT on when you are traveling, maybe I'd have seen more of a difference if my original ticket weren't for Spring Break Time.


The fares on the Texas Eagle jumped $270 two weeks ago. From.Chi to Lax it is now $899. It was $623. Quite a steep hike.


----------



## zephyr17

Sidney said:


> The fares on the Texas Eagle jumped $270 two weeks ago. From.Chi to Lax it is now $899. It was $623. Quite a steep hike.


Yield management bucket jump, not a general fare jump. Those happen all the time, and are (or should be) demand driven. Fares move into higher buckets as inventory is sold, or Amtrak reallocates inventory in each bucket for anticipated demand. Goes the other way if anticipated demand doesn't materialize.

Per Niemi24's chart, it went from low bucket to the middle bucket. Could go to high bucket $1185.


----------



## Sidney

$899 is now low bucket on the Eagle from Chi to Lax.


----------



## zephyr17

Sidney said:


> $899 is now low bucket on the Eagle from Chi to Lax.


Well, I will not discount the possibility they have decided not to release any inventory in the lowest two buckets, especially since there is only one through sleeper and several intermediate points that generate demand on 421/422. They have declined to offer low buckets at all many times in the past on several trains, well in advance, if they anticipate high demand. They also have largely stopped putting out the inventory initially in the lowest bucket in many cases.

Things are pretty disrupted now. With other trains just coming off three days a week and post-COVID travel demand possibly high. It could be that Amtrak's yield management folks have decided to put the limited inventory on 421/422 starting in the middle bucket for the time being as they see how the situation develops.

If memory serves, low bucket on the through Texas Eagle cars was always a lot rarer than on either the Sunset or the San Antonio TE cars, or the SW Chief.

Since it lined up precisely with the existing middle bucket (general fare increases tend not to do that, and are also not so extreme) and no other trains appear to have had such a shift, I still contend it is probably an inventory management move. While in the short term that amounts to the same thing as a straight up increase, in the longer term it allows for the possibility that they'll reopen the lower buckets if anticipated demand doesn't develop at the current price point.

I would tend to believe it an actual bucket shift if there is a day the price is higher than the $1185 of the current high bucket.

I will say at that price and without the SSL, I won't be filling my Texas Eagle gap on my Amtrak long distance experiences any time soon.


----------



## niemi24s

Sidney said:


> $899 is now low bucket on the Eagle from Chi to Lax.


Your terminology is lacking. $899 is not low bucket but no doubt the _lowest_ bucket you've seen offered on a limited search. 

Low bucket is, in reality, the $623 which you previously mentioned. You must realize that the bucket that's offered can change from day to day - or even _every _day. Here's an example from an AnSnag search. . .



. . .showing each of the five buckets during a five day period. No reason at all to get your shorts in a wad when fares double from one search to the next. It happens all the time - especially for Roomettes. On the other hand I've seen Family Bedrooms stay at high bucket for weeks on end.


----------



## Sidney

I have seen a few $623 fares on the Southwest Chief Eastbound from LA. I may have missed a few days but I checked almost every day from Chicago to LA on the Chief and TE and nothing is lower than $899 all the way through next April.


----------



## zephyr17

Niemi24, fyi, in the absence of Amsnag I did a couple of phantom reservations in what should be low demand periods, early November when I recently got my low bucket EB and LSL fares, plus mid-January, and early February. All the dates I tried came up at $899. I do agree with you that $899 is not the low bucket, just the lowest available bucket. But I also honestly think that Amtrak may just not be putting any inventory in the two lower buckets on 421/422 right now, based on those random samples of what should be low demand days. I have theories of why they might do this, but no firm knowledge. I hold hope they put some inventory into the lower bucket as actual demand develops (or doesn't). If they can sell them in middle bucket, why offer them in the low bucket? But whether or not they can remains to be seen. And they may blink.


----------



## bms

zephyr17 said:


> Niemi24, fyi, in the absence of Amsnag I did a couple of phantom reservations in what should be low demand periods, early November when I recently got my low bucket EB and LSL fares, plus mid-January, and early February. All the dates I tried came up at $899. I do agree with you that $899 is not the low bucket, just the lowest available bucket. But I also honestly think that Amtrak may just not be putting any inventory in the two lower buckets on 421/422 right now, based on those random samples of what should be low demand days. I have theories of why they might do this, but no firm knowledge. I hold hope they put some inventory into the lower bucket as actual demand develops (or doesn't). If they can sell them in middle bucket, why offer them in the low bucket? But whether or not they can remains to be seen. And they may blink.



You used to be able to get the low bucket by booking 5 months out, but I'm seeing some fares over $1000 for trains 5 months out that are 6% or 12% full. A lot of times it's cheaper to take the Builder and change to the Starlight in Portland, even though it has to cost Amtrak more to take people on a three-night trip than a two-night trip.


----------



## zephyr17

How do you know how fully booked the sleepers are? That is something I'd like to be able to figure out.


----------



## bms

zephyr17 said:


> How do you know how fully booked the sleepers are? That is something I'd like to be able to figure out.



That's just the percent full for the whole train on the site. Can't imagine there are many sleepers booked if the whole train is only 6% full.


----------



## zephyr17

You'd be surprised with the pandemic. There was a post either here or on one of the Amtrak oriented Facebook groups within the last couple days about a train with like 12 people in coaches and the sleepers were full.

I can probably find it again if I look for it.


----------



## caravanman

zephyr17 said:


> How do you know how fully booked the sleepers are? That is something I'd like to be able to figure out.


One method I used, was to "pretend" that I wanted to book more passengers than just myself into the bedrooms. May not be a 100% perfect solution, but one gets a feel for the availability of sleepers on a train...


----------



## AmtrakBlue

bms said:


> That's just the percent full for the whole train on the site. Can't imagine there are many sleepers booked if the whole train is only 6% full.


The percentage MAY be only for coach since people like to know if they’ll be stuck with a seat mate.


----------



## bms

AmtrakBlue said:


> The percentage MAY be only for coach since people like to know if they’ll be stuck with a seat mate.



Good point. In any event, $889 is outrageous. I don't think I could enjoy my trip knowing it cost that much.


----------



## Cal

zephyr17 said:


> I will say at that price and without the SSL, I won't be filling my Texas Eagle gap on my Amtrak long distance experiences any time soon.


I'd go now before they eliminate more things!


----------



## zephyr17

Cal said:


> I'd go now before they eliminate more things!


I've taken every other long distance train, the TE route has never called to me, and it is way out of my way. I already know I really dislike not having a Sightseer. I miss it on the single evening on the Builder out of Seattle.

Plus, the SW Chief is a particular favorite of mine as riding that route always reminds me of when I had the privilege of riding the Super Chief. So when going between LA and Chicago I've always chosen it. Also, low bucket fares on the Eagle through cars have always been a bit elusive.

So if I miss the Eagle, so be it. I sure as heck am not going to pay $899 for that a ride that without a Sightseer, especially because for me it would be riding it just for the sake of riding it.


----------



## Lissa

In my own experience, the price for which we had purchased 2 roomettes from Philly to Orlando for late summer 2000 was almost a full thousand dollars less than the prices I just checked for the same route, same train, same dates in 2021. Ouch. Now granted, we did snag a deal for those 2000 tickets (That wound up being cancelled.), but it wasn't a nearly thousand dollar deal by a long shot!


----------



## niemi24s

Lissa said:


> In my own experience, the price for which we had purchased 2 roomettes from Philly to Orlando for late summer 2000 was almost a full thousand dollars less than the prices I just checked for the same route, same train, same dates in 2021.


See what the fares are a few days on either side of the one you checked. You might be surprised.

Then again, maybe not. Don't forget there are two trains for you to pick from.


----------



## dlagrua

I have complained the most about the high fare situation here and won't present the whole story again but as people who have spent thousands on LD travel ( we figure $35-$40K) over the years, we would hope that there would be some concern on Amtrak's end that some passengers may have been shut out and turned away this year due to cost. We enjoy train travel and wish to continue to support the service. We are ready to fork over up to 2X the first class air fare if and when the fare structure can support that.


----------



## jis

dlagrua said:


> I have complained the most about the high fare situation here and won't present the whole story again but as people who have spent thousands on LD travel ( we figure $35-$40K) over the years, we would hope that there would be some concern on Amtrak's end that some passengers may have been shut out and turned away this year due to cost. We enjoy train travel and wish to continue to support the service. We are ready to fork over up to 2X the first class air fare if and when the fare structure can support that.


It is really like an auction. If there are sufficient number of people willing to fork out more than you are for the same thing, any outfit would tend to sell it to the highest bidder, unless they are limited by other factors like say the commuter railroads are. I am not saying this is right, but as a famous ex-President said "It is what it is".


----------



## Bostontoallpoints

" It is really like an auction. If there are sufficient number of people willing to fork out more than you are for the same thing, any outfit would tend to sell it to the highest bidder, unless they are limited by other factors like say the commuter railroads are."

I would be fine with that if Amtrak was a private company and not using public funds. For example I think first class domestic commercial airline tickets are outrageously priced and I won't pay for it but some people do. Amtrak needs public funds and thus the public should have a say on what is acceptable fare. Presently the level of service provided doesn't come close to the price requested.


----------



## flitcraft

Bostontoallpoints said:


> I would be fine with that if Amtrak was a private company and not using public funds. [snip]. Amtrak needs public funds and thus the public should have a say on what is acceptable fare. Presently the level of service provided doesn't come close to the price requested.



But the public does get a say--they choose to pay or not. And, with the current occupancy rate of sleepers, it seems the public is voting with their wallets. And, I would guess that a lot of the public would argue that, as a publicly supported entity, they'd rather not subsidize Amtrak sleeper travel when there are plenty of sleeper passengers willing to pay the higher rates. I get that it is aggravating to see the fares so high, but I'd prefer for Amtrak to use sleeper fares to makes LD trains more cost-effective so as to increase the odds that they will continue to be available in the future.


----------



## Bostontoallpoints

flitcraft said:


> But the public does get a say--they choose to pay or not. And, with the current occupancy rate of sleepers, it seems the public is voting with their wallets. And, I would guess that a lot of the public would argue that, as a publicly supported entity, they'd rather not subsidize Amtrak sleeper travel when there are plenty of sleeper passengers willing to pay the higher rates. I get that it is aggravating to see the fares so high, but I'd prefer for Amtrak to use sleeper fares to makes LD trains more cost-effective so as to increase the odds that they will continue to be available in the future.


We'll see how things shake out. I doubt that Amtrak will obtain returning sleeping car passengers at the present level of service. If the meal's provided improved greatly and the attendants provided service levels at pre-Amtrak then I could see the value. RIght now its worse service and food at a cost far greater than justified.


----------



## jis

Bostontoallpoints said:


> We'll see how things shake out. I doubt that Amtrak will obtain returning sleeping car passengers at the present level of service. If the meal's provided improved greatly and the attendants provided service levels at pre-Amtrak then I could see the value. RIght now its worse service and food at a cost far greater than justified.


I think the point that @flitcraft was making is that contrary to your earlier claim, the public does get a say. If they really don't fill the accommodation at a price level the yield management system will (hopefully) lower the fares to where they do. The only way to figure out what that point is is to try out various price levels and offering schedules and see what yields the most for the level of service provided, whatever it turns out to be.

The other possibility of course is that they are preparing for a long play to discontinue the service. Only time will tell. I would not put anything past them at this point, notwithstanding all the happy talk emanating from RPA and such.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Just checked on Fares Austin-Chi-Austin for the October Gathering.

Southwest Airlines- $116 each way Non-Stop to Midway

Amtrak: Texas Eagle Roomette
AUS-CHI. $625( 3 left @ this Price)
CHI-AUS. Sold Out

Good thing no-one rides Amtrak LD Trains.

I'll be Flying both ways needless to say!


----------



## jis

Bob Dylan said:


> Just checked on Fares Austin-Chi-Austin for the October Gathering.
> 
> Southwest Airlines- $116 each way Non-Stop to Midway
> 
> Amtrak: Texas Eagle Roomette
> AUS-CHI. $625( 3 left @ this Price)
> CHI-AUS.  Sold Out
> 
> Good thing no-one rides Amtrak LD Trains.
> 
> I'll be Flying both ways needless to say!


Apparently TE will have neither a Transdorm, nor a second Sleeper (except on 421/422 days when there is a 421/422 Sleeper and Coach), and will have a Coach and a Coach Baggage and of course a CCC. Not a very long train. Quite puzzling really.


----------



## Ryan

Bostontoallpoints said:


> I would be fine with that if Amtrak was a private company and not using public funds.


This goes back to the language in the legal authorization for Amtrak that's been posted in one of these million threads bitching about the same thing. Key words are "managed as a for profit corporation".

Don't like it? Petition Congress to change it, or to massively increase funding to provide for more rolling stock. Increased supply would yield lower prices.


----------



## Bob Dylan

jis said:


> Apparently TE will have neither a Transdorm, nor a second Sleeper (except on 421/422 days when there is a 421/422 Sleeper and Coach), and will have a Coach and a Coach Baggage and of course a CCC. Not a very long train. Quite puzzling really.


They're putting the Eagle back into the Orphan Train Catagory that they share with the CONO and the Cardinal!

I dont like saying it, but I wont be riding the Eagle LD anymore( the Coach Fares for Day tripsare still not bad, but for the same Price to Chicago in Coach I can Fly on SWA) unless the Sightseer Lounge is brought back and Reasonsble/Affordable Prices for the Rooms are returned to this Route!


----------



## jiml

Bostontoallpoints said:


> I think first class domestic commercial airline tickets are outrageously priced and I won't pay for it but some people do.


First Class airfare is a relative bargain compared to just a few years ago - not that you get much for it currently, with lounges closed or lacking services and minimal on-board amenities. I can book YYZ-LAX for an optimistic September trip for $456 on AA - less than half of what it has been in the past. The drop started well before Covid, so not necessarily a sale intended to win back customers.


----------



## jis

It is pretty unusual to get lounge access for standard Domestic First Class in the US. Lounge Access is normally though Club membership for US domestic First Class. YYZ to LAX is not exactly domestic unless Canada has finally seen the light of the day and joined the United States


----------



## lrh442

Ryan said:


> Don't like it? Petition Congress to change it, or to massively increase funding to provide for more rolling stock. Increased supply would yield lower prices.



Would more rolling stock really lead to lower prices? Currently there are plenty of idle Superliner sleepers sitting around due to tri-weekly service, yet Amtrak seems to be reluctant to lengthen trains. I nixed a trip this month on the SWC due to sold out conditions on the days I needed to travel.


----------



## Exvalley

jiml said:


> First Class airfare is a relative bargain compared to just a few years ago


I have noticed this trend as well. Airlines seem to have decided that they would rather sell first class seats than award them as upgrades.


----------



## jiml

jis said:


> It is pretty unusual to get lounge access for standard Domestic First Class in the US. Lounge Access is normally though Club membership for US domestic First Class. YYZ to LAX is not exactly domestic unless Canada has finally seen the light of the day and joined the United States


That's true of course. I think Alaska is the only exception remaining. However, in my example UA and AC and sometimes DL do give access; AA does not. Pre-pandemic I flew frequently between YYZ and IAD, always with lounge access.


----------



## jiml

Exvalley said:


> I have noticed this trend as well. Airlines seem to have decided that they would rather sell first class seats than award them as upgrades.


Could only apply one reaction - Like because you're right; Sad because it's true. Upgrades were getting pretty lean even in 2019. Ironically my now cancelled and refunded trip on AA last summer had mostly cleared.


----------



## Bostontoallpoints

Ryan said:


> This goes back to the language in the legal authorization for Amtrak that's been posted in one of these million threads bitching about the same thing. Key words are "managed as a for profit corporation".
> 
> Don't like it? Petition Congress to change it, or to massively increase funding to provide for more rolling stock. Increased supply would yield lower prices.


I have been riding Amtrak for Fifty years. I have traveled on Amtrak all over the country for business and pleasure. I have ridden during lean times and not so lean times. I have the right to voice my opinion. Petitioning Congress is a waste of time. I have traveled to Florida every year on Amtrak for the last 10 years. $778-$1000 one-way for two in a roomette with a reduced diner menu is just too much for me. I don't see the value. Maybe others will pay it just not me. And if this pricing along with the reduced diner service continues, I won't support Amtrak anymore. If Amtrak can get by without my patronage, then so be it. However, I don’t think I am alone.


----------



## jis

jiml said:


> That's true of course. I think Alaska is the only exception remaining. However, in my example UA and AC and sometimes DL do give access; AA does not. Pre-pandemic I flew frequently between YYZ and IAD, always with lounge access.


I would expect to get Lounge access when traveling between Canada and the US since it is an international flight, though some airlines explicitly exclude Canada, Mexico and the Caribbean, none of which are really Domestic. Of course, I have to go looking for this info since I have Lounge Access through other means irrespective of the class I am flying, on airlines that I fly frequently.

Whether a complementary upgrade will clear or not also depends on frequent flier status. At 1K on United it clears almost all the time.


----------



## Ryan

lrh442 said:


> Would more rolling stock really lead to lower prices? Currently there are plenty of idle Superliner sleepers sitting around due to tri-weekly service, yet Amtrak seems to be reluctant to lengthen trains. I nixed a trip this month on the SWC due to sold out conditions on the days I needed to travel.



The tai-weekly service was due to cratering ridership, and thus no revenue coming in. Without revenue, you can't pay employees, and without employees, you can't run extra cars. Now that demand is recovering, revenue is increasing, and service levels are increasing. With pent up demand driving more people to be interested in being out, I would expect to see high prices and full trains be the norm for some time.



Bostontoallpoints said:


> I have the right to voice my opinion. Petitioning Congress is a waste of time.



And complaining about it on a web forum is even a bigger waste of time. At least Congress can actually do something to solve the problem, unlike anyone here.



Bostontoallpoints said:


> If Amtrak can get by without my patronage, then so be it.


I'm sure they're crying themselves to sleep at night regretting leaving money on the table by not selling you a room for cheaper than the market will bear.


----------



## Sidney

Bob Dylan said:


> They're putting the Eagle back into the Orphan Train Catagory that they share with the CONO and the Cardinal!
> 
> I dont like saying it, but I wont be riding the Eagle LD anymore( the Coach Fares for Day tripsare still not bad, but for the same Price to Chicago in Coach I can Fly on SWA) unless the Sightseer Lounge is brought back and Reasonsble/Affordable Prices for the Rooms are returned to this Route!


You may be right. It's a one night train
I can see flex dining continuing and,of course the lack of a SSL car. Only overnight train with a SSL car is the CS and hopefully traditional dining makes it's return on July 1,but with the date pushed back four times,I have my doubts.


----------



## pennyk

I paid quite a bit for my roundtrip from ORL to NYP in a bedroom last week. I looked at the fares for a few weeks and chose the days that had the best fares. I wanted a bedroom in a new car (of which supply is very limited). I know I paid more than I would have paid a few years ago, but I wanted to travel in a bedroom in a new car and see the new station. So be it.


----------



## Bostontoallpoints

Ryan said:


> The tai-weekly service was due to cratering ridership, and thus no revenue coming in. Without revenue, you can't pay employees, and without employees, you can't run extra cars. Now that demand is recovering, revenue is increasing, and service levels are increasing. With pent up demand driving more people to be interested in being out, I would expect to see high prices and full trains be the norm for some time.
> 
> 
> 
> And complaining about it on a web forum is even a bigger waste of time. At least Congress can actually do something to solve the problem, unlike anyone here.
> 
> I'm sure they're crying themselves to sleep at night regretting leaving money on the table by not selling you a room for cheaper than the market will bear.


So what Amtrak trips are you taking in the future and how much are you spending?


----------



## Ryan

Completely irrelevant and quite frankly none of your business.

That said, most of my time off this year is devoted to transitioning my oldest from high school to college and then a visit or two down there.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

jiml said:


> First Class airfare is a relative bargain compared to just a few years ago - not that you get much for it currently, with lounges closed or lacking services and minimal on-board amenities.


Other than a 50/50 PDB or a random snack plate my usual flights seem to be back to pre-pandemic service levels.



jiml said:


> Like because you're right; Sad because it's true. Upgrades were getting pretty lean even in 2019. Ironically my now cancelled and refunded trip on AA last summer had mostly cleared.


After getting bumped into coach on a revenue ticket (thanks to a cancelled flight) it occurred to me that shrinking cabins and increasing status rosters are also part of the equation.



jis said:


> I would expect to get Lounge access when traveling between Canada and the US since it is an international flight, though some airlines explicitly exclude Canada, Mexico and the Caribbean, none of which are really Domestic.


Where I live domestic non-stops run twice the duration of our longest international flight.


----------



## Amtrak709

I, too, have been an intense railfan all my 73 years of life. Really fell in love with the trains and especially the sleepers while in college in Virginia in the mid 1960's I have supported Amtrak since its inception and have to date travelled about 300,000 miles on the rails. For the last twenty years, my regular most used route has been the Crescent ATN-WAS or NYP and return. A fare, one-way, ATN-NYP @ $971 in a bedroom has clearly caught my attention. I just can NOT justify the expense. I have really tried to be loyal and recommend Amtrak to my co-workers. They--whoever they are?--are making it impossible. Just checked my favorite route CHI-SEA-CHI and a bedroom @ $2000??!!?? I acknowledge the supply and demand issue--but still. I am sad about it.


----------



## Sidney

I have been a loyal Amtrak rider for over thirty years and each year I have taken circle trips,never paying more than low bucket for a roomette. I ll be catching the LS in Buffalo around Midnight and taking the Texas Eagle to LA Friday. Thankfully,I booked before the recent price hikes. I am another one who can't justify the roomette prices now. I look ahead to April and a roomette from Chi to LA is over $1000. Insane. Obviously the rooms are selling,but if the lowest Southwest Chief fare from Chi-Lax is $899 or more I just won't go and I have been a huge Amtrak supporter always telling people how great traveling by train is. These days with the outrageous pricing,I am less inclined to promote train travel. We have reached a breaking point where the train experience is not worth the price.

simply put when the SW Chief was $623 it was worth it. Not at $899


----------



## niemi24s

AMTRAK709 said:


> A fare, one-way, ATN-NYP @ $971 in a bedroom has clearly caught my attention. I just can NOT justify the expense.


If you sniff around long enough, you might stumble across a low bucket Bedroom for one senior twixt ATL and NYP for $610.20. High bucket would be <gasp> $1127.20!


----------



## zephyr17

As I said in a recent thread, I recently booked Everett to New York in a roomette single occupancy for $809.40 (with senior discount, would have been $840 without it). According to Niemi24's charts, that's low bucket.

The three day a week thing has clearly skewed fares towards high buckets on the those days, as they were the only bookable days until fairly recently. Things are warped right now.

I never have and will not now pay high bucket fares. High buckets have always been outrageous. I will either not travel or take an alternative (fly or drive) if I can't find an alternative day with a lower bucket.

So yes, I will not take Amtrak at those fares. But I still take Amtrak. Most of the time I can find a fare I can live with.


----------



## caravanman

I too have enjoyed many Amtrak miles, especially enjoyable when I got almost $2 to my £1. 
We are all fed up with the Covid worries, and sad to find that rail fares are now much higher.
Maybe we should calm down and wait for a little longer, I feel that when things get more back to normal, maybe the train fares will reduce again? 
(I know the next "normal" may not be the same as our past situations, but we have to hope for improvements...)


----------



## zephyr17

jis said:


> It is pretty unusual to get lounge access for standard Domestic First Class in the US. Lounge Access is normally though Club membership for US domestic First Class. YYZ to LAX is not exactly domestic unless Canada has finally seen the light of the day and joined the United States


You get lounge access on a paid Domestic First Class ticket or a frequent flyer award on Alaska, even in a discount fare class (P for discount First Class, IIRC).

You don't get lounge access on a First Class upgrade.


----------



## rrdude

Sidney said:


> For example,the cheapest one.person roomette is $691 from Chicago to Albuquerque on the Southwest Chief. One overnight,three meals. A little excessive? As a 30 year plus Amtrak rider I have never seen prices this steep. Sadly,people would pay this price so Amtrak will charge it.
> 
> Knock off $300 and we'll talk



No need to "talk", when they can sell all they offer at $691


----------



## Sidney

I know they can sell a rommette for almost $700 for a one night trip. I would never pay it,so I wouldn't go.


----------



## jruff001

One would think people on a supposed pro-passenger rail website would be HAPPY that Amtrak can find people willing to buy its product for such high fares. Doesn't that mean they are doing something right?


----------



## Ryan

One would think, but that only works up until the point that you take their nice things away. Then it's a case of the sky falling.



Sidney said:


> I know they can sell a rommette for almost $700 for a one night trip. I would never pay it,so I wouldn't go.


Thanks for clearing that up. I was confused and unsure of what your position was. Maybe consider repeating it a few more times, even.


----------



## Amtrakfflyer

We know Amtrak is holding back roomettes on the TE (not selling them in one sleeper) for whatever crazy reason. They literally just sell the bedrooms in that car. 

Anecdotally I’ve heard from friends that work for Amtrak the trains may not be a busy as we are being lead to believe especially in the case of bedrooms. Either way none of this makes sense. 

Anderson and Gardner lied to Congress about long distance numbers in their push to break up the SWC in 2018. While I would like to believe Amtrak is playing above board I don’t think we can just accept their word. There’s never been a more appropriate time for an unbiased auditor to take a deep dive in Amtrak’s books and see what’s really going on. Especially with a possible windfall from the infrastructure bill coming.

Food for thought if they really are getting these insane fares with no amenities and little labor why do they hate the network trains so much? These fares indicate the network is the crown jewel of Amtrak. Somehow I don’t think managements numbers will show that next time financial performance come out.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Amtrakfflyer said:


> We know Amtrak is holding back roomettes on the TE (not selling them in one sleeper) for whatever crazy reason. They literally just sell the bedrooms in that car.


Those unsold rooms are most likely for the crew. The TE no longer has a transdorm.


----------



## jruff001

Amtrakfflyer said:


> We know Amtrak is holding back roomettes on the TE (not selling them in one sleeper) for whatever crazy reason. They literally just sell the bedrooms in that car.
> 
> Anecdotally I’ve heard from friends that work for Amtrak the trains may not be a busy as we are being lead to believe especially in the case of bedrooms. Either way none of this makes sense.
> 
> It’s a fact Anderson and Gardner lied to Congress about long distance numbers in their push to break up the SWC in 2018. While I would like to believe Amtrak is playing above board I don’t think we can just accept their word. There’s never been a more appropriate time for an unbiased auditor to take a deep dive in Amtrak’s books and see what’s really going on.
> 
> Food for thought if they really are getting these insane fares with no amenities and little labor why do they hate the network trains so much? These fares indicate the network is the crown jewel of Amtrak. Somehow I don’t think managements numbers will show that next time financial performance come out.


Yes I am sure everything is just a big conspiracy. It probably all fits into QAnon somehow.


----------



## Amtrakfflyer

All 14 rooms roomettes, the H and family room? For 4 OBS?



AmtrakBlue said:


> Those unsold rooms are most likely for the crew. The TE no longer has a transdorm.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

AmtrakBlue said:


> Maybe because the "extra" OBS needed for those extra cars have been furloughed. Do you expect the current SCA's to take on the extra car (yes, I know sometimes they do, but I don't think it's a daily requirement).


Since they "take on" as little as half-a-car now why not? If they cannot handle 1½ sleepers maybe it's time to retire.



jruff001 said:


> One would think people on a supposed pro-passenger rail website would be HAPPY that Amtrak can find people willing to buy its product for such high fares. Doesn't that mean they are doing something right?


I'd prefer Amtrak sell two or three cars at more reasonable daily rates rather than a single car every few days.



railiner said:


> Probably because most of Amtrak's long distance passenger's tend to be senior's, who seem more sensitive to lower temps, I would guess. But as they say, you can always add layer(s) of clothing if cold, but can't do much about it being too warm...


I actively avoid Amtrak for around six months of the year thanks to their lopsided HVAC settings. By the time I'm old and frail enough to benefit from this unwritten policy I'll have long since forgotten to resume riding again.


----------



## lrh442

jruff001 said:


> One would think people on a supposed pro-passenger rail website would be HAPPY that Amtrak can find people willing to buy its product for such high fares. Doesn't that mean they are doing something right?



Sky-high sleeper prices are fools gold. They feed the damaging perception that LD trains are land cruises for the wealthy, rather than viable transportation for the average Joe. That is not a good look for Amtrak, and if it takes hold in Congress you can kiss funding goodbye.


----------



## jruff001

lrh442 said:


> Sky-high sleeper prices are fools gold. They feed the damaging perception that LD trains are land cruises for the wealthy, rather than viable transportation for the average Joe. That is not a good look for Amtrak, and if it takes hold in Congress you can kiss funding goodbye.


I don't agree with that. Congress wants to see what looks like Amtrak "making money" (or at least losing less) and operating like a business. THAT is what will keep Amtrak funding going, not the perception that it is a bottomless money pit that can never hope to make even an operating profit.


----------



## plane2train

I must admit that even the EB was sky-high on a number of dates this summer and some of the sleepers sold out completely. I'm thinking that it may be time to reassess how much sleeper travel I do. It is really quite a treat to ride in a roomette or bedroom, but there are a lot of ways to do train travel, and riding coach for day trips, however they may be put together, may be a more suitable option in the future if fares continue to be so high.


----------



## zephyr17

I've managed for years to avoid high buckets which I won't pay for.

Plan ahead, travel in the off or shoulder seasons, and be a bit flexible on dates. Basically, I start planning a year in advance, and usually have a travel window of an acceptable date ranges. I start checking fares about when they come into inventory and keep checking (RIP Amsnag).

I've even managed to get decent fares (2nd lowest bucket) during the holiday season by being flexible on travel days.

And while I recently retired, I've been doing this for years and was employed full time for most of that time.

The Empire Builder has the cheapest sleeper fares West Coast-Chicago at all bucket levels. They are significantly below equivalent buckets on the Southwest Chief. If you started planning months ago for a summer trip, as you ordinarily should, you probably got tripped up by triweekly. This was a weird year. If you started looking in May for summer, well, that is way too late.

In any case, running into a number of sold out days among high bucket days is just an indication that yield management is doing what it is supposed to do.

PS, I have a low bucket trip on the EB and LSL that I booked just one week ago for November travel.

All is not lost.


----------



## MARC Rider

Before you start getting too upset at Amtrak sleeper fares, check this out:

Travel by train to destinations around North America on your luxurious private train car - the Chapel Hill Railcar. 

I saw this car tacked on to the end of the Silver Meteor as it was roaring through Princeton Junction last week and looked it up to find out more about it.

They will give you a nice 3-day trip between Cincy and DC "starting at $15,000" for "up to 6 people" (4 bedrooms and a sleeper sofa in the observation lounge). I'm sure you don't have to worry about getting served flex meals, either.  They'll plan your own bespoke rail tour across America to wherever Amtrak lets them, "starting at $6,000 a day." (And you know when they quote prices as "starting at ..." the most common price you'll end up paying is usually a good bit higher.) That means your 4-day trip across the country will be "starting at" $24,000, or $4,000 a person if you manage to get the right combination of couples and singles to fill up the car. It's also not clear if you have to pay to return the car back to base if your final destination isn't Cincinnati. 

I also looked up the Royal Canadian Pacific, which will be offering public tours once they decide COVID is over. No prices being quoted yet, but some other stuff on the web suggests that a 4 day trip will be running $8,000. 

It certainly makes the $400 Baltimore-Chicago trip I booked on the Lake Shore Limited look like a real bargain, even if I do have to eat Flex Meals. And that price includes business class from Baltimore to New York and a 2 hour layover at the new Metropolitan Lounge at the Moynihan Train Hall in New York.


----------



## dlagrua

Yes sleeper fares can be crazy high. Either they will keep selling at the current prices, will create new first class air travelers from long time loyal Amtrak travelers (who will fly fraction of the sleeper price) , or it may collapse the LD service. Where is the comment from the Rail Passengers Association on their take on this?


----------



## Amtrak709

As a follow up to my post here earlier this week, I did find and buy a $792.20 round trip fare ATN-NYP in a roomette (appears to be low bucket in June 2021). I have always preferred the bedrooms but (for one traveler) that would have added exactly $1200.00 to the fare. My favorite thing used to be upgrading to an accessible bedroom when released if still available about 48 hours before train departure. My personal opinion is the "H" room is the best space on viewliner trains. I cannot image what that space must cost these days. I am trying my best be remain an intense railfan of 73 years and a loyal Amtrak supporter. It is just getting harder to do that.


----------



## Sidney

AMTRAK709 said:


> As a follow up to my post here earlier this week, I did find and buy a $792.20 round trip fare ATN-NYP in a roomette (appears to be low bucket in June 2021). I have always preferred the bedrooms but (for one traveler) that would have added exactly $1200.00 to the fare. My favorite thing used to be upgrading to an accessible bedroom when released if still available about 48 hours before train departure. My personal opinion is the "H" room is the best space on viewliner trains. I cannot image what that space must cost these days. I am trying my best be remain an intense railfan of 73 years and a loyal Amtrak supporter. It is just getting harder to do that.


I hear you. I've been doing cross country trips for over thirty years. It's getting to the point where I can't justify sleeper prices. However,there are low buckets of $505 and $530 one person senior roomette fares on the CZ and EB.,even though there aren't too many left.Eastern trains are the worst. Continued flex dining,no sightseer cars,obviously and high prices.


----------



## Bonser

caravanman said:


> There have been a lot of A.U. members recently complaining about the high costs of sleeper accommodations, together with the poor meals on offer...
> 
> My favourite ride is the Zephyr, and just for fun I checked some fares for later in the year.
> 
> I find that a roomette from Chicago to Sacramento is $640 in October, and only $555 in December.
> 
> I think those are comparable fares to a few years ago, or is my old age playing tricks on my memory?


What has skyrocketed are bedroom prices, not roomettes. In many cases more than double from pre Covid levels. Particularly on the Zephyr.


----------



## 20th Century Rider

Bob Dylan said:


> Supply and demand! Lots of folks want to go to LA and Southern California.
> 
> Same thing happens on the Florida Trains in the Winter ( directional in their cases)and the Zephyr and Empire Builder in the Summer.
> 
> I agree that the Texas Eagle and Chief Rooms have become to Pricey for what's on offer, I can't afford them, but folks are riding, so that's the way it is!


And if they pack their PB & J sandwiches they'll have something to eat too!


----------



## MARC Rider

MARC Rider said:


> Before you start getting too upset at Amtrak sleeper fares, check this out:
> 
> Travel by train to destinations around North America on your luxurious private train car - the Chapel Hill Railcar.
> 
> I saw this car tacked on to the end of the Silver Meteor as it was roaring through Princeton Junction last week and looked it up to find out more about it.
> 
> They will give you a nice 3-day trip between Cincy and DC "starting at $15,000" for "up to 6 people" (4 bedrooms and a sleeper sofa in the observation lounge). I'm sure you don't have to worry about getting served flex meals, either.  They'll plan your own bespoke rail tour across America to wherever Amtrak lets them, "starting at $6,000 a day." (And you know when they quote prices as "starting at ..." the most common price you'll end up paying is usually a good bit higher.) That means your 4-day trip across the country will be "starting at" $24,000, or $4,000 a person if you manage to get the right combination of couples and singles to fill up the car. It's also not clear if you have to pay to return the car back to base if your final destination isn't Cincinnati.
> 
> I also looked up the Royal Canadian Pacific, which will be offering public tours once they decide COVID is over. No prices being quoted yet, but some other stuff on the web suggests that a 4 day trip will be running $8,000.
> 
> It certainly makes the $400 Baltimore-Chicago trip I booked on the Lake Shore Limited look like a real bargain, even if I do have to eat Flex Meals. And that price includes business class from Baltimore to New York and a 2 hour layover at the new Metropolitan Lounge at the Moynihan Train Hall in New York.


Here's another one:

Belmond Hotels, Trains, River Cruises - Discover Belmond Luxury Travel - Journey

It's an Amsterdam-Venice one night trip. Two lunches, a dinner, and continental breakfast included. *£2,835* That's a bit over $4,000 at current rates of exchange.

But at least you won't have to worry about being served Flex meals.


----------



## MARC Rider

The more I think about it, there's some sort of perverse disconnect between "yield management" and the alleged "law" of supply and demand. For a product like railroad transportation, which has high fixed overhead costs, the more passengers you stuff into the train, the less the expense per passenger for running the train. Also, when the train is relatively empty, the on-board experience is better because (1) the train isn't crowded, and (2) the staff has fewer other passengers to deal with, so they can pay more attention to your needs. If you're riding in coach, an empty train means that you won't have to endure a seatmate, you can always get a window seat and a seat in the lounge. From this point of view, the fares should be higher when the train is empty, and a discount applied for full trains.  Yet the yield management software prices things in the exact opposite. I'm not sure whether a reversal of yield management algorithms would provide better financial results, especially when the trains are not running full. Or perhaps it might be better to do away with yield management entirely?

One thing about the underlying assumptions of the discipline of economics is that all of the players in a free market are making rational decisions that provide them with maximum monetary benefit. This is obviously not the case in reality, perhaps to the extent that the discipline of economics really doesn't have much to teach us.


----------



## flitcraft

MARC Rider said:


> One thing about the underlying assumptions of the discipline of economics is that all of the players in a free market are making rational decisions that provide them with maximum monetary benefit. This is obviously not the case in reality, perhaps to the extent that the discipline of economics really doesn't have much to teach us


Yup--the 'rational actor' assumption baked into economic theory is why economics fails the 'real world' test so often. And why psychology-trained Daniel Kahneman won the Nobel Prize in economics for empirically debunking that assumption.


----------



## niemi24s

Tom Booth said:


> What has skyrocketed are bedroom prices, not roomettes. In many cases more than double from pre Covid levels. Particularly on the Zephyr.


Skyrocketed? Don't confuse the recent relatively modest fare increases in the bedroom buckets on the CZ of 1.9% to 4.5% with the normal ~100% increase from low to high bucket. 

F'rinstance, if you look long enough on the CZ you might find a low bucket Bedroom ($1015) one day, a high bucket ($2022) one the next day and some other bucket in between those two the day after that! That's the normal bucket system that's been in existence for years. Sometimes fares for a certain accommodation can remain constant for days on end. They can also jump around like fleas on a hot brick!


----------



## caravanman

Tom Booth said:


> What has skyrocketed are bedroom prices, not roomettes. In many cases more than double from pre Covid levels. Particularly on the Zephyr.


Ah, those fabled bedrooms... I have heard of them, passed by them, but sadly, even in the good old days, never snagged one! 
Just a thought, what were "roomettes" called previously, I seem to remember the term "roomette" appearing only in the last 15 years?


----------



## lrh442

jruff001 said:


> I don't agree with that. Congress wants to see what looks like Amtrak "making money" (or at least losing less) and operating like a business. THAT is what will keep Amtrak funding going, not the perception that it is a bottomless money pit that can never hope to make even an operating profit.



@Jruff, if you're right then Amtrak is in for continued misery. The very reason that Amtrak exists is that the private railroads couldn't operate passenger service "like a business" (i.e. operate at a profit). If Congress is going to continue to judge Amtrak by that measure, they will continue to see it, as you said, a bottomless money pit and not an important public service deserving of government funding. If you add in the perception that Amtrak is only a land cruise for the rich, Amtrak likely has a dreary future (outside of the NEC).


----------



## railiner

caravanman said:


> Ah, those fabled bedrooms... I have heard of them, passed by them, but sadly, even in the good old days, never snagged one!
> Just a thought, what were "roomettes" called previously, I seem to remember the term "roomette" appearing only in the last 15 years?


Originally on the Superliner's, they were called "Economy Bedrooms"...the larger ones with the bathrooms were called "Deluxe Bedrooms"...


----------



## jis

lrh442 said:


> @Jruff, if you're right then Amtrak is in for continued misery. The very reason that Amtrak exists is that the private railroads couldn't operate passenger service "like a business" (i.e. operate at a profit). If Congress is going to continue to judge Amtrak by that measure, they will continue to see it, as you said, a bottomless money pit and not an important public service deserving of government funding. If you add in the perception that Amtrak is only a land cruise for the rich, Amtrak likely has a dreary future (outside of the NEC).


If Congress was serious about letting Amtrak thrive as a service providing corporation they would have characterized the relationship between the FDOT and Amtrak as one defined by at least annual and preferably longer term, contracts which FDOT enters in with Amtrak wherein it pays Amtrak what is today called subsidy, as a contract fee, for precisely services provided by Amtrak in exchange. They fact that they chose to set things up the way they did is indicative of their desire to portray the whole thing as a money losing proposition to be beat up on year over year, instead of a means for providing a thriving service to the nation. Until they collectively change their minds, which they are yet to do completely, Amtrak and the nation will bungle along as they are and fares will be what they need to be to satisfy the hawks in Congress. Specially considering in general (barring a few exceptions) fares mid points have not gone up more than inflation since 1971 this is sort of working event that in yield management Amtrak gets to choose the allocation of inventory to buckets which can skew the picture upwards considerably, which is what we are seeing today.

Somehow the supporters of Congress have found it politically expedient to not rock the boat and fix this core perception problem in accounting. If it was a contractual relationship then Amtrak running a loss would mean poor maangement in need of fixing. Under normal circumstances they would be breaking even at fares agreed upon between the FDOT and Amtrak as part of the contract, or perhaps even making a small profit, thus removing the "big loss maker" argument off the table. The Brits got that part right when they conjured up the most complex privatization scheme.


----------



## flitcraft

I'm no expert on Amtrak, but I fully expected few or no low bucket fares for sleepers this summer. It's obvious that there has been a huge pent up demand for travel after a year and a bit with no travel, and on top of that, sleepers are particularly attractive for late-pandemic travel because they maximize protection from exposure to other people. When I booked my trip this June on the Empire Builder, as soon as they announced daily trains, I knew I was competing for a limited, highly desirable commodity in booking a sleeper. Sure, I'd have loved to have gotten cheaper prices on my trip, but I recognized that what I wanted, lots of other people did, too. 

I'm curious about those who think that sleepers should be priced at a price point that most Americans are willing and able to pay--which presumably would vastly increase the number of people trying to book sleepers, while the number of actual sleepers available would not increase. Would there be a lottery to determine who the lucky winners would be? (And what would prevent arbitrage--people playing the Amtrak lottery so as to sell their 'lucky' tickets at a profit to those not so lucky in the lottery?)

As it is, I'm willing to compromise on other expenses to pay extra for the Amtrak sleeper this summer. So, I'm not going to pay $140 a month for parking at my university--instead, I'll take two busses to get to work this year. That'll more than pay for my Amtrak indulgence.


----------



## fdaley

lrh442 said:


> Sky-high sleeper prices are fools gold. They feed the damaging perception that LD trains are land cruises for the wealthy, rather than viable transportation for the average Joe. That is not a good look for Amtrak



I do think there is a real problem here in terms of the public perception of Amtrak. I've had many conversations in the past 15 years or more with friends and acquaintances who, given that I was perhaps the only person they knew who actually traveled by LD train, wanted to know how much it would cost to go to X place in a sleeper room. When I'd get them an actual quote, their interest would usually end promptly. 

But it's important to remember that sky-high sleeper prices are essentially a way of rationing (and maximizing revenue from) the extremely limited supply of sleepers Amtrak has. Rather than simply compelling Amtrak to sell space at some arbitrarily "reasonable" price, a better solution would be to convince Congress to make a major investment in new LD equipment to expand the pool of sleeping cars. More cars in service would mean more revenue overall and at least somewhat lower pricing at times. 

Also consider Neroden's comment here:


neroden said:


> The massive demand for Amtrak despite Amtrak's aggressive mismanagement and attempts to drive away customers, and despite the freight railroads' sabotage of on-time performance, shows how huge the underlying demand for passenger rail in the US is.



Increasing the capacity of the LD trains, and especially sleepers, would put a bit of pressure on Amtrak's management to at least give a hoot about retaining customers and treating them well. Right now they can offer horrible service and carry out cost-cutting atrocities like flex food with seeming impunity. People like me have basically quit riding because of the dining situation, but Amtrak seems not to care as long as they have enough other travelers willing to pay top dollar for sleeper space.


----------



## Michigan Mom

Been giving a lot - well, some - thought to the Fares discussion, having just returned from a trip... have to get a TR together... anyway, the fares are not unfair, in the sense that, as travel gets going, the trains are filling up, in coaches and sleeping cars alike. It was clear people are willing to pay more than the low bucket we paid. What's the dividing line? It's really in how you look at the pricing in exchange for what you expect - so for 3 people, a LSL trip from end to end was $932. I'd actually contend that was quite reasonable, given the included meals and a bed to sleep on, plus the convenience of city center to city center - no need for cab, rideshare, or long bus ride to and from an airport.


----------



## fdaley

railiner said:


> Originally on the Superliner's, they were called "Economy Bedrooms"...the larger ones with the bathrooms were called "Deluxe Bedrooms"...



And when they were first introduced, the Viewliner roomettes were called "compartments" to distinguish them from the heritage roomettes, which only had room for one person. I think the bedrooms were called "deluxe bedrooms" like their Superliner counterparts.


----------



## zephyr17

fdaley said:


> And when they were first introduced, the Viewliner roomettes were called "compartments" to distinguish them from the heritage roomettes, which only had room for one person. I think the bedrooms were called "deluxe bedrooms" like their Superliner counterparts.


Never knew that but that is funny, considering the traditional compartment was larger than the double bedroom and priced higher. Not a glorified section with worse beds and a door.


----------



## railiner

Some Amtrivia for all...
Which Amtrak cars contained the first "Economy Bedrooms"?


----------



## fdaley

railiner said:


> Some Amtrivia for all...
> Which Amtrak cars contained the first "Economy Bedrooms"?



I'm guessing it was something before the first Superliners, but I can't recall what.


----------



## Cal

railiner said:


> Some Amtrivia for all...
> Which Amtrak cars contained the first "Economy Bedrooms"?


Superliner I's? Not sure


----------



## railiner

Not them.
Any more guesses?


fdaley said:


> I'm guessing it was something before the first Superliners, but I can't recall what.


Yes, but which?


----------



## fdaley

railiner said:


> Not them.
> Any more guesses?
> 
> Yes, but which?


Surely not the slumbercoach double rooms?


----------



## railiner

fdaley said:


> Surely not the slumbercoach double rooms?


Not them, either...

There is a 'hint' in my post...


----------



## railiner

Goodnight, I'll be back tomorrow with the answer, if no one recalls their story...


----------



## johnmiller

MARC Rider said:


> Before you start getting too upset at Amtrak sleeper fares, check this out:
> 
> Travel by train to destinations around North America on your luxurious private train car - the Chapel Hill Railcar.
> 
> I saw this car tacked on to the end of the Silver Meteor as it was roaring through Princeton Junction last week and looked it up to find out more about it.
> 
> They will give you a nice 3-day trip between Cincy and DC "starting at $15,000" for "up to 6 people" (4 bedrooms and a sleeper sofa in the observation lounge). I'm sure you don't have to worry about getting served flex meals, either.  They'll plan your own bespoke rail tour across America to wherever Amtrak lets them, "starting at $6,000 a day." (And you know when they quote prices as "starting at ..." the most common price you'll end up paying is usually a good bit higher.) That means your 4-day trip across the country will be "starting at" $24,000, or $4,000 a person if you manage to get the right combination of couples and singles to fill up the car. It's also not clear if you have to pay to return the car back to base if your final destination isn't Cincinnati.
> 
> I also looked up the Royal Canadian Pacific, which will be offering public tours once they decide COVID is over. No prices being quoted yet, but some other stuff on the web suggests that a 4 day trip will be running $8,000.
> 
> It certainly makes the $400 Baltimore-Chicago trip I booked on the Lake Shore Limited look like a real bargain, even if I do have to eat Flex Meals. And that price includes business class from Baltimore to New York and a 2 hour layover at the new Metropolitan Lounge at the Moynihan Train Hall in New York.



Probably the ultimate apples-and-oranges analogy. Six people sharing an entire car versus all the people Amtrak fits into one of its cars. The prices will be a BIT different.


----------



## jloewen

Sidney said:


> I hear you. I've been doing cross country trips for over thirty years. It's getting to the point where I can't justify sleeper prices. However,there are low buckets of $505 and $530 one person senior roomette fares on the CZ and EB.,even though there aren't too many left.Eastern trains are the worst. Continued flex dining,no sightseer cars,obviously and high prices.


A week ago I booked a trip in Nov. from DC to IND (on the Cardinal), then flying (!) to O'Hare, then CHI to Ann Arbor, then Ann Arbor via TOL back to DC (on the Capital Ltd.) Costs for the two overnites: WAS-IND, $261.40; AA-WAS $270. Then I needed to make a change, converting the outbound to WAS to South Bend on the Capital. That caused an increase of about $140 as I recall. But when I switched to a day earlier, the price went back down. Ironically, on both days I got roomette #2, in the center of the car, probably indicating a demand of zero to that point, but obviously the Fri. departure was still a higher bucket than the Th. departure. Prices still were not bad, tho, no?
For the record, I shall rent a car (Enterprise) at the South Bend station, drive to speaking events in Plymouth and Indianapolis, IN, then wind up in Chicago. I eliminated the flight.
I thought it had been ironic that the only use of an airplane had been the SHORTEST leg of my complex trip. Now it's just "trains and automobile," and oh yes, an Amtrak bus/limo/whatever, from AA down to TOL.


----------



## Ferroequinologist

MARC Rider said:


> Before you start getting too upset at Amtrak sleeper fares, check this out:
> 
> Travel by train to destinations around North America on your luxurious private train car - the Chapel Hill Railcar.
> 
> I saw this car tacked on to the end of the Silver Meteor as it was roaring through Princeton Junction last week and looked it up to find out more about it.
> 
> They will give you a nice 3-day trip between Cincy and DC "starting at $15,000" for "up to 6 people" (4 bedrooms and a sleeper sofa in the observation lounge). I'm sure you don't have to worry about getting served flex meals, either.  They'll plan your own bespoke rail tour across America to wherever Amtrak lets them, "starting at $6,000 a day." (And you know when they quote prices as "starting at ..." the most common price you'll end up paying is usually a good bit higher.) That means your 4-day trip across the country will be "starting at" $24,000, or $4,000 a person if you manage to get the right combination of couples and singles to fill up the car. It's also not clear if you have to pay to return the car back to base if your final destination isn't Cincinnati.
> 
> I also looked up the Royal Canadian Pacific, which will be offering public tours once they decide COVID is over. No prices being quoted yet, but some other stuff on the web suggests that a 4 day trip will be running $8,000.
> 
> It certainly makes the $400 Baltimore-Chicago trip I booked on the Lake Shore Limited look like a real bargain, even if I do have to eat Flex Meals. And that price includes business class from Baltimore to New York and a 2 hour layover at the new Metropolitan Lounge at the Moynihan Train Hall in New York.



I can't see that this is relevant. This is a niche operation serving a tiny group of people and I very much doubt that it can be sustained. Amtrak's mission is not to serve a tiny elite.


----------



## jiml

railiner said:


> Goodnight, I'll be back tomorrow with the answer, if no one recalls their story...


Possibly the two Amfleet coaches that were modified with sleeper modules and used on the "Hilltopper" and a couple of other trains?


----------



## jruff001

> I'm curious about those who think that sleepers should be priced at a price point that most Americans are willing and able to pay--which presumably would vastly increase the number of people trying to book sleepers, while the number of actual sleepers available would not increase. Would there be a lottery to determine who the lucky winners would be? (And what would prevent arbitrage--people playing the Amtrak lottery so as to sell their 'lucky' tickets at a profit to those not so lucky in the lottery?)


EXACTLY!!!

How it would play out would be like getting a low-number boarding pass on Southwest Airlines if you are not A-List or didn't pay extra for Early Bird Check-In: those who are near a computer the minute a train opens for booking on amtrak.com would snag all the rooms. The rest of us would be out of luck. And Amtrak would leave a lot of money on the table.


----------



## MARC Rider

Ferroequinologist said:


> I can't see that this is relevant. This is a niche operation serving a tiny group of people and I very much doubt that it can be sustained. Amtrak's mission is not to serve a tiny elite.


Well, some people think that long-distance premium-class train service is a "niche operation," and not Amtrak's primary mission. Long distance service has been mandated by Congress to provide mobility for rural areas, not focus on luxury-demanding travelers who want to cross the country. You're right that Amtrak's mission is not to serve a tiny elite, and you've just given an argument for Amtrak completely discontinuing sleeper and dining services.


----------



## MARC Rider

johnmiller said:


> Probably the ultimate apples-and-oranges analogy. Six people sharing an entire car versus all the people Amtrak fits into one of its cars. The prices will be a BIT different.


Yeah, but Amtrak has to run their cars every day (or every 3 days for some train), and there are days when Amtrak's rooms are empty. The private car only runs when it has customers. So Amtrak's expenses may be just as great.

But the real point is, if you want a railroad sleeper experience, private cars or other luxury operations are the only other alternative (as long as we're stuck in the United States) to Amtrak, and they're a LOT more expensive than even Amtrak high-bucket fares. Do you have any public policy reason why taxpayer money should be used to subsidize premium service for the long-distance trains so the fares can be what you think they should be? The only reason Amtrak runs the premium classes is as a cash cow to cross-subsidize the coach service, which does have a public policy value.


----------



## Ferroequinologist

MARC Rider said:


> Well, some people think that long-distance premium-class train service is a "niche operation," and not Amtrak's primary mission. Long distance service has been mandated by Congress to provide mobility for rural areas, not focus on luxury-demanding travelers who want to cross the country. You're right that Amtrak's mission is not to serve a tiny elite, and you've just given an argument for Amtrak completely discontinuing sleeper and dining services.



I don't think Amtrak's sleeping car service can be considered luxurious - and they_ have_ discontinued dining-cars. While it is not Amtrak's mission to run Orient Express style luxury trains, it is not their mission to provide barebones service. Sleeping cars should be more expensive than coach travel but priced within reach of a far larger segment of the population than is the case now.


----------



## Ferroequinologist

MARC Rider said:


> Yeah, but Amtrak has to run their cars every day (or every 3 days for some train), and there are days when Amtrak's rooms are empty. The private car only runs when it has customers. So Amtrak's expenses may be just as great.
> 
> But the real point is, if you want a railroad sleeper experience, private cars or other luxury operations are the only other alternative (as long as we're stuck in the United States) to Amtrak, and they're a LOT more expensive than even Amtrak high-bucket fares. Do you have any public policy reason why taxpayer money should be used to subsidize premium service for the long-distance trains so the fares can be what you think they should be? The only reason Amtrak runs the premium classes is as a cash cow to cross-subsidize the coach service, which does have a public policy value.



I suppose it has something to do with what standards can be considered reasonable in a developed nation. There are lots of services that the government provides that are not absolutely critical but that improve the lives of citizens.


----------



## fdaley

MARC Rider said:


> Long distance service has been mandated by Congress to provide mobility for rural areas, not focus on luxury-demanding travelers who want to cross the country.



Who's demanding luxury? Edible food that's put on a plate, rather than served in its freezer tub, is not luxury. Amtrak's threadbare blue blankets are not luxury. We are a long, long way from luxury.


----------



## MARC Rider

fdaley said:


> Who's demanding luxury? Edible food that's put on a plate, rather than served in its freezer tub, is not luxury. Amtrak's threadbare blue blankets are not luxury. We are a long, long way from luxury.


1. The food, while it could be better, is perfectly edible.
2. By serving food in its original packaging, they're able to cut back on staff, and thus improve the bottom line. And it doesn't make any difference to the diner, unless they're picky and insist on white glove service, in which case, try the Rocky Mountaineer for multiple times the price, and it doesn't have sleeping cars. OK, maybe also the Alaska Railroad, they have traditional dining cars, too, but they don't have sleepers, and you need an 8 hour flight to get to Alaska in the first place (unless you live there.)
3. The blankets, while a bit old, are not "threadbare." They keep me perfectly worn. More importantly, the sheets are always fresh.

The main point is that people are filling up the sleepers at the current service level at the current (high) fares. The only alternative to Amtrak for an overnight rail experience until foreign travel becomes practical again is a luxury rail tour costing far more money and which doesn't go to as many places as Amtrak does.


----------



## MARC Rider

Ferroequinologist said:


> I suppose it has something to do with what standards can be considered reasonable in a developed nation. There are lots of services that the government provides that are not absolutely critical but that improve the lives of citizens.


Some people might argue about the United States being a "developed nation."  (Well, at least some people might argue that we've been a banana republic since at least 2017, and we've been showing banana republic dysfunctions for at least 20 years before that.)

But then again, in undeveloped nations, real banana republics, the transport system for the elite can have very high service standards for relatively low fares. That's because the workers, of course, are poorly paid, and, in any event, the service is really only for the elite and a few well-off tourists. 

Amtrak sleeper service is really a niche market. And the experience is more about riding the train, not having your whims catered to by a servant. In some ways, we should curse George Pullman for his business model of trying to make the ride in his sleeping cars the equivalent of a stay in a grand hotel. He was able to pull it off because he had lots of newly freed slaves available who were willing to work for peanuts and knew how to be docile.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

MARC Rider said:


> The main point is that people are filling up the sleepers at the current service level at the current (high) fares. The only alternative to Amtrak for an overnight rail experience until foreign travel becomes practical again is a luxury rail tour costing far more money and which doesn't go to as many places as Amtrak does.


Depending on the train up to half of the sleeper rooms are apparently filled/blocked by Amtrak staff rather than customers and there are several US airlines ready to take every sleeper customer Amtrak is willing to lose over this. The people I feel bad for are the folks who cannot fly or drive and are stuck with Amtrak no matter what they do.



MARC Rider said:


> Amtrak sleeper service is really a niche market. And the experience is more about riding the train, not having your whims catered to by a servant. In some ways, we should curse George Pullman for his business model of trying to make the ride in his sleeping cars the equivalent of a stay in a grand hotel. He was able to pull it off because he had lots of newly freed slaves available who were willing to work for peanuts and knew how to be docile.


Your repeated attempts to shame people for wanting better service are getting old.


----------



## jimdex

dlagrua said:


> Yes sleeper fares can be crazy high. Either they will keep selling at the current prices, will create new first class air travelers from long time loyal Amtrak travelers (who will fly fraction of the sleeper price) , or it may collapse the LD service. Where is the comment from the Rail Passengers Association on their take on this?


Either demand for sleeper space will remain high, in which case Amtrak -- which needs every penny it can get -- will have no incentive to lower the fares. Or demand for sleeper space will fall, forcing Amtrak to lower sleeper fares. My bet would be that demand will fall as we get into the post-Covid era, and travelers regain confidence in flying or riding in coaches.


----------



## Sidney

MARC Rider said:


> 1. The food, while it could be better, is perfectly edible.
> 2. By serving food in its original packaging, they're able to cut back on staff, and thus improve the bottom line. And it doesn't make any difference to the diner, unless they're picky and insist on white glove service, in which case, try the Rocky Mountaineer for multiple times the price, and it doesn't have sleeping cars. OK, maybe also the Alaska Railroad, they have traditional dining cars, too, but they don't have sleepers, and you need an 8 hour flight to get to Alaska in the first place (unless you live there.)
> 3. The blankets, while a bit old, are not "threadbare." They keep me perfectly worn. More importantly, the sheets are always fresh.
> 
> The main point is that people are filling up the sleepers at the current service level at the current (high) fares. The only alternative to Amtrak for an overnight rail experience until foreign travel becomes practical again is a luxury rail tour costing far more money and which doesn't go to as many places as Amtrak does.


Your #1 point..the food is barely adequate at best. Traditional dining is supposed to return July 1 hopefully. After that the point will be moot. Sadly it is only the Western trains. All of the Eastern trains are stuck with it. At the price people are paying for sleepers the food should be better with options for sandwiches and healthier options.

I just got off the Texas Eagle. I was on since Friday night. I never want to see a flex meal again. I had a hamsteak and eggs at Phlllipes in LA. Compared to what I was being served on the train,this felt like a five star gourmet .meal





m


----------



## fdaley

MARC Rider said:


> 1. The food, while it could be better, is perfectly edible.
> 2. By serving food in its original packaging, they're able to cut back on staff, and thus improve the bottom line. And it doesn't make any difference to the diner, unless they're picky and insist on white glove service, in which case, try the Rocky Mountaineer for multiple times the price, and it doesn't have sleeping cars. OK, maybe also the Alaska Railroad, they have traditional dining cars, too, but they don't have sleepers, and you need an 8 hour flight to get to Alaska in the first place (unless you live there.)
> 3. The blankets, while a bit old, are not "threadbare." They keep me perfectly worn. More importantly, the sheets are always fresh.
> 
> The main point is that people are filling up the sleepers at the current service level at the current (high) fares. The only alternative to Amtrak for an overnight rail experience until foreign travel becomes practical again is a luxury rail tour costing far more money and which doesn't go to as many places as Amtrak does.



I don't think that by wanting something better than what Amtrak is now offering, I'm "insisting on white glove service." And I cannot recall ever receiving "white glove service" in 40-plus years of riding Amtrak LD trains. If people are filling up the sleepers at Amtrak's current pricing and service levels, more power to them. Certainly on the routes with flex "dining," I no longer see value for price paid and have no desire to ride. I'd rather drive, fly or stay home. If traditional dining returns to the western trains, I'll probably ride them, though less often than in the past, because of the hassle of figuring out how to get from the Northeast to Chicago first. 

Nearly all of my rail travel is ultimately to get from A to B, albeit sometimes by roundabout routing, so I am unlikely to take the Rocky Mountaineer or Alaska Railroad just for the experience. I've ridden Via Rail's Canadian and Ocean many times, and found both to be far superior to any Amtrak service even before Amtrak's recent downgrades, so I'll surely use them again whenever the border reopens.


----------



## fdaley

MARC Rider said:


> Amtrak sleeper service is really a niche market. And the experience is more about riding the train, not having your whims catered to by a servant. In some ways, we should curse George Pullman for his business model of trying to make the ride in his sleeping cars the equivalent of a stay in a grand hotel.



And I don't think that expecting to be treated decently at a restaurant, hotel or other hospitality business is the same as expecting to "have your whims catered to by a servant." Like it or not, Amtrak is in the hospitality industry as well as the transportation business.


----------



## Amtrak709

I decided that I would throw my "2 cents worth" in the this discussion of outrageous sleeping car fares.
An intense railfan my entire 73 years of life; logged about 300,000 miles on the rails since the 1960's; and a strong supporter
of Amtrak for 50 years (it is the only rail we've got). My preference has already been a sleeping car bedroom. My initial shock was pricing a bedroom ATN-NYP-ATN just to ride and to see the new Moynihan Train Hall in New York ($2100 round trip) I did book and buy a roomette at $792.20 round trip for June 2021 (low bucket fare I think with senior discount).
REAL SHOCK VALUE: Had always wanted to be on the train Christmas Day so on 24 December 2015, my wife and I boarded the Empire Builder CHI-SEA. My wife and I had a bedroom SUITE (booked D and E). The ticket was $1,218.00. I priced that trip "if we should have wanted to go THIS Christmas" and it priced at: $4,628.00. 
I am not sure what the point of all this may be but I post this just for discussion. Even as much as I love being on the trains, would NOT pay $4000+ under any circumstances.


----------



## Sidney

There are many schools of thought on these outrageous sleeper prices. Some say Amtrak should charge as much as someone would pay. If that means $4000 r/t ,so be it. Others,including myself think Amtrak is pricing sleepers out of the comfort range of average people. When I see roomettes already priced at well over $1000 on the SW Chief for next April,my first thought is how can these be booked that much so far in advance?

I have been riding Amtrak for over three decades taking cross country and circle trips every year. If the prices remain this high,I just won't go. I am sure many people here agree with me.


----------



## Qapla

It would seem like making the tickets "non-transferable" would curb people from "snagging all the rooms" if they could not sell them to anyone ... unless the person they sell them to has their exact same name, phone number and birthdate


----------



## zephyr17

If Amtrak can largely fill its accommodations using its current yield management methods, more power to them. It maximizes much needed revenue.

If they are not nearly full, they are wasting a perishable commodity by setting prices too high, thereby losing revenue and so need to improve their yield management practices.

There is no morality here. No one has a right to a roomette. Amtrak is selling inventory, they are entitled to maximize the yield on that inventory.

I always search for lower bucket fares and usually manage to get them. I refuse to pay high bucket fares and will turn to other alternatives or not travel. I am willing to pay a substantial premium over airfare to take the train, but I have my limits. If Amtrak ultimately prices me out, but maintains high load factors, I will accept that. There are things I can't afford, and that is a simple fact of life. If they price me out but are dispatching trains with large numbers of empty rooms, I will be pissed.

The win win solution here is to increase the supply to more closely meet demand. That would result in lower sleeper fares while increasing revenue. While acquiring sleeping cars incur a high capital costs, those costs ought to amortized over the life of the cars, which can be measured in decades. There are higher incremental costs to running additional cars, but the additional revenue also helps cover a greater portion of high fixed costs.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Sidney said:


> There are many schools of thought on these outrageous sleeper prices. Some say Amtrak should charge as much as someone would pay. If that means $4000 r/t ,so be it. Others,including myself think Amtrak is pricing sleepers out of the comfort range of average people. When I see roomettes already priced at well over $1000 on the SW Chief for next April,my first thought is how can these be booked that much so far in advance?
> 
> I have been riding Amtrak for over three decades taking cross country and circle trips every year. If the prices remain this high,I just won't go. I am sure many people here agree with me.


Constantly telling us on AU is not going to make Amtrak change the pricing, improve the food, add back the SSL, etc. All it does is irritate your fellow train lovers.


----------



## railiner

jiml said:


> Possibly the two Amfleet coaches that were modified with sleeper modules and used on the "Hilltopper" and a couple of other trains?


That's it, except not on the "Hilltopper". Amfleet I 22901, and 22902 were 60 seaters that were rebuilt with a pair of prototype Superliner Economy Bedroom modules at one end. They were used on the Washington-Parkersburg-Cincinnati "Shenandoah" overnight train in the late '70's. Wags called them "Ampads"....


----------



## Ryan

Sidney said:


> I have been riding Amtrak for over three decades taking cross country and circle trips every year. If the prices remain this high,I just won't go. I am sure many people here agree with me.


If you had a dollar for every time you repeated this over and over, you'd be able to afford those high fares.


----------



## Ryan

What purported problem would this solve?


----------



## Sidney

OK Got the message.


----------



## zephyr17

My understanding is they've stopped tour companies from grabbing large blocks of rooms early on without having to pay for them up front, which was distorting the yield management. Then when it came time to pay (60 days out? 90? I don't recall), they'd release the unsold ones. They can still grab them, but now they either have pay for them upfront, or have to pay for them much earlier or release them. Seaboard92 may have more and better info on that.

That was the only example of an entity "snagging all the rooms" that I knew of.

Oh, and tickets are already non-transferable. They just don't check IDs much to enforce it.


----------



## jiml

railiner said:


> That's it, except not on the "Hilltopper". Amfleet I 22901, and 22902 were 60 seaters that were rebuilt with a pair of prototype Superliner Economy Bedroom modules at one end. They were used on the Washington-Parkersburg-Cincinnati "Shenandoah" overnight train in the late '70's. Wags called them "Ampads"....


Imagine how useful those would be today. Start with the NEC overnight...


----------



## flitcraft

Qapla said:


> It would seem like making the tickets "non-transferable" would curb people from "snagging all the rooms" if they could not sell them to anyone ... unless the person they sell them to has their exact same name, phone number and birthdate


Well, that would require that they collect such information--which based on my experience, they don't. In fact, I have never even been asked to show proof of age to justify my senior discount--let only phone number and date of birth to verify my identity. Now that you mention it, though, I should be offended that the conductors haven't asked me for proof that I qualify as a senior.


----------



## flitcraft

MARC Rider said:


> The food, while it could be better, is perfectly edible.
> 2. By serving food in its original packaging, they're able to cut back on staff, and thus improve the bottom line. And it doesn't make any difference to the diner, unless they're picky and insist on white glove service,


I'm reminded of a lawsuit settlement compliance inspection I was a part of as a young whippersnapper, of the food served at Mississippi's Parchman prison, which I would concur, could have (very much) been better, but was perfectly edible--at least in the sense that you wouldn't die or even get seriously ill from consuming it.  

And on the second point, I wouldn't patronize a place that served its food in the original packaging--and I hope that if I ever am unlucky enough to be served Amstew due to a problem that it isn't served in its original tin can!

The thing is, no one is asking for luxurious food or plating here. Just the kind of quality you would expect at a diner or low-end chain restaurant. For the price of bedrooms and roomettes, I don't think that keeping up with Denny's or a greasy spoon diner is asking too much, myself.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

flitcraft said:


> Now that you mention it, though, I should be offended that the conductors haven't asked me for proof that I qualify as a senior.


Yeah. When I first started asking for senior meals/discounts I wondered if I should feel insulted if they didn’t question me. But, hey, I was saving money, so insult me all you want.


----------



## jis

Back when they first started including food in the ticket price, I thought it was a horrible idea, but I was told that without doing so there would not be any Diner service. Well apparently even after doing so there is only very marginal Diner service, and additionally all additional revenue from Coach passengers have been dropped completely. Go figure!

Maybe it is time to decouple food from the fare and charge for food commensurate with the quality of service provided in the Diner. Those that do not wish to partake in the luxury of Diner can fend for themselves for food from the Cafe at Cafe prices as was the way before this complication was added.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Planes are filling up and tickets are very expensive


Americans making summer vacation plans are about to find airfare costs are near or even above pre-pandemic levels, according to the nation's major airlines.




www.cnn.com


----------



## Ryan

The airlines are obviously conspiring to put themselves out of business. Clearly.


----------



## dlagrua

jruff001 said:


> I don't agree with that. Congress wants to see what looks like Amtrak "making money" (or at least losing less) and operating like a business. THAT is what will keep Amtrak funding going, not the perception that it is a bottomless money pit that can never hope to make even an operating profit.


Can you name any form of government transportation that is making money? I thought public transportation was there to serve the American public. No form of government makes money so why should Amtrak be the exception?


----------



## Mailliw

Ferroequinologist said:


> I find it's generally too warm including in the sleepers. I like it 70 F but Amtrak seems to set the temp around 75 F or higher


Well at least in a roomette you can strip naked; I imagine that's frowned upon in coach regardless if you're wearing a mask or not.


----------



## joelkfla

Mailliw said:


> Well at least in a roomette you can strip naked; I imagine that's frowned upon in coach regardless if you're wearing a mask or not.


Please -- put a towel on the seat.


----------



## Bob Dylan

caravanman said:


> Ah, those fabled bedrooms... I have heard of them, passed by them, but sadly, even in the good old days, never snagged one!
> Just a thought, what were "roomettes" called previously, I seem to remember the term "roomette" appearing only in the last 15 years?


ECONOMY BEDROOMS!


----------



## Cal

Bob Dylan said:


> ECONOMY BEDROOMS!


Hey, I haven't seen you on here in a little bit. Welcome back


----------



## JayPea

AmtrakBlue said:


> Constantly telling us on AU is not going to make Amtrak change the pricing, improve the food, add back the SSL, etc. All it does is irritate your fellow train lovers.



A-double-Men!!!!


----------



## jiml

jis said:


> Back when they first started including food in the ticket price, I thought it was a horrible idea, but I was told that without doing so there would not be any Diner service. Well apparently even after doing so there is only very marginal Diner service, and additionally all additional revenue from Coach passengers have been dropped completely. Go figure!
> 
> Maybe it is time to decouple food from the fare and charge for food commensurate with the quality of service provided in the Diner. Those that do not wish to partake in the luxury of Diner can fend for themselves for food from the Cafe at Cafe prices as was the way before this complication was added.


Although it's a good idea, doesn't that return the "vicious circle" argument that more exclusivity and higher prices could bring lower patronage making having a diner harder to justify - the reason meals were included? If you're going "experiential" the whole product would have to be upgraded - not just the diner.


----------



## jis

To go into the background, a little rambling tour of the territory is perhaps in order, so here goes....

You see, I don't care about "experiential" much. As long as a Sleeper is made available without the "experience" at a lower cost, I am all for the "experiential" for those that need it at whatever they need to be charged for the experience.  As long as it was available, I took the Slumbercoach which is the sort of thing I need mostly, and it did not add the cost of the experiential since meals were not included in the fare for it. Sadly they went down with the potty fiasco.

As far as I am concerned the way Sleeper service fares are structured these days, it is a means for the likes of me to subsidize the "experiential" for those who are unwilling to bear the cost of their experience. I know this is probably not a popular position specially in a group tilting "experiential". But hey it takes one of each kind to make this world.

The reality though, is that LD passenger service is so minuscule and Sleeper within that even more so, that it is probably unrealistic to partition the market further with myriads of levels of service, so in practical terms perhaps this is all that is realistically possible. The cost of not having a system that is not really large enough to be quite viable yet, and which has failed to keep pace with just the population growth in terms of ridership. So the train lovers like me would now basically have a train at virtually any price. At least I certainly behave that way! 

Historically, after the fares were raised by very significant amounts ostensibly to cover meals, the transfer rules were set up such that provably a larger proportion of the additional fare (which was supposed to be for covering meals) was plowed back into the transportation side, and an inadequate amount was assigned to the F&B side to sustain the Diners (that is how we got where we are). They could have transferred a fixed proportion of the fare to F&B and F&B would have gotten more money overall if done right. Instead they decided the complex method of actually transferring only the menu price of actual food consumed, as if people eating cheaper items would require fewer OBS personnel to serve them. The whole thing was a typical Amtrak and DOT/Volpe Center engineered cockup. At the end of the day all of this is direct consequence of making "profit" more important than "service", which has been Amtrak's Achilles heel since day 1.


----------



## jiml

I mostly agree with everything you just said and don't necessarily favor experiential over quality basic service. My counterpoint to your paid diner suggestion (which I also basically agree with) was that when included dining came in Amtrak didn't have much else to offer. By including decent food, pleasantly served, they provided a "carrot" for the fact they were operating ancient inherited equipment. Perhaps the time to return to paid dining was when the Superliners were relatively new and provided a better passenger experience. To revert to paid dining right now when things are a little "worn" schedules are slipping and amenities like lounges are disappearing might not achieve the ideal result. If you tell someone they're going to have to pay $50 for a steak before returning to a slightly shabby room on a 6-hour late train for $1000+, they may decide to opt for cafe food and the diner will face two choices - higher prices or discontinuance.


----------



## jis

So instead we have many people entirely opting out of using Amtrak. I guess there are no good choices here. It is a choice between bad and worse. Sadly.

However, when one is so capacity constrained that one can afford to lose significant amount of clientele simply because there is no inventory to accommodate them anyway, it probably makes sense to focus on the clientele who has the deepest pockets. That is what Amtrak is doing and it is logical if "profit over service" is our motto. Improve the service just enough to keep the deep pockets giving and then milk them for all they are worth. As I said before, that includes saps like me who would pay almost any price to ride in basic comfort, even if the rest of the bells and whistles ostensibly paid for by the very high fares are of little interest.

And then it becomes a bourgeois service as the masses rise in revolt...


----------



## Ryan

dlagrua said:


> why should Amtrak be the exception



Because Congress said so?



lordsigma said:


> FYI The bid upgrade program is now available for sleepers.


That's impossible. I was assured that Amtrak's claim that it was coming soon was just more lies because they hate LD service and want to kill it.


----------



## uncleboots

I paid 300 Dollars for a Roomete for the Westbound Chief Chicago to LA on 10/2. I was fortunate enough to transfer Chioce Hotel Points to Amtrak Rewards which knocked the price down to $300.


----------



## dlagrua

AmtrakBlue said:


> Planes are filling up and tickets are very expensive
> 
> 
> Americans making summer vacation plans are about to find airfare costs are near or even above pre-pandemic levels, according to the nation's major airlines.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com


If that is the case then why are some route Amtrak LD sleeper fares 3-5X that of first class air? Government owned pubic transportation systems hardly ever, if ever make a profit and are supposed to be there to serve the Amercan public. Should we now look at Amtrak as being a corporation chartered to utilize cutthroat pricing to stay in business? If so let them privatize, put them on the stock exchange and let them go at it.


----------



## Barb Stout

uncleboots said:


> I paid 300 Dollars for a Roomete for the Westbound Chief Chicago to LA on 10/2. I was fortunate enough to transfer Chioce Hotel Points to Amtrak Rewards which knocked the price down to $300.


Hmm. Is this something new or a special deal? A few years ago I transferred some Hilton points to AGR, but didn't get any big (or small) discount on my ticket prices for doing so.


----------



## hlcteacher

if ld service is so "minuscle" how come i can't book a ld seat when i want to travel? always sold out so i end up taking a bus (or flying)-pre-covid!!!


----------



## jis

hlcteacher said:


> if ld service is so "minuscle" how come i can't book a ld seat when i want to travel? always sold out so i end up taking a bus (or flying)-pre-covid!!!


It is precisely because it is minuscule due to inadequate funding that you cannot get a toehold into the available inventory. It could be much bigger but that would require significant capital investment which there is at present a lack of desire as far as LD service goes, evidently. It is the way it is because of collective political decisions based on dogmas currently in fashion, not because there is something inherent governed by laws of Physics or something like that.

Demand far outstrips the supply that the nation is willing to bear the initial cost of. Given those consciously chosen constraints by the powers that be, the service remain teetering on the verge of non-viability. Adequately funded it could be quite vibrant and the fare equations and viablity of the system across the board could all change in a positive way.


----------



## Ryan

dlagrua said:


> Should we now look at Amtrak as being a corporation chartered to utilize cutthroat pricing to stay in business?


Once more, in hopes that you will understand it this time.



Congress said:


> § 700.2 Organization and functioning of Amtrak.
> The creation of the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (“Amtrak”) was authorized by the Rail Passenger Service Act, as amended, 84 Stat. 1327, 45 U.S.C. 541 et seq. (“the Act”). *The Act requires that Amtrak be operated and managed as a for-profit corporation*, that it be incorporated under the District of Columbia Business Corporation Act, and subject to the provisions of that statute to the extent not inconsistent with the Act, and that it provide a balanced transportation system by developing, operating, and improving intercity rail passenger service. *The Act also states that Amtrak will not be an agency or establishment of the United States Government. *


----------



## jis

Ryan said:


> Once more, in hopes that you will understand it this time.


It maybe a fools errand @Ryan


----------



## Ryan

Fortunately, many people already think I am a fool.


----------



## lrh442

Fool or not , Ryan is absolutely correct that Amtrak is, by charter, required to be operated and managed as a for-profit corporation (regardless of whether we think that's appropriate or not).

The interesting question is whether the current high sleeper prices are straying into price-gouging territory. A for-profit enterprise will certainly maximize short-term revenue/profits _up to a point_ , but will carefully avoid running prices so high that they chase off future customers or invite federal scrutiny of their pricing practices. 

If ultra-high prices are alienating future customers, or jeopardizing government funding by perpetuating the perception that Amtrak is a land cruise for the wealthy, then one can make the case that they are not fulfilling their obligation to operate as a for-profit enterprise (where it is implicit that the obligation is to operate as a _rational_ for-profit enterprise). 

If neither situation applies, then Amtrak should charge what the market will bear and damn the torpedoes.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Ryan said:


> Fortunately, many people already think I am a fool.


Redacted


----------



## uncleboots

Barb Stout said:


> Hmm. Is this something new or a special deal? A few years ago I transferred some Hilton points to AGR, but didn't get any big (or small) discount on my ticket prices for doing so.


Yeah! Choice Hotels have a program where you can transfer points to Amtrak Rewards. It’s worth checking into.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

uncleboots said:


> Yeah! Choice Hotels have a program where you can transfer points to Amtrak Rewards. It’s worth checking into.


She was asking about your “knocked the price down”. How did using points knock the price down? Did you split the trip up so you could use points on one leg and $$$ on the other leg?


----------



## neroden

jis said:


> Back when they first started including food in the ticket price, I thought it was a horrible idea, but I was told that without doing so there would not be any Diner service. Well apparently even after doing so there is only very marginal Diner service, and additionally all additional revenue from Coach passengers have been dropped completely. Go figure!
> 
> Maybe it is time to decouple food from the fare and charge for food commensurate with the quality of service provided in the Diner. Those that do not wish to partake in the luxury of Diner can fend for themselves for food from the Cafe at Cafe prices as was the way before this complication was added.


I suppose I should repeat my complaint about the degradation of the cafe menu in the 2018-2019 timeframe. It was rather good for a few years before that.


----------



## neroden

zephyr17 said:


> The win win solution here is to increase the supply to more closely meet demand. That would result in lower sleeper fares while increasing revenue. While acquiring sleeping cars incur a high capital costs, those costs ought to amortized over the life of the cars, which can be measured in decades. There are higher incremental costs to running additional cars, but the additional revenue also helps cover a greater portion of high fixed costs.



Indeed -- order more sleepers! Lots more!


----------



## Bonser

Why have bedroom costs gone astronomically up for the summer and fall 2021? Cross country, NYP-SFC, that used to be from $1250 to $2200, now is priced $2900-$3900. I've taken this trip about 8 times in the past 7 years and the jump from roomette to bedroom is often double. And the roomette cost now equals or exceeds the old bedroom price. Is all this just supply and demand? Is the relative inaccessibility to Canada and limited service of ViaRail contributing to this? Or is it a new Amtrak LD policy to discourage ridership? Thanks for any insight.


MODERATOR NOTE: 2 threads on similar topics (high prices on SWC roomettes and high prices on bedrooms) have been merged and the thread title edited.


----------



## railiner

Supply and Demand is my guess. I don't believe in any "conspiracy theories" to kill Long Distance. At least from within the Company....


----------



## Devil's Advocate

My post below is more succinct. ⬇


----------



## dlagrua

We've seen prices for sleepers even higher than mentioned by Tom like $6500 Bedroom coast to coast R/T. Amtrak may come to realize that they are not the only transportation service choice available or will they? 
We will gladly continue to support Amtrak at 2X the price of First Class Air but not a penny more. I believe that is generous enough of us. Due to the exorbitant sleeper prices this year will be flying first class air on our August trip. As for the theory that the Amtrak BOD is trying to kill the LD service they already lost $3200 of our business and the airlines picked up $1600. There must be more that have been priced out. Is there a plan to kill LD sleeper service? It sure seems like it right now but a watch to see if the bedrooms/roomettes are really selling out might tell the story.


----------



## Sidney

Simple. If people are willing to pay sky high prices for sleepers,Amtrak will charge it.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

Sidney said:


> Simple. If people are willing to pay sky high prices for sleepers,Amtrak will charge it.


If so many are willing to pay sky high prices why did Amtrak feel the need to implement a new bidding process for coach customers? Is there any proof that the same number of rooms are being sold as before? Seems to me that supply is constrained and Amtrak is trying to sell fewer rooms at twice the price to cover the shortfall. When routine sleeper travelers balk at the new prices Amtrak simply dumps the rooms on random passengers at a steep discount just before departure.


----------



## coventry801

Sleeper price for the second half of 2021 is an insanity.

I guess I will pass LD train travel for the rest of the year. Glad I did multiple coast to coast sleeper trip during 2020 and first half of 2021.


----------



## Tlcooper93

I'm looking to take a sleeper on the silver star/meteor June 26th from Tampa to NYP, and it seems that sleeper prices have hit a "reasonable," point at $631. I guess occasionally there is a sweet spot for fares sometime closer to the departure date. Much less than buisness class for the same date on any legacy airline.


----------



## zephyr17

Tlcooper93 said:


> I'm looking to take a sleeper on the silver star/meteor June 26th from Tampa to NYP, and it seems that sleeper prices have hit a "reasonable," point at $631. I guess occasionally there is a sweet spot for fares sometime closer to the departure date. Much less than buisness class for the same date on any legacy airline.


That looks to be middle bucket. Amtrak's yield management will reallocate inventory if anticipated demand appears not to be materializing.


----------



## Cal

dlagrua said:


> It sure seems like it right now but a watch to see if the bedrooms/roomettes are really selling out might tell the story.


Tonight's 422 out of LA is sold out on rooms, it says 90% full. Did full route.

Chief shows also 90% full, but also says 4 roomettes, 2 FB's, and 3 bedrooms left at this price. 


Checked July 14th, same thing..

Eagle is sold out in rooms, shows 50% full. 

Chief shows 60% full, 2 FB's left, 2 bedrooms left. Nothing about roomettes, so I'm assuming not too many are sold yet.


----------



## jis

I am not sure those percentage full things apply to Sleepers at all. I think they are mostly about Coaches, or maybe just aggregate of the entire capacity irrespective of class.


----------



## Cal

jis said:


> I am not sure those percentage full things apply to Sleepers at all. I think they are mostly about Coaches, or maybe just aggregate of the entire capacity irrespective of class.


I don't think they include sleepers either. I did a Sunset search SAS-NOL, rooms were full but coach was well under 50% (can't remember exact number, I think it was 10%).


----------



## Amtrak709

As a follow up to my previous post I guess I should feel fortunate (but for some reason I don't) to have booked a roomette on the Crescent ATN-NYP-ATN on 06/10/2021 for $392.00 each way (senior fare + roomette). Today my trip on the same train same departure date is $1142 one way (now I will admit that is for an accessible bedroom). Admittedly, I would love to have that accessible bedroom (it is a great accommodation), but for $1142 one way--I think NOT.


----------



## Michigan Mom

Well, I'm deep into summer trip planning. I'm finding higher rates for everything - airfare, hotels, car rentals.


----------



## Qapla

It's funny ... in Florida, when there is a hurricane, there are "price gauging" laws that prevent the overly inflated prices that used to result from the disaster - but, with this disaster (COVID) the price gouging protection seems to have "gone out the window". Look at the prices for lumber, steel, travel and other things that have increased by what would be called "price gouging" had the price increase come as a result of a hurricane.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Michigan Mom said:


> Well, I'm deep into summer trip planning. I'm finding higher rates for everything - airfare, hotels, car rentals.


Supply and Demand @ work, aka Greed!!!


----------



## railiner




----------



## AmtrakBlue

Qapla said:


> It's funny ... in Florida, when there is a hurricane, there are "price gauging" laws that prevent the overly inflated prices that used to result from the disaster - but, with this disaster (COVID) the price gouging protection seems to have "gone out the window". Look at the prices for lumber, steel, travel and other things that have increased by what would be called "price gouging" had the price increase come as a result of a hurricane.


Is it price gouging or is it supply & demand. Low supply of lumber, etc due to COVID and high demand because people want new homes (aka, get out of the big cities).


----------



## Qapla

The same could be said of the damage caused by a hurricane - ice is in short supply with high demand as is plywood and other things - but the law prohibits the type of price gouging that is happening with the COVID disaster ...

Call it what you will - either type of disaster causing price increases beyond what is reasonable is taking advantage of people who are suffering - why allow one and not the other?


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Why Lumber And Plywood Prices Are So High—And When They Will Come Down


Lumber and plywood prices have jumped through the roof in the U.S. Building materials prices will retreat in 2022, returning to pre-pandemic levels by 2023. They reflect housing-specific issues, not general inflation.




www.forbes.com


----------



## flitcraft

Car rentals are indeed crazy high--I just booked a compact rental car for more than 100 bucks a night! But in this case, it wasn't greed, or at least sheer greed, but the pandemic that caused a shortage of cars. Early on in the pandemic, no one was traveling at all and rental car companies suddenly had no money coming in. Hertz nearly filed for bankruptcy. At the same time, people were understandably unwilling to use public transit, and many urbanites who were previously happily carless wanted a used car right away, driving up used car prices. So, the rental companies sold off their stock of cars for cashflow, keeping them afloat at the time. But now, travel has resumed with gusto, and the rental car companies have much diminished fleets. So...very high prices while the companies recoup their COVID losses. Stinks, of course, as I gritted my teeth and booked the car. I was advised to book at an airport because the stock of cars is higher there than at other rental offices. But I am still concerned that I could arrive, having paid for my car in advance (!) and find no car at all at the end of my Amtrak trip. At least I'll be at National Airport, where I could check on a flight to my final destination in Pennsylvania, or in the alternative take Amtrak to Philly and change to get to Harrisburg. More trains, amirite?


----------



## coventry801

flitcraft said:


> Car rentals are indeed crazy high--I just booked a compact rental car for more than 100 bucks a night! But in this case, it wasn't greed, or at least sheer greed, but the pandemic that caused a shortage of cars. Early on in the pandemic, no one was traveling at all and rental car companies suddenly had no money coming in. Hertz nearly filed for bankruptcy. At the same time, people were understandably unwilling to use public transit, and many urbanites who were previously happily carless wanted a used car right away, driving up used car prices. So, the rental companies sold off their stock of cars for cashflow, keeping them afloat at the time. But now, travel has resumed with gusto, and the rental car companies have much diminished fleets. So...very high prices while the companies recoup their COVID losses. Stinks, of course, as I gritted my teeth and booked the car. I was advised to book at an airport because the stock of cars is higher there than at other rental offices. But I am still concerned that I could arrive, having paid for my car in advance (!) and find no car at all at the end of my Amtrak trip. At least I'll be at National Airport, where I could check on a flight to my final destination in Pennsylvania, or in the alternative take Amtrak to Philly and change to get to Harrisburg. More trains, amirite?



Hertz has $29 a day cargo van across all non-airport locations. 

You just have to reserve early and show up early in the morning coz they are like hot cakes


----------



## Sidney

flitcraft said:


> Car rentals are indeed crazy high--I just booked a compact rental car for more than 100 bucks a night! But in this case, it wasn't greed, or at least sheer greed, but the pandemic that caused a shortage of cars. Early on in the pandemic, no one was traveling at all and rental car companies suddenly had no money coming in. Hertz nearly filed for bankruptcy. At the same time, people were understandably unwilling to use public transit, and many urbanites who were previously happily carless wanted a used car right away, driving up used car prices. So, the rental companies sold off their stock of cars for cashflow, keeping them afloat at the time. But now, travel has resumed with gusto, and the rental car companies have much diminished fleets. So...very high prices while the companies recoup their COVID losses. Stinks, of course, as I gritted my teeth and booked the car. I was advised to book at an airport because the stock of cars is higher there than at other rental offices. But I am still concerned that I could arrive, having paid for my car in advance (!) and find no car at all at the end of my Amtrak trip. At least I'll be at National Airport, where I could check on a flight to my final destination in Pennsylvania, or in the alternative take Amtrak to Philly and change to get to Harrisburg. More trains, amirite?


A year ago at the height of the pandemic there were no drop off fees from Enterprise. I drove from Pa. to California and back for $375 round trip. Gas was under $1.50. Masked outside the car and my only human contact was in the motel lobby,if it was open and in one of the few open restaurants.


----------



## zephyr17

Constrained supply + high demand = high prices.

Pricing is how the market allocates scarce resources, whether it is rental cars or a roomettes.

Gouging laws briefly restrain the market forces when a natural disaster greatly increases demand or reduces supply for a brief "pulse" where supply and demand very briefly come unbalanced, and do not apply to most things. During the pandemic we saw ridiculous prices online for things that were temporarily in extraordinary demand due to pandemic, such as hand sanitizer, liquid soap, clorox wipes. None of those were subject to price gouging laws, and if they were, it wasn't effective. It was effective, too, as far as it went, I wasn't going to spend $50 for a plastic jar of Clorox wipes, but I am sure someone else did. I went without. Fortunately, just before the pandemic hit I had picked up my regular Costco toilet paper supply that was sufficient to see me through the Great Toilet Paper Crisis of 2020. That would have been harder to go completely without.

Rental car supply is reduced because the rental car companies sold a lot of their fleets early to maintian cash flow and did not expect for demand to return so soon or heavily. They cannot quickly increase their fleets because the car manufacturers cannot fulfil new orders because of the chip shortage. That whole mess is because of the over use of "just in time" inventory practices up and down the supply chain and the fact that there is no spare inventory to be had anywhere along the line if supply chains get interrupted. The extreme implementation of "just in time" that is now pervasive demonstrated its extreme fragility. If you want to look to something that probably needs some kind of regulatory hand, it is just in time inventory practices. That has proven to be a threat to the national economy and national security to a degree that regulation is justified. Look at the PPE shortage early in the pandemic, that was almost entirely due to JIT inventory practices.

In any case, how else would anyone propose to replace the market system in allocating scarce resources. Lottery? First come, first served?


----------



## railiner

zephyr17 said:


> In any case, how else would anyone propose to replace the market system in allocating scarce resources. Lottery? First come, first served?


Interesting subject....In the case of oil, the government buys a lot when prices are low, in order to build up the "strategic supply", just in case of another OPEC embargo or other disruption of the supply chain. Perhaps they should wharehouse a "strategic supply" of toilet paper and other "essential's"?


----------



## zephyr17

I am not sure about toilet paper, but medical PPE certainly.


----------



## dlagrua

Just an example. In 2020 our trip to Glacier (one way) last August from CHI to WFH cost us $1068 (Bedroom for 2). Last I checked the fare this year for the exact same dates was $2350. Yes over double the cost of 2020. If Amtrak is selling these tickets to wealthy first time travelers, that audience is going to be very disappointed when they experience a very slow trip and basic sleeper service that is in no way first class. This type of price gouging will work short term because some people post Covid are willing to pay anything for privacy. However, by selling at the highest prices that they can squeeze from the traveler, Amtrak is doing itself a disservice by driving away loyal long term customers and supporters like us. Right now there are no affordable travel options left but to fly First Class at 20% the cost of sleeper travel. Does anyone here wish to pay $5000-$6000 for a R/T cross country trip? 
Just received our TSA pre-check so the flying option just became more attractive. We hope to return to the rails when it becomes worth it, but right now its no inconvenience taking our business elsewhere.


----------



## Sidney

At 5 to 6 thousand dollars round trip I would expect a private car,unlimited alcoholic drinks and world renown chefs. These are Canadian prices from Toronto to Vancouver where the level of service is far superior.

We booked a 9 day Caribbean cruise. Total for both of us $1450. I know comparing a cruise and a bedroom on Amtrak is apples to oranges,but someone willing to pay over $2000 for a three day trip is looking for more than basic

basic transportation


----------



## AmtrakBlue

dlagrua said:


> Just an example. In 2020 our trip to Glacier (one way) last August from CHI to WFH cost us $1068 (Bedroom for 2). Last I checked the fare this year for the exact same dates was $2350. Yes over double the cost of 2020. If Amtrak is selling these tickets to wealthy first time travelers, that audience is going to be very disappointed when they experience a very slow trip and basic sleeper service that is in no way first class. This type of price gouging will work short term because some people post Covid are willing to pay anything for privacy. However, by selling at the highest prices that they can squeeze from the traveler, Amtrak is doing itself a disservice* by driving away loyal long term customers and supporters like us.* Right now there are no affordable travel options left but to fly First Class at 20% the cost of sleeper travel. Does anyone here wish to pay $5000-$6000 for a R/T cross country trip?
> Just received our TSA pre-check so the flying option just became more attractive. We hope to *return to the rails *when it becomes worth it, but right now its no inconvenience taking our business elsewhere.


Obviously they're not driving away loyal customers.... If they can get double what you're willing to pay, good on them. 

BTW, the price you got in 2020 was probably because no one wanted to travel in 2020, so, here we go again, supply (lots of rooms) and demand (not a lot of buyers).


----------



## lordsigma

I wouldn’t really call a private room with personal toilet and shower basic transportation. Im traveling this week and I got my trip for far less - I booked early. I’d pretty much expect prices to be crazy this year with pent up travel demand especially last minute.


----------



## jruff001

lordsigma said:


> I wouldn’t really call a private room with personal toilet and shower basic transportation.


Exactly.

Price gouging laws generally only apply to "essential commodities" that are necessary for the public to survive a natural disaster. Think things like ice, gasoline and potable water.

First Class intercity transportation with a bed, personal plumbing and meals included (no matter how nasty you may think they are, or how much you think Amtrak's sleeping cars are not "First Class") is not "essential."


----------



## NYP2NFL01

I planned to travel from Kissimmee, FL to New York - Penn Station on Saturday September 18th in a Silver Star Bedroom. But, the price was astronomical!
It was cheaper to stay another night at Disney World and book a Bedroom on the Silver Meteor the next afternoon. The price of the bedroom dropped significantly. It still wasn't cheap, but, it was better than Saturday evening's bedroom price!


----------



## Michigan Mom

coventry801 said:


> Hertz has $29 a day cargo van across all non-airport locations.
> 
> You just have to reserve early and show up early in the morning coz they are like hot cakes


I have not been able to duplicate this.


----------



## coventry801

Michigan Mom said:


> I have not been able to duplicate this.



Hmm. Might just be available in metropolitan area. I was able to reserve it and got a Ford Transit Van during the past Memorial Day weekend at Denver downtown location for $26 (with hotel discount). Also reserved and got it on on some weekends at 2 different locations in Tucson, AZ


----------



## flitcraft

Doesn't seem to be available at the non-airport Seattle locations--checked for the next few days. If it works, terrific, but it isn't a deal that one can count on, it seems.


----------



## Exvalley

Is Amtrak required to be run like a for-profit company? Sure. But the people who point out that law and say nothing else are ignoring the reality. Amtrak is run like a typical government bureaucracy and less like a true for-profit company, at least as far as most service is concerned.

Compare Amtrak to an airline. Airlines are incredibly adept at adjusting their service to meet supply and demand. Is the Superbowl happening in Tampa? They are going to add flights. Do more people go to Fort Meyers in the winter than in the summer? Then more flights will be flown in the winter.

Now compare that to Amtrak. How many Silvers go to Florida in the winter? Exactly the same number as in the summer. Do they add sleepers to the City of New Orleans during Mardi Gras? Nope. Do they add trains to the Bay area when a Los Angeles sports team is playing there? No way. Do they add sleepers to the Lake Shore Limited when the Democratic National Convention is held in Chicago? Not a chance.

Sure, there is a SLIGHT amount of adjusting the number of sleepers and coaches, but it's a token effort. So, no, they aren't run entirely like a for profit corporation. Far from it.

Amtrak is good at adjusting their prices reflect demand. But they aren't good at adjusting supply in response to changes in demand. And because of that they are leaving a lot of money on the table and hurting consumers that would benefit from an increase in supply. Increasing ticket prices due to very limited supply does not mean that overall profits are as high as they could be. There is a balance to be struck.


----------



## jimdex

Exvalley said:


> Is Amtrak required to be run like a for-profit company? Sure. But the people who point out that law and say nothing else are ignoring the reality. Amtrak is run like a typical government bureaucracy and less like a true for-profit company, at least as far as most service is concerned.
> 
> Compare Amtrak to an airline. Airlines are incredibly adept at adjusting their service to meet supply and demand. Is the Superbowl happening in Tampa? They are going to add flights. Do more people go to Fort Meyers in the winter than in the summer? Then more flights will be flown in the winter.


I suppose airlines do adjust their schedules from time to time, but I think it's fairly limited. As far as I know, most airlines fly approximately the same total number of planes summer and winter. Like Amtrak, airlines are much more likely to adjust supply to demand by raising or lowering fares accordingly. It's not smart business practice to maintain large numbers of planes (or railcars) for use only during peak periods.


----------



## dlagrua

I get the whole idea of supply and demand with Amtrak Should it be that way with public transportation? I think not, but thats a debate for a different day. It should be noted that the formula of supply and demand doesn't always hold true. An investigative reporter did an inquiry as to why lumber prices were going through the roof. What he found was that the prices of raw lumber, the lumberjacks, the saw mills and the trucking companies were making/charging no more money than they were 5 years ago BUT the profit of the large lumber corporations like Weyerhauser went up over 250% over the same period last year. Strong supply, no shortage just higher prices. Lets hope that Amtrak won't buy into that philosophy.


----------



## Exvalley

jimdex said:


> I suppose airlines do adjust their schedules from time to time, but I think it's fairly limited. As far as I know, most airlines fly approximately the same total number of planes summer and winter. Like Amtrak, airlines are much more likely to adjust supply to demand by raising or lowering fares accordingly. It's not smart business practice to maintain large numbers of planes (or railcars) for use only during peak periods.



Airlines use their equipment to the maximum extent possible. They don't want planes sitting on the tarmac for any longer than is necessary.

But what you are missing is that, within that context, airlines are MUCH more nimble in how they allocate their planes. Planes that fly business routes on Monday fly leisure routes on Saturday. And if the Superbowl is in town, some planes are going to be pulled off of their regular schedule to meet demand in the Superbowl city. Lots more planes fly to southern destinations in the winter than in the summer.

Or look at the cruise lines. They move ships seasonally to go where the demand is. Far fewer ships sail the Caribbean in the summer. They move those ships to Europe and Alaska, among other places.

Does Amtrak add any significant capacity to Florida in the winter? Nope. Do they add it to the western routes in peak summer? Nope. To be fair, their ability to do so is hampered by the lack of fleet consistency - but that choice is another example of a choice that a true for-profit corporation probably wouldn't have made.

True for-profit corporations are MUCH more nimble than Amtrak. So if you want to talk about how Amtrak is run like a for-profit corporation, your first question should be, "Why isn't Amtrak actually run like a for-profit corporation?" It seems like the only time Amtrak actually wants to run like a for-profit corporation is when they are cutting things that make the customer experience better. They leave a whole lot of money on the table in other ways.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

dlagrua said:


> I get the whole idea of supply and demand with Amtrak Should it be that way with public transportation? I think not, but thats a debate for a different day. It should be noted that the formula of supply and demand doesn't always hold true. An investigative reporter did an inquiry as to why lumber prices were going through the roof. What he found was that the prices of raw lumber, the lumberjacks, the saw mills and the trucking companies were making/charging no more money than they were 5 years ago BUT the profit of the large lumber corporations like Weyerhauser went up over 250% over the same period last year. Strong supply, no shortage just higher prices. Lets hope that Amtrak won't buy into that philosophy.











Why Lumber And Plywood Prices Are So High—And When They Will Come Down


Lumber and plywood prices have jumped through the roof in the U.S. Building materials prices will retreat in 2022, returning to pre-pandemic levels by 2023. They reflect housing-specific issues, not general inflation.




www.forbes.com


----------



## Tlcooper93

Back to the OP topic:

I just booked my sleeper ticket from St. Petersburg, FL - Boston on the Silver Meteor/NE Regional for a total of $482 on June 28th.
Pretty solid fare in my opinion.


----------



## jis

I have multiple trips in Sleeper booked by Silvers from KIS/ORL to ALX/WAS/NYP over the next six months. All of them are somewhere between $450 and $500 each way for round trip.


----------



## saxman

I've only seen this mentioned a couple of times. A big reason why sleepers are expensive is that Amtrak hasn't returned many of the TransDorms back to service! I know the Texas Eagle and Sunset Ltd aren't using one taking up valuable roomette space for crew. I'm pretty sure the CONO, Cap, and maybe the SWC aren't running one either. The Starlight just got theirs back too. I'll admit I haven't checked on consists lately, so I could be wrong. I'll have to check youtube. Amtrak in their infinite wisdom parked many Dorm cars and now they have to be inspected at certain terminals to be put back in service. Apparently this is a big process. This is the same problem for the Sightseer Lounge cars.


----------



## OBS

saxman said:


> I've only seen this mentioned a couple of times. A big reason why sleepers are expensive is that Amtrak hasn't returned many of the TransDorms back to service! I know the Texas Eagle and Sunset Ltd aren't using one taking up valuable roomette space for crew. I'm pretty sure the CONO, Cap, and maybe the SWC aren't running one either. The Starlight just got theirs back too. I'll admit I haven't checked on consists lately, so I could be wrong. I'll have to check youtube. Amtrak in their infinite wisdom parked many Dorm cars and now they have to be inspected at certain terminals to be put back in service. Apparently this is a big process. This is the same problem for the Sightseer Lounge cars.


Except, unless these cars are due for their 4 yr air brake inspection, it is not a big deal to get them inspected and back in service...


----------



## jis

Apparently not much regular maintenance was carried out on equipment sidelined during the COVID crisis in order to preserve cash to stay afloat until Congress came through. Now it is a maintenance catchup game.


OBS said:


> Except, unless these cars are due for their 4 yr air brake inspection, it is not a big deal to get them inspected and back in service...


Indeed. It should really not take that long once they get going and upto speed on normal maintenance. Of course, I have no idea how many had their 4 year cycle postponed through the COVID year either.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

How many airlines need special approval from another airline to add an extra flight for a special event? How many airlines suffer routine hull loss by commercial trucks and construction equipment fouling taxiways? How many airlines are saddled with domestic manufacturing requirements or have to wait ten years for an order to materialize? An airline can lease extra aircraft in a pinch and borrow against future earnings to increase the fleet size which Amtrak cannot.


----------



## jis

Devil's Advocate said:


> How many airlines need special approval from another airline to add an extra flight for a special event? How many airlines suffer routine hull loss by commercial trucks and construction equipment fouling taxiways? How many airlines are saddled with domestic manufacturing requirements or have to wait ten years for an order to materialize? An airline can lease extra aircraft in a pinch and borrow against future earnings to increase the fleet size which Amtrak cannot.


Yes. I agree that some of the criticism leveled against Amtrak regarding quick redeployment of equipment is borne out of ignorance of the issues involved, and flailing against stuff that seems not to ones immediate liking.


----------



## Exvalley

Devil's Advocate said:


> How many airlines need special approval from another airline to add an extra flight for a special event? How many airlines suffer routine hull loss by commercial trucks and construction equipment fouling taxiways? How many airlines are saddled with domestic manufacturing requirements or have to wait ten years for an order to materialize? An airline can lease extra aircraft in a pinch and borrow against future earnings to increase the fleet size which Amtrak cannot.


You missed what I was saying. Let me make it clearer. I wasn't attributing fault. My point was that Amtrak, due to a variety of circumstances, is NOT run like most for-profit companies - even if the law says that they should be. You have given some of the reasons why Amtrak leaves money on the table. (Although plenty of aircraft are hit by equipment on the ground.) That said, as a result of these challenges, in many ways the Amtrak corporate culture has probably atrophied compared to a genuine for-profit corporation. I am going to go out on a limb and say that you don't go work for Amtrak's corporate office because you value a nimble and dynamic company.


----------



## Tlcooper93

Exvalley said:


> You missed what I was saying. Let me make it clearer for you. I wasn't attributing fault. My point was that Amtrak, due to a variety of circumstances, is NOT run like most for-profit companies - even if the law says that they should be. You have given some of the reasons why Amtrak leaves money on the table. (Although plenty of aircraft are hit by equipment on the ground.) That said, as a result of these challenges, in many ways the Amtrak corporate culture has probably atrophied compared to a genuine for-profit corporation.



I really never the saw the point of constantly comparing Amtrak and legacy airlines.



Exvalley said:


> Does Amtrak add any significant capacity to Florida in the winter? Nope. Do they add it to the western routes in peak summer? Nope. To be fair, their ability to do so is hampered by the lack of fleet consistency - but that choice is another example of a choice that a true for-profit corporation probably wouldn't have made.



The problem warrents a bigger admission of legitimacy than, "being fair" and acknowledging fleet inconsistency.
The only way I can see more (than usual) rolling stock being deployed seasonally is with Autotrain/western routes.
There's that pesky problem of Amfleet vs. Superliners vs. Viewliners (not to mention platform heights), which I guess is an inherited issue in some ways.

Redeploying aircraft is not very difficult to do, and really the only problems to consider are fuel, pilot hours, and weekly hours fitting in with/leading up to scheduled A/B/C checks.

I suppose Amtrak could deadhead more cars than they do, but we talk about these things as if someone isn't already thinking about it.

One elephant in the room is the issue that being run as a true for-profit company will NOT fix is the fact that people in this country, for any number of reasons, don't take the train. I was talking to my dad the other night about a trip he took on the bus from Boston to Springfield. I mentioned there being one train a day, and he simply replied, "it never occured to me to take the train."

Trains are not really a part of American culture, and it's hard to run a for-profit company where there is no desire to purchase the product.


----------



## jimdex

Exvalley said:


> Does Amtrak add any significant capacity to Florida in the winter? Nope. Do they add it to the western routes in peak summer? Nope. To be fair, their ability to do so is hampered by the lack of fleet consistency - but that choice is another example of a choice that a true for-profit corporation probably wouldn't have made.


I believe some western trains DO get extra cars in the summer. And Amtrak DOES find ways to add cars to some regional trains during the Thanksgiving rush. You suggest that standardizing the fleet would make it possible to shift cars back-and-forth between the Florida trains and the western trains, but there may not be as strong a business case for standardization as you think. It would require standardizing with single-level cars that can operate in the east, and if they stopped using double-deck cars on the western trains, that would presumably mean giving up a lot of capacity. What I might suggest is reviving the wintertime-only Florida Special, and having it operate only between Florida and Washington so it could use Superliners from the western trains.


----------



## jis

In the past Amtrak has added extra Coaches to Florida trains during high season. This year is an oddity. We'll see how it unforlds. Right now they don't even have the usual three Coaches on the Silvers. I don;t know what gives.

Sleepers used to be a different story since there were very few surpluses floating around. With the V-IIs deployed they should have more flexibility after they catch up on deferred mainetance from the COVID year. So we'll have to wait and see.


----------



## Exvalley

Tlcooper93 said:


> One elephant in the room is the issue that being run as a true for-profit company will NOT fix is the fact that people in this country, for any number of reasons, don't take the train.


Generally speaking, I agree with you. But corridors can definitely be an exception to that rule. If there was a genuine Boston to Albany corridor with several trains per day that ran in a timely manner, I bet that your father would have considered taking the train to Springfield. But instead we have one train per day between Boston and Albany that takes twice as long as driving. 

It's a chicken and egg dilemma. Demand is not there, so the infrastructure is not built. But demand is not there because the infrastructure doesn't exist. Yet another reason why Amtrak should not be run as a for-profit company.


----------



## Ryan

Exvalley said:


> But corridors can definitely be an exception to that rule.


It's almost as if, with their newfound focus on corridors, Amtrak is doing the exact thing that you're claiming they can't.


----------



## Exvalley

Ryan said:


> It's almost as if, with their newfound focus on corridors, Amtrak is doing the exact thing that you're claiming they can't.


My point was that Amtrak is not as nimble and innovative as a true for-profit company needs to be if a for-profit company is to survive.

It’s taken Amtrak a half of a century to become serious about building out corridors. And as of now it’s a thought and nothing more.

If you think that’s evidence that Amtrak is generally as nimble and innovative as a typical for-profit company, we will have to respectfully disagree.


----------



## lstone19

jimdex said:


> I suppose airlines do adjust their schedules from time to time, but I think it's fairly limited. As far as I know, most airlines fly approximately the same total number of planes summer and winter. Like Amtrak, airlines are much more likely to adjust supply to demand by raising or lowering fares accordingly. It's not smart business practice to maintain large numbers of planes (or railcars) for use only during peak periods.



As someone who worked in airline scheduling (now retired), your first sentence is about 180 degrees from the truth. Airline schedules are developed in periods of one to two months (sometimes shorter such as the holiday schedule which might run from only around 12/20 to 1/4). While there might be a certain sameness to the basic structure, fleeting (assigning the airplane subfleet that will fly a flight) is done with every schedule and specific times are tweaked every schedule based on history and expected congestion and other issues). And despite a consistent fleet size, frequency can and will be added or removed from a market in response to customer demand and competitive issue.

And as the last sentence above says, while no airline keeps surplus fleet for peak periods, available fleet can be increased at peak times by not scheduling major maintenance (maintenance that requires the plane to be out of service for multiple days) during those periods. And that also keeps the maintenance division employees happy as more vacation time (which they bid for based on seniority) can be allocated to those peak periods.


----------



## Ryan

Exvalley said:


> My point was that Amtrak is not as nimble and innovative as a true for-profit company needs to be if a for-profit company is to survive.



It looks like this was your point:



Exvalley said:


> Is Amtrak required to be run like a for-profit company? Sure. But the people who point out that law and say nothing else are ignoring the reality.



What reality are the people that point out that law ignoring? When pointing out the law, it's a response to "they're a public service and therefore prices should be cheaper". Is anyone saying that Amtrak is as nimble or innovative as other for-profit companies such as airlines? Obviously not. They're hampered by things like this:


Devil's Advocate said:


> How many airlines need special approval from another airline to add an extra flight for a special event? How many airlines suffer routine hull loss by commercial trucks and construction equipment fouling taxiways? How many airlines are saddled with domestic manufacturing requirements or have to wait ten years for an order to materialize? An airline can lease extra aircraft in a pinch and borrow against future earnings to increase the fleet size which Amtrak cannot.



So, back to your original point, what reality is being ignored, and who is doing the ignoring?


----------



## jimdex

lstone19 said:


> As someone who worked in airline scheduling (now retired), your first sentence is about 180 degrees from the truth. Airline schedules are developed in periods of one to two months (sometimes shorter such as the holiday schedule which might run from only around 12/20 to 1/4).


I stand corrected then.


----------



## Tlcooper93

So then I guess a question worth answering is:
To extent could Amtrak alter their scheduling/route saturation to respond to demand? Is Amtrak already doing all they can with their slot/fleet/track limitations?


----------



## Exvalley

Tlcooper93 said:


> So then I guess a question worth answering is:
> To extent could Amtrak alter their scheduling/route saturation to respond to demand? Is Amtrak already doing all they can with their slot/fleet/track limitations?


There isn't a whole lot they can do immediately. They had 50 years to work on the problem, but they can certainly start now. It will take an omnibus plan that will include lobbying for preferable legislation, equipment funding, etc.


----------



## jis

As of today the Meteor has been restored to its normal complement of 4 Coaches and 3 Sleepers. Allegedly the Star will be restored too in the near future.

Apparently they took all the Coaches that were in circulation and redistributed them to make all the trains daily while they worked on taking cars parked at JAX and Lorton to brush them up and bring them on line. As they come back on line capacity is being restored.


----------



## Amtrak709

I have a question about sleeping cars sales and pricing to anyone who may know. These days, does the conductor on the train have any flexibility in pricing a sleeper upgrade if available?? My reason for asking is this: ATN-NYP on the Crescent tomorrow I have a roomette but really wanted a bedroom. Now, today, this minute: the 2 accessible bedrooms are still available but at a price tag of $940 + rail fare. $1128.10 fare one way Anniston to New York is just a little outrageous. I guess!!?? As a side note: the Crescent left NOL today with at least one empty bedroom but the fare is still the $1128.10 today if I were to get on in ATN today. My roomette price was only $208. I am just speculating for tomorrow's trip.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

AMTRAK709 said:


> I have a question about sleeping cars sales and pricing to anyone who may know. These days, does the conductor on the train have any flexibility in pricing a sleeper upgrade if available?? My reason for asking is this: ATN-NYP on the Crescent tomorrow I have a roomette but really wanted a bedroom. Now, today, this minute: the 2 accessible bedrooms are still available but at a price tag of $940 + rail fare. $1128.10 fare one way Anniston to New York is just a little outrageous. I guess!!?? As a side note: the Crescent left NOL today with at least one empty bedroom but the fare is still the $1128.10 today if I were to get on in ATN today. My roomette price was only $208. I am just speculating for tomorrow's trip.


The conductor no longer sells rooms. You would be told to call, or use the app, to upgrade. And you would be paying that higher cost. That room may disappear if someone made a bid that Amtrak accepted.


----------



## zephyr17

No, with eticketing conductors will just tell you to phone in to the reservation center and buy the upgrade from them or use the app. If purchased, the manifest will be updated and upgrade will be downloaded to his device.

It'll be at current bucket.


----------



## Amtrak709

Also, another curiosity. If the Amtrak conductor (big IF) had have sold that one remaining bedroom as an upgrade upon departing NOL, does he (the conductor)
have a way of notifying the reservation system that the space is sold so that some unsuspecting passenger getting on hours farther up the line is kept from
buying the space???


----------



## OBS

As noted on the post above yours, The Conductors are no longer allowed to sell rooms. It is handled thru the Res. office.


----------



## Amtrak709

Thanks for all your help and replies. I guess it is my decision in the next 30 hours or so hours on whether to spend the money. Thanks again!!


----------



## zephyr17

AMTRAK709 said:


> Also, another curiosity. If the Amtrak conductor (big IF) had have sold that one remaining bedroom as an upgrade upon departing NOL, does he (the conductor)
> have a way of notifying the reservation system that the space is sold so that some unsuspecting passenger getting on hours farther up the line is kept from
> buying the space???


That was one of the big reasons many (not all) conductors were reluctant to do upgrades in the era before eticketing. While his manifest would show whether a room would be occupied down the line, reservations could have sold it since the manifest was issued. He'd have to call into reservations, make sure the space was open and have it blocked for sale. It was a pain and many conductors did not want to deal with it.


----------



## saxman

AMTRAK709 said:


> Thanks for all your help and replies. I guess it is my decision in the next 30 hours or so hours on whether to spend the money. Thanks again!!



Have you tried the Bidup option? I saw someone just post on another site that they got a roomette for only $255 from Minnesota to Spokane using the BidUp feature. I'm not sure if it works for roomettes to bedrooms, so I could be wrong.


----------



## saxman

Exvalley said:


> Does Amtrak add any significant capacity to Florida in the winter? Nope. Do they add it to the western routes in peak summer? Nope. To be fair, their ability to do so is hampered by the lack of fleet consistency - but that choice is another example of a choice that a true for-profit corporation probably wouldn't have made.



In the past, they've added a coach between CHI and MSP, a sleeper between CHI and DEN, and I think they are doing a coach between CHI and STL on the Eagle. They also added a 3rd sleeper and a 4th coach on the Starlight a few years ago during peak. The biggest problem is the lack of equipment to add more. 



OBS said:


> Except, unless these cars are due for their 4 yr air brake inspection, it is not a big deal to get them inspected and back in service...



Amtrak seems to make the process a big deal. I have no idea where they are being stored. Apparently they can only be inspected in Beach Grove, Chicago, or Los Angeles. I assume they are sitting in those places anyway.



Devil's Advocate said:


> How many airlines need special approval from another airline to add an extra flight for a special event? How many airlines suffer routine hull loss by commercial trucks and construction equipment fouling taxiways? How many airlines are saddled with domestic manufacturing requirements or have to wait ten years for an order to materialize? An airline can lease extra aircraft in a pinch and borrow against future earnings to increase the fleet size which Amtrak cannot.



I totally agree with this generalization. If I want to start a bus company and add service, all I need are buses and some permits. A private company can't really stop me. Same with an airline. Just need to lease some planes and might need to rent gate space from another airline, but in general an airline will be accommodated. But a passenger train...? In other words, the infrastructure is already there and available for public use.


----------



## Cal

saxman said:


> In the past, they've added a coach between CHI and MSP, a sleeper between CHI and DEN, and I think they are doing a coach between CHI and STL on the Eagle. They also added a 3rd sleeper and a 4th coach on the Starlight a few years ago during peak. The biggest problem is the lack of equipment to add more.


Coaches are regularly attached to the SWC and TE between Kansas City and St. Louis to Chicago. 

I believe the formal normal consist for the Starlight was 3 sleepers (including transdorm) for off-peak seasons and four sleepers (including transdorm) for peak season with 3 coaches + the BC car and service cars.


----------



## jis

saxman said:


> Amtrak seems to make the process a big deal. I have no idea where they are being stored. Apparently they can only be inspected in Beach Grove, Chicago, or Los Angeles. I assume they are sitting in those places anyway.


Amfleets appear to be inspectable at Bear DE and even Hialeah. Viewliners are mostly Hialeah I guess.

The Amfleet IIs were parked in many places, more visibly at Lorton and at Jacksonville in addition to Hialeah and perhaps some at Sunnyside too. Viewliners were mostly at Hialeah and Sunnyside AFAIK. There has been a lot of Viewliner deadheading going on between Sunnyside and Hialeah. Seems to be routinely one to three on each 97/98.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

saxman said:


> Have you tried the Bidup option? I saw someone just post on another site that they got a roomette for only $255 from Minnesota to Spokane using the BidUp feature. I'm not sure if it works for roomettes to bedrooms, so I could be wrong.


He did try the bid up and it was "unsuccessful" (most likely someone offered more).


----------



## bratkinson

saxman said:


> In the past, they've added a coach between CHI and MSP, a sleeper between CHI and DEN, and I think they are doing a coach between CHI and STL on the Eagle. They also added a 3rd sleeper and a 4th coach on the Starlight a few years ago during peak. The biggest problem is the lack of equipment to add more.



That was then, this is now...
Historically, whenever they add a coach CHI-STL, it would show as train #321, in addition to tr 21 & 421 (3x/wk). Checking mid July, it does not show up across several days.

The same with a CHI-MSP coach. It would show up as train #37, IIRC. It's not there this July, either.

I didn't check CHI-DEN.

Other forum posters have surmised there's a shortage of LD equipment right now as the inspections & maintenance on the stored equipment was not kept up to date. Maybe in a month or so, they'll get caught up and rebuild 'normal' summer LD consists. All we can do is wait and see.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

bratkinson said:


> That was then, this is now...
> Historically, whenever they add a coach CHI-STL, it would show as train #321, in addition to tr 21 & 421 (3x/wk). Checking mid July, it does not show up across several days.
> 
> The same with a CHI-MSP coach. It would show up as train #37, IIRC. It's not there this July, either.
> 
> I didn't check CHI-DEN.
> 
> Other forum posters have surmised there's a shortage of LD equipment right now as the inspections & maintenance on the stored equipment was not kept up to date. Maybe in a month or so, they'll get caught up and rebuild 'normal' summer LD consists. All we can do is wait and see.


I was booked on #21, not #321, in 2019 from CHI - STL and was told to board a specific car that I believe was for STL passengers. I did not hang around to see if they took the car off #21 continued on it's way. I can't remember if #321 showed on the departure board in CUS.


----------



## bratkinson

AmtrakBlue said:


> I was booked on #21, not #321, in 2019 from CHI - STL and was told to board a specific car that I believe was for STL passengers. I did not hang around to see if they took the car off #21 continued on it's way. I can't remember if #321 showed on the departure board in CUS.


Whenever I've been in the 421 or 422 sleeper (about once per year) in the past 15 years or so, the add-on STL coach was always the last car of the train, to make for simple removal/addition at STL. The same was true with the MSP coach, the few times I've gone through there in the summer.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

bratkinson said:


> Whenever I've been in the 421 or 422 sleeper (about once per year) in the past 15 years or so, the add-on STL coach was always the last car of the train, to make for simple removal/addition at STL. The same was true with the MSP coach, the few times I've gone through there in the summer.


I do remember my car was the last car and could kick myself for not thinking about it and going back to rail fan window.


----------



## jis

I remember being on a St Louis drop car and once on a St Louis add car, which was not identified as a separate train with its own number on the departure board. So as @Bob Dylan says YMMV I guess.


----------



## mitako

Just for kicks, I just priced a trip on the SWC from Los Angeles to Chicago, two passengers, one of them a senior. That's a two-night trip. Looking at two weeks from now, leaving on a Friday, price for a bedroom showed as $2383. First Friday in December, $2092. Going out as far as possible, into May of 2022, bedroom on a Friday for $1237. That's why I plan my trips around a year in advance and book usually 10 months or so out.


----------



## Michigan Mom

To add another layer to this discussion.... it isn't just high sleeper car prices. It's also in Coach.
I've been pricing one way flights vs Amtrak coach from Miami to Detroit, and there is no way to justify paying more for train/bus than for a flight.


----------



## Siegmund

Re the discussion of shortages of LD equipment:

I happened to see 7(11) pass through Whitefish this evening (on time - beautiful sunset.)

I was very surprised to see it running with the minimum legal consist (baggage, transdorm, one Seattle sleeper, one Seattle coach, two Portland coaches, one Portland sleeper.) That's the typical non-covid winter consist... but it normally runs with two Seattle sleepers all summer (and occasionally in ski seaon too), and frequently has two Seattle coaches.


----------



## Danno

Are points being devalued by AGR?
Today (June 16, 2021) I booked a roomette from SAC to DEN, for September 2, 2 seniors for $656.
When I looked at cost for points it said 49,061. Seems like it should have been about 26,500.
According to ‘The Points Guy’, 49,000 points should be worth about $1,225. Am I missing something?


----------



## Bob Dylan

Danno said:


> Are points being devalued by AGR?
> Today (June 16, 2021) I booked a roomette from SAC to DEN, for September 2, 2 seniors for $656.
> When I looked at cost for points it said 49,061. Seems like it should have been about 26,500.
> According to ‘The Points Guy’, 49,000 points should be worth about $1,225. Am I missing something?


Remember, when it's close to a Holiday ( Labor Day) the Buckets go up and Points become worth Less,as Supply and Demand becomes the Ruling factor in Travel!

I did some test bookings for July Austin-Emeryville in Roomettes( TexasEagle/Sunset/Coast Starlight, or Texas Eagle/Thruway Van/Zephyr (on the days the Trains weren't Sold out,)the Lowest Roomette Trip I could book was $1789 Cash, 68,000 AGR! Points


----------



## nti1094

What is with the almost impossible task of booking a room on pretty much any long distance train that is not sold out or some insane high price? I have been getting queries back on sone dates listing rooms on the LSL CHI to NYP at $1800 for example! Are they running fewer sleeping cars than the usual summer consists? I have noticed that the CONO has had only a single dorm car (or some days a regular superliner sleeper with rooms taken for the crew) lately, as opposed to the usual summer consist of Dorm and sleeper car. What are the other trains running? 

Or is it that ridership has returned with a vengeance?


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Combination of things.
Superliner sleepers and coaches are going through rehab, so not as many are available right now
Yes, people are anxious to get out and travel, so demand is up for the fewer cars available
The greater the demand, the higher the prices


----------



## caravanman

Rooms are popular in these Covid times, market forces dictate high prices for scarce, finite resources...


----------



## Brian Battuello

If you can afford $1800 for a LSL room, you can get a gourmet chef to provide you with a superb picnic lunch or dinner, and not eat the flex crap.


----------



## Sidney

Who in their right mind would pay $1800 for a room on the LSL? At that price you would expect first class gourmet dining,unlimited alcohol and a personal valet to attend to your every need.


----------



## Brian Battuello

Heck, we are approaching private jet level rates. 

I'm guessing that there is a group of people that have become accustomed to train room travel, and will pay anything for it. And if they are habitual riders, they know how awful the service is. 

I sure feel sorry for anyone taking their first trip and thinking it will somehow be first class. The first time they ask an attendant for a cup of coffee and he points toward the cafe car. 

I'm still getting over the thrill of my one free soda with business class.

(And yes, I know some SCA's will bring you a cup of coffee, but not all will. If you can even find one)


----------



## Danib62

you can go BOS to BBY for $90 like this guy did


----------



## Brian Battuello

Now that is performance art!


----------



## Exvalley

I could never imagine paying $1,800 for a bedroom on the LSL. 

On the one hand, I am all for Amtrak charging whatever they can get away with. If they are chartered to be a for-profit company and can make a healthy profit, good for them.

On the other hand, charging high fares will do nothing to endear the general public to the benefit of overnight train travel. We are at risk of slipping into the model of viewing train travel as just a form of land cruise. Congress won't want to support a land cruise as much as they will want to support essential transportation.


----------



## Brian Battuello

Excellent point. The rooms are great for those of us that can afford them (although perhaps not at these prices). But the real Amtrak is the families with their coolers and kids back in coach.


----------



## Maglev

I remember 25 years ago paying over $800 for a Bedroom on the _Coast Starlight_. Nowadays I usually travel in off-peak times, and have been able to find good fares. But I just checked fares for a possible upcoming SEA-MSP journey for myself only, and while Roomettes are reasonable at $489, Bedrooms are $1,813. But as I did 25 years ago, if I were able to get my wife to join me on a train trip I would be willing to pay almost any amount for the necessary Bedroom.


----------



## Sidney

Maglev said:


> I remember 25 years ago paying over $800 for a Bedroom on the Coast Starlight. Nowadays I usually travel in off-peak times, and have been able to find good fares. But I just checked fares for a possible upcoming SEA-MSP journey for myself only, and while Roomettes are reasonable at $489, Bedrooms are $1,813. But as I did 25 years ago, if I were able to get my wife to join me on a train trip I would be willing to pay almost any amount for the necessary Bedroom.


Two roomettes would be a lot cheaper than one bedroom. Of course,if a private shower and toilet is worth the extra $800...


----------



## Brian Battuello

Maglev said:


> If I were able to get my wife to join me on a train trip I would be willing to pay almost any amount for the necessary Bedroom.



You lovebirds!


----------



## jis

Exvalley said:


> I could never imagine paying $1,800 for a bedroom on the LSL.
> 
> On the one hand, I am all for Amtrak charging whatever they can get away with. If they are chartered to be a for-profit company and can make a healthy profit, good for them.


They are chartered to be "run like a for profit company" as distinct from being "a for profit company". This change in language was carefully made by Congress presumably implying they need not actually make a profit - I kid you not!

So for a period they were supposed to be merely run like a for profit company, but the minuscule artificially hived out F&B was supposed to not lose money in and of itself, though the big company could. It just boggles the mind the pretzels that people tie themselves into for various political expediencies.

Incidentally, for $1,800 I could possibly fly round trip to India in Premium Economy and most likely get food that is less sloppy too for the 15 hour nonstop flight, specially these days with reduced traffic.


----------



## zephyr17

According to RPA, that language is being dropped in the upcoming authorization and "operated as a public service" is replacing it.


----------



## Brian Battuello

Sounds like Biden is getting some good things accomplished behind the scenes. 

No one that ever bought a micro-burger from the cafe car could ever expect that they would make a profit from it.


----------



## Asher

Maglev said:


> I remember 25 years ago paying over $800 for a Bedroom on the _Coast Starlight_. Nowadays I usually travel in off-peak times, and have been able to find good fares. But I just checked fares for a possible upcoming SEA-MSP journey for myself only, and while Roomettes are reasonable at $489, Bedrooms are $1,813. But as I did 25 years ago, if I were able to get my wife to join me on a train trip I would be willing to pay almost any amount for the necessary Bedroom.


$489 to St Paul. Two martinis and I’d Shanghai my wife.


----------



## Tennessee Traveler

I confess to not reading all the post in this topic but would like to note that Amtrak is not the only one increasing prices to unheard levels. I booked late April when Amtrak announced going back to daily service and got Empire Builder roomettes to and from Seattle from Chicago for $502 each direction and price has shot up from there. Amtrak is not alone. I booked hotels for August 31 to Sept 5 in Chicago(I book several and then cancel all but the final selection). Despite COVID loss of business the hotel rates were relatively high compared to my last visit to Chicago early 2020 before COVID. Not surprisingly the Chicago hotel prices have increased almost 100 per cent and the rates I booked are no longer available now. The same is true for Seattle. Since the Embassy Suites Pioneer Square right next to King Street Station opened about 3-4 years ago this is my go to hotel and their cost has always been high as are most downtown Seattle hotels - more so that the Chicago hotel rates. Seattle Hotel prices with taxes included exceed $300 nightly. All I am saying is that with the sudden overwhelming number of persons traveling, ALL TRAVEL RELATED PRICES HAVE Gone through the roof. Note that Southwest, American and other airlines cannot hire enough pilots and cabin crew to operate all their scheduled flights. Here in my home city Nashville we had a record setting 400,000 pack downtown Nashville for one if not the largest fireworks display in the country. So let's not be on Amtrak's back for charging what the market will bear. Everyone else is doing it.


----------



## Eric in East County

Tennessee Traveler said:


> I confess to not reading all the post in this topic but would like to note that Amtrak is not the only one increasing prices to unheard levels. I booked late April when Amtrak announced going back to daily service and got Empire Builder roomettes to and from Seattle from Chicago for $502 each direction and price has shot up from there. Amtrak is not alone. I booked hotels for August 31 to Sept 5 in Chicago(I book several and then cancel all but the final selection). Despite COVID loss of business the hotel rates were relatively high compared to my last visit to Chicago early 2020 before COVID. Not surprisingly the Chicago hotel prices have increased almost 100 per cent and the rates I booked are no longer available now. The same is true for Seattle. Since the Embassy Suites Pioneer Square right next to King Street Station opened about 3-4 years ago this is my go to hotel and their cost has always been high as are most downtown Seattle hotels - more so that the Chicago hotel rates. Seattle Hotel prices with taxes included exceed $300 nightly. All I am saying is that with the sudden overwhelming number of persons traveling, ALL TRAVEL RELATED PRICES HAVE Gone through the roof. Note that Southwest, American and other airlines cannot hire enough pilots and cabin crew to operate all their scheduled flights. Here in my home city Nashville we had a record setting 400,000 pack downtown Nashville for one if not the largest fireworks display in the country. So let's not be on Amtrak's back for charging what the market will bear. Everyone else is doing it.


A year ago at this time, in East San Diego County we were pay $3.15 for a gallon a gas. Now it is something like $4.15 and that's if you pay cash rather than using a credit card.


----------



## dlagrua

If an Amtrak cross country trip in a sleeper/bedroom stays at the $5000-$6,000 price; we can only wonder if some people will keep paying it. Are these new customers or repeat customers? If they are new customers I just wonder how they rate the second class service for a private rail car excursion rate?. 
At this point It seems Amtrak has shut out the loyal customers like us that are willing to pay say $2500 for a round trip bedroom fare to Arizona. If that's the way it stays then I believe other people will buy the first class air fare for less than 1/3 the price.


----------



## Exvalley

dlagrua said:


> If an Amtrak cross country trip in a sleeper/bedroom stays at the $5000-$6,000 price;


I wonder how many people are actually paying these prices. It is possible that the yield management system attempts to get that price, but eventually drops the price if nobody bites.


----------



## jruff001

jis said:


> Incidentally, for $1,800 I could possibly fly round trip to India in Premium Economy and most likely get food that is less sloppy too for the 15 hour nonstop flight, specially these days with reduced traffic.


Not sure that is a fair comparison. Premium Economy is not anything like a flat bed, and in fact I think Amtrak coach on LD trains gives you more space. (Of course, NY - India is a LOT farther than CHI-NY, but I took the point of your post to be about the $ for service / experience more than the transportation function.)

But just for fun, I did a quick search New York to Delhi one month from today and on the only nonstop I could find, the fare was $2885. Amtrak CHI-NYP in a roomette on the same dates was $1480 (round trip for both - I didn't see $1800, at least not on the date I selected). And as much as people here criticize Amtrak's food, cleanliness, service, on-time record, etc., have you every flown Air India???


----------



## jis

jruff001 said:


> Not sure that is a fair comparison. Premium Economy is not anything like a flat bed, and in fact I think Amtrak coach on LD trains gives you more space. (Of course, NY - India is a LOT farther than CHI-NY, but I took the point of your post to be about the $ for service more than the transportation function.)
> 
> But just for fun, I did a quick search New York to Delhi one month from today and on the only nonstop I could find, the fare was $2885. Amtrak CHI-NYP in a roomette on the same dates was $1480 (round trip for both - I didn't see $1800, at least not on the date I selected). And as much as people here criticize Amtrak's food, cleanliness, service, on-time record, etc., have you every flown Air India???


My point was mostly about the distance one could travel for that fare. I was not trying to make a fair comparison of service. As for Air India the last time I flew them was in 1980. Haven't touched their international service since then. Of course I have flown plenty of domestic legs and they are fine for those, mostly, though my preference these days is Vistara.

My trips to India, which happens annually when not prevented by pandemics, is usually by United nonstops in Polaris ( which is really a one stop with transit at Newark which is not currently restricted) or by one stop Lufthansa (Frankfurt/Munich) or Emirates (Dubai) Business Class. These one stops are currently not available due to pandemic restrictions.

In reality I would not pay $1800 for traveling to anywhere on the LSL either, nor would I pay $1800 to travel cross country by Amtrak in any class. Just not worth it.


----------



## jruff001

jis said:


> My point was mostly about the distance one could travel for that fare.


Oops, my apologies for misunderstanding then.

But then why does anyone take the train, even in coach? Flying / Greyhound are often cheaper.


----------



## jis

jruff001 said:


> Oops, my apologies for misunderstanding then.
> 
> But then why does anyone take the train, even in coach? Flying / Greyhound are often cheaper.


When I take trains I take it for a relaxing journey when the price is right. If you see my travel pattern I am generally not frugal in my travels. But I also am not extravagant, and specially pointlessly so. It is possible to get under $1800 (just to pick a random number since we happened to have picked it before) cross country by Roomette from Orlando to say Seattle round trip, and I consider that to be reasonable for a few relaxing days of travel. OTOH I would not pay $2500-$3000 for such a thing. OTOH, I have no problem paying $3000-$4000 for a RT ticket in Lie Flat Business Class for flying from Orlando to Mumbai, but I would not pay $6000+ for the same. Just my choices. Others can have other choices depending on their circumstances and mood and habits.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

jruff001 said:


> Oops, my apologies for misunderstanding then.
> 
> But then why does anyone take the train, even in coach? Flying / Greyhound are often cheaper.


Flying - may have medical issues or just a fear of flying
Bus - not as comfortable? Can't get up to walk around. Or maybe no bus service that meets their need. And, of course, there are those who would snub at the idea of riding a bus with "those kinds of people".


----------



## crescent-zephyr

AmtrakBlue said:


> And, of course, there are those who would snub at the idea of riding a bus with "those kinds of people".



Most of them would snub at the idea of riding Amtrak as well.


----------



## jis

crescent-zephyr said:


> Most of them would snub at the idea of riding Amtrak as well.


If they happen to know of the existence of Amtrak that is  Really! It is amazing how many people are completely floored to learn that there is a train service with beds in them that serve Orlando!


----------



## AmtrakBlue

crescent-zephyr said:


> Most of them would snub at the idea of riding Amtrak as well.


Oh, they ride Amtrak alright - in sleepers.


----------



## Sidney

jis said:


> My point was mostly about the distance one could travel for that fare. I was not trying to make a fair comparison of service. As for Air India the last time I flew them was in 1980. Haven't touched their international service since then. Of course I have flow plenty of domestic legs and they are fine for those, mostly, though my preference these days is Vistara.
> 
> My trips to India, which happens annually when not prevented by pandemics, is usually by United nonstops in Polaris ( which is really a one stop with transit at Newark which is not currently restricted) or by one stop Lufthansa (Frankfurt/Munich) or Emirates (Dubai) Business Class. These one stops are currently not available due to pandemic restrictions.
> 
> In reality I would not pay $1800 for traveling to anywhere on the LSL either, nor would I pay $1800 to travel cross country by Amtrak in any class. Just not worth it.


Agree. If it ain't low bucket,I won't book it. Good to be retired and flexible(not dining)with different dates.


----------



## Cal

jis said:


> If they happen to know of the existence of Amtrak that is  Really! It is amazing how many people are completely floored to learn that there is a train service with beds in them that serve Orlando!


I was telling my neighbor the other day about my upcoming trip to the Northeast and how we're taking the train home all the way from New York. She had no idea trains even went cross country, and was even more surprised to know we only had to take two different trains. 

I wonder, if a survey is done, how many people know of Amtrak's network.


----------



## west point

These outrageous sleeper prices . If we were to take even a third of the posted last ditch fare would sleeper revenue be more than coach on that train ? Especially since coaches seem to be fewer on trains right now.


----------



## Tennessee Traveler

When talking about these prices, while the prices everyone is quoting if for ONE PERSON on the airlines, etc.; the price for Amtrak sleeping accommodations are the price for one if traveling alone, yet those prices are the total for 2 people in roomettes and up to 3 people in a bedroom with no increase for the second and third passengers other than their coach fare.


----------



## coventry801

Tennessee Traveler said:


> When talking about these prices, while the prices everyone is quoting if for ONE PERSON on the airlines, etc.; the price for Amtrak sleeping accommodations are the price for one if traveling alone, yet those prices are the total for 2 people in roomettes and up to 3 people in a bedroom with no increase for the second and third passengers other than their coach fare.




Total of 2 people in a roomettes is usually 1/3 higher than traveling solo.


----------



## Tennessee Traveler

_coventry801 stated: * "Total of 2 people in a roomettes is usually 1/3 higher than traveling solo."* _

I understand why the cost of 2 people in roomettes is "usually 1/3 higher than traveling solo". That increase is the standard coach fare for the second person which I noted with this statement in my original post: _*"no increase for the second and third passengers other than their coach fare."*_


----------



## coventry801

Tennessee Traveler said:


> _coventry801 stated: * "Total of 2 people in a roomettes is usually 1/3 higher than traveling solo."* _
> 
> I understand why the cost of 2 people in roomettes is "usually 1/3 higher than traveling solo". That increase is the standard coach fare for the second person which I noted with this statement in my original post: _*"no increase for the second and third passengers other than their coach fare."*_




Yes I'm aware of the statement. I was not saying you're wrong. My statement is a simple mathematical summary / complement on top of yours.


----------



## Bonser

Exvalley said:


> My point was that Amtrak is not as nimble and innovative as a true for-profit company needs to be if a for-profit company is to survive.
> 
> It’s taken Amtrak a half of a century to become serious about building out corridors. And as of now it’s a thought and nothing more.
> 
> If you think that’s evidence that Amtrak is generally as nimble and innovative as a typical for-profit company, we will have to respectfully disagree.


Amtrak's purpose is different from a for profit company. Congress created it (and subsidizes it) to help serve our transportation needs. Yes, it's supposed to be self sustaining but that's not the same as a for profit company which is answerable to its shareholders. Amtrak is still answerable to Congress (presumably us).


----------



## west point

Sleeper fares must be supporting their trains. Revenue from sleepers higher than coach ?


----------



## Brian Battuello

Sleepers pull their weight revenue-wise, but remember that not all the rooms sold for $1800 plus. The folks that booked six months ago got a pretty good deal. You're only seeing the last one or two rooms, and they might not even sell at that price.


----------



## Sidney

Brian Battuello said:


> Sleepers pull their weight revenue-wise, but remember that not all the rooms sold for $1800 plus. The folks that booked six months ago got a pretty good deal. You're only seeing the last one or two rooms, and they might not even sell at that price.


If nobody would pay that insane price Amtrak will hopefully lower it. Thing is if just one person pays,the price stays. A few months ago I noticed the Southwest Chief between Chi and Lax was $899 no matter what date I punched in. There were a few $623 low bucket Eastbound. I checked yesterday and I saw a few $623 prices back Westbound. Hopefully, few people are paying $899..and that's a one person roomette.


----------



## zephyr17

Yes, that is the way yield management is supposed to work. If anticipated demand doesn't develop, more inventory is assigned to lower price buckets.

The yield management folks apparently didn't see the sales they wanted at the 899 mid bucket, so put some inventory in the low, 623 bucket.

Looks like the process is operating as intended. It also shows that Amtrak is no longer always bringing inventory in initially at low bucket 11 months in advance, but is bringing in inventory using an optimistic (from their standpoint) projection of demand, then adjusting downwards if it doesn't develop.


----------



## Brian Battuello

And again recognizing the considerable differences, that is more like the way cruise ships do it. They started an average yield and then adjust the prices up or down depending on how actual sales go. 

With cruise ships, if you can find a cruise that is significantly under booked, you can find a real deal even a few weeks before departure.


----------



## MARC Rider

To put some perspective on this, one should keep in mind that back in the 1870s, a one-way sleeper ticket between Omaha and Oakland sold for $100, which is about $2,000 in today's money. And, I believe you had to change trains in Ogden. And the whole journey took 4-7 days, depending on the weather and the moods of various outlaws, disgruntled Indians, buffalo herds, jerry-built infrastructure, etc. Also, the fare didn't include food, and maybe only one train a week had a dining car, which means one had to pay $1 (that's $20 in today's money) for every lousy meal choked down at meal stops whose facilities would probably be closed down by the order of any competent 21st century health inspector.

This is on top of whatever it cost to get from the east coast to Omaha, and for a while, the trains didn't cross the Missouri River there, and you had to take a ferry from Council Bluffs.

And more recently, from a December 1968 timetable:

Baltimore and Miami (Penn Central and Seaboard Coast Line)

coach fare $40.02 ($303.35 in 2121 $)
Sleeping car fare: $57.71 plus:
roomette $24.30 (total 82.01) ($621.63 in 2021 $))
bedroom $41.70 (99.41) ($753.45 in 2021 $)
compartment $44.75 ($102.46) ($776.55 in 2021 $)
Bedroom Suite $74.70 ($132.41) ($1,003.67 in 2021 $)
Drawing room $59.25 ($116.96) ($886.56 in 2021 $)

These fares did not include meals in the dining car, which may have cost between $7 and $50 in 2021 dollars.

I just did a search on amtrak.com for Baltmore-Miami fares departing on July 18.

Silver Star:
Coach $207 Value Fare, $345 Flexible fare
Roomette $1,614 (No bedrooms available, only 1 roomette available)

Silver Meteor:

Coach: Only flexible fare available ($345)
Roomette $656
Bedroom :$1,234.

Do the reservation for departures on August 22, and you get:

coach: $159 (both trains)
Roomette $552 Silver Star; no bedrooms available)
Roomette $487 Silver Meteor
Bedroom $1,234 Silver Meteor

Push your trip to September 19 and you can get a bedroom for $1,037 on the Meteor, and becomes available on the Star for $1,234.

In summary, I would say that even this summer's inflated Amtrak prices, even with flex dining are a better deal than riding the Overland Limited in the 1870s, and, for the most part, they're a better deal than riding the Seaboard Coast Line in 1968, though I will concede that the food on the SCL was probably a lot better. And there was also no yield management uptick in fares due to high season crowding. But that only means that off season Amtrak fares, purchased in advance, are a definite bargain compared to the Seaboard Coast Line.

The real exception seems to be in fares for single people occupying bedrooms, though I'm not sure how a modern bedroom compares to the choices available in 1968.


----------



## Bob Dylan

I can't afford those Fares, then or now! Flying is lots cheaper ( especially Southwest Airlines) even with the hassles involved.

It's good you mentioned the Food being better in the old days,as was the Service( remember Amtrak Diners were a la carte up until the 90s), and as for the Comparisons between Heritage Sleepers and Amtraks current equipment,the bedding was much better, and the Sections and Slumber Coaches gave you a more affordable option .

Lots of us have had the pleasure of riding the Canadian with the Budd equipment and the better food and service, it's the closest thing to the Super Chief that I rode as a kid. 

I will say that I much prefer the Viewliner Roomettes over the Superliner ones, and of course the Superliner Bedrooms are a nice Luxuy if you can afford one.( I've never ridden in a regular Viewliner I Bedroom,nor the New II,except for the H Room on the Is, which I consider the Best Sleeping Car Room that Amtrak offers.


----------



## MARC Rider

Bob Dylan said:


> Flying is lots cheaper


That's part of the problem here.


----------



## Qapla

I don't care how the prices compare to any other time period, adjusted for inflation or not - fact is, right now, at current rates and current living finances ... I can't afford to ride sleepers everywhere I want to go on a train. 

The price gap between coach and sleeper is just too great to justify the addition expense when I will need that money when I get to my destination

As long as there are people willing to pay the overinflated costs of the sleepers people like me will just have to ride coach or seek other forms of transportation


----------



## dlagrua

Tennessee Traveler said:


> When talking about these prices, while the prices everyone is quoting if for ONE PERSON on the airlines, etc.; the price for Amtrak sleeping accommodations are the price for one if traveling alone, yet those prices are the total for 2 people in roomettes and up to 3 people in a bedroom with no increase for the second and third passengers other than their coach fare.


When I did my comparison on our first class air fare to Arizona (United) $1600 was the full cost of the R/T for my wife and myself. The Amtrak bedroom fare for two was over $5,000. That's just too high a price to pay for second class accommodations. First Class rail to me would be equivalent to what Orient Express service was like..


----------



## MARC Rider

Bob Dylan said:


> Flying is lots cheaper


In 1970, when I started flying to look at colleges, a one-way airline ticket between Philadelphia and Chicago was $55, or the equivalent of $382 in today's money. That was for coach, and coach service was good enough that you didn't really need to bother with first class unless you just wanted to do some conspicuous consumption or didn't want to associate with the riff-raff. Back then, even though wages and salaries were generally higher than they are now, these prices really meant that most people couldn't afford to fly, or more likely, they flew much more infrequently than they did now, unless they were flying for business. This was personally true for me; our family was pretty well off, but we hardly ever took a family vacation that involved airplanes. Most of the time it was "pack up the car, let's drive to Maine and rent a cabin." Come to think of it, we hardly ever ate out in restaurants, either.

I think airline deregulation was a huge mistake, specifically because it achieved its goal -- cheaper airline fares. That meant more people were flying, which has turned out to not be such a good thing for a number of reasons. First, of course, it means that the service you get on these cheap flights is lousy. You can get good service, but the fares are so high that most people just can't afford it. Second, is that the airports and planes are crowded, and the entire experience is much more unpleasant than it used to be. Third, service to smaller cities has been severely cut back. Finally, the vastly number of increased flights means more pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and more transmission of disease as more and more people are traveling long distances. I've read that emissions from jet engines at the cruising altitudes of 30,000 ft. have a much more negative impact on air quality, global warming, and such than emissions on the ground.

Not to entirely pick on airplanes as a source of pollution. All transportation emits nasty stuff, and the world's increasing population means that even with technological improvements min emissions reductions, the emissions are going to increase. Probably if we're really serious about climate change, were going to have reduce mobility in general, but I can't see how that is possible in a democratic society. Maybe something like a carbon tax, riding the bad emitters will cost you more, but I'm not sure that Amtrak LD trains would fare so well, at least as long as they're being hauled by Tier 0 P-42s.


----------



## Tennessee Traveler

> _*Tennessee Traveler said:*_
> *When talking about these prices, while the prices everyone is quoting if for ONE PERSON on the airlines, etc.; the price for Amtrak sleeping accommodations are the price for one if traveling alone, yet those prices are the total for 2 people in roomettes and up to 3 people in a bedroom with no increase for the second and third passengers other than their coach fare.*


_*When I did my comparison on our first class air fare to Arizona (United) $1600 was the full cost of the R/T for my wife and myself. The Amtrak bedroom fare for two was over $5,000. That's just too high a price to pay for second class accommodations. First Class rail to me would be equivalent to what Orient Express service was like.. *_


Such a quote of $5000 is simply out of the realm of acceptable and prior to this summer unheard of even on Amtrak. My maximum budget for roomettes is in the $600 price range and a bedroom would be under $1400 and I do not consider the $800 extra cost for a bedroom desirable nor justified for me. As a solo traveler the bedrooms are less desirable since the sofa can face either forward or backward since in every other room the sofa faces opposite directions and since the bedrooms are over the downstairs bathrooms and next to the adjacent room's toliet, there is always chance of toliet smells which I have experienced. I suggest we all hold off reserving any room in the current $5000 realm since that is not value selling, it is pent up demand for people who will pay any price after COVID confinement. Hopefully we will survive the "bid any price" mentality we have now.


----------



## neroden

MARC Rider said:


> Maybe something like a carbon tax, riding the bad emitters will cost you more, but I'm not sure that Amtrak LD trains would fare so well, at least as long as they're being hauled by Tier 0 P-42s.


Thankfully they're being replaced with Tier 4 ALC-42s, which should put Amtrak in a pretty comfortable position in terms of emissions.


----------



## niemi24s

The previous fare increases noticed occurred sometime around April, 2021. Now the fares for Family Bedrooms and Bedrooms have increased again as seen during a few spot checks of the TE, SWC and CZ today. 

For SWC and TE high bucket Bedrooms:
• 1 Adult fares were $2137, 2173 and 2233
• Increases were 2.6 and 2.8%

For SWC and TE _low_ bucket Bedrooms:
• 1 Adult fares were $1013, 1029 and 1052
• Increases were 1.6 and 2.1%

For CZ high bucket Bedrooms:
• 1 Adult fares were $2108, 2202 and 2261
• Increases were 4.5 and 2.7%

For CZ _low_ bucket Bedrooms:
• 1 Adult fares were $966, 1015 and 1039
• Increases were 5.1 and 2.4%

On the bright side, Coach and Roomette fares have remained constant through these last two increases.

Let the pissing and moaning begin!


----------



## Exvalley

Supply and demand. What more can you say.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

If it's as simple as supply and demand why is Amtrak auctioning compartments for pennies on the dollar? Something does not add up but today's shorter trains with fewer cars and a higher percentage of rooms blocked for staff might be fooling the yield management system into overpricing buckets. Or maybe Amtrak really thinks their outdated compartments are worth more than every other option on the market.


----------



## Bob Dylan

niemi24s said:


> The previous fare increases noticed occurred sometime around April, 2021. Now the fares for Family Bedrooms and Bedrooms have increased again as seen during a few spot checks of the TE, SWC and CZ today.
> 
> For SWC and TE high bucket Bedrooms:
> • 1 Adult fares were $2137, 2173 and 2233
> • Increases were 2.6 and 2.8%
> 
> For SWC and TE _low_ bucket Bedrooms:
> • 1 Adult fares were $1013, 1029 and 1052
> • Increases were 1.6 and 2.1%
> 
> For CZ high bucket Bedrooms:
> • 1 Adult fares were $2108, 2202 and 2261
> • Increases were 4.5 and 2.7%
> 
> For CZ _low_ bucket Bedrooms:
> • 1 Adult fares were $966, 1015 and 1039
> • Increases were 5.1 and 2.4%
> 
> On the bright side, Coach and Roomette fares have remained constant through these last two increases.
> 
> Let the pissing and moaning begin!


The Roomettes Fares Buckets may have stayed steady, but they're still Unaffordable by me.( Coach Fares are still Affordable! Most Days)

Examples: Texas Eagle. AUS-CHI for 1: $786!!!( SWA $212 RT)

TexasEagle. AUS-ALP for 1: $365 ( it was $202 in May on my Trip)

Texas Eagle/Starlight. AUS-EMY for 1: $1537!!!( SWA $246 RT)

COACH Example:Normal Coach Fare is $15-$30 ( Depending on Day and When Booked ) There are currently only 2 Coaches/ 1 Sleeper and 1 CCC on this Train!!!!!

Texas Eagle-AUS- DAL 6/23
#422. $58!!! (1 Left @ this Price)
#22. SOLDOUT 

They are only running a 4 Car Consist on the Eagle, even on #421/#422 Days ( CHI-LAX), and still serving Flex Flex Meals in the CCC and there is No Sightseer Lounge between CHI and SAS( 31 Hours!)

This Train has been consistently Full since May and on most Days the Sleepers ate SOLD OUT ( with no Transdorm the Crew takes up 3-4 Roomettes in the Sleeper)

Supply and Demand, Yes, but they've priced me out of LD Trips, so I'll be Flying on Southwest on any LD trips I take, including to the Gathering.( and Driving on Short Trips)


----------



## Exvalley

Devil's Advocate said:


> If it's as simple as supply and demand why is Amtrak auctioning compartments for pennies on the dollar?


Are you aware of how many bedrooms are being auctioned off at the last minute using “bid up”? For all we know it’s extremely rare.


----------



## Amtrakfflyer

I still near from crew members and friends traveling, bedrooms are going out empty more often than not. As a family thats taken 2-3 cross country trips per year the past decade (GBB-LAX) they've lost our business. Family room prices for a family of 3 or 4 are insane on the SWC.


----------



## daybeers

Exvalley said:


> Are you aware of how many bedrooms are being auctioned off at the last minute using “bid up”? For all we know it’s extremely rare.


Regardless, why are many rooms empty?


----------



## Sidney

Amtrakfflyer said:


> I still near from crew members and friends traveling, bedrooms are going out empty more often than not. As a family thats taken 2-3 cross country trips per year the past decade (GBB-LAX) they've lost our business. Family room prices for a family of 3 or 4 are insane on the
> 
> 
> Bob Dylan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Roomettes Fares Buckets may have stayed steady, but they're still Unaffordable by me.( Coach Fares are still Affordable! Most Days)
> 
> Examples: Texas Eagle. AUS-CHI for 1: $786!!!( SWA $212 RT)
> 
> TexasEagle. AUS-ALP for 1: $365 ( it was $202 in May on my Trip)
> 
> Texas Eagle/Starlight. AUS-EMY for 1: $1537!!!( SWA $246 RT)
> 
> They are only running a 4 Car Consist on the Eagle, even on #421/#422 Days ( CHI-LAX), and still serving Flex Flex Meals in the CCC and there is No Sightseer Lounge between CHI and SAS( 31 Hours!)
> 
> This Train has been consistently Full since May and on most Days the Sleepers ate SOLD OUT ( with no Transdorm the Crew takes up 3-4 Roomettes in the Sleeper)
> 
> Supply and Demand, Yes, but they've priced me out of LD Trips, so I'll be Flying on Southwest on any LD trips I take, including to the Gathering.( and Driving on Short Trips)
> 
> 
> 
> I wish there was something between Coach and Roomette. I miss the days when you could buy a sleeper after you board. I'm booked from Chicago to Buffalo in September in Coach. A roomette for basically an overnight trip with that sorry excuse for a breakfast is $450. No way would I ever pay that.
Click to expand...


----------



## Bob Dylan

daybeers said:


> Regardless, why are many rooms empty?


Because they are Obscenely Expensive for what you get now!


----------



## Qapla

So, apparently, the excessively high prices are NOT a result of "supply and demand" - there is some other excuse "reason"


----------



## Sidney

$350 is about what I would pay for a one overnight trip in a roomette for 24 hours which would include all three meals. I grabbed that on the Crescent in September. Only downside is flex dining.


----------



## niemi24s

Train is full but rooms are empty?


----------



## pennyk

Last time I checked, all the bedrooms in the trains I plan to take to and from the October Gathering were sold out. I was unable to book a bedroom on one of the trains when I reserved a few months ago. On a couple of the trains, all the rooms were sold out.


----------



## Palmland

I believe Amtrak has decided to minimize train consist size to reduce maintenance and labor costs, which of course also drives up prices with the reduced ‘supply’. That’s strange economics if you are trying to grow your business - but then, maybe they aren’t!

But ‘bargains’ can still be found. In early October on northbound Auto-Train, traditionally a slow time, you can get a bedroom for $642 and family room for $601. Of course your car is an additional expense. The A-T with six or seven sleepers and lower fares seems counter to the strategy for other LD trains.

The Capitol Ltd for the same time and and also an overnight trip will set you back $1092 for a bedroom.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

For those who believe today's sleepers are excessively priced the solution seems to be booking coach and then bidding up for a compartment at a fraction of the cost. If the bid fails to succeed you cancel and re-book until you "win" the auction process. My problem is that the only daily train in my area retains Flexicon dining with no observation car and the routes I want to ride most require a mix of flights and hotels to be practical. When I price sleeper tickets every date I check is the same rate, which seems to go against this idea that it's all some sort of yield management strategy.


----------



## Amtrakfflyer

My main concern is something more nefarious is going on. Like not allowing coach passengers in the diner, a new dining service that exceeded our expectations but may be over the top expense wise with linen and china. The Capital and Eagle so small they are turning customers away possibly not even big enough to break even during high season. Running two full consist stub trains with sleepers and diners the CS, LAX-SMF and SEA-KFS but not allowing people to book it. Only available to previously booked customers all summer long as of now.

And back to this topic prices so high long time loyal customers aren’t traveling. Sure the website might say bedrooms are sold out but that’s not what a lot of attendants are saying onboard. The stub trains I mentioned earlier also are saying “sold out“ as well when the reality is you just can’t book them.

All the actions listed above COULD be setting up horrible loss numbers for the network trains going forward. Numbers we know members of this management have wanted to show Congress for years. Look management has a horrible track record. Maybe they have changed their tune but look at the whole picture with the long distance trains. Something doesn’t add up. I hope it’s just incompetence and not nefarious but we need to keep our eye on the ball. Labor shortage only doesn’t explain all these snafus.


----------



## VentureForth

This just isn't "fare".


----------



## tonys96

What/where is this bidding process?


----------



## City of Miami

And at the same time our NER (171&176) is cheap. And not just in VA either. My trip cvs-was Friday is $21 right now, not even 2 weeks advance. I checked for cvs-nyp a week later, $43. The lowest saver fare before 3/2020 was $74.
The Cardinal continues to go by here with 2 coaches, 1 sleeper, 0 business class. The app frequently says sold out. Recent summers have seen 3 & 4 coaches, 2 sleepers and business class. Sad.


----------



## Ryan

daybeers said:


> Regardless, why are many rooms empty?



Objection, assumes facts not in evidence.




tonys96 said:


> What/where is this bidding process?











BidUp | Amtrak







www.amtrak.com


----------



## jis

City of Miami said:


> And at the same time our NER (171&176) is cheap. And not just in VA either. My trip cvs-was Friday is $21 right now, not even 2 weeks advance. I checked for cvs-nyp a week later, $43. The lowest saver fare before 3/2020 was $74.


Few things...

1. NER fares on corridor is very high is in general a myth. Acela fares are high because the lowest class is BC and the fare usually is close to NER BC. NER fares not so much, though specific runs may get high.

2. CVS to WAS is a Virginia run.

3. NER fares in Coach are generally lower than the Coach fares charged on LD trains on the NER

I suppose as more capacity has come on line fares have been bumped down to fill them and maximize yield at the same time.


----------



## jruff001

Palmland said:


> But ‘bargains’ can still be found. In early October on northbound Auto-Train, traditionally a slow time, you can get a bedroom for $642 and family room for $601. Of course your car is an additional expense. The A-T with six or seven sleepers and lower fares seems counter to the strategy for other LD trains.


That's because the AT does not have the same strategy as other LD trains.

Traffic on the AT is very imbalanced going south in the fall and north in the spring (roughly). It carries the consist and crew for the peak high-traffic, high-fare direction but then has to haul the same consist back in the slow direction to do it all over again. So there are always good deals to be had going against the flow, which includes NB in the fall as the snowbirds start their migration southward.

Other LD trains don't really have seasonal peaks in only one direction and are (roughly) busy in the summer and slow in the winter in both directions, so they can just have a shorter consist round trip both ways during the slow periods.


----------



## TracyH

I’ve been eyeing the prices for roomettes on the Empire Builder from Glacier National Park to Chicago and last week the price for two adults and two children was under $1300 (for 2 roomettes), 11 months out. Just a couple of days ago I checked and the price increased to $2300, also 11 months out. I can’t even buy my tickets yet because we’re planning this for mid summer of next year. I’ve been reading all about the need to book as soon as possible, and discussions about buckets. Any insights on why the sudden increase? (In two days, I should finally be able to buy tickets based on the dates of travel.) Thanks!


----------



## Cal

Some people have already bought roomettes and another fare bucket increase? Gosh, amtrak is going to put price everyone!


----------



## TracyH

So when I see a price 11 months out, is that the low bucket fair that is not going to drop? Most people have said that you should book with Amtrak as far in advance as possible, although I’ve seen other threads in this forum saying that the price may fluctuate, like airline tickets do.


----------



## zephyr17

TracyH said:


> So when I see a price 11 months out, is that the low bucket fair that is not going to drop? Most people have said that you should book with Amtrak as far in advance as possible, although I’ve seen other threads in this forum saying that the price may fluctuate, like airline tickets do.


They do. Amtrak has gotten more sophisticated in their yield management and no longer routinely releases inventory in the lowest bucket 11 months out as they used to. They introduce inventory based on historic demand for that period and somewhat optimistic forecasts and then will reallocate inventory among the buckets as actual demand develops or doesn't develop as anticipated. My own experience is the sweet spot is generally 4-6 months out, more like 6 for high demand periods. This isn't a scientific measurement, merely my own pre-pandemic experience. I'll also note that coming off of triweekly frequencies, shortened consists, and post-pandemic travel demand have skewed things and the old rules may not apply, or not apply for some time until things settle down.


----------



## TracyH

Ok thanks. That’s really helpful! I was hoping that if I was on top of things well in advance I’d get the lowest price, but now I’ll rethink that.


----------



## OBS

TracyH said:


> Ok thanks. That’s really helpful! I was hoping that if I was on top of things well in advance I’d get the lowest price, but now I’ll rethink that.


You can always try some different dates near your date of travel to get an idea of possible price differences. It may also be possible someone else booked on your days and temporarily drove up the price. If so, it may drop again in a few days.

Finally, try pricing one roomette vs two and see if you get a cheaper rate at least on one...


----------



## TracyH

Oh neat idea. I tried booking for 1 adult and 1 child and it was $1154, so just half of the 2 roomette deal for the 4 of us. I've been looking at the very last date available to book 11 months in advance when the train says it's 0% full. So it doesn't seem to be an issue of other people booking roomettes. I'll keep trying....


----------



## niemi24s

If you've not considered this option, it looks like the cheapest Family Bedroom for 2 adults and 2 children would be $1279 for your trip. Just make sure your children would fit in the shorter bunks:


----------



## niemi24s

Cal said:


> Some people have already bought roomettes and another fare bucket increase?


Don't steam your cookies. Roomettes have had the same five bucket values for at least a year. What they're reporting above is a jump from one bucket to another - and that happens quite frequently.


----------



## Cal

niemi24s said:


> Don't steam your cookies. Roomettes have had the same five bucket values for at least a year. What they're reporting is a jump from one bucket to another - and that happens quite frequently.


Sorry, I thought the low buckets jumped a few months back.


----------



## TracyH

Thanks! The family room has been on my mind. I think that I'll at least book that and then see if I can change it if the roomette price goes down. As a family, we had decided that the 2 roomettes would be better (better windows, opportunity to ask for upper level rooms, etc.) but it's not worth an extra $1,000 over the family room!


----------



## Cal

TracyH said:


> Thanks! The family room has been on my mind. I think that I'll at least book that and then see if I can change it if the roomette price goes down. As a family, we had decided that the 2 roomettes would be better (better windows, opportunity to ask for upper level rooms, etc.) but it's not worth an extra $1,000 over the


Good choice!


----------



## danasgoodstuff

What I noticed playing around was that Roomettes on the EB, the CZ, and elsewhere hadn't gone up just one step but had more than doubled, so a family bedroom (for 1) was cheaper than a roomette. And I had different prices for the same dates displaying in different tabs - but I'm afraid to refresh! Seems weird - an increase to the next bucket (say from $505 with the senior discount for a roomette PDX to CHI might plausibly go up to $6XX the next day on a 10% full train... but this seems weird.


----------



## TracyH

Strange. I found that the price for 2 roomettes jumped $1000 within one day without any change in how full the train was.


----------



## zephyr17

I think the percent full only measures coach.


----------



## PaTrainFan

zephyr17 said:


> I think the percent full only measures coach.



I don't get how they determine that given the constant churn of passengers on and off. Can be far different load factors between any two stops. Easy on a plane flight point to point, not so much on a train. I am sure there is an anaswer, but I was an English major, not a math major.


----------



## niemi24s

Cal said:


> Sorry, I thought the low buckets jumped a few months back.


There have been two increases in _all_ the buckets for Family Bedrooms and Bedrooms so far this year. Those for Coach and Roomettes have not increased since about the middle of 2020.

Each of these (including what didn't increase) have been reported here (somewhere).


----------



## jis

PaTrainFan said:


> I don't get how they determine that given the constant churn of passengers on and off. Can be far different load factors between any two stops. Easy on a plane flight point to point, not so much on a train. I am sure there is an answer, but I was an English major, not a math major.


I don't know what they do, but a pretty clear average estimation would be provided by the metric (booked passenger miles/total seat miles) * 100. In principle this could be computed for any segment, but when a single number is given for a train I suspect it would be computed for its entire journey.

And yes, for various reasons the number provided I believe is for Coach and excludes Sleeper occupancy.


----------



## dlagrua

Due to cost we were shut out of rail travel for our Grand Canyon trip in early August . We tried to book a BR trip from PHL to FLG 8 months out. Prices were coming in at near $4976 R/T-. OK that's old news posted a few times before but thats not the end of the story. 
UPDATE: We checked the price yesterday and the trip is now near $5675 R/T with bedrooms still available 3 weeks out. We wanted to take the train but for $1600 first class air to PHX was the far more affordable choice. If Amtrak believes their sleepers are worth nearly 4X first class air and they can sell out at those prices, then we are shut out of their customer base. Since sleepers are still available, this has got to be part of Amtrak's plan to remain non-competitiive and discourage LD ridership. What else could it be? 
We have used Amtrak for our LD trips for over 18 years but sadly not this year.


----------



## Qapla

I have been shut out of the sleeper customer base since I started riding Amtrak. The price disparity between coach and sleeper simply does not agree with my financial situation - so, when I ride, I travel coach.


----------



## Sidney

Low bucket fares can still be found,$525 from Chi to Sea and $560 from Chi to Sac,but you have to book way ahead. The extremes :$299 for a ten segment thirty day rail pass when it was on sale and $2500 plus for a bedroom on a two and and a half day trip from Chicago to Seattle Sacramento and LA.


----------



## TracyH

Sorry if this is ignorance on my part, but I don’t quite understand. I’m looking at the maximum in terms of advance ticketing. So that’s June 29, 2022 right now. Roomettes are $2,300 for that date , when last week at 11 months out they were under $1,300. So $2,300 is considered a low bucket fair?


----------



## TracyH

Oh, and sorry. This is for two roomettes for a family of four.


----------



## zephyr17

If the fare jumped up, it is not low bucket almost by definition.

According to Niemi24's chart roomette buckets CHI-SEA for accommodation charge only are:
282
406
522
688
829

While I don't have GPK fares, once you factor in 2 adult rail fares and 2 half price child fares even taking into account the shorter distance, it looks like high bucket to me. Maybe mid-high.

Traveling 11 months from now is absolutely peak season. Under the more sophisticated yield management practices Amtrak is now using, they probably released no inventory at all in the low bucket. It looks to me like there may have been a little inventory in the mid bucket initially, but that was scooped up.

The good news is, assuming my educated guess that you are looking at high bucket is true, it is unlikely the price will go higher. It might drop at some point if bookings don't materialize, but that point is probably some months away, if ever. They are unlikely to reallocate their inventory this far out. Also, the fact that the inventory at the lowest initially offered bucket was quickly taken would indicate to the yield management folks that they guessed right


----------



## zephyr17

TracyH said:


> Oh neat idea. I tried booking for 1 adult and 1 child and it was $1154, so just half of the 2 roomette deal for the 4 of us. I've been looking at the very last date available to book 11 months in advance when the train says it's 0% full. So it doesn't seem to be an issue of other people booking roomettes. I'll keep trying....


Per Niemi24's chart, CHI-SEA high bucket for an adult and 1/2 price child would be 829 accommodation + 245 adult rail + 122.50 child rail = 1201.50.

That 1154 is almost certainly high bucket.


----------



## niemi24s

For the OP's trip GPK to CHI in two Roomettes, high bucket is $2246 and low bucket is estimated to be $1106.


----------



## zephyr17

Thanks Niemi. Better than my estimation from Seattle fares.


----------



## Michigan Mom

dlagrua said:


> Due to cost we were shut out of rail travel for our Grand Canyon trip in early August . We tried to book a BR trip from PHL to FLG 8 months out. Prices were coming in at near $4976 R/T-. OK that's old news posted a few times before but thats not the end of the story.
> UPDATE: We checked the price yesterday and the trip is now near $5675 R/T with bedrooms still available 3 weeks out. We wanted to take the train but for $1600 first class air to PHX was the far more affordable choice. If Amtrak believes their sleepers are worth nearly 4X first class air and they can sell out at those prices, then we are shut out of their customer base. Since sleepers are still available, this has got to be part of Amtrak's plan to remain non-competitiive and discourage LD ridership. What else could it be?
> We have used Amtrak for our LD trips for over 18 years but sadly not this year.


What's happening is Disney pricing... there's enough wealthy people willing to pay, that there's no business reason to care about anyone who can't. Basically the wealthy are hollowing out America as we know it.


----------



## 1884Derby

In may I booked a roomette for 2 adults on the CZ travelling CHI-SF in february 2022. I paid $789, wich I believe was lower bucket, or at least a fair price in my opinion.

I have been monitoring the price since, and it recently went up to $1278. I would call that a massive jump in price.


----------



## amtrakp42

TracyH said:


> I’ve been eyeing the prices for roomettes on the Empire Builder from Glacier National Park to Chicago and last week the price for two adults and two children was under $1300 (for 2 roomettes), 11 months out. Just a couple of days ago I checked and the price increased to $2300, also 11 months out. I can’t even buy my tickets yet because we’re planning this for mid summer of next year. I’ve been reading all about the need to book as soon as possible, and discussions about buckets. Any insights on why the sudden increase? (In two days, I should finally be able to buy tickets based on the dates of travel.) Thanks!


Try several different dates as sometimes there may be several bookings on one certain day. And I have seen prices way out come down in the spring. I've have done this for 40 years and it varies every year. I rode the zephry last summer (2020) and all sleepers were booked full with only about 10 riders in each of 2 coaches with rear 3rd coach locked. And also some travel groups will book a block of sleepers for one day. I will say with the demand now that I haven't seen prices go down much after about March for the summer. I booked all my trips in March with one in April to get the lowest bucket price. Also it is much faster to check day by day on the phone app than website.


----------



## niemi24s

Welcome to the Forum!



1884Derby said:


> In may I booked a roomette for 2 adults on the CZ travelling CHI-SF in february 2022. I paid $789, wich I believe was lower bucket, or at least a fair price in my opinion.
> 
> I have been monitoring the price since, and it recently went up to $1278. I would call that a massive jump in price.



That's nothing more than a jump from low bucket to high bucket and all such jumps are massive. For one adult, Roomette fares can as much as double from low to high bucket.


----------



## 20th Century Rider

Michigan Mom said:


> What's happening is Disney pricing... there's enough wealthy people willing to pay, that there's no business reason to care about anyone who can't. Basically the wealthy are hollowing out America as we know it.


Yup... we all need to make sacrifices to make the wealthy even richer! Aaah and the corporations increase profits by rising the prices of all commodities... while reducing the size of packaging! 

RE: Amtrak pricing is going up up up as well. But isn't this supposed to be a government supported service for the tax paying citizens???


----------



## FunNut

I've been on here for quite a while but haven't visited in some time. Can someone point me to "Niemi24's chart," please. My trips are in a roomette, usually ABQ-LAX and back.


----------



## pennyk

FunNut said:


> I've been on here for quite a while but haven't visited in some time. Can someone point me to "Niemi24's chart," please. My trips are in a roomette, usually ABQ-LAX and back.



There are more charts in the FAQ forum. 



niemi24s said:


> This partial update shows those one adult sleeper fares now offered on NER 66 and 67. As only three in each category could be found there's no way of knowing if any additional fares are loaded into Arrow.
> 
> 
> View attachment 22012


----------



## niemi24s

This is the thread pennyk referred to and the chart with the LAX - ABQ and ABQ - CHI fares is in Post #38.

Long Distance Train Coach & Sleeper Fares (Buckets)

The chart shows the current two lowest sleeper fares for Roomettes but the fares for Family Bedrooms and Bedrooms have increased twice so far this year.


----------



## IndyLions

Michigan Mom said:


> What's happening is Disney pricing... there's enough wealthy people willing to pay, that there's no business reason to care about anyone who can't. Basically the wealthy are hollowing out America as we know it.



I agree it sucks that prices are so high these days for travel. But let’s face it - I think we all saw it coming. Demand is high from ALL Americans, hardly just the wealthy. And we’re all paying the price for Amtrak having such a small inventory of available capacity.

Your bogeyman of the “wealthy” is a fallacy. The wealthy don’t travel Amtrak for the most part, nor can they fill Disney to capacity. if you took an Amtrak train today or walked a Disney park, I doubt you would see much difference in the demographics from two years ago.

The people traveling Amtrak today are the same ones that traveled it two years ago. A combination of lower income folks who need to get from Point A to Point B, retirees who now have two years of travel budget that has not been spent, and middle income folks probably charging way too much on their credit cards for that big vacation this year.


----------



## 20th Century Rider

IndyLions said:


> I agree it sucks that prices are so high these days for travel. But let’s face it - I think we all saw it coming. Demand is high from ALL Americans, hardly just the wealthy. And we’re all paying the price for Amtrak having such a small inventory of available capacity.
> 
> Your bogeyman of the “wealthy” is a fallacy. The wealthy don’t travel Amtrak for the most part, nor can they fill Disney to capacity. if you took an Amtrak train today or walked a Disney park, I doubt you would see much difference in the demographics from two years ago.
> 
> The people traveling Amtrak today are the same ones that traveled it two years ago. A combination of lower income folks who need to get from Point A to Point B, retirees who now have two years of travel budget that has not been spent, and middle income folks probably charging way too much on their credit cards for that big vacation this year.


Everyone's getting hit with out of control inflation... gas just went up another dime yesterday... after going up 15 cents last week; yeeks! $3.75 per gallon... on the West Coast everything is on fire as well. And wherever you live you know that food packaging is shrinking as the price goes up! 

And sadly enough many have now been priced out of the housing market and face rising rents.

As for public travel... many local bus lines have just gone out of business and airfares are out of control. I guess Amtrak is no different; if I can get a sleeper from coast to coast for $1500 to $2000 [double that for round trip] I grab it. The article below explains things realistically...









Here's how inflation will dip into your pocket and what you can do about it


Consumer prices are accelerating at their fastest pace in 13 years, and that is going to hit major purchases, investments, and more.




www.cnbc.com


----------



## me_little_me

From what I've read, in most cases, prices really have not gone up that much. Comparing gas prices to the depressed 2020 numbers is wrong. One has to look back at 2019. And for travel, not just on Amtrak, think about how much was spent in 2020. I know, it was virtually zero after March for us and the travel in January and February were scheduled in 2019. Many are in that situation so travel now is really two years of travel in 6 months. "This too shall pass" (Old Persian Adage).

I know that my one Amtrak trip later this year (with a possible second one if I can get it in) is making up for the three I didn't take last year and the missed ones from this year. So like so many others (especially those of us with few years of travel left), I'm willing to spend more than in the past on a trip. In the future, I expect most people will go back to their normal pattern and prices will settle down.

Our touristy town is just full of visitors EVERY DAY - more on Mondays than even on Saturdays in the past! The museum I volunteer at has gift shop sales that have blown away even the 2019 number - doubling those and more. and the free Model RR club and museum I am a member of are having more people in the building and on the grounds at one time than we used to get in the whole day. Donations are unbelievable and we've found many $20s and even a $50 bill in our donation box when two years ago, $1 to $5 was the norm and $10 bills were few.


----------



## Bob Dylan

me_little_me said:


> From what I've read, in most cases, prices really have not gone up that much. Comparing gas prices to the depressed 2020 numbers is wrong. One has to look back at 2019. And for travel, not just on Amtrak, think about how much was spent in 2020. I know, it was virtually zero after March for us and the travel in January and February were scheduled in 2019. Many are in that situation so travel now is really two years of travel in 6 months. "This too shall pass" (Old Persian Adage).
> 
> I know that my one Amtrak trip later this year (with a possible second one if I can get it in) is making up for the three I didn't take last year and the missed ones from this year. So like so many others (especially those of us with few years of travel left), I'm willing to spend more than in the past on a trip. In the future, I expect most people will go back to their normal pattern and prices will settle down.
> 
> Our touristy town is just full of visitors EVERY DAY - more on Mondays than even on Saturdays in the past! The museum I volunteer at has gift shop sales that have blown away even the 2019 number - doubling those and more. and the free Model RR club and museum I am a member of are having more people in the building and on the grounds at one time than we used to get in the whole day. Donations are unbelievable and we've found many $20s and even a $50 bill in our donation box when two years ago, $1 to $5 was the norm and $10 bills were few.


Same thing here in Austin, and I'm sure all Tourist towns are experiencing the same thing as pent up demand has resulted in an explosion of Travel.

Unfortunately, the current COVID Wave caused by the Delta Varaint and the Unvaccinated will probably set us back to the 2020/early 2021 Levels of Travel.


----------



## Barb Stout

FunNut said:


> I've been on here for quite a while but haven't visited in some time. Can someone point me to "Niemi24's chart," please. My trips are in a roomette, usually ABQ-LAX and back.


Hi FunNut from Rio Rancho! Greetings from Barb in ABQ!


----------



## 20th Century Rider

FunNut said:


> I've been on here for quite a while but haven't visited in some time. Can someone point me to "Niemi24's chart," please. My trips are in a roomette, usually ABQ-LAX and back.


If you are flexible and get a good Amtrak agent [Philadelphia Based] they can usually find the best possible fare within the date range you want to go. A few things of interest... the Florida based agents are outsourced and IMO don't have the skills or the customer interest to provide the same level of service. Also, I've noticed that certain city pairs are higher... I guess that depends on overall demand. ABQ and LAX seem to be a high frequency route. The fares I found for September and October ranged from $429 to $587 on dates I checked. Kind-a funny in an annoying way that advanced search allows flexibility for 'any time of day departure' when there is only one train per day!

Yup... I know... coach can be tough on that stretch... and you could end up with a seat mate which can be good or bad. You may end up in an aisle. Amtrak traditionally places same genders together for coach seating. And the SSL is usually packed out of ABQ. Flying for around $250 to $350 is a hassle as well plus the expense of getting from airport to local destination.

So try to get that Philadelphia based Amtrak agent and they may be able to find a lower fare.


----------



## Sidney

20th Century Rider said:


> If you are flexible and get a good Amtrak agent [Philadelphia Based] they can usually find the best possible fare within the date range you want to go. A few things of interest... the Florida based agents are outsourced and IMO don't have the skills or the customer interest to provide the same level of service. Also, I've noticed that certain city pairs are higher... I guess that depends on overall demand. ABQ and LAX seem to be a high frequency route. The fares I found for September and October ranged from $429 to $587 on dates I checked. Kind-a funny in an annoying way that advanced search allows flexibility for 'any time of day departure' when there is only one train per day!
> 
> Yup... I know... coach can be tough on that stretch... and you could end up with a seat mate which can be good or bad. You may end up in an aisle. Amtrak traditionally places same genders together for coach seating. And the SSL is usually packed out of ABQ. Flying for around $250 to $350 is a hassle as well plus the expense of getting from airport to local destination.
> 
> So try to get that Philadelphia based Amtrak agent and they may be able to find a lower fare.


If I am on a train with a sightseer car and I'm in Coach I'll always opt for an aisle seat. If I have a seatmate,the last thing I want to do is bother him to get out of my seat. I usually spend most of my time in the SSL car and if my seatmate happens to be obese,has BO or is obnoxious(it's happened several times) I'll spend overnight in the SSL Not the most comfortable for sleeping,but at least you have your own seat.

I would love single seating in the Coaches. A few of the business cars have them. I would gladly.pay a premium for that. If only roomettes weren't so pricy for just an eight hour period..overnight. A few years ago you could grab a roomette for $100 for an overnight.

I


----------



## 20th Century Rider

Sidney said:


> If I am on a train with a sightseer car and I'm in Coach I'll always opt for an aisle seat. If I have a seatmate,the last thing I want to do is bother him to get out of my seat. I usually spend most of my time in the SSL car and if my seatmate happens to be obese,has BO or is obnoxious(it's happened several times) I'll spend overnight in the SSL Not the most comfortable for sleeping,but at least you have your own seat.
> 
> I would love single seating in the Coaches. A few of the business cars have them. I would gladly.pay a premium for that. If only roomettes weren't so pricy for just an eight hour period..overnight. A few years ago you could grab a roomette for $100 for an overnight.
> 
> I


RE the SSL... I have been on crowded trains when the conductor has restricted the amount of time you can use the SSL... and frequently some conductors restrict use at late hours of the night. One thing that is very risky is getting out of your seat and placing something there to reserve your space when you need to use the WC or get a snack. Best to make friends with some other passengers sitting there... and hold it with something of little value... then return as quickly as you can. The SWC is usually a full train... especially after ABQ.


----------



## zephyr17

Well, everyone complains about VIA's fares, but in a trip I am planning for early April I found that the roomette fares on VIA from Toronto to Vancouver are roughly the same as the roomette fares from New York to Seattle (via LSL and EB) for my travel dates. The Amtrak fares are almost double what I am paying for the same trip in November, the LSL roomette alone is 740, which is high bucket . I was originally planning to do Everett-Vancouver-Toronto-New York and then return from New York on Amtrak, since the trip is basically about returning to ride the Canadian. With fares about the same, I'd rather just stay on VIA which is a much better product for the money.


----------



## Qapla

Regardless if the price increase is "sudden" or not they are very inconsistent.

I just looked at a trip from PAK to NYP. Both Silvers serve both stops. On one date the Star is more expensive for the coach seat and cheaper for a roomette than the Silver is while on another date the Silver is higher for coach and cheaper for the roomette. 

Also, in the same week coach can vary by $42 from one day to the next even though the percentage of how full the train is is the same for both trains.

Either way - a price difference of nearly $400 between coach and a roomette for an overnight trip seems a bit steep.

It's obvious that the people who set these fares do not ride the trains - or, if they do, they ride for free and have no real idea of the ridiculousness of the prices they are setting/charging.


----------



## joelkfla

Qapla said:


> It's obvious that the people who set these fares do not ride the trains - or, if they do, they ride for free and have no real idea of the ridiculousness of the prices they are setting/charging.


The objective is to maximize revenue, not to minimize ridiculousness.


----------



## Michigan Mom

IndyLions said:


> I agree it sucks that prices are so high these days for travel. But let’s face it - I think we all saw it coming. Demand is high from ALL Americans, hardly just the wealthy. And we’re all paying the price for Amtrak having such a small inventory of available capacity.
> 
> Your bogeyman of the “wealthy” is a fallacy. The wealthy don’t travel Amtrak for the most part, nor can they fill Disney to capacity. if you took an Amtrak train today or walked a Disney park, I doubt you would see much difference in the demographics from two years ago.
> 
> The people traveling Amtrak today are the same ones that traveled it two years ago. A combination of lower income folks who need to get from Point A to Point B, retirees who now have two years of travel budget that has not been spent, and middle income folks probably charging way too much on their credit cards for that big vacation this year.



Oh, it's not a fallacy. I didn't say the demographics changed. It's a continuation.


----------



## Michigan Mom

Qapla said:


> Regardless if the price increase is "sudden" or not they are very inconsistent.
> 
> I just looked at a trip from PAK to NYP. Both Silvers serve both stops. On one date the Star is more expensive for the coach seat and cheaper for a roomette than the Silver is while on another date the Silver is higher for coach and cheaper for the roomette.
> 
> Also, in the same week coach can vary by $42 from one day to the next even though the percentage of how full the train is is the same for both trains.
> 
> Either way - a price difference of nearly $400 between coach and a roomette for an overnight trip seems a bit steep.
> 
> It's obvious that the people who set these fares do not ride the trains - or, if they do, they ride for free and have no real idea of the ridiculousness of the prices they are setting/charging.



The prices have gotten quite ridiculous, yes.
When you look at a city pair and realize you can purchase a first class seat on a major airline for less than the cost of a roomette, or purchase a coach seat and get there in a couple of hours for the same money... yes, it's arguably high cost for the value and yes, there are retired/wealthy/both who are more than willing to pay. So it's hard to see the prices coming down, at least in the near term.


----------



## Bostontoallpoints

I travel to Florida from Boston often. I use to take 2 trips a year on Amtrak. I can fly for 1/2 the price of a roomette for 2 people. I can fly 1st class for less than a roomette. The food and service have gone down hill, and the trains are beat up. I don’t see the value in Amtrak long distance.


----------



## PaTrainFan

Bostontoallpoints said:


> I travel to Florida from Boston often. I use to take 2 trips a year on Amtrak. I can fly for 1/2 the price of a roomette for 2 people. I can fly 1st class for less than a roomette. The food and service have gone down hill, and the trains are beat up. I don’t see the value in Amtrak long distance.



Neither does Amtrak, apparently.


----------



## Sidney

Looking into an April trip I picked a random date for the Coast Starlight and from Lax to Klamath Falls is $288 for a roomette. To Pdx it's $394. By moving to Coach in Klamath I save $70. Thats 23 hours in a sleeper with three meals. I thought of transferring to the EB to Chi but at $860 I'll pass

Many people plan trips with connections. A 30 day chart showing sleeper fares would be most welcome. I got a $505 fare from Chi to Sea next month in a roomette. I wanted to takethe CS to Sac the next day but the low bucket was gone,so I manually looked.up dates where low bucket pricing was in effect for all my conne tions It takes time and being flexible,it can be done



It


----------



## niemi24s

And, just in case you hadn't noticed, all Amtrak fare increases are sudden. Never saw a slow one.

Same goes for fare decreases.


----------



## zephyr17

zephyr17 said:


> Well, everyone complains about VIA's fares, but in a trip I am planning for early April I found that the roomette fares on VIA from Toronto to Vancouver are roughly the same as the roomette fares from New York to Seattle (via LSL and EB) for my travel dates. The Amtrak fares are almost double what I am paying for the same trip in November, the LSL roomette alone is 740, which is high bucket . I was originally planning to do Everett-Vancouver-Toronto-New York and then return from New York on Amtrak, since the trip is basically about returning to ride the Canadian. With fares about the same, I'd rather just stay on VIA which is a much better product for the money.


I just bought the tickets and locked down VIA round trip Vancouver-Toronto in a roomette with my Privilege status 50% off coupon. Total price is $1857.61 USD ($2319.45 CAD) _all in round trip ._ Considering that Amtrak one way coming back NYP-SEA was over $1700, I think that is a stellar deal for a better product.

That 50% off coupon is gold. If you go Vancouver-Toronto one way in a room you get status ($999 CAD spend with VIA is the threshold) and that coupon. Even without the coupon, the $1900 CAD discount class roomette fare winds up competitive with Amtrak fares. I thought the coupon would apply only to travel one direction, it turns out they applied the 50% discount to both legs. Learn something new every day. One other fun fact, if your origin is Toronto instead of Vancouver, the taxes are twice as high. Found that out checking the one way fares. Round trip, the Vancouver level taxes apply to the whole trip.


----------



## OBS

zephyr17 said:


> I just bought the tickets and locked down VIA round trip Vancouver-Toronto in a roomette with my Privilege status 50% off coupon. Total price is $1857.61 USD ($2319.45 CAD) _all in round trip ._ Considering that Amtrak one way coming back NYP-SEA was over $1700, I think that is a stellar deal for a better product.
> 
> That 50% off coupon is gold. If you go Vancouver-Toronto one way in a room you get status ($999 CAD spend with VIA is the threshold) and that coupon. Even without the coupon, the $1900 CAD discount class roomette fare winds up competitive with Amtrak fares. I thought the coupon would apply only to travel one direction, it turns out they applied the 50% discount to both legs. Learn something new every day. One other fun fact, if your origin is Toronto instead of Vancouver, the taxes are twice as high. Found that out checking the one way fares. Round trip, the Vancouver level taxes apply to the whole trip.


Great info....thanks. I have coupon to use and this info is very helpful....especially about the taxes!


----------



## Bob Dylan

OBS said:


> Great info....thanks. I have coupon to use and this info is very helpful....especially about the taxes!


Yep, in Canada you have the Federal GAST ( National Sales Tax)and each Provence has its own Taxes, plus any Local ones.

BC has lower Taxes than Ontario, hence you save when you buy in Vancouver as the OP points out.


----------



## plane2train

Don't forget as well that there are fares and then there are buckets. It's altogether possible for one fare bucket to have several fare changes over a year. This year, I got lucky by waiting to book until the fares came down. I believe I ended up booking like 3 months out or something. But I had to check pretty frequently. You have to ask yourself what your sweet spot is and wait for it if you can or try different dates.


----------



## KiraPi

I booked a trip for October back in April. For funzies, I occasionally check to see how much it costs if I were to book it now. So far, I'm saving $637 on the trip from Seattle to NYC. Plus, I applied for the Amtrak BoA credit card so I also got $100 off the fare and enough points to get tickets for a trip to Baltimore for my and my husband. 
If I were to book the trip now, I wouldn't be doing it. The cost got crazy at some point.


----------



## Sidney

Always wanting to ride,I looked into April dates. I did get a roomette from Lax to Klamath Falls for $288,and Coach for $38 to Pdx. 24 hours in a roomette,three meals and I usually am in the SSL car during the day so saving $70 for the seven hour ride to PDX was worth it.

I then checked roomette fares to Lax from Pa. and back after Pdx. Way too high for me. A $850 rate from Chicago to Albuquerque in a roomette over $1100 to LA.Somebody will pay that. I won't. I'll fly to Lax on Southwest for $125 to $150 from BWI and fly back from Pdx for $150 to $175 and get a train ride in the middle.

I have been doing circle trips on Amtrak for over thirty years. Trying to get low buckets that connect is getting harder and harder..and this is for April 2022.


----------



## Michigan Mom

I've been perusing roomette prices out of North Carolina (Raleigh and other stations) either to NYP or South Florida for a while now. In a nutshell, the rooms are selling and I'm priced out of that market.
OTOH the rail options between Charlotte and Durham are quite appealing, only $25 Coach. Of course, if going to one of the airports there'd be ancillary Uber or Bus cost. If the Carolinian and Piedmonts are decently reliable this is going to be a good option when I'm in the area which will be happening. Same for service as far as WAS - 7 hours, daytime, which would be about my limit in Coach and quite reasonable fares. Bottom line Roomette pricing seems to really depend on the city pair and personal judgment as to whether it's worth it. I'd still pay the low bucket on the LSL, but the Florida trains are out of the question.


----------



## JC_620

Looking at booking a post cruise trip home across the country from Seattle to Boston in June of 2022. What is going on with Amtrak!? By that, I mean, Amtrak used to preach about booking early! We used to hear 'You better book early for the best fares!' That is entirely false when, looking now, a bedroom on the Builder starts out at $2,396 for June 2022??  

My questions: 
Is that the "low bucket"? 
Subsequently, if that is the "low bucket" fare, then what is the "high bucket" fare? Does anyone happen to have the 4 or 5 "buckets" that used to be out there as a general reference to what was being charged for a roomette or a bedroom? 

$2,400 about 10 months out? 

Really Amtrak...


----------



## pennyk

I travel in bedrooms routinely. Because of Covid, more passengers are opting for bedrooms to avoid public restrooms, causing the demand for bedrooms to increase. The fares are increasing as demand is increasing. I compared an early December 2019 cross country trip (booked 2-3 months in advance) with an early December 2021 cross country trip (booked 5 months in advance). The 2021 fare is more than double the 2019 fare. Not only has demand increased, the supply has decreased since many of the consists have been shortened.


----------



## niemi24s

Current high/low bucket one adult fares for SEA to BOS are:

• Roomette $1822/$929
• Bedroom $3781/$1600


----------



## JC_620

niemi24s said:


> Current high/low bucket one adult fares for SEA to BOS are:
> 
> • Roomette $1822/$929
> • Bedroom $3781/$1600


Nuts. My guess is it's COVID possibly but also it is just Amtrak's way of trying to recoup what they lost when they went to tri-weekly service.


----------



## niemi24s

pennyk said:


> I compared an early December 2019 cross country trip (booked 2-3 months in advance) with an early December 2021 cross country trip (booked 5 months in advance). The 2021 fare is more than double the 2019 fare.


What you paid may have more than doubled, but that doesn't mean the value of the fare buckets has more than doubled. The following extreme case comparisons are for a Bedroom from MIA to SEA

• The high bucket fare in 2019 would have been $4740 and the low bucket fare in 2021 would have been $2515 or 53% of the earlier fare. At the other extreme...

• The low bucket fare in 2019 would have been $1450 and the high bucket fare in 2021 would have been $5378 or 371% of the earlier fare.

• And somewhere in between these two extremes there'd probably be some combination of buckets that would add up to very little difference between the 2019 and 2021 trip. 

But the basic bucket structure for this trip has increased only (!) 28% in that two year period. FWIW, the Bedroom fares for MIA to SEA now range from $3088 to $5129 for a three segment trip during the first ten days of December.


----------



## niemi24s

Sorry for this, but there's an error in the second bulleted item, above, and edit time has expired. It should read...

• The low bucket fare in 2019 would have been _$2302_ and the high bucket fare in 2021 would have been $5378 or _234%_ of the earlier fare.

Bear in mind that sleeper fares doubling is possible even within a few days (much less a few years) if the fares jump from low to high bucket. It's been like that since late 2015 when I started collecting fare data.


----------



## TracyH

I had a similar reaction when trying to book a roomette from Glacier National Park to Chicago on the Empire Builder for June 2022. The discussion is here:





Sudden roomette price increase


I’ve been eyeing the prices for roomettes on the Empire Builder from Glacier National Park to Chicago and last week the price for two adults and two children was under $1300 (for 2 roomettes), 11 months out. Just a couple of days ago I checked and the price increased to $2300, also 11 months...



www.amtraktrains.com


----------



## niemi24s

Those not familiar with the Amtrak fare bucket system would probably have a similar reaction. Unfortunately it seems few have that familiarity. But for the California Zephyr...




...the ratio between the high and low bucket sleeper fares (for 1 adult) is about 2.0 to 1. Other trains a bit more, others a bit less. But each of those fares includes the Coach fare followed by the ">" symbol, so what really changes from day to day when fares routinely change is the accommodation charge for the particular sleeper. When that $224> is deducted, the ratio between high and low bucket accommodation charges (only) increases to about 2.4 to 1.

For plain old Coach fares the ratio between the highest and lowest is 2.5 to 1.

This is why if there's any flexibility in travel dates, it pays to shop. But shopping doesn't always save as the fares offered by Amtrak are often stuck at high bucket and sometimes low bucket is never offered.


----------



## TracyH

Thanks. Although I don't have extensive familiarity with the fare bucket system, the fares are all currently high (or at least much higher than they were when I was looking last month) for roomettes from Glacier to Chicago, no matter what the date is...so travel flexibility doesn't seem to apply in my case.


----------



## Larry H.

Why don't they return to the way railroad fares used to always be. A set cost for the room and you knew what you were paying. Of course they fares were far, far cheaper in those days. Why couldn't they use and average cost and just make that the set price?


----------



## zephyr17

They could. Of course fares are no longer regulated as they were in those days, and yield management, if done right, ought to provide much greater returns on the limited and perishable inventory.

And, allowing for inflation, today's accommodation charges in the mid buckets are roughly equivalent to Pullman's in days gone by. They were only "far, far cheaper" if you assume the dollar's value held steady, which, of course, it hasn't. Sleepers were never cheap.


----------



## Larry H.

I think that is a myth often stated here! A Pullman fare was maybe a third more than coach and very affordable. I Know, I never made much money but could easily afford the sleeper extra charge. Compared to the difference in fares between coach and so called first class is many times higher than the coach fare, I would guess at least 5 times more and that is probably low. And as to the charges overall, if this is public transportation why do we have to sock it too people for the very highest rates possible most of the time. Yes people travel that way, and I do as well, but maybe its because we don't or can't fly. The fares are also a problem because Amtrak is using the excuse of not having sufficient equipment so they have to charge more. Maybe thats true I would say, but where are the plans now to run enough sleepers that when people try to book a room they don't get a sold out screen. That has been going on forever with them and also produces a skewed result as to how many people are supporting a train. We can't really say a line isn't making much money or carrying enough passengers if half the time or more you can't even get an accommodation on the route?


----------



## dlagrua

The LD sleeper fares are what they are and if you can afford them you buy but if not you drive or fly. I just wonder if the sleepers are really selling out at these exhorbitant high fares?. If they are it must be that the rich are the primary customers but if they are expecting Orient Express type first class service they will be sorely disappointed. We would like to take the train again for our LD trips and hope that the fares relax a bit. In the meantime we are shut out of the system. We just completed a first class air trip (NJ-Arizona) and it was a horrible experience but at 1/4 the price of an Amtrak bedroom we will grit our teeth and bear it for now. At $1600 for two R/T, it fits the budget.


----------



## neroden

Someone did a careful comparison of recent fares vs. historic fares, adjusting for inflation. Bottom line: coach fares have actually gone DOWN after adjusting for inflation. Sleeper fares have gone up somewhat. I think it's pretty obvious Amtrak has a severe shortage of sleeper cars, and needs to add more. 

But right now they aren't even running everything they have, due to what I can only assume is malicious mismanagement by someone who values sabotaging-the-sleepers over making-a-profit. Even as a monopoly, right now they'd be better served economically by running more sleeper cars at slightly lower prices -- they'd still fill up.


----------



## joelkfla

neroden said:


> But right now they aren't even running everything they have, due to what I can only assume is malicious mismanagement by someone who values sabotaging-the-sleepers over making-a-profit. Even as a monopoly, right now they'd be better served economically by running more sleeper cars at slightly lower prices -- they'd still fill up.


I thought it was due to a labor shortage. There have been reports of job postings for OBS at multiple locations.


----------



## Exvalley

It would not surprise me if sleepers are selling well even with high fares. Lots of people have not spent anything on travel for the past year and a half - so they can afford to spend more right now. Whether or not people are willing to spend that sort of money for all future travel is another question.


----------



## niemi24s

Larry H. said:


> We can't really say a line isn't making much money or carrying enough passengers if half the time or more you can't even get an accommodation on the route?


So when, pray tell, CAN we say a line isn't making much money or carrying enough passengers?


----------



## Larry H.

niemi24s said:


> So when, pray tell, CAN we say a line isn't making much money or carrying enough passengers?


Hopefully your joking.. All we ever here is the long distance are big time loosers money wise. My point being if your not able to sell all the accommodations people want then your getting a false picture of what the train might really carry if it had the equipment to meet the needs. You really shouldn't be in a position of turning passengers away like so many have over time reported full bedrooms or roomettes for months out.


----------



## Tlcooper93

I’ve been planning an EB trip in Feb 2022 for some time now. When I checked roomette prices a month ago, they were VERY reasonable (~500) but I just recently checked back in, and they’re roughly double what they were back in late June.

My guess is that there will be a time window (probably brief) where the prices go down before February. I hope to act then and get the ticket, and just use a companion coupon for my fiancé.


----------



## zephyr17

Keep checking. You don't know when they'll review sales figures and adjust the allocation of inventory across the buckets.


----------



## Cal

neroden said:


> But right now they aren't even running everything they have, due to what I can only assume is malicious mismanagement by someone who values sabotaging-the-sleepers over making-a-profit. Even as a monopoly, right now they'd be better served economically by running more sleeper cars at slightly lower prices -- they'd still fill up.


My guess is for a mix of reasons:
-Backlog of maintenance
-Refreshing Superliners 
-OBS Shortage


----------



## PaTrainFan

Cal said:


> My guess is for a mix of reasons:
> -Backlog of maintenance
> -Refreshing Superliners
> -OBS Shortage



And why is not possible for Amtrak to exhibit a modicum of transparency. If these things challenges are true, then say so and attempt to assure the traveling public and the non-profit organization that represents the most loyal passengers, that fixes are in the works and here's what we can expect. Wait, ok, sorry. I forgot about Amtrak's record of delivering on promises.


----------



## Ryan

Larry H. said:


> I think that is a myth often stated here!


You think incorrectly. It's been backed up with actual fares across the years many, many times.


----------



## Tennessee Traveler

I consider myself LUCKY. I booked my Empire Builder roomettes from Chicago to Seattle and return from Seattle to Chicago just as Biden's COVID support bill was passed and the long distance trains were scheduled to return to daily trips late May 2021 instead of three times a week and before the public decided it was time to leave home. I made my reservation as the extra four days a week schedules were set up and booked travel on one of the four new days trips for September 2021. The fares on the three days a week trains were already scheduled and tickets being sold were about three times the low bucket price being offered on the new four days. I was able and did ticket a roomette with only one passenger(myself) for $505 each way and I do note that the coach fare portion of my ticket is $232 each way. So I bought my tickets before the demand exploded. The prices are high because the demand is high even 11 months out. Interestingly, I also reserved my September hotel accommodations in February/March and the same hotels on the same dates I reserved have increased their prices almost 50%. The number of people booking travel has caused these increases. Rental car prices are exploding and in some cases cars are not available. I used frequent flyer miles for my air travel so cannot evaluate increases in airline costs. I have abundant miles available since I don't fly more than once or twice a year and my flights to Chicago from Nashville and back will be the first flights I have flown in 17 months.

My travel days may be limited in the future with the current high prices for trains and hotels and the fact that I am turning 80 in October and have been living on fixed income with no increases since I retired in 2004.


----------



## caravanman

I know I annoy folk at times, but as TT above says, it is all just "market forces", the American way. If you are tasked with either making a profit, or at least minimising losses, then you make hay while the sun shines. It's the new reality of the current covid America, demand for private rooms driving up train fares.
At least the coach fares are still reasonable, due to less increased demand for them.


----------



## MilwaukeeRoadLover

PaTrainFan said:


> And why is not possible for Amtrak to exhibit a modicum of transparency. If these things challenges are true, then say so and attempt to assure the traveling public and the non-profit organization that represents the most loyal passengers, that fixes are in the works and here's what we can expect. Wait, ok, sorry. I forgot about Amtrak's record of delivering on promises.


I don't think this is much different from the airlines.


----------



## Sidney

Tennessee Traveler said:


> I consider myself LUCKY. I booked my Empire Builder roomettes from Chicago to Seattle and return from Seattle to Chicago just as Biden's COVID support bill was passed and the long distance trains were scheduled to return to daily trips late May 2021 instead of three times a week and before the public decided it was time to leave home. I made my reservation as the extra four days a week schedules were set up and booked travel on one of the four new days trips for September 2021. The fares on the three days a week trains were already scheduled and tickets being sold were about three times the low bucket price being offered on the new four days. I was able and did ticket a roomette with only one passenger(myself) for $505 each way and I do note that the coach fare portion of my ticket is $232 each way. So I bought my tickets before the demand exploded. The prices are high because the demand is high even 11 months out. Interestingly, I also reserved my September hotel accommodations in February/March and the same hotels on the same dates I reserved have increased their prices almost 50%. The number of people booking travel has caused these increases. Rental car prices are exploding and in some cases cars are not available. I used frequent flyer miles for my air travel so cannot evaluate increases in airline costs. I have abundant miles available since I don't fly more than once or twice a year and my flights to Chicago from Nashville and back will be the first flights I have flown in 17 months.
> 
> My travel days may be limited in the future with the current high prices for trains and hotels and the fact that I am turning 80 in October and have been living on fixed income with no increases since I retired in 2004.


I also snagged a $505 1 person roomette from Chi-Sea for next month several months ago. I wanted to do Sea to Lax after a night in Seattle,but low bucket was gone,so I checked the next day and low bucket was still there. I checked the EB for the next day and it was still $505 so I changed dates. This was in March. I used to do circle trips with low buckets for years by planning far in advance. It's getting harder and harder to do. I did grab the CL next June,but the connecting trains that I wanted were already out of low bucket fares. Guess I'll keep watching to see if they come down. If not,I ll fly from BWI to Lax and Sea return on Southwest.


----------



## 20th Century Rider

What one pays is determined by available buckets... and reaching a good agent to help make the reservation. Of the few times I had to pay a mid or high bucket was on the deprived TE. 

Just booked a 4th transcontinental adventure with the help of an excellent agent along with my willingness to be flexible. This is for Mid January... and as with most months, there's a weekend holiday to bring up the fares. There are 4 sleeping nights in each direction... with use of certs to upgrade to business class if available.

EUG - EMY CS - sleeper
EMY - CHI CZ - sleeper
CHI - PHI Cardinal - sleeper
PHI - ALT Pennsylvanian coach [upgrade to bus with cert if avail]
ALT - NYP Pennsylvanian coach [upgrade to bus with cert if avail]
NYP - CHI Cardinal - sleeper
CHI - LAX SWC - sleeper
LAX - EUG CS - sleeper

Sleepers are H rooms due to ‘plumbing’ problems and I carry a letter from the doctor. H rooms are sometimes harder to get since there is only one now on many trains. My total was $2740. In addition... hotels along the way are between $125 and $225 [NYP]. These are for modest but clean hotels. I also try to get additional food from super markets where available... and stick to salads and unprocessed foods as much as possible.


----------



## Larry H.

I am linking here to a schedule from the mid 60s that shows the cost of both coach (41.85) and sleeper (52.68) from Chicago to San Francisco was as I had recalled the added cost of sleepers in the past. It no way equals the inflation everyone keeps saying is the same now. A small upcharge from coach allowed people to use the sleepers who wished a bit of privacy and somewhere to sleep other than a seat. It wasn't as now where only if you really have a great deal of money to spend and it doesn't matter what they cost that the bedroom charge isn't quite high. I didn't check the amtrak fares for the same trip but I am pretty sure the cost of a sleeper compared to coach is many times higher in comparison to what they used to be before amtrak









Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad May 1 1965 Time Tables Fares Route Map | eBay


A soft cover booklet with color photo of theCalifornia Zephyr on the front cover, and a list of Traffic Representatves on the back cover. Twelve pages, including the covers. This will enable you to receive your item more quickly.



www.ebay.com





For some reason the this page I copied isn't showing the fare structure. I will have to look later, a quick look in history didn't bring it up either, I just know it had all the various fares and what I wrote down was correct. How I found it now I am wondering too. I clicked the above link when I was on that page but it doesn't seem to have access the fares somehow!


----------



## joelkfla

Larry H. said:


> I am linking here to a schedule from the mid 60s that shows the cost of both coach (41.85) and sleeper (52.68) from Chicago to San Francisco was as I had recalled the added cost of sleepers in the past. It no way equals the inflation everyone keeps saying is the same now. A small upcharge from coach allowed people to use the sleepers who wished a bit of privacy and somewhere to sleep other than a seat. It wasn't as now where only if you really have a great deal of money to spend and it doesn't matter what they cost that the bedroom charge isn't quite high. I didn't check the amtrak fares for the same trip but I am pretty sure the cost of a sleeper compared to coach is many times higher in comparison to what they used to be before amtrak
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad May 1 1965 Time Tables Fares Route Map | eBay
> 
> 
> A soft cover booklet with color photo of theCalifornia Zephyr on the front cover, and a list of Traffic Representatves on the back cover. Twelve pages, including the covers. This will enable you to receive your item more quickly.
> 
> 
> 
> www.ebay.com


Where are you seeing that? I can only see 5 pages viewable, the last one showing fares only from CO Spr,, Denver, Glenwood Spr, Grand Jctn, Pueblo, & SLC.


----------



## PaTrainFan

According to the handy Bureau of Labor Statistics Inflation Calculator, in today's dollars, the sleeper fare would be $461 and the coach fare would be $366.



Larry H. said:


> I am linking here to a schedule from the mid 60s that shows the cost of both coach (41.85) and sleeper (52.68) from Chicago to San Francisco was as I had recalled the added cost of sleepers in the past. It no way equals the inflation everyone keeps saying is the same now. A small upcharge from coach allowed people to use the sleepers who wished a bit of privacy and somewhere to sleep other than a seat. It wasn't as now where only if you really have a great deal of money to spend and it doesn't matter what they cost that the bedroom charge isn't quite high. I didn't check the amtrak fares for the same trip but I am pretty sure the cost of a sleeper compared to coach is many times higher in comparison to what they used to be before amtrak
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad May 1 1965 Time Tables Fares Route Map | eBay
> 
> 
> A soft cover booklet with color photo of theCalifornia Zephyr on the front cover, and a list of Traffic Representatves on the back cover. Twelve pages, including the covers. This will enable you to receive your item more quickly.
> 
> 
> 
> www.ebay.com


----------



## Qapla

PaTrainFan said:


> the sleeper fare would be $461 and the coach fare would be $366.



A price differential of $95 is much more reasonable than the differential in many of the sleeper vs coach fares we have now


----------



## Sidney

Qapla said:


> A price differential of $95 is much more reasonable than the differential in many of the sleeper vs coach fares we have now


Indeed. For $100 more I would gladly pay for a roomette,even just for eight hours overnight. Sadly,it's more like$300 plus these days and no way I can justify that. Obviously,others will.

Several years ago I got a roomette after boarding the Cardinal in Dyer,In to DC for $95. Traditional dining,too. Sure miss those days when you could buy an empty sleeper from the conductor


----------



## Larry H.

joelkfla said:


> Where are you seeing that? I can only see 5 pages viewable, the last one showing fares only from CO Spr,, Denver, Glenwood Spr, Grand Jctn, Pueblo, & SLC.



Your right! That was the page I was viewing when I had the whole system charges between Chicago and San Francisco but I can't seem to access that from those pages now either. I haven't time right now to try and find it, I made a quick view of my viewing history but that didn't bring it up either yet.


----------



## niemi24s

It would appear that the D&RGW timetables for its California Zephyr for 1965 contain only 10 pages (or 5 double pages). Neither the one posted above on ebay or the one here... drgw_ptt_1_nov_1965_cover.jpg ...contain single combined fares for CHI to SFO. But both contain fares from those end points to a variety of mid points. When adding those fares the sums for Coach range from $72.94 to $78.07 in the May, 1965 version for an average of $75.51

$75.51 would inflate to $656.51 for Coach between CHI and SFO using the calculator referenced above.

Don't know if any of this has any merit, however. But it is fun to noodle around with numbers on a nice Sunday afternoon.


----------



## joelkfla

Larry H. said:


> Your right! That was the page I was viewing when I had the whole system charges between Chicago and San Francisco but I can't seem to access that from those pages now either. I haven't time right now to try and find it, I made a quick view of my viewing history but that didn't bring it up either yet.


OK, it looks like the D&RG timetables don't show fares between Chicago & SF, probably because those segments of the CZ were serviced by Burlington & WP, respectively. But I found a 1965 Burlington timetable here.

Here are the fares listed between Chicago & SF eff. 4/25/65:

*Rail Fares**2021 Value*Coach$ 67.39$585.911st Class$ 85.56$743.89*Sleeper Supplement**Total*Lower Berth$ 24.20$ 91.59$ 796.31Dupl. Roomette$ 26.60$ 93.99$ 817.18Roomette$ 33.80$ 101.19$ 879.78

Having never traveled as an adult pre-Amtrak, I'm assuming a sleeper required regular Coach fare, not 1st Class.

So in this case, a full-size roomette was 150% of the coach fare.

BTW, that site also has some really cool CZ brochures & booklets.

Edit: @Willbridge replied that 1st Class rail fare was usually required, so add 
$157.98 to the 2021 value of each sleeper class. That would make the full roomette fare $1,037.76!


----------



## niemi24s

And rounding that figure in the lower right to the nearest dollar, here's how that 2021 value fits in with the current Roomette fare buckets on the CZ: $563, 688, 804, 880, 928 and 1052 That's about 5% above middle bucket. Nice fit, eh?

But were meals included in those Burlington fares?


----------



## PaTrainFan

Probably not. Including meals in first class rail fares did not become a thing until well into the Amtrak years.



niemi24s said:


> And rounding that figure in the lower right to the nearest dollar, here's how that 2021 value fits in with the current Roomette fare buckets on the CZ: $563, 688, 804, 880, 928 and 1052 That's about 5% above middle bucket. Nice fit, eh?
> 
> But were meals included in those Burlington fares?


----------



## Qapla

I would be more than happy having a fare structure for roomettes that is much more affordable if the meals were optional

For those that want the full dining experience, have the higher fare (what it is now) and lower the fare for those of us who are willing to bring/get our own food.


----------



## Tlcooper93

Qapla said:


> I would be more than happy having a fare structure for roomettes that is much more affordable if the meals were optional
> 
> For those that want the full dining experience, have the higher fare (what it is now) and lower the fare for those of us who are willing to bring/get our own food.



I’ve always wondered why this isn’t an option already...

especially for eastern LD one night trains, where the trip is less experiential than western trains.


----------



## Ryan

If you like dining cars, forcing everyone that buys a sleeper ticket to also buy every meal they're aboard for is a great way to make sure that they stay around.

Conversely, if you don't, then what you suggest is a great way to see them vanish for lack of revenue.


----------



## Larry H.

joelkfla said:


> Where are you seeing that? I can only see 5 pages viewable, the last one showing fares only from CO Spr,, Denver, Glenwood Spr, Grand Jctn, Pueblo, & SLC.



Now that I had time to check that link out again, I found that it is the right link. You have to click on the pamplet to keep moving to the right arrows that show up on the edge of the pages usually. The last page is two pages of the fares. Somehow I missed that too when I made a hasty check of it from your comment.


----------



## Willbridge

joelkfla said:


> Having never traveled as an adult pre-Amtrak, I'm assuming a sleeper required regular Coach fare, not 1st Class.
> 
> So in this case, a full-size roomette was 150% of the coach fare.
> ......



Normally sleeper travel required First Class fares. That also blocked access to various coach ticket discount sales. Exceptions included Slumbercoaches and some seasonal promotions. For example, the _Western Star _in winter carried a 16 duplex roomette / 4 double bedroom car and rooms could be purchased on top of coach fares, possibly to compete with the Slumbercoach on the _Mainstreeter._

There were some really arcane fares, too. My favorite is that in 1968 for single occupancy of a drawing room the GN required 1¼ first class fares but scheduled no sleepers with drawing rooms. Information such as this overloaded travel agents and GN agents at low-volume locations.


----------



## joelkfla

Willbridge said:


> Normally sleeper travel required First Class fares. That also blocked access to various coach ticket discount sales. Exceptions included Slumbercoaches and some seasonal promotions. For example, the _Western Star _in winter carried a 16 duplex roomette / 4 double bedroom car and rooms could be purchased on top of coach fares, possibly to compete with the Slumbercoach on the _Mainstreeter._
> 
> There were some really arcane fares, too. My favorite is that in 1968 for single occupancy of a drawing room the GN required 1¼ first class fares but scheduled no sleepers with drawing rooms. Information such as this overloaded travel agents and GN agents at low-volume locations.


Thanks. In that case, add *$157.98* to the 2021 Value of each of the sleeper classes in my post. That would make the full roomette fare $1,037.76, just $15 shy of Amtrak high bucket.

But Amtrak coach fare on 9/14/21 is $142, less than 1/4 the inflation-adjusted $586 value of 1965 Coach fare. Which explains why the disparity between Coach and Sleeper seems so much more than in pre-Amtrak days.


----------



## johann

Larry H. said:


> I clicked the above link when I was on that page but it doesn't seem to have access the fares somehow!



I could not find the San Francisco to Chicago fares, but did get comparable Coach and Pullman fares for Colorado Springs to San Francisco to be $41.88 and $52.68. However I am confused by the "FARES FOR OTHER STANDARD PULLMAN ACCOMODATIONS" but know someone can explain this.


----------



## Larry H.

johann said:


> I could not find the San Francisco to Chicago fares, but did get comparable Coach and Pullman fares for Colorado Springs to San Francisco to be $41.88 and $52.68. However I am confused by the "FARES FOR OTHER STANDARD PULLMAN ACCOMODATIONS" but know someone can explain this.
> View attachment 24128
> 
> 
> View attachment 24129


If you took this off m y original link there are two pages at the last right hand page, that is where the Francisco are. Those Other Fares might represent more than one person in a bedroom or roomette?


----------



## johann

Larry H. said:


> If you took this off m y original link there are two pages at the last right hand page, that is where the Francisco are. Those Other Fares might represent more than one person in a bedroom or roomette?


Thanks. I was especially confused by the top/bottom bed distinction.


----------



## niemi24s

As previously stated...


niemi24s said:


> It would appear that the D&RGW timetables for its California Zephyr for 1965 contain only 10 pages (or 5 double pages). Neither the one posted above on ebay or the one here... drgw_ptt_1_nov_1965_cover.jpg ...contain single combined fares for CHI to SFO. But both contain fares from those end points to a variety of mid points. When adding those fares the sums for Coach range from $72.94 to $78.07 in the May, 1965 version for an average of $75.51


Once again, NO SINGLE FARE BATEWEEN CHI AND SFO CAN BE FOUND IN THIS D&RGW TIMETABLE! But from the partial route fares given in the D&RGW timetable, fares can pieced together by adding the fares from CHI to (either Colorado Springs, Denver, Glenwood Springs, Grand Junction or Pueblo) to the fares from (either of those same 5 places) to SFO.

But the single Burlington fare between CHI and SFO of $67.39 reported by joelkfla is about $8 or 11% less than what can be gleaned from the pairs of D&RGW fares - and that makes good sense. 

So while the D&RGW timetables do indeed give SFO fares, these D&RGW timetables do NOT give a single one-shot fare between SFO and CHI. Total fares must be pieced together from five different pairs of partial routes found on Page 9 of the D&RGW timetable.

But sometimes I don't find things so well. I can't find a SFO/CHI fare anywhere in the D&RGW timetable. If there is one, kindly tell me exactly where to look.


----------



## Ryan

No, you're correct @niemi24s. There isn't a single fare to be found in there.

Top/Bottom bed distinction refer to sectionals, where you don't have a private room - they're not equivalent to a roomette where you have a private space.

We seem to have demonstrated what my memory recalls from every other time we've played this game. Sleepers aren't significantly more expensive once you factor in for inflation, yes the gap is smaller but that's because coach today (adjusted for inflation) is significantly cheaper. I'm pretty sure that those longing to go back to the old days don't actually want to keep the "ZOMGSUPARHIGH SLEEPER FARES" and significantly increase the cost of a coach ticket.


----------



## Exvalley

Ryan said:


> Sleepers aren't significantly more expensive once you factor in for inflation


This is especially true when you consider that sleeper fares generally did not include meals.

On the other hand... sleeper fares back then were much more competitive in comparison to airline fares. The drastic change since then is that airline fares (adjusted for inflation) have come WAY down. This is probably why Amtrak coach fares are much lower when you adjust for inflation. There is more of a direct competition with airlines in regard to coach class. 

It is also why Amtrak sleeper fares "feel" much higher - even if they aren't when you adjust for inflation. Because compared to the alternatives, sleeper fares really are MUCH higher now.


----------



## Larry H.

niemi24s said:


> As previously stated...
> 
> Once again, NO SINGLE FARE BATEWEEN CHI AND SFO CAN BE FOUND IN THIS D&RGW TIMETABLE! But from the partial route fares given in the D&RGW timetable, fares can pieced together by adding the fares from CHI to (either Colorado Springs, Denver, Glenwood Springs, Grand Junction or Pueblo) to the fares from (either of those same 5 places) to SFO.
> 
> But the single Burlington fare between CHI and SFO of $67.39 reported by joelkfla is about $8 or 11% less than what can be gleaned from the pairs of D&RGW fares - and that makes good sense.
> 
> So while the D&RGW timetables do indeed give SFO fares, these D&RGW timetables do NOT give a single one-shot fare between SFO and CHI. Total fares must be pieced together from five different pairs of partial routes found on Page 9 of the D&RGW timetable.
> 
> But sometimes I don't find things so well. I can't find a SFO/CHI fare anywhere in the D&RGW timetable. If there is one, kindly tell me exactly where to look.



Heck to get old! Your correct, I was looking at the SF name at the bottom and the Chicago name at the top and didn't realize they were showing fares in both directions from Colorado. That explains a lot. I will have to keep searching to see if I can find a time table for that period in time with the starting point Chicago and ending in SF. That brochure is a bit tricky I see now. I hate to start a new topic but I wonder why the DRG decided to not let the California trains run on the Royal Gorge Routing?


----------



## Ryan

Exvalley said:


> On the other hand... sleeper fares back then were much more competitive in comparison to airline fares. The drastic change since then is that airline fares (adjusted for inflation) have come WAY down. This is probably why Amtrak coach fares are much lower when you adjust for inflation. There is more of a direct competition with airlines in regard to coach class.


That's an excellent point as well.

I wasn't alive to witness it personally, but my sense is that its our old friend supply and demand at work. Airline capacity (both in plane size and number of flights) is probably significantly higher than it was 60 years ago. Increased supply would explain the lower fares, and gives credence to what should be the AU motto: The best thing to fix Amtrak is moar Amtrak.


----------



## niemi24s

FWIW, I do have some current Amtrak Roomette fare buckets for one adult for partial routes should anyone want to make similar comparisons. As an example, the D&RGW timetable shows a Pullman Roomette fare from CHI to DEN to be $39.95 + $17.10 = $57.05 in May of 1965 which inflates to $496 as of last month.

Here's how that $496 fits into the current Roomette fare bucket scheme for one adult between CHI and DEN: $365, 440, 496, 510, 586 and 661 which puts it $14 or 3% below the current middle bucket.

However, this and similar comparisons lack merit if meals were not included in the 1965 fares. But if somebody wants to dig up the CZ menus and come up with prices for the meals - have at it. I've got better ways to waste my time!


----------



## Emmo213

We were thinking about taking the Empire Builder in June of 2022 from Chicago to West Glacier but wow, it's expensive! We already have a trip on the SWC for April and a family bedroom is half the cost of the EB.


----------



## Larry H.

Its almost impossible to think how 57.00 could now cost 496.00. But then I have some turn of the previous century Sears Catalogs and a gallon of paint is like 50 cents. A beautiful cast iron cooking stove is maybe 7.95 and thats high compared to most things.


----------



## jpakala

The above photos of RR fares and Pullman accommodation fares was the way it worked. To your first-class fare was added whatever the accommodation charge was. The lower berth $5.80 in the left-edge column was the base unit so to speak, so an upper berth was $4.40 but all the other accommodations were more. The first line beginning with $5.80 was the amount for the length of a basic overnight trip or fraction thereof, and the progressively higher charges were for increasing time & mileage trips.


----------



## joelkfla

niemi24s said:


> Once again, NO SINGLE FARE BATEWEEN CHI AND SFO CAN BE FOUND IN THIS D&RGW TIMETABLE! But from the partial route fares given in the D&RGW timetable, fares can pieced together by adding the fares from CHI to (either Colorado Springs, Denver, Glenwood Springs, Grand Junction or Pueblo) to the fares from (either of those same 5 places) to SFO.


It appears that the CZ at that time was operated jointly by Burlington, D&RG, & WP. Burlington ran the segment from Chicago westward, WP ran from CA eastward, and D&RG ran the middle section, from CO westward. So D&RG might sell tickets between CHI & some point on its route, or between SF & its route, but never between CHI & SF, hence no reason to show fares between SF & CHI on its timetable.



johann said:


> I could not find the San Francisco to Chicago fares, but did get comparable Coach and Pullman fares for Colorado Springs to San Francisco to be $41.88 and $52.68. However I am confused by the "FARES FOR OTHER STANDARD PULLMAN ACCOMODATIONS" but know someone can explain this.
> View attachment 24128
> 
> 
> View attachment 24129


It's really just the same as Amtrak (except for no multiple buckets.) There's a rail fare component, and then you add a sleeper fare supplement. Amtrak calls them fare & accommodations charge.

So on the fare chart, you start with 1st Class rail fare (according to @Willbridge.) Then you add the sleeper fare shown for the lower berth, to get the complete lower berth fare.

But to save space, instead of listing all the possible sleeper accommodations for each city pair, they put them in a separate table, indexed by the lower berth fare. So take the lower berth fare found in the fare table, and find that in the left column of the Other Accommodations table. Then read right to find the supplement for the desired accommodation, and add that to the 1st Class fare *instead *of the adding the lower berth fare. That's why the upper berth fares in the Accommodations table are less than the lower berth, but all the private rooms are higher.

To sum up, take the 1st Class fare, and add *either *the lower berth fare, *or *the corresponding fare for another type of accommodation.


----------



## Ryan

Larry H. said:


> Its almost impossible to think how 57.00 could now cost 496.00.


Math works. Compound interest is a hell of a thing.


----------



## Qapla

Personally, I was alive back in the 1960's - and, yes, things were "cheaper" back then compared to what they cost now. And, while I understand that, accounting for inflation, prices can be stated as being "equivalent" to some "adjusted" price today ... I am not currently making and spending "inflated" money. I am spending out of the funds I currently have and paying prices currently being charged - regardless of how they compare to prices in the 60's

I do not need to "adjust for inflation" to know when something is too expensive and therefore not buy it ... that goes for products like cars, TV's and food - as well as train/sleeper fares.

Regardless of inflation, IMHO train sleeper fares are just plain too high - it is as simple as that.


----------



## Ryan

You raise an excellent point that would quickly take us into political territory, but yes - failure of wages to increase in step with inflation (partially due to a horrifically stagnant minimum wage) lead to the growing income inequality we see results in us kids not being able to afford that which you old folks were able to "back in the day".


----------



## Exvalley

Ryan said:


> You raise an excellent point that would quickly take us into political territory, but yes - failure of wages to increase in step with inflation (partially due to a horrifically stagnant minimum wage) lead to the growing income inequality we see results in us kids not being able to afford that which you old folks were able to "back in the day".


And don't forget that in the 1960s way more households had just one wage earner. So when you compare household income from then to now, the difference is even worse than it seems.

On the other hand, the shift to overseas production of consumer goods has made some things cheaper. A television, for example, is much cheaper today than it was in the 1960s.


----------



## danasgoodstuff

So much has changed since the '60s that meaningful comparisons are difficult if not impossible. Generalized inflation rates miss a lot. Factoring in wages and housing costs and food could give you a look at what's left - discretionary income to spend on travel and other things. But it all gets pretty squishy and can be manipulated to paint very different pictures. And the cost of other modes of transport and convenience too... Marginal futility. But fun if you have the time and inclination.


----------



## joelkfla

niemi24s said:


> However, this and similar comparisons lack merit if meals were not included in the 1965 fares. But if somebody wants to dig up the CZ menus and come up with prices for the meals - have at it. I've got better ways to waste my time!


Challenge accepted!

From menus on the streamlinermemories.info website I referenced earlier, 1969 full dinner in the dining car averaged around $4.25, lunch with a cooked entree around $3.80, and hot breakfast around $2.25. Based on the schedule, travelers might eat 1 of each for a total of $10.30. The menus were from 1968 & 1969, so using 12/68 as a starting point, 2021 value is $82.46, + your $496 roomette estimate puts the total at $578, which is just short of the 2nd highest bucket.

So once again, Amtrak sleeper fares are not out of line with inflated values of 1960's fares, but coach fares are a much better deal.

Typical items on the menu for breakfast are ham & eggs, shirred eggs with sausage, and wheat cakes or french toast with bacon or sausage. Fruit or juice, toast or muffin, & beverage included.

For lunch, selections in that price range are lamb chop or steak (ham & eggs much cheaper), with soup, veggie, dessert, & beverage included.

Dinner in that price range offered halibut, chicken, pork chops, or roast beef (steak $1.70 higher), again all-inclusive except for a salad, which was 45¢ extra.


----------



## joelkfla

Exvalley said:


> On the other hand, the shift to overseas production of consumer goods has made some things cheaper. A television, for example, is much cheaper today than it was in the 1960s.


Lower labor & environmental mitigation costs overseas are a major factor, but not the only one. Technology advances, automation, and reduced customer service are also factors.

Back in the 60's, companies still cared about customer loyalty & good will. Now, just about everything is a commodity. Whoever can produce it cheapest with barely acceptable quality gets the business.


----------



## niemi24s

joelkfla said:


> So once again, Amtrak sleeper fares are not out of line with inflated values of 1960's fares, but coach fares are a much better deal.


I agree with your conclusion about sleeper fares, but here's my take on Coach. CHI/DEN in Coach for one adult was $31.46 in 1965 which inflates up to $274 now. Here's how that inflated $274 coach ticket fits in with the current six Coach buckets on the CZ between CHI and DEN: $(141), 176, 224, 271, 274, 339, 346.

So the way I see it, Coach fares were a much better deal back in 1965 only when the two current highest buckets are being offered by Amtrak. 

Q: Can you find either of those $339 or $346 high bucket Coach fares being offered by Amtrak? 

I couldn't in about three dozen searches. If they're never or rarely offered I can only conclude that the 1965 Coach fares on the D&RGW were NEVER OR RARELY a better deal than those now offered by Amtrak.


----------



## Bonser

Ryan said:


> No, you're correct @niemi24s. There isn't a single fare to be found in there.
> 
> Top/Bottom bed distinction refer to sectionals, where you don't have a private room - they're not equivalent to a roomette where you have a private space.
> 
> We seem to have demonstrated what my memory recalls from every other time we've played this game. Sleepers aren't significantly more expensive once you factor in for inflation, yes the gap is smaller but that's because coach today (adjusted for inflation) is significantly cheaper. I'm pretty sure that those longing to go back to the old days don't actually want to keep the "ZOMGSUPARHIGH SLEEPER FARES" and significantly increase the cost of a coach ticket.


We all should remember that sleeper services 1920's -1960's were geared towards wealthy clientele. So was dining. Most middle class folks would not be in sleepers, they'd be in coach.


----------



## Sidney

Emmo213 said:


> We were thinking about taking the Empire Builder in June of 2022 from Chicago to West Glacier but wow, it's expensive! We already have a trip on the SWC for April and a family bedroom is half the cost of the EB.


I booked a roomette on the Starlight in June at low bucket. I wanted to connect to the Builder to Chicago and the fare was way too high. Unless it comes down,I ll fly home. In an earlier post I mentioned I have done circle trips for many years and booking this far out you were almost guaranteed low bucket. Not any more


----------



## zephyr17

The railroad fares were structured were similar to Amtrak's. A rail fare and an accommodation charge. The railroads charge a First Class rail fare that was higher than coach for most sleeper service. Slumbercoaches and Milwaukee's Touralux service used coach rail fares.

The rail fares went to the railroad and the accommodation charge went to Pullman if Pullman operated sleeping cars.

You got separate coupons for the rail and the accommodation. The railroad conductor lifted your rail coupon, and the Pullman conductor lifted the accommodation coupon.

It isn't that different from Amtrak's rail fare and accommodation charge system used to this day (although Amtrak seems to be trying to hide it these days).

To decode the chart:
A roomette from Colorado Springs to Chicago:
$39.95 First Class Rail Fare.
$12.25 Lower Berth fare translates to $17.10 Roomette fare.

$39.95 rail fare + $17.10 roomette accommodation charge = $57.05 roomette Colorado Springs to Chicago, without meals, as opposed to $31.46 coach.

Any of the three railroads of the California Zephyr Consortium would sell you a through ticket. It would just show Oakland-Salt Lake via WP, Salt Lake-Denver via D&RGW and Denver-Chicago vis CB&Q. You'd have a three part rail coupon, with a coupon for each of the railroads, done using carbon backed paper so each segment would imprint on the next coupon.

Any railroad could issue tickets for any other railroad, even where they didn't operate joint trains. They invented interlining and ticket clearinghouses


----------



## niemi24s

zephyr17 said:


> $12.25 Lower Berth fare translates to $17.10 Roomette fare.


How did those 1965 Roomettes on the D&RGWs CZ differ from those today on Amtrak?


----------



## danasgoodstuff

Another complicating factor is that most RRs were losing $ on passenger service in the '60s, but maybe not the D&RGW?


----------



## zephyr17

niemi24s said:


> How did those 1965 Roomettes on the D&RGWs CZ differ from those today on Amtrak?


Bigger and better bed that pulled down from the wall like a Murphy bed. A "combolet" toilet that was under the foot of the bed. There would be a sink that either pulled down from the wall if the berth was full sized all the way down. I don't know which type the Budd sleepers on the CZ had, although the Budd Manor cars on the Canadian of the same era have the cutout and the washstand. The top of the berth was level with the window so it was easier to look out at night.

While the individual cars had railroad ownership, they were bought in a pool and operated as a pool by the consortium members. The CZ sleepers were staffed by Pullman until 12/31/1968 when Pullman ceased operations.

All in all, I think the traditional single person roomettes were much more comfortable than Amtrak roomettes. The berths were wider, the mattresses were thicker. I much preferred them to the Amtrak Economy Bedroom that was renamed as "roomette".

They are still available in Canada.


----------



## zephyr17

Exvalley said:


> This is especially true when you consider that sleeper fares generally did not include meals.
> 
> On the other hand... sleeper fares back then were much more competitive in comparison to airline fares. The drastic change since then is that airline fares (adjusted for inflation) have come WAY down. This is probably why Amtrak coach fares are much lower when you adjust for inflation. There is more of a direct competition with airlines in regard to coach class.
> 
> It is also why Amtrak sleeper fares "feel" much higher - even if they aren't when you adjust for inflation. Because compared to the alternatives, sleeper fares really are MUCH higher now.


But coach fares were much higher, adjusted for inflation. So there's that.


----------



## zephyr17

danasgoodstuff said:


> Another complicating factor is that most RRs were losing $ on passenger service in the '60s, but maybe not the D&RGW?


D&RGW was losing money. They all were.


----------



## Willbridge

danasgoodstuff said:


> Another complicating factor is that most RRs were losing $ on passenger service in the '60s, but maybe not the D&RGW?


Whoo, boy! That's a question that the Greatest Generation spent a lot of time on. My guess is that they were making a small profit in the first half of the decade and losing money in the second half.

Here's the issue. The ICC approved accounting shared costs between different types of service. (As did the CTC in Canada.) The companies that were interested kept a separate unofficial set of books based on avoidable costs. I believe that avoidable "real" cost of running passenger trains is the origin of the Amtrak payments to the railway companies.

I don't remember the date but _Trains_ carried an excellent article from a CB&Q man about that issue coming to the fore when Menk became president. He came in with the idea that passenger trains were losers and hired an outside firm to prove his employees who disagreed "wrong."


----------



## Larry H.

Saying the sleepers were for the rich is not my recollection. Sure if you had a lot of money you could always go first class, it was just the way the rich travel. However on the Canadian which at the time had at least 10 sleepers out of a 22 car consist, many of the passengers in our car and the ones around us were young people like I was at the time. We would all meet in one of the large domes at night and they would play guitars and everyone would sing. They were every day common people who were going two and three day destinations and wanted to not sit up the whole trip. Same goes for people on many long distance trains I have ridden, you see college students, a few drunks, young families all using the sleepers. I am still perplexed by the inflation numbers quoted. I suppose that is because I never made much money, but the step up to a pullman fare never seemed like a real expensive move. But now paying a thousand or two thousand for a room most certainly is a lot of money to me. But then the same applies to houses and cars, all with crazy high prices compared to one for less than 20,000 in the 60s. ( houses that is).


----------



## Larry H.

One other thing not too often recalled here is that after some time of running the Passenger Business, Amtrak decided to charge twice the fare for a bedroom. So if you go alone your paying double what it would have cost before the change. In some ways that doesn't make too much sense as the second person usually just pays the coach fare to ride in an already paid for room? Well either way they got a lot more revenue out of that doubling of fare.


----------



## Ryan

You're going to have to provide a citation for that. Given that we've proven the fares are in line with what has been charged in the past, that would mean that Amtrak was charging half-price for some period of time and then doubled fares.


----------



## PaTrainFan

When I was a kid growing up in the 60s, our family of 4 took numerous extended sleeper trips and we were most decidedly middle class living on two teachers' salaries when they weren't making squat. But my father was frugal and saved well because these vacations were important to him...and to us.



Larry H. said:


> Saying the sleepers were for the rich is not my recollection. Sure if you had a lot of money you could always go first class, it was just the way the rich travel. However on the Canadian which at the time had at least 10 sleepers out of a 22 car consist, many of the passengers in our car and the ones around us were young people like I was at the time. We would all meet in one of the large domes at night and they would play guitars and everyone would sing. They were every day common people who were going two and three day destinations and wanted to not sit up the whole trip. Same goes for people on many long distance trains I have ridden, you see college students, a few drunks, young families all using the sleepers. I am still perplexed by the inflation numbers quoted. I suppose that is because I never made much money, but the step up to a pullman fare never seemed like a real expensive move. But now paying a thousand or two thousand for a room most certainly is a lot of money to me. But then the same applies to houses and cars, all with crazy high prices compared to one for less than 20,000 in the 60s. ( houses that is).


----------



## niemi24s

Larry H. said:


> One other thing not too often recalled here is that after some time of running the Passenger Business, Amtrak decided to charge twice the fare for a bedroom.


Q1: When did that fare increase occur?
Q2: Can you provide sample fares before and after that increase?


----------



## Amtrak709

Just to add my two cents worth: my favorite "cheap" sleeping car fare = Athens, GA to Richmond, VA Broad Street Station November 1966 Pullman Roomette
$27.70 first class rail fare + $8.80 Pullman sleeping car ticket (the bedroom sleeping car ticket Richmond to Athens same trip was $19.10 + rail fare). I have the two Pullman car tickets framed and hanging in my office to this day.


----------



## joelkfla

Ryan said:


> You're going to have to provide a citation for that. Given that we've proven the fares are in line with what has been charged in the past, that would mean that Amtrak was charging half-price for some period of time and then doubled fares.


The comparisons I've done were at roomette level. I don't recall seeing a comparison for bedrooms (but I could've missed it.)


----------



## nferr

Qapla said:


> Personally, I was alive back in the 1960's - and, yes, things were "cheaper" back then compared to what they cost now. And, while I understand that, accounting for inflation, prices can be stated as being "equivalent" to some "adjusted" price today ... I am not currently making and spending "inflated" money. I am spending out of the funds I currently have and paying prices currently being charged - regardless of how they compare to prices in the 60's
> 
> I do not need to "adjust for inflation" to know when something is too expensive and therefore not buy it ... that goes for products like cars, TV's and food - as well as train/sleeper fares.
> 
> Regardless of inflation, IMHO train sleeper fares are just plain too high - it is as simple as that.


 
I understand. But they're too high for you. Since they're consistently booked the sleepers are obviously not too high for everybody. Simple supply and demand. I use points and right now I don't want to use my points un till the prices come down some, if ever. I do have 200,000 points so...


----------



## Qapla

nferr said:


> I use points and right now I don't want to use my points un till the prices come down some, if ever.



So, evidently, your opinion agrees with mine - they are too expensive ... thus the need for the prices to "come down some"


----------



## pennyk

I think the bedroom prices are high. My December 2021 cross country trip is way more expensive (in points) than my December 2019 trip. Part of the increase is that in 2021, I will be traveling in bedrooms on the Silver Meteor, whereas I traveled in roomettes in 2019. However, in 2021, I will be in a roomette on the Lakeshore Limited going to CHI, whereas I was in a bedroom on the CL in 2019. In 2019, I took the CZ west and EB east. In 2021, I will take the SWC west and CZ east. 
Since I want to travel in 2021, have enough points and am not convinced the fares will go down anytime soon (if ever), I bit the bullet and booked the December 2021 trip. 

The demand is higher for travel. It appears that the demand for sleepers has skyrocketed, especially bedrooms with private restrooms. The supply on many trains seems to be down.

One does not need to be wealthy to travel in a sleeper - it just has to be a priority in that person's life.


----------



## Sidney

Qapla said:


> So, evidently, your opinion agrees with mine - they are too expensive ... thus the need for the prices to "come down some"


Obviously,people are paying those outrageous prices,so don't expect them to drop. I've seen bedroom prices on the EB north of $2000 from Chi to Sea. I booked a 9 day Caribbean cruise in January for $1600 .


----------



## enviro5609

pennyk said:


> I think the bedroom prices are high. My December 2021 cross country trip is way more expensive (in points) than my December 2019 trip. Part of the increase is that in 2021, I will be traveling in bedrooms on the Silver Meteor, whereas I traveled in roomettes in 2019. However, in 2021, I will be in a roomette on the Lakeshore Limited going to CHI, whereas I was in a bedroom on the CL in 2019. In 2019, I took the CZ west and EB east. In 2021, I will take the SWC west and CZ east.
> Since I want to travel in 2021, have enough points and am not convinced the fares will go down anytime soon (if ever), I bit the bullet and booked the December 2021 trip.
> 
> The demand is higher for travel. It appears that the demand for sleepers has skyrocketed, especially bedrooms with private restrooms. The supply on many trains seems to be down.
> 
> One does not need to be wealthy to travel in a sleeper - it just has to be a priority in that person's life.



Adding on to your point about high demand, something I have not seen discussed yet here is the potential increase in "short" bookings for Roomettes.

With COVID, and mask restrictions, I would be shocked if there were not more bookings for Roomettes on day trips as compared to pre-2020. While the cost may be reasonable for the day trip, it takes a Roomette out of the end-to end supply, thereby driving the costs up for end to end long distance travel.

For instance, travel from Chicago to Minneapolis is a ~8 hour day trip. In 2019 we would have booked coach without a second thought, and maybe stopped by the dinning car if we felt like splurging.

Now? We'd take the Roomette. Not only is it the only way to get into the dining car, but we get our own space and don't have to wear a mask the entire trip. While that makes sense for us, it takes a Roomette out of supply for its intended purpose-- overnight travel.

I wonder how much of the phenomena discussed here about "empty" rooms is really just people noticing Roomettes or Bedrooms that were short booked for just a day.


----------



## Willbridge

enviro5609 said:


> Adding on to your point about high demand, something I have not seen discussed yet here is the potential increase in "short" bookings for Roomettes.
> 
> With COVID, and mask restrictions, I would be shocked if there are were not more bookings for Roomettes on day trips as compared to pre-2020. While the cost may be reasonable for the day trip, it takes a Roomette out of the end-to end supply, thereby driving the costs up for end to end long distance travel.
> 
> For instance, travel from Chicago to Minneapolis is a ~8 hour day trip. In 2019 we would have booked coach without a second thought, and maybe stopped by the dinning car if we felt like splurging.
> 
> Now? We'd take the Roomette. Not only is it the only way to get into the dining car, but we get our own space and don't have to wear a mask the entire trip. While that makes sense for us, it takes a Roomette out of supply for its intended purpose-- overnight travel.
> 
> I wonder how much of the phenomena discussed here about "empty" rooms is really just people noticing Roomettes or Bedrooms that were short booked for just a day.


I follow the _Cascades _and the related segments of the _Coast Starlight _and typically the PDX<>EUG minimum sleeper charge is higher than the SEA<>PDX sleeper charge. That indicates that Amtrak is pricing to reduce the chances of "shorts" blocking space for longer trips.

For Friday, August 27th,
_SEA>PDX = Rooms start at $153. 186 rail miles.
PDX>EUG = Rooms start at $209. 124 rail miles._

Business Class starts looking really good on the PDX>EUG segment.

The lower occupancy of sleepers north of Portland is why the UP/NP/SP Seattle-Oakland pool cars were fewer than the SP Portland-Oakland cars. It is why in the original brainstorming for Trains 27/28 we considered a through Los Angeles<>Portland<>Chicago sleeper, which would save a car. Fortunately that wasn't tried, as schedule adherence would have been a problem.


----------



## Larry H.

I just started researching the two fares for what used to be available for one that people wanted to know where I found it. Here is a quote from and amtrak review around 2001. It talks about how people are charged double the fare for a room where they used to be a fare for one. Probably some clearer articles but at the moment I don't have time to look for them.

"One for the price of two
The price of a bedroom always builds in the cost of “complimentary” dining car meals for two people, even when only one person is traveling.

Many sleeping car veterans have decried this Amtrak version of the “single supplement,” especially after the retirement of older, more economical Slumbercoaches and Heritage Roomettes. Management argues that if someone will pay and the car is sold out, why cut the rate just because only one person is traveling?"

Pretty much eluding to the point that the charge used to be for one person, not two.


----------



## Ryan

That does absolutely nothing to bolster your claim that priced doubled at some unspecified point in time in the past.


----------



## Amtrak709

I think that those of us who prefer a bedroom to a roomette had (and I repeat: *HAD*) gotten used to paying premium price for it in general--for the larger space, the enclosed toilet, the private shower, etc.--the meals charge is just ancillary (in my opinion). Based on what have become outrageous differences in roomette and bedroom prices, my opinion has dramatically changed. It is impossible for me to ignore that discrepancy on my last trip in June 2021 ATN-NYP roomette would have been $380.20 each way (senior fare + roomette); bedroom was $1142.00. Now, admittedly, I paid for the bedroom--idiot (I wanted to see the new Moynihan Train Hall and I had not been for a train ride in a while), but I will NEVER pay that again.


----------



## niemi24s

AMTRAK709 said:


> , , , but I will NEVER pay that again.


I don't blame you! And only because the Roomette fare you found was the lowest (bucket) possible and the Bedroom fare (bucket) you paid was as high as possible. 

But had you shopped around for different dates you might (maybe) have found some date when the highest Roomette fares were $37 or $121 _more_ than the cheapest Bedroom fare of (presently) $611! Here are the current fares (buckets) between ATN and NYP for one adult (the senior discount amounts to $21):

• Roomette - $417, 499, 582, 669 and [753, estimated]
• Bedroom - $632, 773, 886, 1017 and 1149.

Those outrageous differences between the cheapest and costliest rooms (usually more than 3X) have been in effect for years and years - the exception being the CONO where it's a bit more than 2X.


----------



## Qapla

Larry H. said:


> The price of a bedroom always builds in the cost of “complimentary” dining car meals for two people, even when only one person is traveling.



If that is the case, I would want both meals even if I was traveling alone ... especially since I would have paid for both


----------



## niemi24s

And if you turned up your nose at what was offered you'd want a refund?


----------



## Amtrak709

Thanks for the reply niemi24s. YES, you are absolutely correct. When I booked in April I was searching for low bucket near the week the Crescent resumed daily
service--so I picked 06/10/2021 & 06/12/2021 return and there were NO Bedrooms available. Just to ride and see the Moynihan Train Hall. Later, near departure date, I decided I HAD to have the bedroom (turned out to be the 'H" accessible (both ways)--which, I think, is the nicest accommodation on the sleeper). I am clearly the one who made the decision to pay the fare. It is just I have had the opportunity to recall what I have paid for bedrooms in the past, and the $1100 price tag seemed exorbitant.


----------



## Amtrak709

Hey, Larry H. Both meals?? The flex dining on the Crescent those days I travelled was NOT good. I am a 230-pound guy, but I do not believe I could have eaten two meals.


----------



## Sidney

Qapla said:


> If that is the case, I would want both meals even if I was traveling alone ... especially since I would have paid for both


90% of the time I travel by myself. In all those years I have been paying for two meals instead of one? Of course,there is no discount for solo travelers.


----------



## Ryan

It is the world's most meaningless distinction to wank about what you paid for. You paid for a room of a certain size and includes meals for those people in that room. If you're alone, you're not entitled to two (or more, since you can put more than two people in a room) meals.


----------



## Sidney

AMTRAK709 said:


> I think that those of us who prefer a bedroom to a roomette had (and I repeat: *HAD*) gotten used to paying premium price for it in general--for the larger space, the enclosed toilet, the private shower, etc.--the meals charge is just ancillary (in my opinion). Based on what have become outrageous differences in roomette and bedroom prices, my opinion has dramatically changed. It is impossible for me to ignore that discrepancy on my last trip in June 2021 ATN-NYP roomette would have been $380.20 each way (senior fare + roomette); bedroom was $1142.00. Now, admittedly, I paid for the bedroom--idiot (I wanted to see the new Moynihan Train Hall and I had not been for a train ride in a while), but I will NEVER pay that again.


If nobody would pay high bucket fares,the prices would be more reasonable. Sadly,some people will pay them.


----------



## pennyk

Ryan said:


> It is the world's most meaningless distinction to wank about what you paid for. You paid for a room of a certain size and includes meals for those people in that room. If you're alone, you're not entitled to two (or more, since you can put more than two people in a room) meals.


I have been traveling alone in bedrooms and roomettes for years and realize that I am paying some sort of "single supplement" as one does on a cruise ship. I would rather pay a bit more and not have to share a tiny room with anyone. I never thought I was entitled to 2 meals (however now that alcohol is included with dinner, I am thinking it would be nice to have 2 drinks instead of one - lol).


----------



## Amtrak709

Actually, I am reminded that Amtrak--or it may have been Southern Railway before it joined Amtrak--required an extra one-quarter rail fare (1/4) for one-person exclusive occupancy of a bedroom. This was probably in the 1970's and during the days of heritage sleepers and long before meals were included. This was way back in the days when the published tariffs had "minimum ticket requirements" for exclusive occupancy of a sleeper space (1 for roomette, 1 1/4 for bedroom, maybe 2 for a drawing room or bedroom suite, etc., etc.--you get the idea)


----------



## zephyr17

Larry H. said:


> I just started researching the two fares for what used to be available for one that people wanted to know where I found it. Here is a quote from and amtrak review around 2001. It talks about how people are charged double the fare for a room where they used to be a fare for one. Probably some clearer articles but at the moment I don't have time to look for them.
> 
> "One for the price of two
> The price of a bedroom always builds in the cost of “complimentary” dining car meals for two people, even when only one person is traveling.
> 
> Many sleeping car veterans have decried this Amtrak version of the “single supplement,” especially after the retirement of older, more economical Slumbercoaches and Heritage Roomettes. Management argues that if someone will pay and the car is sold out, why cut the rate just because only one person is traveling?"
> 
> Pretty much eluding to the point that the charge used to be for one person, not two.


The accommodation charges were per room, not per person, back as far as I can remember. It didn't change in 2001.

That was the case even before they started including dining car meals in the fares in the 1980s. I remember it very well, because the accommodation charges went up by a very close approximation of the cost of meals for two for the period of occupancy.

I didn't like it then, and I don't like it now, but it didn't represent a basic change in the single accommodation charge.

I wish they'd go back to charging for meals separately.

You need to cite something else. Ive been riding since Amtrak started, and there was always a single accommodation charge for each accommodation type. Back in the 70s there may have still been a surcharge on the _rail fare_ for occupancy of an accommodation with more capacity than ticketed passengers, but that was gone fairly early on.


----------



## Amtrak709

Another thought, back in the days of the heritage sleepers before the 1990's debut of the Viewliners, I would almost rather have a roomette as a bedroom. Other than not having an enclosed toilet and having to put the bed up to use the toilet, the seats seemed more plush and the beds more comfortable. Does anyone remember the old heritage Super Chief type "drawing room"? Another great sleeping car space!!


----------



## Bob Dylan

I always liked riding the Crescent in a SlumberCoach Roomette, both Sourhern and Amtrak versions ,between Washington and Atlanta on my many trips to/from while visiting my dad.

It is still the best Sleeper Deal I've ever found on US LD Trains.


----------



## Amtrak709

Just to be truthful and to soften my perceived overreaction to high bedroom fares for one person, the SCA on the Crescent did serve me two gin and tonics at dinner on both my northbound and southbound trips. This trip occurred just 4 and 6 days when daily service was returned to the Crescent. Because of staff issues, she (the SCA) was covering both sleepers--and that was appreciated.


----------



## joelkfla

AMTRAK709 said:


> Actually, I am reminded that Amtrak--or it may have been Southern Railway before it joined Amtrak--required an extra one-quarter rail fare (1/4) for one-person exclusive occupancy of a bedroom. This was probably in the 1970's and during the days of heritage sleepers and long before meals were included. This was way back in the days when the published tariffs had "minimum ticket requirements" for exclusive occupancy of a sleeper space (1 for roomette, 1 1/4 for bedroom, maybe 2 for a drawing room or bedroom suite, etc., etc.--you get the idea)


This is from the 1965 Burlington timetable:





Their accommodations fare was higher for 2 passengers than for 1, but only the Drawing Room & Bedroom Suites required additional rail fares. D&RG was the same.

Southern RR (below) does not show a difference for 1 to 2 passengers, but does require 2 rail fares for a Bedroom Suite. (Looks like they didn't offer Drawing Rooms.)






Timetable images copied from streamlinermemories.info


----------



## Amtrak709

Thanks joelkfla for that info. It is true I cannot remember traveling in a drawing room on the Southern, only the Santa Fe Super Chief--but is still was a fabulous
sleeping car space. I know it is 50+ years later, but can you imagine those fares compared to today??


----------



## zephyr17

AMTRAK709 said:


> Thanks joelkfla for that info. It is true I cannot remember traveling in a drawing room on the Southern, only the Santa Fe Super Chief--but is still was a fabulous
> sleeping car space. I know it is 50+ years later, but can you imagine those fares compared to today??


Well, VIA still has Drawing Rooms in the Chateau cars and Park cars they didn't convert to Prestige, although they don't ordinarily run non-Prestige Chateaus on the Canadian except as crew dorms. There might be some on during the height of the summer season if they run out of Manors. The Hudson Bay Winnipeg-Churchill train normally had Chateaus.

They sell them as "Cabin for 3".


----------



## Keith1951

niemi24s said:


> I don't blame you! And only because the Roomette fare you found was the lowest (bucket) possible and the Bedroom fare (bucket) you paid was as high as possible.
> 
> But had you shopped around for different dates you might (maybe) have found some date when the highest Roomette fares were $37 or $121 _more_ than the cheapest Bedroom fare of (presently) $611! Here are the current fares (buckets) between ATN and NYP for one adult (the senior discount amounts to $21):
> 
> • Roomette - $417, 499, 582, 669 and [753, estimated]
> • Bedroom - $632, 773, 886, 1017 and 1149.
> 
> Those outrageous differences between the cheapest and costliest rooms (usually more than 3X) have been in effect for years and years - the exception being the CONO where it's a bit more than 2X.


I shopped around every day for months because our trip isn't until next year. We have to have a bedroom because there would be two of us. We tried a roomette once but it was just too cramped. I finally found a good price on a superliner bedroom on CZ from Chicago to Emeryville that cost $1049, it was less than the price of a roomette which was $1349 on that day. I booked it and we travel in May of 2022. I still go online from time to time to check the prices to see if I can find something lower. I have learned that the prices fluctuate and they can change at any time.


----------



## Railspike

AMTRAK709 said:


> Thanks joelkfla for that info. It is true I cannot remember traveling in a drawing room on the Southern, only the Santa Fe Super Chief--but is still was a fabulous
> sleeping car space. I know it is 50+ years later, but can you imagine those fares compared to today??


In 1979, my wife's first trip on a train (we're doing what???) was on the SL to LA from Houston. I got a bedroom and when we got on the train to my surprise our accommodation was a drawing room. Spoiled her. Haven't heard the end of it since. We still get a bedroom but I hear about the drawing room every time. Best accommodation ever.


----------



## Amtrak709

I just remembered another fabulous drawing room trip: it was on Via Rail Canadian in the year 2000 Vancouver to Toronto. The "Park Car" I think it is called; a tapered-end dome observation last car on the train. The drawing room had been retrofitted with a private bathroom. I wonder what that space cost now in the year 2021?


----------



## Amtrak709

Subsequent to my post above, I got curious as to what that trip Vancouver to Toronto in that same drawing room for 2 people would cost TODAY 21 years later.
Nearly had a stroke upon seeing the result. I should quit complaining about Amtrak high bedroom fares!!!!


----------



## joelkfla

AMTRAK709 said:


> Subsequent to my post above, I got curious as to what that trip Vancouver to Toronto in that same drawing room for 2 people would cost TODAY 21 years later.
> Nearly had a stroke upon seeing the result. I should quit complaining about Amtrak high bedroom fares!!!!


Yes, VIA "Prestige" class. Many times the cost of regular Sleeper Plus.


----------



## jimdex

I never thought meal prices should be bundled into sleeping car fares in the first place!


----------



## Emmo213

Emmo213 said:


> We were thinking about taking the Empire Builder in June of 2022 from Chicago to West Glacier but wow, it's expensive! We already have a trip on the SWC for April and a family bedroom is half the cost of the EB.



As an update my wife and I have decided to fly instead of take the Empire Builder. Flying round trip first class from Cleveland to Glacier National Park will cost about $3.5k as opposed to taking the EB which would be $2k one way, plus we have to get to Chicago, plus we have to get home to Cleveland. In the end it was just too much money/effort. Looking forward to our SWC trip though!


----------



## amtrakpass

Correct me if I am wrong but didn't the fares used to be the same published rate regardless of how empty or full the train was? Some of the stress of the current system I believe is how much it can change in a matter of moments with the yield management system.
Also I do believe regardless of average fares and inflation there certainly is more real inequality among income levels than there used to be with many having way more than they need but also many more not having enough.


----------



## zephyr17

amtrakpass said:


> Correct me if I am wrong but didn't the fares used to be the same published rate regardless of how empty or full the train was? Some of the stress of the current system I believe is how much it can change in a matter of moments with the yield management system.
> Also I do believe regardless of average fares and inflation there certainly is more real inequality among income levels than there used to be with many having way more than they need but also many more not having enough.


Yes. When Amtrak first started, they were still under the same ICC regulations as their railroad predecessors and all tariffs had to be filed. At that time the airlines were in same situation and their fares had to filed and approved by the CAB. It was the same cost for the same trip whether you bought the ticket months in advance or walked up that day, or whether travel was the Wednesday before Thanksgiving or in the depths of mid-February. Since then both air and rail fares were deregulated. Airfares were first. I am not sure of the timeframe for Amtrak but the yield management system was in place in the 1990s, IIRC.

Amtrak still is not quite so dizzying in their yield management as the airlines, but they have gotten more sophisticated with it over the years. Up until a few years ago, they did routinely allocate inventory into the lowest bucket when inventory was released 11 months in advance. They no longer do that and the old 11 month "rule" to get cheap fares is now a thing of the past. Amtrak now allocates that initial inventory according to historical trends and anticipated demand for the date with an "optimistic" skew towards higher buckets. They adjust inventory allocation among the yield management buckets as demand develops or doesn't.

They certainly appear to be on the "optimistic" (higher bucket) side right now for much of 2022.

Yield management isn't going anywhere. It is a way of life now. I have no intrinsic argument with yield management as long as it is done well. Amtrak is entitled to get what they can get for inventory that is both limited and perishable. My issues would be if it were done incompetently and inventory were allowed to go out empty because pricing was too high, or BidUp put that inventory out a fire sale rates after staying at high prices for too long. Based on reports here and on Facebook, BidUp is not resulting in really deep discounts thus far.

PS, VIA Rail Canada does not appear to be doing yield management, other than the amount inventory allocated into their "Discount" fare class. They have 3 basic fare seasons, Peak, Shoulder and Off Peak, each with a Discount and Full fare. They do (or did, pre-COVID) what amounted to distressed inventory sales with travel between selected points on selected dates released 4-8 weeks in advance which would be 40-50% off, but you could not plan around them since it didn't become available until relatively shortly before departure and there was no way to tell if your travel dates, destinations, or accommodation type would be offered.


----------



## PaTrainFan

This is an excellent explainer of the history behind yield management. Thank you.



zephyr17 said:


> Yes. When Amtrak first started, they were still under the same ICC regulations as their railroad predecessors and all tariffs had to be filed. At that time the airlines were in same situation and their fares had to filed and approved by the CAB. It was the same cost for the same trip whether you bought the ticket months in advance or walked up that day, or whether travel was the Wednesday before Thanksgiving or in the depths of mid-February. Since then both air and rail fares were deregulated. Airfares were first. I am not sure of the timeframe for Amtrak but the yield management system was in place in the 1990s, IIRC.
> 
> Amtrak still is not quite so dizzying in their yield management as the airlines, but they have gotten more sophisticated with it over the years. Up until a few years ago, they did routinely allocate inventory into the lowest bucket when inventory was released 11 months in advance. They no longer do that and the old 11 month "rule" to get cheap fares is now a thing of the past. Amtrak now allocates that initial inventory according to historical trends and anticipated demand for the date with an "optimistic" skew towards higher buckets. They adjust inventory allocation among the yield management buckets as demand develops or doesn't.
> 
> They certainly appear to be on the "optimistic" (higher bucket) side right now for much of 2022.
> 
> Yield management isn't going anywhere. It is a way of life now. I have no intrinsic argument with yield management as long as it is done well. Amtrak is entitled to get what they can get for inventory that is both limited and perishable. My issues would be if it were done incompetently and inventory were allowed to go out empty because pricing was too high, or BidUp put that inventory out a fire sale rates after staying at high prices for too long. Based on reports here and on Facebook, BidUp is not resulting in really deep discounts thus far.
> 
> PS, VIA Rail Canada does not appear to be doing yield management, other than the amount inventory allocated into their "Discount" fare class. They have 3 basic fare seasons, Peak, Shoulder and Off Peak, each with a Discount and Full fare. They do (or did, pre-COVID) what amounted to distressed inventory sales with travel between selected points on selected dates released 4-8 weeks in advance which would be 40-50% off, but you could not plan around them since it didn't become available until relatively shortly before departure and there was no way to tell if your travel dates, destinations, or accommodation type would be offered.


----------



## zephyr17

AMTRAK709 said:


> Subsequent to my post above, I got curious as to what that trip Vancouver to Toronto in that same drawing room for 2 people would cost TODAY 21 years later.
> Nearly had a stroke upon seeing the result. I should quit complaining about Amtrak high bedroom fares!!!!


VIA hasn't routinely offered Drawing Rooms ("Cabin for 3") on the Canadian for a few years now. What they do have is Prestige Class which is a different and new thing. They completely tubed out some Chateau cars to convert to the the Prestige rooms (6 per car, IIRC) and also drastically reconfigured some Park cars to offer a Handicapped room and a Prestige room or two. The non-Prestige Chateaus and Park cars, which still have Drawing Rooms ("Cabin for 3") have been withdrawn from routine Canadian service, although some Chateaus may show up in peak periods if they run out of Manors.

Prestige rooms are indeed extraordinarily expensive and not worth it, IMHO. But they are not Drawing Rooms, they are even bigger than Drawing Rooms.

BTW, the VIA Service Manager routinely gets the Drawing Room in the unconverted Chateau they use as a crew dorm (and don't sell space in, although they may use unoccupied space in that car to accommodate a passenger in a room that has to be bad ordered and no other space is available).


----------



## amtrakpass

Thanks for the explanation of the yield mgmt system. Even though it seems to be here to stay for me I think the amount of unpredictable severe swings in pricing are a disservice to the passengers, especially those less fortunate. It used to be less of an issue to me because for many years you could cancel most fares for a full refund or exchange up to the last moment and rebook to a different date or cheaper fare if it came up. Now with the current fees it is much harder to do that without a cost making Amtrak travel much less flexible for someone like me.


----------



## zephyr17

amtrakpass said:


> Thanks for the explanation of the yield mgmt system. Even though it seems to be here to stay for me I think the amount of unpredictable severe swings in pricing are a disservice to the passengers, especially those less fortunate. It used to be less of an issue to me because for many years you could cancel most fares for a full refund or exchange up to the last moment and rebook to a different date or cheaper fare if it came up. Now with the current fees it is much harder to do that without a cost making Amtrak travel much less flexible for someone like me.


Well, can't disagree it is a something of a disservice to passengers, but if properly done should reflect the market for sleeping accommodations. The real solution is to expand inventory (buy more sleeping cars) so the very limited inventory isn't pushed into the the high buckets so routinely. Pricing should be reflective of supply and demand, and most organizations when they see such an outstripping of supply to meet demand would increase supply. Amtrak needs to get more sleeping cars and get away from their fixation on fixed consists. In my opinion the reasoning for both is a reflection of Amtrak management's total fixation and incentive system based almost solely on containing costs while completely ignoring and not incentivizing increasing revenue.


----------



## Willbridge

Fixed-rate fares and unreserved coach seats are why railways and intercity bus lines kept older equipment around to handle surges in ridership.

There were promotional fares that tried to achieve what yield management does but being fixed in themselves they were risky. My brother rode the _Mainstreeter _on the half-price Youth Fare in January 1967 and across Montana college kids were sitting on their suitcases. There was no immediate way of halting sales.


----------



## Larry H.

Willbridge said:


> Fixed-rate fares and unreserved coach seats are why railways and intercity bus lines kept older equipment around to handle surges in ridership.
> 
> There were promotional fares that tried to achieve what yield management does but being fixed in themselves they were risky. My brother rode the _Mainstreeter _on the half-price Youth Fare in January 1967 and across Montana college kids were sitting on their suitcases. There was no immediate way of halting sales.



I agree, but one thing did sort of ruin that idea of having extra old running stock. My grandparents wanted to go to Colorado Springs for Christmas to see one of their children's family. I planned to ride as far as KC from St. Louis on the Missouri Pacific.. I made the reservations plenty far out to get hopefully a nice sleeper for them since it was one of their first pullman trips. When we boarded the train however they did have wonderful new well maintained pullmans in the consist, but the car we got was a very old version with wall lamps that hung out from the walls and other things you could tell meant it was probably from the 30s or maybe 40s. Our trip was in the early 60s. The car rode rough like it had a flat wheel and was noisy at that. When I got off it was late evening an later they told me it was impossible to sleep in the car it bounced and made so much noise. So extra cars are nice but it was too bad that early booked customers got stuck with the old equipment.


----------



## Amtrak709

Thanks, zephyr17, for the concise update on VIA. I have paid little attention to VIA in the past twenty years. I loved that ride VAN-TOR
in that drawing room in the observation car in 2000. From your description, the prestige class sounds like "luxury" type accommodations like maybe the American Orient Express type train. What obviously struck me was the enormous fare. While I did not check last night, I think the fare for the drawing room in 2000 was about $1800 (2 persons occupying the 3-person drawing room) as opposed to the $10000 ??? prestige fare today. As I posted earlier, perhaps I should give Amtrak a break from my criticism of high bedroom sleeper fares.


----------



## Railspike

Here's a novel idea. Until the new sleepers arrive, Amtrak could lease Heritage sleepers from PV owners and place them between the baggage car and the Transition Sleeper car on LD trains. More inventory without the capital expenditure, more space to sell, lower prices(?), and the PV owners get a temporary income stream. Win-Win. Would I book a Heritage sleeper room over a Superliner sleeper room? You bet.


----------



## neroden

AMTRAK709 said:


> Thanks joelkfla for that info. It is true I cannot remember traveling in a drawing room on the Southern, only the Santa Fe Super Chief--but is still was a fabulous
> sleeping car space. I know it is 50+ years later, but can you imagine those fares compared to today??



You have to adjust for inflation. For anything pre-1970s, that means multiplying the prices by 10. Interestingly, sleepers were cheaper back then but coach tickets were more expensive.


----------



## neroden

amtrakpass said:


> Thanks for the explanation of the yield mgmt system. Even though it seems to be here to stay for me I think the amount of unpredictable severe swings in pricing are a disservice to the passengers, especially those less fortunate. It used to be less of an issue to me because for many years you could cancel most fares for a full refund or exchange up to the last moment and rebook to a different date or cheaper fare if it came up.


The recent customer-unfriendly refund policies are unjustifiable; all they do is tick people off and create ill-will. They don't really make any money.


----------



## zephyr17

AMTRAK709 said:


> Thanks, zephyr17, for the concise update on VIA. I have paid little attention to VIA in the past twenty years. I loved that ride VAN-TOR
> in that drawing room in the observation car in 2000. From your description, the prestige class sounds like "luxury" type accommodations like maybe the American Orient Express type train. What obviously struck me was the enormous fare. While I did not check last night, I think the fare for the drawing room in 2000 was about $1800 (2 persons occupying the 3-person drawing room) as opposed to the $10000 ??? prestige fare today. As I posted earlier, perhaps I should give Amtrak a break from my criticism of high bedroom sleeper fares.


Prestige is a different class of service and the cars' interiors were completely rebuilt within the gutted shells. The Prestige rooms are large enough to contain a double bed. Prestige also offers "concierge" service and free premium booze. And exclusive access to the Park car during most of the day during peak season.

A Drawing Room would be in the Sleeper Plus class ( the old Silver & Blue class). VIA Sleeper Plus fares currently are about $1900 CAD per person in private rooms Vancouver-Toronto in the off peak Discount fare class to about $2800 CAD per person for full fare peak. VIA no longer follows the old rail fare plus accommodation charge model that Amtrak still uses, but charges per person with a supplement if under the occupancy limit of the room. If a single person wants to occupy a Bedroom ("Cabin for 2") they pay 1 1/2 times the roomette fare. Extrapolating from that, assuming 2 1/2 fares for 2 people to occupy a Drawing Room, all in today in a Drawing Room about $4750 CAD off peak Discount to $7,000 CAD peak full fare.

But that accommodation type is no longer on the train.


----------



## dlagrua

I don't know what's going on with the LD sleeper fares but this is the first year in the last 18 that we have not taken Amtrak on our vacation. We are passengers that are willing to spend $3,000 for a R/T coast to coast bedroom fare (far more than first class air) but definitely not $5,500-$6,000. Point is that we have money to spend and we are being turned away. A smart business would figure out how to acquire more sleepers, take our money and do more business but this doesn't seem to fit Amtrak's plans.


----------



## pennyk

dlagrua said:


> A smart business would figure out how to acquire more sleepers, take our money and do more business but this doesn't seem to fit Amtrak's plans.


I believe, lack of sufficient crew is also a consideration (even more so than lack of sleepers).


----------



## Nick Farr

Railspike said:


> Here's a novel idea. Until the new sleepers arrive, Amtrak could lease Heritage sleepers from PV owners and place them between the baggage car and the Transition Sleeper car on LD trains. More inventory without the capital expenditure, more space to sell, lower prices(?), and the PV owners get a temporary income stream. Win-Win. Would I book a Heritage sleeper room over a Superliner sleeper room? You bet.



I think @Seaboard92 would be the best equipped to say whether or not this is feasible. I've long argued that Amtrak should create some opportunity for the private sector to come in and operate scheduled differentiated services to the general public along the LD routes. 

That being said, I think a lot of the PV stock at this point is highly specialized for smaller groups and will likely have to be priced dramatically higher than even the high standard sleeper fares to make economic sense for the owners.


----------



## Exvalley

There is also a lot to be said for product standardization.


----------



## jis

If you have to provide a consistent PV based service say on the Silver Meteor, you would require 4 (+1) PVs of roughly the same configuration, or alternatively make such service twice a week or some such. There are very good reasons why such is not generally feasible no matter how much the old timers may think it should be done. So far every attempt to do even a weekly service using a set of PVs seem to have crashed and burned in short order.


----------



## Ryan

Nick Farr said:


> That being said, I think a lot of the PV stock at this point is highly specialized for smaller groups and will likely have to be priced dramatically higher than even the high standard sleeper fares to make economic sense for the owners.



This. If you like high Amtrak sleeper prices, you're going to LOOOOOVE PV sleeper prices.


----------



## Cal

Railspike said:


> Here's a novel idea. Until the new sleepers arrive, Amtrak could lease Heritage sleepers from PV owners and place them between the baggage car and the Transition Sleeper car on LD trains. More inventory without the capital expenditure, more space to sell, lower prices(?), and the PV owners get a temporary income stream. Win-Win. Would I book a Heritage sleeper room over a Superliner sleeper room? You bet.


Interesting idea. My first thought when reading this was 'There will be people who are going to rip this idea up (politely)'.It seems I was right. 

If you want to ride in a heritage sleeper, I'm sure you can, even on Amtrak routes. Just not sold by Amtrak.


----------



## Nick Farr

Exvalley said:


> There is also a lot to be said for product standardization.



I mean, if Amtrak OBS policies differ based on the crew, why should we expect PV owners to standardize?


----------



## Nick Farr

jis said:


> If you have to provide a consistent PV based service say on the Silver Meteor, you would require 4 (+1) PVs of roughly the same configuration, or alternatively make such service twice a week or some such. There are very good reasons why such is not generally feasible no matter how much the old timers may think it should be done. So far every attempt to do even a weekly service using a set of PVs seem to have crashed and burned in short order.



As a stand-in for sleepers being refurbished: I agree this isn't really feasible.

That being said, there has to be some way to make regularly scheduled PV travel work. By regularly scheduled, maybe just one PV car on the CZ that goes back and forth on the same consist and allows for access to the rest of the train (and possibly even provides dining to coach passengers?)


----------



## zephyr17

Nick Farr said:


> As a stand-in for sleepers being refurbished: I agree this isn't really feasible.
> 
> That being said, there has to be some way to make regularly scheduled PV travel work. By regularly scheduled, maybe just one PV car on the CZ that goes back and forth on the same consist and allows for access to the rest of the train (and possibly even provides dining to coach passengers?)


Ask Ed Ellis. He tried it on the CONO. It did not end well for him.


----------



## Nick Farr

zephyr17 said:


> Ask Ed Ellis. He tried it on the CONO. It did not end well for him.



Without Amtrak actively supporting it as an idea, I don't see how it could get off the ground. That being said, I've seen much less viable proposals get venture funding.

The last actually new rail product in the US was the Acela. Does Amtrak actually do any feasibility studies into new products, similar to the study that led to the creation of the Auto Train?

Do we feel there's any room for private industry to come in and pitch new rail travel ideas?

Wouldn't it be interesting if someone took a Superliner, made a slumbercoach out of it and priced it below sleepers but above coach?


----------



## jis

All theoretically possible. Practically wake me up when it happens


----------



## Exvalley

I say that we contract with ÖBB to provide equipment and run every sleeper on certain routes with their equipment.

I fully recognize that they don't have the equipment to spare - but one can always dream, right?

Being more serious, aren't there manufacturers in eastern Europe/Asia that have expertise in making sleeper equipment that can operate in all sorts of weather conditions? I know that we have rules about equipment being manufactured in the United States, but if the new VII sleepers are being delivered with all sorts of problems, maybe it is time to rethink this. At a minimum, we could license their designs and hire some of their talent.


----------



## Nick Farr

Exvalley said:


> I say that we contract with ÖBB to provide equipment and run every sleeper on certain routes with their equipment.



I cannot recall a single time I've been on the internet where I've agreed so strongly with someone I've agreed to disagree with. 

This would be amazing and I am all for it.


----------



## joelkfla

Nick Farr said:


> The last actually new rail product in the US was the Acela.


Brightline?


----------



## Sidney

dlagrua said:


> I don't know what's going on with the LD sleeper fares but this is the first year in the last 18 that we have not taken Amtrak on our vacation. We are passengers that are willing to spend $3,000 for a R/T coast to coast bedroom fare (far more than first class air) but definitely not $5,500-$6,000. Point is that we have money to spend and we are being turned away. A smart business would figure out how to acquire more sleepers, take our money and do more business but this doesn't seem to fit Amtrak's plans.


Totally agree. I can't believe anybody would pay $6000 for a r/t sleeper. This is price gouging at it's worst. Sadly.it takes only one person to pay that obscene price. If nobody would pay that,the price would go down to a more reasonable level. ...
oh and don't tell me this price and demand. This price is outrageous,unless you were talking Orient Express with unlimited drinks and great chefs cooking the finest food there is


----------



## Ryan

Oddly, people attach different values to things and are willing to spend their money in different ways.


----------



## Nick Farr

joelkfla said:


> Brightline?



Is Brightline somehow a new product? Looks kind a slightly glammed up commuter rail line.


----------



## Cal

Nick Farr said:


> Is Brightline somehow a new product? Looks kind a slightly glammed up commuter rail line.


Using that logic, I don't see how Acela is that different either.


----------



## Exvalley

Ryan said:


> Oddly, people attach different values to things and are willing to spend their money in different ways.


If Amtrak didn’t provide a public service that would be the end of it. But most people here want to see Amtrak provide a service to as many people as reasonably possible, myself included. If rates stay extremely high it’s time to take a serious look at increasing supply.


----------



## Ryan

Amtrak would serve a similar number of people if they charge the current prices or charged $1 a head.

The difference is that the current prices make it far more likely that more equipment can be purchased to increase that supply.


----------



## Nick Farr

Cal said:


> Using that logic, I don't see how Acela is that different either.



Acela is unique in that it's the first high(er) speed rail running over legacy track. 

Brightline is doing the same thing. While I applaud their efforts and give them credit for being a quasi-private entity building some new higher speed intercity rail, from the operational perspective it's not really a new concept or product. The real estate games they're playing to fund the service are analogous to the ones that have forever been a part of railroading, from selling off the air rights to Grand Central to land grants to build the transcontinental railroad.


----------



## joelkfla

Nick Farr said:


> Is Brightline somehow a new product? Looks kind a slightly glammed up commuter rail line.


No, it's intercity rail. They should be running to Orlando in about 18 months.

I haven't ridden many commuter lines this century, but I believe it's way beyond a commuter line, in terms of comfort, amenities, and services: spacious and comfortable leather seating, 2 + 1 seating in 1st class, power and charging outlets at each seat, reserved on-line selectable seating, spacious accessible restrooms with automatic doors, snack & drink cart service (free in 1st class), controlled-access departure lounges (with separate 1st class areas having complimentary snacks, drinks, and wine), checked baggage, available last-mile transportation to and from stations.

And it's a new product because it's the 1st privately financed and operated intercity rail line in the U.S. since the advent of Amtrak.


----------



## joelkfla

Nick Farr said:


> I applaud their efforts and give them credit for being a quasi-private entity building some new higher speed intercity rail


It's privately funded and operated. They got some tax relief on the bonds, but I'm pretty sure there is no taxpayer money involved.


----------



## Nick Farr

Exvalley said:


> If Amtrak didn’t provide a public service that would be the end of it. But most people here want to see Amtrak provide a service to as many people as reasonably possible, myself included. If rates stay extremely high it’s time to take a serious look at increasing supply.



Here's where I'm conflicted. Rail transportation itself is the public service.

If we're talking about sleeper accommodations, I'm not sure where they fit in the matter of Amtrak as a public service. If Amtrak finds a market for a premium service at what we consider to be extraordinarily high fares, then I'm not sure where their public service mission calls upon them to lower that price--especially if they're being told to become a break-even concern. Of course, if they set a high price and they go dramatically unsold, then that's a violation of the public interest.

Then again, without Congressional intervention, we probably aren't going to see new bi-level cars before 2030. Maybe ÖBB could sell us sleeper cars they plan to retire!


----------



## Larry H.

Who came up with the idea that wishing to have a bed to sleep in and some privacy was Luxurious service? Most all the Pullman ads from the streamliner era showed them as a place for granny and the kids to arrive rested and safe. Sure it was a step above coach in cost but nothing like the differences now and worse we have many in congress who think its something we shouldn't be pushing for. I wonder how many of them would ride three days in a coach and then say a place to lay down and sleep away from crowds was some outrageous privilege. As above I feel the public is already paying for the trains to operate, why do we think we have to charge such high fares on top of that. We pay for the highways but there isn't a premium charge to drive somewhere on them.


----------



## Nick Farr

joelkfla said:


> It's privately funded and operated. They got some tax relief on the bonds, but I'm pretty sure there is no taxpayer money involved.



They got a lot of prime real estate to develop which bondholders found interesting. They just had to build a rail service in order to develop it.

Also, at around 80 miles, it's a commuter rail service with intercity stop frequency. So--perhaps in that sense it's a new product.

I still hold that what is riding on the rails is not unique to the US in some new fundamental way as when the Auto Train, Pullman Cars or even the Vista Dome were introduced. Then again, just having a conference room on Brightline would probably fit my definition of a new product.

When/if they serve beyond the Miami Metropolitan Area, we can call it intercity rail. And to be clear: I do hope they make it all the way to Tampa and beyond and bring about a lot of new investment and interest in intercity-esque passenger rail.


----------



## Nick Farr

Larry H. said:


> Who came up with the idea that wishing to have a bed to sleep in and some privacy was Luxurious service?



Actually, it was Pullman. The entire pitch of the service was “luxury for the middle class” and the “height of luxury” for the wealthy.



Larry H. said:


> We pay for the highways but there isn't a premium charge to drive somewhere on them.



There is no premium charge to go from one place to another on Amtrak, either.

However, driving on the highways in a Winnebago is definitely going to involve paying more per mile than a Wrangler.


----------



## Ryan

Larry H. said:


> why do we think we have to charge such high fares on top of that.


Someone else needs to go read 49 CFR 700.2. Key words "for profit".


----------



## John Bredin

Larry H. said:


> Sure it was a step above coach in cost but nothing like the differences now


Isn't that the point of the number-crunching with old fare tables and inflation calculators earlier in this thread? That you're right the coach-sleeper fare difference is bigger now, but it's because the sleeper fares then and now are roughly equivalent but the coach fares are cheaper now.

Which makes sense if Amtrak is setting coach fares on a public-service model unlike the old for-profit railroads but setting sleeper fares on a profit-seeking model like the old railroads. Which in turn makes sense politically until enough members of Congress can be convinced to agree with you that sleepers are a necessity and not a luxury. Until then, lower-fare sleepers would be fodder for anti-Amtrak political screeds on publicly subsidizing luxury service.


----------



## Bonser

Larry H. said:


> Who came up with the idea that wishing to have a bed to sleep in and some privacy was Luxurious service? Most all the Pullman ads from the streamliner era showed them as a place for granny and the kids to arrive rested and safe. Sure it was a step above coach in cost but nothing like the differences now and worse we have many in congress who think its something we shouldn't be pushing for. I wonder how many of them would ride three days in a coach and then say a place to lay down and sleep away from crowds was some outrageous privilege. As above I feel the public is already paying for the trains to operate, why do we think we have to charge such high fares on top of that. We pay for the highways but there isn't a premium charge to drive somewhere on them.


On many highways there is a premium charge. They're called toll roads and the tolls continue long after public bonds have been paid off.


----------



## jruff001

jimdex said:


> I never thought meal prices should be bundled into sleeping car fares in the first place!


That would be a very efficient way of killing off what is left of the dining cars.


----------



## jruff001

Ryan said:


> Oddly, people attach different values to things and are willing to spend their money in different ways.


Yep. People seem to think if sleeping car fares were "affordable" (whatever that means), they would actually be available for booking when people actually want to book. I for one am glad sleeping cars are (relatively) expensive and use yield management and have different buckets. That way there are rooms available for me when I am ready to book them, rather then all being hoovered up at cheap fares the moment they appear in the reservation systems 11 months in advance of departure.

Also puts more $ in Amtrak's pockets, which is a good thing (even though many people here disagree with that, which I find strange from a group of people who supposedly want Amtrak to succeed).


----------



## toddinde

AMTRAK709 said:


> Thanks joelkfla for that info. It is true I cannot remember traveling in a drawing room on the Southern, only the Santa Fe Super Chief--but is still was a fabulous
> sleeping car space. I know it is 50+ years later, but can you imagine those fares compared to today??


You might be surprised at how expensive rail fares were “back in the day.” Use an inflation calculator, and you’ll find Amtrak fares are usually lower.


----------



## toddinde

joelkfla said:


> This is from the 1965 Burlington timetable:
> View attachment 24141
> 
> 
> View attachment 24142
> 
> Their accommodations fare was higher for 2 passengers than for 1, but only the Drawing Room & Bedroom Suites required additional rail fares. D&RG was the same.
> 
> Southern RR (below) does not show a difference for 1 to 2 passengers, but does require 2 rail fares for a Bedroom Suite. (Looks like they didn't offer Drawing Rooms.)
> View attachment 24144
> 
> 
> View attachment 24143
> 
> 
> Timetable images copied from streamlinermemories.info


I believe the railroads always required the minimum rail fares for an accommodation. That wasn’t something new in the ‘70s. It’s a relic from the Pullman days when the railroad got the rail fare and Pullman the space charge. Railroads had skin in the game in seeing that single travelers weren’t taking up a drawing room.


----------



## toddinde

Bob Dylan said:


> I always liked riding the Crescent in a SlumberCoach Roomette, both Sourhern and Amtrak versions ,between Washington and Atlanta on my many trips to/from while visiting my dad.
> 
> It is still the best Sleeper Deal I've ever found on US LD Trains.


Southern didn’t have Slumbercoaches.


----------



## SwedeC

0831 Bedroom "C", SEA 8/23 to CHI 8/25, price $1807 (seniors). Not a good experience. Older car, A/C stuck on max, no control of it, freezing in Bedroom. Waste removal system failed last day, had to go to next car. Food was good, decent selection, prepared & served well, friendly staff. Real flowers.


----------



## joelkfla

Nick Farr said:


> They got a lot of prime real estate to develop which bondholders found interesting. They just had to build a rail service in order to develop it.
> 
> Also, at around 80 miles, it's a commuter rail service with intercity stop frequency. So--perhaps in that sense it's a new product.
> 
> I still hold that what is riding on the rails is not unique to the US in some new fundamental way as when the Auto Train, Pullman Cars or even the Vista Dome were introduced. Then again, just having a conference room on Brightline would probably fit my definition of a new product.
> 
> When/if they serve beyond the Miami Metropolitan Area, we can call it intercity rail. And to be clear: I do hope they make it all the way to Tampa and beyond and bring about a lot of new investment and interest in intercity-esque passenger rail.


I'm not disputing that Brightline's business plan revolves around RE development, but I don't have a problem with that.

You can reasonably say that the completed portion is in the distance range of commuter rail, but the character of their service is way above commuter rail. And service to Orlando is a when, not an if. The construction is over 60% complete, and all leases, government approvals, etc. have been completed. Tampa may or may not happen; WDW is further along but not yet a sure thing.


----------



## Nick Farr

joelkfla said:


> I'm not disputing that Brightline's business plan revolves around RE development, but I don't have a problem with that.



Neither do I, I hope they succeed in Florida and go on to build between Los Angeles and Las Vegas and many other places. I hope other real estate developers copy their idea throughout the country. Whether Brightline, development the Los Angeles Metro has done, or the High Line, developing dormant rail properties is on the upswing. Granted, it's the cheapest way to acquire new land in urban metros. It's also probably the only way we'll get new passenger rail in this country. 



joelkfla said:


> You can reasonably say that the completed portion is in the distance range of commuter rail, but the character of their service is way above commuter rail.



When it's operating. That's the part that scares me. The disadvantage to not being a public service or really regulated as far as service frequency is that they can shut down whenever they want and keep the RE holdings.

I think it's premature to say that Orlando is a "when" given that the service itself is not even operating.

While I hope this doesn't happen, a downturn in the economy or a variety of other factors could kill/delay the expansion or the project itself.


----------



## Maglev

I've been watching _Empire Builder _fares for travel dates in November over the past couple months. It started out with Roomettes for $437, Bedrooms for about $1,500, and the Family Bedroom for $817 (SEA-MSP). When I actually bought my ticket, Roomettes had gone up to $602, and so I sprang for the Family Bedroom (but couldn't afford a Bedroom). Recently, Bedrooms went up to about $2,200. Today, Bedrooms are unavailable. The Family Bedroom on nearby dates is going for about $1,700, but Roomettes are still at $602.


----------



## niemi24s

Nothing unusual about any of those fares. The ratios between high and low bucket fares on the EB range from 2.0 to 1 for Roomettes, 2.2 to 1 for Family Bedrooms and 2.6 to 1 for Bedrooms.

FWIW, the low bucket Bedroom fare for your trip is $1193 and the $817 you paid for a Family Bedroom is also its low bucket. For the EB, the most expensive Bedroom fare is 4.2 times the cheapest Roomette fare. The most expensive Family Bedroom fare is 3.4 times the cheapest Roomette fare.

On the other hand, you may find some date(s) where the top two Roomette fare buckets exceed the low bucket fares for a Family Bedroom or a Bedroom.

Ya gotta just love dem buckets!!


----------



## mgkeihl

I took the EB in April. Had a fabulous trip. Looked into doing it again next April and the prices are a full thousand dollars more! I'm sure playing with dates might help but wow! To me besides the difference in years the only change is the food! I did not eat any flex meals on my trip, except for the tasty warm rolls! I dont eat frozen meals at home and didn't want to on vacation! Lol I ate enough in the 8 days in Seattle to make up for it! I hate to fly but could round trip 5 times for current prices on the EB. Sad, because it was an incredible trip.


----------



## Sidney

mgkeihl said:


> I took the EB in April. Had a fabulous trip. Looked into doing it again next April and the prices are a full thousand dollars more! I'm sure playing with dates might help but wow! To me besides the difference in years the only change is the food! I did not eat any flex meals on my trip, except for the tasty warm rolls! I dont eat frozen meals at home and didn't want to on vacation! Lol I ate enough in the 8 days in Seattle to make up for it! I hate to fly but could round trip 5 times for current prices on the EB. Sad, because it was an incredible trip.


Very glad I booked a roomette at $505 from Chi to Sea last March for early next month. When the railpass was $299 I booked my trip around that. I m on my pass now. My original itinerary included the CONO and the Crescent today and Tuesday. Ida stopped that portion.


----------



## jimdex

jruff001 said:


> That would be a very efficient way of killing off what is left of the dining cars.


I still think people should pay separately for sleeping car service and dining car meals. If the only way to fund diners is to force people to pay for meals they don't want, then maybe the diners really should be killed off, but I don't think that is what would happen. If fewer sleeping car passengers ate in the diners, that would presumably create room for coach passengers to use the diners again, and that would be a good thing. It would be nice to see some full accounting of dining car and sleeping car finances, but I suspect that when you transfer sleeping car revenues to the dining car account to pay for "complimentary" meals, both diners and sleepers end up losing money. That doesn't look good politically, because it makes both services like taxpayer-funded subsidies for the wealthy (especially when coach passengers are excluded from the diner). My guess is that if you end the cash transfer, the sleeper accounts would show a clear profit, and that's important if we want sleeping car service to continue. Diners would continue to show a loss, I assume, but that would be easier to justify politically, especially if the dining cars were for coach passengers too, because people have to eat.


----------



## zephyr17

Well, the whole reason they went to effectively bundling meals into the sleeping car fares in the 1980s when meals were made "complimentary" was to boost dining car booked revenue.

So that ship sailed a long time ago.


----------



## niemi24s

mgkeihl said:


> I took the EB in April. Had a fabulous trip. Looked into doing it again next April and the prices are a full thousand dollars more! I'm sure playing with dates might help but wow!


No reason to be amazed by that. Current Family Bedroom and Bedroom fares on the EB have ranges of $1038 and $1407, respectively. The range for Roomettes is a meager $547.

Even 5½ years ago, the range for Bedrooms was $1142.

BTW, welcome to the Forum!


----------



## jimdex

zephyr17 said:


> Well, the whole reason they went to effectively bundling meals into the sleeping car fares in the 1980s when meals were made "complimentary" was to boost dining car booked revenue.


I am aware of that. I thought it was a bad idea at the time, and I still do.


----------



## lordsigma

One thing driving sleeper prices may be the pandemic. For those a little more concerned about COVID that can afford the high bucket fares and are too afraid to get on a flight right now - Amtrak sleepers provide a completely private room experience that's just not possible on an airline and saves you from having to drive yourself. It certainly gives you a more secure feeling than sitting inches away from a stranger on a flight - yes I understand that if everyone is masked flights have a good track record with their air filtration, but getting packed in a small space with a bunch of strangers just feels freaky in a global pandemic regardless of the science of the HVAC system.


----------



## ms garrison

lordsigma said:


> One thing driving sleeper prices may be the pandemic. For those a little more concerned about COVID that can afford the high bucket fares and are too afraid to get on a flight right now - Amtrak sleepers provide a completely private room experience that's just not possible on an airline and saves you from having to drive yourself. It certainly gives you a more secure feeling than sitting inches away from a stranger on a flight - yes I understand that if everyone is masked flights have a good track record with their air filtration, but getting packed in a small space with a bunch of strangers just feels freaky in a global pandemic regardless of the science of the HVAC system.


I just cancelled a trip from Chicago to Seattle- flying there, EB back because I didn't want to have to be at Midway and on Southwest for 4 hours. When I reschedule it will be EB both ways.


----------



## niemi24s

These are the current Empire Builder fare buckets for one adult between CHI and SEA. . .


. . .in order of Coach, Roomette, Family Bedroom and Bedroom. Those in square brackets are estimates. High bucket Bedroom is 2.6 times the low bucket.


----------



## BigRedEO

JC_620 said:


> Looking at booking a post cruise trip home across the country from Seattle to Boston in June of 2022. What is going on with Amtrak!? By that, I mean, Amtrak used to preach about booking early! We used to hear 'You better book early for the best fares!' That is entirely false when, looking now, a bedroom on the Builder starts out at $2,396 for June 2022??
> 
> My questions:
> Is that the "low bucket"?
> Subsequently, if that is the "low bucket" fare, then what is the "high bucket" fare? Does anyone happen to have the 4 or 5 "buckets" that used to be out there as a general reference to what was being charged for a roomette or a bedroom?
> 
> $2,400 about 10 months out?
> 
> Really Amtrak...



Yes, the prices have gotten ridiculous. Three months ago, I booked the Zephry from Emeryville to Chicago (my final destination is Cleveland) in mid-January and a Bedroom was almost $2,400!! That's more than double what it was when I took the same route about five years ago!


----------



## niemi24s

Nothing unusual about that - if you have an understanding of the bucket system. For two adults in a Bedroom just on the CHI - EMY leg of your journey there's a possibility the fares _could_ have been a high bucket $1980 five years ago and only $1220 now for low bucket!

How 'bout them apples?


----------



## zephyr17

Well, just for fun I looked at fares for mid-January on the CZ, and yes, Bedrooms do appear to be generally at high or second highest buckets.
But roomettes appear to be pretty consistently in low buckets. Two people each traveling in their own roomette EMY-CHI is $1126 most dates. In one roomette, it would be a total of $787.

A Bedroom is $2485 for two, which appears to be high bucket (BTW, Niemi24s, right now your November 2020 chart seems to be tracking well for roomettes on the CZ, but it appears the Bedroom buckets have crept up a bit).

If you want to pay a $1300 premium for a bedroom over two roomettes, that is fine. I understand wanting the private WC and shower. But yield management is showing variations and there is inventory in low buckets. On the CZ in January, Amtrak is clearly anticipating high Bedroom demand against the 10 room supply and much lower Roomette demand against 26 room (plus any rooms they elect to sell in the transdorm) supply. Whether they are right or not, time will tell. But they clearly are not just sticking everything in higher buckets and walking off.


----------



## niemi24s

zephyr17 said:


> (BTW, Niemi24s, right now your November 2020 chart seems to be tracking well for roomettes on the CZ, but it appears the Bedroom buckets have crept up a bit).


Roomette fares have not increased since Nov 2020 except for the Auto Train. The other two sleepers on all trains have increased twice since then, but it's going to be several weeks before an updated bucket chart is ready to post - maybe. 

Ferreting out fares from Arrow a day at a time is sheer agony without AmSnag. Just hope I get it done before fares go up again!


----------



## zephyr17

Willing to help with that. See DM.


----------



## PaTrainFan

niemi24s said:


> Ferreting out fares from Arrow a day at a time is sheer agony without AmSnag. Just hope I get it done before fares go up again!



Thank you for your efforts! I am sure it is gritty work.


----------



## Seaboard92

Nick Farr said:


> I think @Seaboard92 would be the best equipped to say whether or not this is feasible. I've long argued that Amtrak should create some opportunity for the private sector to come in and operate scheduled differentiated services to the general public along the LD routes.
> 
> That being said, I think a lot of the PV stock at this point is highly specialized for smaller groups and will likely have to be priced dramatically higher than even the high standard sleeper fares to make economic sense for the owners.



Actually at some point in the 1990s Amtrak did experiment with this on the Pennsylvanian. They operated the JP Henderson as the Keystone Club Class. So is it doable yes. But is it practical no. 

Now could some PV owners do some supplementing at peak periods. I've thought about chartering a car for the Thanksgiving Holiday. Specifically the Lake Shore Limited.


----------



## niemi24s

zephyr17 said:


> Willing to help with that. See DM.


What's a DM?


----------



## pennyk

niemi24s said:


> What's a DM?


like a PM


----------



## zephyr17

niemi24s said:


> What's a DM?


Direct message


----------



## Tlcooper93

Currently browsing roomette fares for a February EB trip from CHI-PDX.

Seems that fares stay at $1052 no matter the date, whether it be next week or 6 months from now.
Really makes my blood boil.


----------



## Sidney

Tlcooper93 said:


> Currently browsing roomette fares for a February EB trip from CHI-PDX.
> 
> Seems that fares stay at $1052 no matter the date, whether it be next week or 6 months from now.
> Really makes my blood boil.


That"s probably the roomette fare. I cannot justify paying over $1000 for a two and a half day trip. I am leaving this afternoon on the EB from Chicago to Seattle and I paid $505,the low bucket senior fare. I booked last March.


----------



## Tlcooper93

Sidney said:


> That"s probably the roomette fare. I cannot justify paying over $1000 for a two and a half day trip. I am leaving this afternoon on the EB from Chicago to Seattle and I paid $505,the low bucket senior fare. I booked last March.



It only recently changed to that fare.
When I checked last August, the roomette fare was very reasonable, hovering around $600. Now, even 9 months-1 year in the future, its the same as if I booked for tomorrow.
$1052.


----------



## Exvalley

Tlcooper93 said:


> When I checked last August, the roomette fare was very reasonable, hovering around $600. Now, even 9 months-1 year in the future, its the same as if I booked for tomorrow.
> $1052.


Low bucket fares are harder to find than Bigfoot right now.


----------



## Sidney

Exvalley said:


> Low bucket fares are harder to find than Bigfoot right now.


I 'm planning a circle trip for June. Texas Eagle,Coast Starlight,Empire Builder. Roomettes.TE prices are $200 more than a few months ago ,but leaving from Bloomington saves you $240. Coach to Bloomington is $13. CS $305 to Pdx. That's where my planning hit a snag. Pdx to Chi $1000 plus. Unless prices come down to earth,I'll fly from Pdx to BWI for about $150.I'm leaving from Was in Coach on the CL. 

Hopefully by next summer both the CL and TE will have traditional dining and a sightseer car.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

jruff001 said:


> Also puts more $ in Amtrak's pockets, which is a good thing (even though many people here disagree with that, which I find strange from a group of people who supposedly want Amtrak to succeed).


I want _dependable passenger rail infrastructure_ to succeed. In my view that requires being priced and operated in a manner that is practical for average everyday Americans to use it on a regular basis. Coach seats are fine for young travelers on day trips but they are impractical for older travelers on long overnight journeys.


----------



## niemi24s

A check within the last half hour showed Roomettes from CHI to PDX are available on 1 through 9 February for $653.

While there were no low buckets ($529), they were not _all _high buckets. At least tonight. It pays to keep checking.


----------



## Sidney

niemi24s said:


> A check within the last half hour showed Roomettes from CHI to PDX are available on 1 through 9 February for $653.
> 
> While there were no low buckets ($529), they were not _all _high buckets. At least tonight. It pays to keep checking.


I wish Amtrak would show fares at a glance for each month,like airlines do. Going manually day by day is tiresome. Being retired,my dates are very flexible and if I can see a low bucket in a monthly calendar I'll grab it. Also,when planning circle trips it would be very convenient.


----------



## Barb Stout

Sidney said:


> I wish Amtrak would show fares at a glance for each month,like airlines do. Going manually day by day is tiresome. Being retired,my dates are very flexible and if I can see a low bucket in a monthly calendar I'll grab it. Also,when planning circle trips it would be very convenient.


The airlines show fares for each day for a month? When did that start? I have not seen that. The last time I flew was December 2019. Probably purchased the tickets a few months prior to that. Maybe I just didn't/don't know how to access that information.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

Barb Stout said:


> The airlines show fares for each day for a month? When did that start?


The first time I saw a monthly fare calendar was on Southwest.com sometime in the early 2000's. Not every airline provides their own monthly calendar but most of them publish real time fares to a global booking service which can be read by third parties. Google's travel service is based on the ITA engine and shows several months of fares from hundreds of airlines with lots of user customization that puts Amtrak's clumsy low effort booking process to shame.






Google Travel







www.google.com


----------



## Qapla

I have seen Greyhound and MegaBus showing a week of fares, not a month ... even that would help if Amtrak would follow suit.


----------



## zephyr17

Most airlines you can get a week of fares.


----------



## Nick Farr

If you select "My Dates Are Flexible" on pretty much any airline, you'll get a view like this:


----------



## MilwaukeeRoadLover

Nick Farr said:


> If you select "My Dates Are Flexible" on pretty much any airline, you'll get a view like this:
> 
> View attachment 24331


I use this feature all the time


----------



## dwebarts

MilwaukeeRoadLover said:


> I use this feature all the time


Same here, in conjunction with flexible dates views for hotel rates.

Sometimes, I'll choose the higher airfare if the hotel rates are significantly more or less for a given date range. Certain cities are more expensive for weekdays than weekends and vice-versa. Events play a bigger role in accommodations pricing than transportation pricing in general.


----------



## 20th Century Rider

With Amtrak it's not so easy... especially if you want to put together an extensive itinerary. There are some agents who are really good at this... but that involves the luck of getting that good agent or persistence to call back... waiting on hold each time... yet that time spent can save good money sleeping accommodations.


----------



## Nick Farr

20th Century Rider said:


> With Amtrak it's not so easy... especially if you want to put together an extensive itinerary. There are some agents who are really good at this... but that involves the luck of getting that good agent or persistence to call back...



YES ALL OF THIS.

With the exception of a missed flight, I've never had to call and airline to deal with a ticketing issued. 

Everything I've needed to take care of (even on a train) has involved calling Amtrak.


----------



## 20th Century Rider

Nick Farr said:


> YES ALL OF THIS.
> 
> With the exception of a missed flight, I've never had to call and airline to deal with a ticketing issued.
> 
> Everything I've needed to take care of (even on a train) has involved calling Amtrak.


Ah ha! And now they've added a new step for all of us who want to access the website... another authentication mandate which is not sent to my Yahoo mail that I use, but to Safari which I don't use. 

Woah... Too much. So me too! I gotta call Amtrak res and hope for a decent agent... or call again... wait on hold... in hopes of getting that good agent... or try again!


----------



## nferr

Qapla said:


> So, evidently, your opinion agrees with mine - they are too expensive ... thus the need for the prices to "come down some"



No. The prices are higher than I want to pay, but since they're basically selling out they obviously don't need to "come down some". I'm sure you understand the concept of supply and demand. That said I think the current prices will drop some in the future when travel returns to somewhat normal.


----------



## Ryan

20th Century Rider said:


> another authentication mandate which is not sent to my Yahoo mail that I use, but to Safari which I don't use.


This makes no sense whatsoever. Safari is a web browser. You don't sent emails to a web browser.


----------



## Michigan Mom

I'm seeing some Roomette prices trend lower for the fall, on the Capitol Ltd, than they were this summer. On certain days. Not booking anything, because there's no same day connection to Raleigh, NC. Still good to see some viable travel options if the right situation presents itself.

Edit: It might be these are lower bucket fares that simply weren't available before.


----------



## Sidney

Michigan Mom said:


> I'm seeing some Roomette prices trend lower for the fall, on the Capitol Ltd, than they were this summer. On certain days. Not booking anything, because there's no same day connection to Raleigh, NC. Still good to see some viable travel options if the right situation presents itself.
> 
> Edit: It might be these are lower bucket fares that simply weren't available before.


Calif Zephyr and Empire Builder roomette fares from Chi to Pdx or Chi to Sac are about $860 no matter how far out you book. Even for next August it says only one room left at this price. If the date has just been added,how can rooms have been booked?There are a few $623 fares on the SW Chief from Chi to LA for next summer.

I miss the days when I could plan a circle trip ten or eleven months ahead at low bucket for every leg. I did luck out getting $505 senior roomette on the EB last week. I booked that in March. In case you didn't know,the Texas Eagle and SW Chief no longer have identical fares. I booked Bloomington to LA for $449 earlier this year. Now it's $654. Still better than paying $860 from Chicago. $13 Coach to Bloomington


----------



## Ziv

The Flex Date feature is a great one to know about! I used to have to do it manually, inserting each potential travel date manually. I have been looking at traveling to Tokyo later this year and on some days the price is $1631 and on other days it is $666. Being able to choose the day you fly is a huge plus if you can see what days are cheapest!
My Kayak price comparison is attached below.





MilwaukeeRoadLover said:


> I use this feature all the time


----------



## 20th Century Rider

Sidney said:


> Calif Zephyr and Empire Builder roomette fares from Chi to Pdx or Chi to Sac are about $860 no matter how far out you book. Even for next August it says only one room left at this price. If the date has just been added,how can rooms have been booked?There are a few $623 fares on the SW Chief from Chi to LA for next summer.
> 
> I miss the days when I could plan a circle trip ten or eleven months ahead at low bucket for every leg. I did luck out getting $505 senior roomette on the EB last week. I booked that in March. In case you didn't know,the Texas Eagle and SW Chief no longer have identical fares. I booked Bloomington to LA for $449 earlier this year. Now it's $654. Still better than paying $860 from Chicago. $13 Coach to Bloomington


Same thing here... have two journeys coming up with booking the TE well in advance between LAX and SPI [well before Chicago] in a sleeper... is always above $679 // $659... and even though it's three nights it's still high. The dining up to SAS makes that somewhat worthwhile... but then it's flex for a day and a half. :-(


----------



## 20th Century Rider

Ziv said:


> The Flex Date feature is a great one to know about! I used to have to do it manually, inserting each potential travel date manually. I have been looking at traveling to Tokyo later this year and on some days the price is $1631 and on other days it is $666. Being able to choose the day you fly is a huge plus if you can see what days are cheapest!
> My Kayak price comparison is attached below.


This sounds like a good idea and I tried it... but they said they are 'adding' more features to the train search. It would be nice if that included roomettes and bedrooms... similar to the bucket charts.

Please send along any other tips you have with Kayak... much appreciated!


----------



## niemi24s

Sidney said:


> In case you didn't know, the Texas Eagle and SW Chief no longer have identical fares.


In case you didn't know, they do indeed still have identical fares - at least between their common endpoints. And between any two other points, there's no reason for those two trains to have identical fares (except by happenstance) because no stations other than CHI and LAX are common!

In addition to that, that 46% fare increase you noticed was probably just due to a simple two bucket jump in the fare offered. There has been no change in the overall Roomette fare bucket offerings for the TE or SWC (or any other LD train except the AT) since last Fall.


----------



## Qapla

Ziv said:


> My *Kayak* price comparison is attached below.



Regardless of how cheap the fare may be ... that is a long way to row for any price !!!


----------



## 20th Century Rider

Qapla said:


> Regardless of how cheap the fare may be ... that is a long way to row for any price !!!


Yes but is there a way to use KAYAK for Amtrak? When I tried there was a note saying they were working on placing it in their system to include seats as well as sleeper options.


----------



## Ziv

Sorry, 20th CR, I was kind of replying to Nick's post about his post regarding Delta Airlines flexible date booking pages. As far as I know there is no Amtrak flexible date search capability nor sleeper reservations, so far, on Kayak. Not sure why not, but I haven't been able to find a way to make the reservation request use flexible dates.
It would be nice to have, now that Amsnag is no more. 
On the upside, Qapla, you don't HAVE to paddle the whole way unless you want to! 
;-)



20th Century Rider said:


> This sounds like a good idea and I tried it... but they said they are 'adding' more features to the train search. It would be nice if that included roomettes and bedrooms... similar to the bucket charts.
> 
> Please send along any other tips you have with Kayak... much appreciated!


----------



## Sidney

niemi24s said:


> In case you didn't know, they do indeed still have identical fares - at least between their common endpoints. And between any two other points, there's no reason for those two trains to have identical fares (except by happenstance) because no stations other than CHI and LAX are common!
> 
> In addition to that, that 46% fare increase you noticed was probably just due to a simple two bucket jump in the fare offered. There has been no change in the overall Roomette fare bucket offerings for the TE or SWC (or any other LD train except the AT) since last Fall.


The low bucket on the TE between Chi and LA went up $250 a few months ago. It was $600 when I rode in May.


----------



## zephyr17

Sidney said:


> The low bucket on the TE between Chi and LA went up $250 a few months ago. It was $600 when I rode in May.


Well, we've said it before. The actual low bucket and the price on any given day for a departure are not the same thing.

There may not be any inventory at all in low bucket for long periods of departure dates. That does not mean the buckets themselves changed.

You are seeing a bucket jump.

Sigh.


----------



## Ryan

Sidney said:


> The low bucket on the TE between Chi and LA went up $250 a few months ago. It was $600 when I rode in May.


No it didn’t.


----------



## Sidney

Ryan said:


> No it didn’t.


I have checked every date over the last few weeks and there are no $623 roomette fares to be found between Chicago and LA and return on the Texas Eagle. If $623 is low bucket,why aren't there any fares at that price?


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Sidney said:


> I have checked every date over the last few weeks and there are no $623 roomette fares to be found between Chicago and LA and return on the Texas Eagle. If $623 is low bucket,why aren't there any fares at that price?


How far in advance are you looking? The closer you are to a travel date the less likely there will be a low bucket fare.


----------



## Sidney

AmtrakBlue said:


> How far in advance are you looking? The closer you are to a travel date the less likely there will be a low bucket fare.


I have literally checked every date over the past week including the latest dates available into August and the lowest one person senior roomette fare from Chi to Lax and return on the TE was $876. Booking way ahead doesn't guarantee you low bucket anymore. If anybody on this forum can find a $600 fare,I'll grab it!


----------



## zephyr17

Sidney said:


> I have checked every date over the last few weeks and there are no $623 roomette fares to be found between Chicago and LA and return on the Texas Eagle. If $623 is low bucket,why aren't there any fares at that price?


There doesn't have to be. They can allocate zero inventory to that bucket and apparently have. That doesn't mean the won't reallocate inventory to a lower bucket if demand at the current bucket doesn't develop.

Words matter. Low bucket and lowest available bucket are two different things.


----------



## zephyr17

Sidney said:


> I have checked every date over the last few weeks and there are no $623 roomette fares to be found between Chicago and LA and return on the Texas Eagle. If $623 is low bucket,why aren't there any fares at that price?


There doesn't have to be. They can allocate zero inventory to the low bucket and apparently have. That doesn't mean they won't reallocate inventory to a lower bucket if demand at current buckets doesn't develop.

Low bucket and lowest available bucket are two different things.

What is clear is Amtrak has gotten more aggressive in their inventory allocations.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Sidney said:


> The low bucket on the TE between Chi and LA went up $250 a few months ago. It was $600 when I rode in May.


Multiple Trains
DEPARTS
1:45p






20% full
65h 50m2 Segment
ARRIVES
5:35a
Fri, Feb 18
Details

Rooms from
$526
2 left at this price


----------



## Sidney

AmtrakBlue said:


> Multiple Trains
> DEPARTS
> 1:45p
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 20% full
> 65h 50m2 Segment
> ARRIVES
> 5:35a
> Fri, Feb 18
> Details
> 
> Rooms from
> $526
> 2 left at this price



That 's Coach to San Antonio,then sleeper to LA.


----------



## niemi24s

Please try to understand that just because _you_ cannot find any date where a low bucket fare of $623 is offered for a Roomette for 1 adult on the TE or SWC over its full route doesn't mean nobody else has found the $623 fare.

I found such a fare during the last months of intermittent searching. Just for giggles and snorts, within the next 6 hours try LAX to CHI on 7 Jan 2022 and see how much a Roomette costs for one adult on the TE.


----------



## Sidney

AmtrakBlue said:


> Multiple Trains
> DEPARTS
> 1:45p
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 20% full
> 65h 50m2 Segment
> ARRIVES
> 5:35a
> Fri, Feb 18
> Details
> 
> Rooms from
> $526
> 2 left at this price


That's Coach from Chi to Sas. Roomette after Sas


----------



## niemi24s

Break, break, I say again - - -

" Just for giggles and snorts, within the next 6 hours try LAX to CHI on 7 Jan 2022 and see how much a Roomette costs for one adult on the TE."


----------



## zephyr17

Niemi24s, I just looked.

Yeah, Sidney, check it out.


----------



## Sidney

zephyr17 said:


> Niemi24s, I just looked.
> 
> Yeah, Sidney, check it out.


I saw $1019 a minute ago. I ll keep checking.


----------



## Sidney

Sidney said:


> I saw $1019 a minute ago. I ll keep checking.


Well...I did see $600 from LA to Chicago on the TE on 1/7. I stand corrected. They do exist!


----------



## niemi24s

Of course they exist! That's why it's on my fare bucket chart in Post #11 here: Long Distance Train Coach & Sleeper Fares (Buckets)

Any estimated fares are put in square brackets. As the $623 is not, it was actually found - and found sometime prior to or on the date of the chart, 6 Sep 2020.


----------



## zephyr17

Sidney said:


> I saw $1019 a minute ago. I ll keep checking.


Well, here it is. The actual low bucket available for sale.


----------



## HammerJack

What's the low fare for roomettes on the Builder these days from end to end? $650 or so?


----------



## Ryan

zephyr17 said:


> Well, here it is. The actual low bucket available for sale.


I was assured such a thing no longer existed. You must be mistaken.


----------



## OBS

"And the wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round...."....LOL


----------



## niemi24s

That low bucket Roomette yesterday on the TE? 

Poof - gone like a fart in the wind!!


----------



## Exvalley

Low bucket fares are becoming as hard to find as Bigfoot and UFOs.


----------



## zephyr17

niemi24s said:


> That low bucket Roomette yesterday on the TE?
> 
> Poof - gone like a fart in the wind!!


Someone bought it, there was likely just one allocated to low bucket.


----------



## Sidney

That 1/7 LA to Chi TE fare didn't last long. The reverse direction on that day was $1019. I really thought low bucket went to $876. In all the searching I did I never saw anything lower. I did pay $653 out of Bloomington in a roomette for a June trip and the $13 coach fare from Chicago. To save $210 is a no brainer. 

Again,thanks for alerting me that the $623 is still low bucket on the Eagle but trying to find that fare is very difficult.


----------



## zephyr17

Sidney said:


> Again,thanks for alerting me that the $623 is still low bucket on the Eagle but trying to find that fare is very difficult.


Especially difficult because 421/422 only has one sleeper.

That situation has spread to other trains with the short consist binge Amtrak is currently on.


----------



## niemi24s

Sidney said:


> That 1/7 LA to Chi TE fare didn't last long.


Don't make that assumption. 

That accommodation first became available 11 months back from 7 Jan 2022 or on about 7 Feb 2021. That was more than 7 months ago and for all any of us know it may have been offered at low bucket since it came on the market and remain unchanged until last night - and lasted more than 7 months.

But I know what you meant!


----------



## Bob Dylan

zephyr17 said:


> Especially difficult because 421/422 only has one sleeper.
> 
> That situation has spread to other trains with the short consist binge Amtrak is currently on.


----------



## caravanman

I seem to remember roomette fares on the EB Chicago to Seattle were around $265 low bucket about 10 years ago?


----------



## Sidney

caravanman said:


> I seem to remember roomette fares on the EB Chicago to Seattle were around $265 low bucket about 10 years ago?


Sounds right. I paid $505 a few months ago for a trip last week. I think that's still low bucket,but they are very hard to find.


----------



## Ryan

Sidney said:


> I really thought low bucket went to $876. In all the searching I did I never saw anything lower.


If only people had done painstaking searching and mapped out all of the possible fares and published them so that you would have known with zero effort.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Sidney said:


> Sounds right. I paid $505 a few months ago for a trip last week. I think that's still low bucket,but they are very hard to find.


Maybe, just maybe Amtrak is selling out its rooms (due to COVID). Isn't that a good thing? Amtrak is making revenue?


----------



## niemi24s

FWIW, if anyone is interested in a low bucket ($623) Roomette on the SWC to LAX, there's one available now on 20 Jul 2022, but it might be gone in 5 hours.


----------



## Cal

niemi24s said:


> FWIW, if anyone is interested in a low bucket ($623) Roomette on the SWC to LAX, there's one available now on 20 Jul 2022, but it might be gone in 5 hours.


The amount of research you do for us... thank you!! 

I can't take it, but I hope someone does!


----------



## Cal

AmtrakBlue said:


> Maybe, just maybe Amtrak is selling out its rooms (due to COVID). Isn't that a good thing? Amtrak is making revenue?


Those mirror my thoughts too. But something was brought up on an article posted here a few days back, that Amtrak might not be making money even while selling out due to the short consists. Not saying it's true, just an idea that was posted.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

Ryan said:


> If only people had done painstaking searching and mapped out all of the possible fares and published them so that you would have known with zero effort.


The spreadsheet does not come close to mapping _all possible fares_ and the fact that a fare bucket _may_ exist on a day when no search engine can find it without dozens or even hundreds of manual test bookings is hardly _zero effort_.



AmtrakBlue said:


> Maybe, just maybe Amtrak is selling out its rooms (due to COVID). Isn't that a good thing? Amtrak is making revenue?


Maybe, just maybe Amtrak is selling out because they're leaving sleepers and transition dorms sitting unused in the yard. I'm a passenger rail supporter because I enjoy traveling by rail and want to share this option with as many people as possible. I do not ride passenger rail because I want Amtrak to make as much money as possible. If we turned the interstate system into a self-funded tollway I doubt even the biggest road fan would cheer $1,000 toll fees.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Devil's Advocate said:


> The spreadsheet does not come close to mapping _all possible fares_ and the fact that a fare bucket _may_ exist on a day when no search engine can find it without dozens or even hundreds of manual test bookings is hardly _zero effort_.
> 
> 
> Maybe, just maybe Amtrak is selling out because they're leaving sleepers and transition dorms sitting unused in the yard. I'm a passenger rail supporter because I enjoy traveling by rail and want to share this option with as many people as possible. I do not ride passenger rail because I want Amtrak to make as much money as possible. If we turned the interstate system into a self-funded tollway I doubt even the biggest road fan would cheer $1,000 toll fees.


Maybe when they’re no longer short staffed they’ll add more cars to the consists.


----------



## Ryan

Devil's Advocate said:


> The spreadsheet does not come close to mapping _all possible fares_ and the fact that a fare bucket _may_ exist on a day when no search engine can find it without dozens or even hundreds of manual test bookings is hardly _zero effort_.


It does for the end points, and while I agree that it is a significant amount of effort for those doing the research, my point was that with that research kindly done for us, looking at the spreadsheet is in fact zero effort.


----------



## niemi24s

Devil's Advocate said:


> The spreadsheet does not come close to mapping _all possible fares. . ._


If you're referring to this spreadsheet..


...it's tedious enough gathering all those 200+fares using AmSnag, but without AmSnag it has become excruciating.

And even though it doesn't show all possible fares, anybody'd have to be nuts to think somebody'd try to make a chart like that showing the fares between all 7,288 possible end points for those individual trains - even IF AmSnag was up and operating!

BTW, this latest chart shows the current fares with the exception of FB and B - except for the AT where all three sleepers are out of date.


----------



## Exvalley

Sidney said:


> I really thought low bucket went to $876. In all the searching I did I never saw anything lower.


Don't worry about it! Amtrak certainly does not make that information easy to find, and finding it on the web isn't that easy. You aren't the first person that this has happened to!


----------



## Ryan

Your claim that it isn't easy to find on the web seems inaccurate when it's available literally in the post above yours.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

AmtrakBlue said:


> Maybe when they’re no longer short staffed they’ll add more cars to the consists.


How many people are required to staff a baggage car or a transition dorm? Even a lounge car works just fine with a closed snack shop.



niemi24s said:


> If you're referring to this spreadsheet.....it's tedious enough gathering all those 200+fares using AmSnag, but without AmSnag it has become excruciating. And even though it doesn't show all possible fares, anybody'd have to be nuts to think somebody'd try to make a chart like that showing the fares between all 7,288 possible end points for those individual trains - even IF AmSnag was up and operating!


There is nothing wrong with the spreadsheet itself. I just have a problem with members who use it to silence people who bring up pricing and website issues. Which buckets exist in general and which prices are bookable in particular are two different discussions. The loss of Amsnag has become a major setback IMO.


----------



## Ryan

Devil's Advocate said:


> I just have a problem with members who use it to silence people who bring up pricing and website issues.


Where do you see this happening?

Again, my point was very narrowly tailored to the specific complaint in this thread for which the information was readily available in this very thread.

You seem to be railing against something that isn't happening.


----------



## Exvalley

Ryan said:


> Your claim that it isn't easy to find on the web seems inaccurate when it's available literally in the post above yours.


I do not doubt the sincerity of the OP when they say that they looked. And I am quite certain that they are not alone. The bottom line is that people should not have find a third-party forum and then search through hundreds of threads in order to find this information. Amtrak can do better - but for whatever reason chooses not to.


----------



## F900ElCapitan

Just a heads up, I was doing some fare checking this morning and it appears Family Bedrooms and Bedrooms have had an increase. Roomettes seem to be left out of this one so far. On the EB (SEA) this equates to these high bucket fares, FB $1920, +5.7% and B $2376, +12.7%.


----------



## Exvalley

I wonder why roomettes have been left out of recent price increases? Not that I am complaining...


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Exvalley said:


> I wonder why roomettes have been left out of recent price increases? Not that I am complaining...


Because there’s more of them, maybe.


----------



## niemi24s

F900ElCapitan said:


> Just a heads up, I was doing some fare checking this morning and it appears Family Bedrooms and Bedrooms have had an increase. Roomettes seem to be left out of this one so far. On the EB (SEA) this equates to these high bucket fares, FB $1920, +5.7% and B $2376, +12.7%.


There have been two such fare increases since sometime last year. For those who dote on numbers, here is the chronological progression of high bucket/low bucket Bedroom fares for one adult on the Empire Builder since I started frittering away my spare time on this:

Oct 2015 - $1878 / 719
Apr 2016 - $1882 / 740
Jan 2017 - $1901 / 755
Oct 2018 - $1922 / 757
Jan 2019 - $1941 / 764
Nov 2019 - $2036 / 836
Jul 2020 - $2215 / 890
???????? - $???? / ????
Apr 2021 - $2376 / 907

The dates are _not_ dates of the increases - merely when I got done compiling data for the charts after noticing an increase.

[Edited to add low bucket fares]


----------



## bratkinson

This entire discussion seems to be revolving around one of the first rules of running a business...

If you can sell all the items you have for $X, then raise the price! If you still sell out, raise the price again! The goal is to find 'what the market will bear' in terms of price. When the price gets too high and they're not always selling out, then back off a bit and see what happens. Then regularly try higher fares and if they sell out, keep 'em higher.

Of course, supply and demand is in control. Whether the shortage of sleeping cars is 'manufactured' or there's either mechanical or staffing issues causing the shortage, unless someone has an 'in' at Amtrak, we'll never know why and are relegated to whining about high prices. Why isn't anyone pissing and moaning against high gasoline and grocery prices?


----------



## Qapla

bratkinson said:


> Why isn't anyone pissing and moaning against high gasoline and grocery prices?



Who says we're not ... but this is an Amtrak site not a gas and grocery site so such complaining would be "off topic" - and everyone knows that no AU member would ever post an off-topic message


----------



## Ryan

Exvalley said:


> I do not doubt the sincerity of the OP when they say that they looked. And I am quite certain that they are not alone. The bottom line is that people should not have find a third-party forum and then search through hundreds of threads in order to find this information. Amtrak can do better - but for whatever reason chooses not to.


Whilst I don't disagree for the average Joe, as I have repeated over and over, my criticism was directed at one specific poster (who was not the OP) that had the information presented to them and refused to believe it on many occasions. That specific poster can to better - but for whatever reason chooses not to.


----------



## Sidney

Sidney said:


> Well...I did see $600 from LA to Chicago on the TE on 1/7. I stand corrected. They do exist!


Always looking for a mid winter train ride into warmer weather I checked mid January and February roomette prices on the Eagle from LA to Bloomington,Il. Didn't take long with checking three days a week and I found Amtrak's best deal.$448. With the$13 Coach fare to Chicago,$461. Three nights. Three days. The icing on the cake would be the return of traditional dining and a sightseer between SAS and Chi. Next I'll work around that trip. I ll probably fly from BWI to LA and spend a few days before the train. Never thought I'd find that fare again.


----------



## Tlcooper93

Just found a $767 fare on October 23 from Seattle to Chicago. May snag it while the gettin is good.


----------



## zephyr17

JC_620 said:


> Looking at booking a post cruise trip home across the country from Seattle to Boston in June of 2022. What is going on with Amtrak!? By that, I mean, Amtrak used to preach about booking early! We used to hear 'You better book early for the best fares!' That is entirely false when, looking now, a bedroom on the Builder starts out at $2,396 for June 2022??
> 
> My questions:
> Is that the "low bucket"?
> Subsequently, if that is the "low bucket" fare, then what is the "high bucket" fare? Does anyone happen to have the 4 or 5 "buckets" that used to be out there as a general reference to what was being charged for a roomette or a bedroom?
> 
> $2,400 about 10 months out?
> 
> Really Amtrak...


They appear to have halted the old practice routinely allocating initial inventory 11 months out to low bucket some time ago. They now initially allocate inventory on a somewhat aggressive projection of anticipated demand. They'll then adjust it as actual demand develops if they think they were off.

The number of months out from departure is now kind of immaterial under what appears to be current methodology.


----------



## Emmo213

bratkinson said:


> Why isn't anyone pissing and moaning against high gasoline and grocery prices?



Because gasoline really isn't any higher than normal, just higher than 2020 (no demand due to pandemic).


----------



## Exvalley

Emmo213 said:


> Because gasoline really isn't any higher than normal, just higher than 2020 (no demand due to pandemic).


Gasoline prices are somewhat higher right now - at least in my neck of the woods where prices are in the $3.09 - $3.19 range.

This chart is a couple of years out of date, but it shows that the average price, adjusted for inflation, is a little bit lower.


----------



## Tlcooper93

Tlcooper93 said:


> Just found a $767 fare on October 23 from Seattle to Chicago. May snag it while the gettin is good.



Just realizing that Amtrak has been offering a fall special on travel this season. Perhaps this is purely a special offer and not ordinary...


----------



## Sidney

Tlcooper93 said:


> Just realizing that Amtrak has been offering a fall special on travel this season. Perhaps this is purely a special offer and not ordinary...


That is hardly a special fare. Low bucket on the EB Chi-Sea is $530.


----------



## Sidney

Sidney said:


> That is hardly a special fare. Low bucket on the EB Chi-Sea is $530.


Oh...unless you were referring to a bedroom


----------



## niemi24s

$767 is the middle bucket Roomette fare all the way on the EB (SEA) for one adult and low bucket is $527, not $530.


----------



## Cal

Low bucket found for roomettes. Bedrooms are high buckets.


----------



## zephyr17

Cal said:


> View attachment 24544
> 
> 
> Low bucket found for roomettes.


That's impossible. Low buckets never exist anymore, right?


----------



## Mr.Technician

I'm tentatively planning on riding the CZ from EMY to GBB and have been playing with dates over the past few weeks. All of a sudden it seems only the second and third lowest buckets are available, even 11 months from now. Has the demand for the CZ suddenly increased that much?


----------



## zephyr17

Mr.Technician said:


> I'm tentatively planning on riding the CZ from EMY to GBB and have been playing with dates over the past few weeks. All of a sudden it seems only the second and third lowest buckets are available, even 11 months from now. Has the demand for the CZ suddenly increased that much?


Amtrak's yield managers have largely stopped routinely allocating inventory to the low buckets when it is first released for sale 11 months in advance.

Now they appear to be allocating inventory based on historical and projected demand, with a pronounced aggressive skew. Often that results in zero initial allocation to the lower buckets 11 months out.

The game has changed and the amount of time before departure is no longer nearly as much of a factor as it was. Easy strategies to ensure getting a low bucket, like grabbing space 11 months in advance, are no longer nearly as effective.

If demand doesn't develop as projected, they will reallocate inventory into lower buckets, if they are managing their yield properly. Getting a lower bucket is much more of a guessing, waiting, and obsessively checking game now.


----------



## Mr.Technician

zephyr17 said:


> Getting a lower bucket is much more of a guessing, waiting, and obsessively checking game now.



Good to know, thanks! At least there's still hope of cheaper buckets.


----------



## Tlcooper93

Just booked a roomette on the EB for $671.
Decent price for December 22. Used a companion coupon to include my wife, and avoided paying pricey airfare for 2 people by taking the train, and leaving a day earlier.


----------



## JoshP

I booked for my trip NYP-MIA in ADA Accessible Room on January 7th only $489 then January 17th return same back, $502

I guess Silver Meteor average that price, maybe? I wanna try EB one day maybe in Spring when I'm ready.


----------



## Keith1951

I think I got a pretty good deal, dont know about low buckets or high buckets. This past summer I booked a trip for April 2022, CLE to CHI in coach on the LSL and next day CHI to EMY in a superliner bedroom on the CZ for $1290.20.


----------



## niemi24s

Keith1951 said:


> . . . dont know about low buckets or high buckets.


You can learn about them here: Long Distance Train Coach & Sleeper Fares (Buckets)


----------



## joelkfla

JoshP said:


> I booked for my trip NYP-MIA in ADA Accessible Room on January 7th only $489 then January 17th return same back, $502
> 
> I guess Silver Meteor average that price, maybe? I wanna try EB one day maybe in Spring when I'm ready.


The H-room rates for qualified passengers are based on Roomette rates, which haven't been as crazy as bedroom rates, and the Silver rates in general (the Meteor in particular) haven't been as crazy as the western train rates.

On a recent round trip between Orlando & NYP on the Meteor, there appeared to be plenty of unsold bedrooms & roomettes.


----------



## Qapla

I'm not sure if I would classify and additional $554-$559 for the H-room "not as crazy" for an overnight trip to NY from Fl (coach fare is $121-130) ... the lower fare is from JAX and the higher fare is from MIA - both ends of the state ,,, making the total fare $675-$689


----------



## Amtrak709

I know we have "beat this dead horse" for months. I know COVID has affected forever how we do things. I know there has been recently a significant snow storm in the Virginia and the northeast. I think I understand the economic principles of supply and demand. Having said that, who would pay $1606.00 for a one-way bedroom DLD-WAS? I know the answer: "someone probably will". I rest my case.


----------



## hlcteacher

not me


----------



## Sidney

I look at Amtrak as a land cruise. Many people see Amtrak as basic transportation. I have done circle trips every year since 1990. It's getting harder and harder to find reasonable sleeper fares. Ill be on the Zephyr,Coast Starlight and Sunset/Eagle in a few weeks. Coach from Pa. to Chicago and the CS and roomette on the CX and SL/TE. Low bucket. I am paying $527 for the Zephyr and $448 for the SL/TE to Bloomington Il,$13 Coach back to Chi saving $139. That fare is the only low bucket I found searching from December through March.

I have been seeing bedrooms go for well over $2000 on all the LD trains from Chicago to the West Coast. Insane. Many people on this forum says comparing an Amtrak sleeper to a Cruise is apples and oranges
Maybe so but for my travels they both fit. I am going on a 10 day Carribean cruise in November. Two people. Inside stateroom,which of course has a shower sink and toilet. All taxes,gratuities and insurance total is$1850. A two day trip in a bedroom on the Zephyr Chief or Builder is usually $2000 plus.

Kind of crazy.



I
z


----------



## zephyr17

Sidney said:


> Kind of crazy.


It is only crazy from Amtrak's point of view if they do not sell at that price, go out empty, and produce no revenue.

If someone buys it, that person may be crazy, but Amtrak isn't.

Under current equipment and inventory conditions sleeper accommodations are a scarce item in relatively high demand. Especially bedrooms, most Superliner trains have 10 bedrooms at most. They have every right to maximize revenue on their limited inventory. If bedrooms are occupied at those prices, Amtrak is not crazy, it means their yield management methods are working properly.

The fact that they may be deliberately limiting equipment and driving up prices through restricting inventory that would otherwise be available is a different and potentially much darker issue.

A bedroom is a luxury item, it is not basic transportation.


----------



## Eric in East County

I recently re-read Edward Hungerford’s book *The Run of the Twentieth Century* describing what all was involved in operating the NYC’s flagship train *Twentieth Century Limited* between New York City and Chicago in 1930. What I found most interesting was how, on any given day, the type of sleeping cars selected for the *Century* was based on passenger demands for various facilities: upper or lower berths, compartments, drawing rooms, etc. If, on a certain day, the demand for compartments was particularly high, those sleeping cars with the most compartments would be used for that day’s train so that the supply of compartments would meet the demand.

As has been pointed out, the demand for bedrooms on Amtrak LD trains now exceeds the supply, even with the super-inflated prices being charged for these bedrooms. If Amtrak were to adopt a policy similar to that of the NYC’s *Century*, it would take into consideration how many requests for bedrooms had been made for a particular train and date and then add more sleepers to that particular train on that particular date to ensure that the demand for bedrooms was met. 

To imagine this ever happening is, of course, pure fantasy. As things stand now, it is unlikely that the supply of bedrooms will ever meet the demand, particularly during peak travel times. (This is why we book our bedrooms six months in advance.)


----------



## hlcteacher

i can cruise for a lot cheaper than amtrak to the port and back


----------



## niemi24s

That's not the least bit surprising considering the majority of the crew on those ships hail from places like Indonesia and make much, much less than Amtrak crews. 

But give yourself some perspective by pricing a river cruise within the USA that's manned by law by American citizens. F'rinstance the cheapest cruise I could find during May 2022 was from NOL to MEM, spending 7 nights on the river and would cost a couple $5671 including gratuities. Two people could get from NOL to MEM in a high bucket Bedroom for somewhere around $568.

But looking at it another way (cost per hour aboard the vehicle) the cruise is 55% the cost of the train on a per hour basis. 

It really is somewhat meaningless to make these sorts of comparisons. Figure it out on the basis of $/meal if you want some goofy numbers!


----------



## Sidney

Sidney said:


> I look at Amtrak as a land cruise. Many people see Amtrak as basic transportation. I have done circle trips every year since 1990. It's getting harder and harder to find reasonable sleeper fares. Ill be on the Zephyr,Coast Starlight and Sunset/Eagle in a few weeks. Coach from Pa. to Chicago and the CS and roomette on the CX and SL/TE. Low bucket. I am paying $527 for the Zephyr and $448 for the SL/TE to Bloomington Il,$13 Coach back to Chi saving $139. That fare is the only low bucket I found searching from December through March.
> 
> I have been seeing bedrooms go for well over $2000 on all the LD trains from Chicago to the West Coast. Insane. Many people on this forum says comparing an Amtrak sleeper to a Cruise is apples and oranges
> Maybe so but for my travels they both fit. I am going on a 10 day Carribean cruise in November. Two people. Inside stateroom,which of course has a shower sink and toilet. All taxes,gratuities and insurance total is$1850. A two day trip in a bedroom on the Zephyr Chief or Builder is usually $2000 plus.
> 
> Kind of crazy.


Again,I know why train travel and cruises can't be logically compared,but I use Amtrak and a cruise for the same reason. $2200 for two people in a bedroom for two days. $1800 for two people on a cruise for ten days.


----------



## MARC Rider

Sidney said:


> I look at Amtrak as a land cruise. Many people see Amtrak as basic transportation.


Well, yeah. Congress didn't appropriate $66 billion to Amtrak for it to run land cruises. If they can sell sleeper space at the current high prices, it will help cross-subsidize the basic transportation that's Amtrak's main mission.


----------



## MARC Rider

By the way, NEC fares seem to be moderating. I saw a Baltimore-Washington advance purchase coach fare at $8, that's the same as a MARC fare. There are lots being offered for $15. When I was working, the fares could be as high as $30. I booked an Acela trip to Boston that cost $125, in the past it's been at least $160. My last trip to Philly was in the low bucket ranges of $35 - $45, I've seen Northeast Regional coach fares as high as $80 for the 90-mile ride.


----------



## MARC Rider

Sidney said:


> $2200 for two people in a bedroom for two days. for $1800 two people on a cruise for ten day.


I just priced a Baltimore-LAX trip for two people. $1,400 for a three night trip. OK, $2,000 if you do Chicago to LA on the Texas Eagle/Sunset Limited, but that's a 4 night trip. And you get a couple hundred off if you qualify for the senior discount. (Coach fare is ~$250 per person.)


----------



## Cal

MARC Rider said:


> I just priced a Baltimore-LAX trip for two people. $1,400 for a three night trip.


That is surprisingly good, what bucket is it?


----------



## tricia

MARC Rider said:


> Well, yeah. Congress didn't appropriate $66 billion to Amtrak for it to run land cruises. If they can sell sleeper space at the current high prices, it will help cross-subsidize the basic transportation that's Amtrak's main mission.



Well, that begs the question whether Amtrak, as a taxpayer-subsidized public facility, should be constraining supply in a way that price-gouges a whole class of travelers. Perhaps better public policy would be to buy enough trainsets to run enough trains to support the whole operation with higher volume and lower fares.


----------



## jis

tricia said:


> Well, that begs the question whether Amtrak, as a taxpayer-subsidized public facility, should be constraining supply in a way that price-gouges a whole class of travelers. Perhaps better public policy would be to buy enough trainsets to run enough trains to support the whole operation with higher volume and lower fares.


That is what is being attempted through the $66B grant and the new authorization, buying more rolling stock fixing long standing infrastructure problems and upgrading some station facilities. Unfortunately these things cannot be made to appear magically in a flash.. The funding together with the change in Amtrak's governance structure and change in its mission, which have all been legislated now, are the necessary first steps to get there.


----------



## Eric in East County

It will be interesting to see how much of this 66 billion will actually end up being used for providing Amtrak customers with a better traveling experience. All too often, a good percentage of the money which Washington approves to help out some industry or business ends up being siphoned off to pension funds, retirement bonuses & buy-outs, the hiring of high priced “consultants” and “software designers” who have some connection to senior Washington politicians, etc.


----------



## jis

Eric in East County said:


> It will be interesting to see how much of this 66 billion will actually end up being used for providing Amtrak customers with a better traveling experience. All too often, a good percentage of the money which Washington approves to help out some industry or business ends up being siphoned off to pension funds, retirement bonuses & buy-outs, the hiring of high priced “consultants” and “software designers” who have some connection to senior Washington politicians, etc.


Of course we will see. But without additional legislation this money cannot be diverted legally to _pension funds, retirement bonuses & buy-outs._

Of course all of the actual work will be done by contractors and all the accompanying hazards still exist.


----------



## Eric in East County

The best indicator of how well the 66 billion is being or was spent will be in the AU posts that will appear in a year or so. If we’re still seeing reports of frequent delays caused by equipment break downs, aging rolling stock still in use, seedy station facilities, on-line software programs that don’t work, etc. there will be some justification for skepticism.


----------



## jis

Eric in East County said:


> The best indicator of how well the 66 billion is being or was spent will be in the AU posts that will appear in a year or so. If we’re still seeing reports of frequent delays caused by equipment break downs, aging rolling stock still in use, seedy station facilities, on-line software programs that don’t work, etc. there will be some justification for skepticism.


I can guarantee you will be skeptical after one year. I would say how things are in three to five years. Almost nothing will change in a year since even the Board changes cannot all happen within a year, so changing management is out in that time frame.There will be no new equipment that is not already in the pipeline, so nothing new for western LDs which is what most AU member care more about as it looks. Service changes like better food service that is already in the pipeline will happen sooner than that hopefully, but that has nothing to do with the $66 Billion.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

Eric in East County said:


> The best indicator of how well the 66 billion is being or was spent will be in the AU posts that will appear in a year or so. If we’re still seeing reports of frequent delays caused by equipment break downs, aging rolling stock still in use, seedy station facilities, on-line software programs that don’t work, etc. there will be some justification for skepticism.


In a year or so we should be able to go from legislative authorization to a modern fleet of cars, pristine stations, and new booking system or else a decade-long budget is a failure?


----------



## MARC Rider

jis said:


> Of course we will see. But without additional legislation this money cannot be diverted legally to _pension funds, retirement bonuses & buy-outs._
> 
> Of course all of the actual work will be done by contractors and all the accompanying hazards still exist.


You know, I'll bet a lot of folks in this group wouldn't mind spending some of that $$$ on a retirement bonus/buy-out for Mr. Gardner, if it means they can get rid of him.


----------



## MARC Rider

Devil's Advocate said:


> In a year or so we should be able to go from legislative authorization to a modern fleet of cars, pristine stations, and new booking system or else a decade-long budget is a failure?


I wonder if the original poster ever worked for a large bureaucracy (government or private.)


----------



## jis

MARC Rider said:


> I wonder if the original poster ever worked for a large bureaucracy (government or private.)


'Tis not even that. In one year the first tranche (1/10th) of the whole amount will barely start flowing. You do not just write a 6 Billion dollar check with no concrete plans and commitments.


----------



## Sidney

Returning to the fares fair..I noticed the Southwest Chief from Chi to Lax one person roomette low bucket of $623 on many dates in the next few weeks. Last May virtually every fare was $899. I would imagine Amtrak had problems selling them at that third bucket tier.

So much for the theory of the furthest out the lower the fare. If they were $623 instead of $899 back then I would have booked a trip. I already have my itinerary booked. I have noticed a couple of trips in the next two weeks have been canceled. That uncertainty as part of a circle trip is tough.


----------



## zephyr17

Sidney said:


> I would imagine Amtrak had problems selling them at that third bucket tier.
> 
> So much for the theory of the furthest out the lower the fare. If they were $623 instead of $899 back then I would have booked a trip.


That theory has been out of date and largely inapplicable for quite awhile now. Amtrak stopped routinely offering low buckets when inventory is released for sale 11 months out a few years ago as their yield management practices got more sophisticated. In the last year they have gotten even more aggressive, in many cases initially releasing inventory only in the top couple buckets, then adjusting as actual demand develops (or doesn't).

Redistributing inventory across the fare buckets in response to demand is a normal and expected part of managing yield.


----------



## Eric in East County

jis said:


> I can guarantee you will be skeptical after one year. I would say how things are in three to five years. Almost nothing will change in a year since even the Board changes cannot all happen within a year, so changing management is out in that time frame.There will be no new equipment that is not already in the pipeline, so nothing new for western LDs which is what most AU member care more about as it looks. Service changes like better food service that is already in the pipeline will happen sooner than that hopefully, but that has nothing to do with the $66 Billion.


So how was the money used that appropriated three to five years ago?


----------



## Cal

Eric in East County said:


> aging rolling stock still in use


How is Amtrak supposed to replace all of it's aging rolling stock in a year? The new Acela sets should be in use, and hopefully the Siemens venture sets. But other than that it'd be impossible for them to improve beyond that with rolling stock


----------



## Eric in East County

To rephrase my original comment, it will be interesting to see, in three to five years, how much of that 66 billion actually ended up being used to provide Amtrak customers with a better traveling experience.


----------



## Trogdor

Perhaps it’s now worth reminding folks (or informing, for the first time, those unaware of the process) that there’s a difference between authorization and appropriation. A $66 billion authorization means nothing if the money does not get appropriated in the annual budget.

At best, you *might* get one year’s appropriation before the midterm elections. If we have a functioning government, you might even get a couple more years, or it might get whittled away in the name of “deficit reduction” or something. Then it’s up to whoever wins the 2024 presidential election to put the funding into the budget, and whoever is in the house and the senate to either agree with that budget or make whatever amendments they will make.

Amtrak’s history is littered with authorized money that never made it to their bank account. 

All told, I will eat my hat if Amtrak gets $66 billion in the next 10 years.


----------



## Todd

yeah, when I booked my cross-country loop 11 months in advance to this April, I like planning way in advance...everything was lowest bucket...under new system I would not be travelling Amtrak in April...everything beyond June right now is priced in highest bucket for cross-country...


----------



## jis

Trogdor said:


> Perhaps it’s now worth reminding folks (or informing, for the first time, those unaware of the process) that there’s a difference between authorization and appropriation. A $66 billion authorization means nothing if the money does not get appropriated in the annual budget.
> 
> At best, you *might* get one year’s appropriation before the midterm elections. If we have a functioning government, you might even get a couple more years, or it might get whittled away in the name of “deficit reduction” or something. Then it’s up to whoever wins the 2024 presidential election to put the funding into the budget, and whoever is in the house and the senate to either agree with that budget or make whatever amendments they will make.
> 
> Amtrak’s history is littered with authorized money that never made it to their bank account.
> 
> All told, I will eat my hat if Amtrak gets $66 billion in the next 10 years.


The $66 Billion is not authorization. It is appropriation for disbursement over the next five years and has to be spent within the next ten years. There is an additional ~$40 Billion that is the normal authorization over the next five years.

The confusion arises because multiple original bills were stapled together to vote on as a single package as a matter of legislative convenience. Among others, the Infrastructure Bill which is almost all appropriation, was stapled with the 5 year DoT Authorization Bill (including Amtrak), and a few other Authorizations.

The $66 Billion is in the Infrastructure appropriated part, and the a little less than $40 Billion authorization over 5 years is in the DoT Authorization part. That part also contains the Amtrak Board restructuring and redefinition of its reason for existence.

Hope this clarifies more than it confuses. RPA has a good writeup on this, I'll look for it and post a link when I find a little more time.

As a matter of covering all bases I would point out that uncommitted portions of appropriated money can always be rescinded. Nothing is quite certain in life. OTOH, the bill did pass with considerable bipartisan support, so that is something to consider too.

Here is the breakdown in the RPA article:









What’s in the Investment in Infrastructure and Jobs Act (IIJA)? | Rail Passengers Association | Washington, DC


Rail Passengers has provided a breakdown of the Investment in Infrastructure and Jobs Act (IIJA)’s passenger rail highlights, looking at both funding and policy reforms.




www.railpassengers.org





Everything under Infrastructure (orange title) is appropriation. Stuff above that is authorization. At present FY22 is running under continuing resolution at the same level as FY21, pending passage of a FY2022 budget.


----------



## Barb Stout

jis said:


> I can guarantee you will be skeptical after one year. I would say how things are in three to five years. Almost nothing will change in a year since even the Board changes cannot all happen within a year, so changing management is out in that time frame.There will be no new equipment that is not already in the pipeline, so nothing new for western LDs which is what most AU member care more about as it looks. Service changes like better food service that is already in the pipeline will happen sooner than that hopefully, but that has nothing to do with the $66 Billion.


What about better website functionality? Could we get that within a year?


----------



## jis

Barb Stout said:


> What about better website functionality? Could we get that within a year?


You could get lots of things within a year. What you cannot get is meaningful management change within a year and substantially Infrastructure Bill funded substantial infrastructure projects done within a year. I.e. while there is money in there to do things like Superliner rebuild/replace, that is unlikely to happen in a year.

A good management team that thought the website was a problem, could get it fixed in less than a year I would reckon. I have no idea what they prioritize how and why. If a Senator lights the fire under their rear end, it could possibly happen, though getting human resources that is competent enough to pull it off these days is another matter.


----------



## GAT

Eric in East County said:


> The best indicator of how well the 66 billion is being or was spent will be in the AU posts that will appear in a year or so. If we’re still seeing reports of frequent delays caused by equipment break downs, aging rolling stock still in use, seedy station facilities, on-line software programs that don’t work, etc. there will be some justification for skepticism.


Minor quibble, but my guess is that it will take much longer than a year osr so for us to see significant improvements.


----------



## MARC Rider

jis said:


> If a Senator lights the fire under their rear end, it could possibly happen,


Well, there's our marching orders. Time for letters to our Senators (and Representatives.) Also, perhaps, letters to the chairs and Ranking Members of the relevant Appropriations subcommittees that oversee Amtrak, whoever they are.


----------



## Willbridge

This is information that has been discussed in a variety of ways, but in a quiet evening I thought to get some perspective by showing fares day by day for Chicago to Emeryville in the current supply and demand situation.

In this chart. fares are shown Coach/Business/Sleeper (starts at). Business class in this case indicates via Portland. Fares are not shown on other optional routings, but the various routings via LAX also have numerous sold out dates. All dates are April, beginning Easter Monday, April 18th.

18th = $283 / $327 / *SO*
19th = *SO *train
20th = $224 / ---- / *SO*
21st = $176 / ---- / *SO*
22nd = $224 / ---- / $1052
23rd = $224 / ----/ $1052
24th = $226 / $289 / $1605
25th = $225 / $289 / $3274
26th = $141 / ---- / *SO*
27th = $141 / ---- / *SO*
28th = $224 / ---- / $1052
29th = $141 / ---- / $1052
30th = $224 / ---- / $1415
etc.


----------



## NorthShore

I'd like to see the prices west to east, too. In checking on costs for the EB, I noticed that the eastbound trip is, often, more affordable and available for booking.


----------



## joelkfla

Willbridge said:


> This is information that has been discussed in a variety of ways, but in a quiet evening I thought to get some perspective by showing fares day by day for Chicago to Emeryville in the current supply and demand situation.
> 
> In this chart. fares are shown Coach/Business/Sleeper (starts at). Business class in this case indicates via Portland. Fares are not shown on other optional routings, but the various routings via LAX also have numerous sold out dates. All dates are April, beginning Easter Monday, April 18th.
> 
> 18th = $283 / $327 / *SO*
> 19th = *SO *train
> 20th = $224 / ---- / *SO*
> 21st = $176 / ---- / *SO*
> 22nd = $224 / ---- / $1052
> 23rd = $224 / ----/ $1052
> 24th = $226 / $289 / $1605
> 25th = $225 / $289 / $3274
> 26th = $141 / ---- / *SO*
> 27th = $141 / ---- / *SO*
> 28th = $224 / ---- / $1052
> 29th = $141 / ---- / $1052
> 30th = $224 / ---- / $1415
> etc.


I was curious about the high fare on the 25th. Turns out it's routing via Portland, with a Bedroom on the 27 and the Family Bedroom on the CS.

But if you're willing to change cars in the middle of the night, you can get a Roomette on the 7 to Spokane and then change to a Roomette on the 27, and finally the Family Bedroom to EMY, for a total of $2167. Still a bunch of money, but an $1100 saving over Arrow's price.


----------



## pennyk

MODERATOR NOTE: There were numerous threads regarding long distance fares that have been combined into this thread. 

Thank you for posting questions/comments/complaints about long distance fares in this thread and avoid starting new threads.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Willbridge said:


> This is information that has been discussed in a variety of ways, but in a quiet evening I thought to get some perspective by showing fares day by day for Chicago to Emeryville in the current supply and demand situation.
> 
> In this chart. fares are shown Coach/Business/Sleeper (starts at). Business class in this case indicates via Portland. Fares are not shown on other optional routings, but the various routings via LAX also have numerous sold out dates. All dates are April, beginning Easter Monday, April 18th.
> 
> 18th = $283 / $327 / *SO*
> 19th = *SO *train
> 20th = $224 / ---- / *SO*
> 21st = $176 / ---- / *SO*
> 22nd = $224 / ---- / $1052
> 23rd = $224 / ----/ $1052
> 24th = $226 / $289 / $1605
> 25th = $225 / $289 / $3274
> 26th = $141 / ---- / *SO*
> 27th = $141 / ---- / *SO*
> 28th = $224 / ---- / $1052
> 29th = $141 / ---- / $1052
> 30th = $224 / ---- / $1415
> etc.


Wow, Sticker Shock!


----------



## Steve4031

I just found out I was going to have some extra money. Looked at sleeper fares for Chief and Sunset Limited. On multiple days those trains are sold out. Then the same thing for the CONO. This would be for June when school lets out.


----------



## zephyr17

It is a bit more than 7 months out for my annual New York trip in November, VIA outbound, Amtrak back. Unfortunately, the trip is a week later than is usually is, so as to capture VIA's off season rates that start on November 1 and that puts the return starting the Saturday before Thanksgiving. With the Canadian now running twice a week, I could more the departure back a couple days (from Monday 11/7 to Friday 11/4), which will have me leaving New York a full week before Thanksgiving (the previous Wednesday), but the fares are all still high bucket then, too.

I think I will adjust the trip back to 11/4, book VIA and give Amtrak some time to play some yield management games. I know they tend to just stick them at higher buckets at first and then shift some inventory to lower buckets as actual demand develops, so I am not losing anything by delaying booking the Amtrak part.

It'll be on points, but there is no sense wasting points.


----------



## F900ElCapitan

zephyr17 said:


> It is a bit more than 7 months out for my annual New York trip in November, VIA outbound, Amtrak back. Unfortunately, the trip is a week later than is usually is, so as to capture VIA's off season rates that start on November 1 and that puts the return starting the Saturday before Thanksgiving. With the Canadian now running twice a week, I could more the departure back a couple days (from Monday 11/7 to Friday 11/4), which will have me leaving New York a full week before Thanksgiving (the previous Wednesday), but the fares are all still high bucket then, too.
> 
> I think I will adjust the trip back to 11/4, book VIA and give Amtrak some time to play some yield management games. I know they tend to just stick them at higher buckets at first and then shift some inventory to lower buckets as actual demand develops, so I am not losing anything by delaying booking the Amtrak part.
> 
> It'll be on points, but there is no sense wasting points.



I’m doing the same thing with a DAL-SEA trip next September. I was fortunate enough to grab a low bucket roomette DAL to LAX but the Coast Starlight has been at high bucket for all rooms since I decided to make the trip. The other day (5 months to the day from departure) roomettes were dropped by 1 bucket. They still show at least 5 roomettes and bedrooms available so I too will continue to wait.


----------



## Sidney

Out of curiosity I checked fares on the EB,CZ SW Chief and the Sunset/Eagle from LAX,EMY,PDX and SEA for six to eight months out on several dates to Chicago.

Only constant was the low bucket on the Chief and Sunset/Eagle $623. Not too long ago there was nothing lower than $899,third bucket. Third bucket seems to be the norm for the other trains. These are for roomettes.

If you ride for the sake of riding and want maximum train time the Sunset/Eagle gives you three nights and if there are two of you going that's 16 meals included,albeit the flex crap after SAS,but with all the complaining about outrageous prices(and there are many) the Chief and Sunset are bargains,considering how high gas prices are.


----------



## zephyr17

I ride for the sake of riding, but personally I intend to give the Eagle a clean miss under present conditions with flex dining and no Sightseer. This despite the fact it is the _only_ Amtrak long distance train currently operating that I have never ridden.

If buckets drop, I may consider returning from New York via LA, but using the SW Chief (one of my favs), not the Eagle.


----------



## thully

NorthShore said:


> I'd like to see the prices west to east, too. In checking on costs for the EB, I noticed that the eastbound trip is, often, more affordable and available for booking.


I’m seeing better availability on the eastbound Empire Builder than west this summer as well when looking for my EB+Canadian loop trip. Roomettes are almost always high-bucket when available on the EB this summer, but perhaps that is expected when looking that close. The Canadian actually seems to have better sleeper availability (even in the “discounted” category) than the EB despite being twice-weekly. Granted, the discounted price of a cabin for 1 is double a roomette for 1’s high bucket, though the trip is also twice as long.


----------



## JC_620

I'll add my .02, 
Looking at the CZ #6 in December from Reno to Chicago in a bedroom. 
Already starting them at $2239 at last look. 
Wowww...We will probably fly back.


----------



## SwedeC

FYI: Business class airfare RNO-ORD runs around $1,100 today, $2,200 for two.


----------



## Sidney

SwedeC said:


> FYI: Business class airfare RNO-ORD runs around $1,100 today, $2,200 for two.


Southwest has a $143 fare for early November from Reno to Chicago Midway.


----------



## joelkfla

SwedeC said:


> FYI: Business class airfare RNO-ORD runs around $1,100 today, $2,200 for two.


In early December, it starts around $500-$600 per person.


----------



## JC_620

Why so expensive Amtrak?
And Amtrak, you are not helping with inflation and so forth. 
Dumb questions, I know, I know


----------



## Sidney

With the price of gas around $4.50 a gallon,riding Amtrak does seem more affordable. We are on the Zephyr from Chicago to Sacramento in July. With a coupon for an additional person we paid $550 for a roomette. Two people and twelve great meals. Three days,two nights. Imagine the price of driving..gas meals.motels. At the other end of the spectrum bedrooms are well over $2000 for that same trip.

If you book three to six months out there are some low buckets to be found. It's time consuming manually looking at dates,but if you can find a low bucket fare you have definately found a bargain.


----------



## IndyLions

I checked out a Cardinal / Chief trip from Indy to LAX in late October / Early November. Only looking to travel one way. Roomette Card + Bedroom Chief was right around $1700. Didn't matter which way I traveled in that case. I was looking at IND - LAX out on a Saturday or LAX - IND back on a Thursday. While that was far from inexpensive - we could make it work.

Unfortunately, my Delta certificate that has an expiration date on it doesn't allow for one way fares. So if we wanted to Air/Rail the trip, we'd have had to throw away a valuable flight certificate.

So in the end, we reluctantly decided to fly both ways. So we're paying $1200 to fly first class IND-SD both ways. Of course it would have been $2400, but I had that expiring free companion certificate. In reality, we're not getting as good of a vacation - because my wife and I really enjoy the western trains - and believe it or not we've never done the Chief before. But God willing there will be another opportunity.


----------



## lordsigma

Sidney said:


> Southwest has a $143 fare for early November from Reno to Chicago Midway.


As great and affordable as Southwest is I think it’s a little unfair to expect that sleeping car accommodations would be price competitive with “Wanna Get Away” saver fares on Southwest. While I imagine for many they may be more willing to be herded like cattle for the shorter trip on Southwest but require sleeping accommodations to consider rail it’s still comparing premium service to budget service. Amtrak sleepers are never going to be cost competitive with Southwest saver fares. Business or first class rail fare comparisons seem a bit more appropriate (at least for one’s expectations.) of course it’s your call what’s an affordable sleeper ticket for you but still I think expecting it to be cost competitive with Southwest is a big unrealistic.


----------



## enviro5609

As of right now, the first week in October seems to have some lower bucket roomettes on the westbound Zephyr.

CHI-EMY for 563 on October 4, for instance.


----------



## Sidney

enviro5609 said:


> As of right now, the first week in October seems to have some lower bucket roomettes on the westbound Zephyr.
> 
> CHI-EMY for 563 on October 4, for instance.


The Zephyr in the fall. Doesn't get much better than that..and low bucket.


----------



## glensfallsse

Maybe someone can help me out with this little oddity I encountered today while looking up prices for a possible a mid-July cross-country trip. There's probably a simple explanation, but I can't figure it out.
I tried several dates Chicago to Portland, and there were no rooms available unless I transferred at Spokane in the middle of the night. I figured that was because the Portland sleeper was booked from Chicago to Spokane, so the only way to do it was to take the Seattle sleeper to Spokane and then move over. Then I tried the same dates for Chicago to Seattle. And again, the only way to get a room was to transfer at Spokane. That doesn't seem to add up. What am I missing?


----------



## Sidney

I checked sleepers from July 10 to the 19 and the only day not sold out from Chi-Pdx was the 18th with one left. Obviously the EB is extremely popular in the summer.


----------



## zephyr17

glensfallsse said:


> Maybe someone can help me out with this little oddity I encountered today while looking up prices for a possible a mid-July cross-country trip. There's probably a simple explanation, but I can't figure it out.
> I tried several dates Chicago to Portland, and there were no rooms available unless I transferred at Spokane in the middle of the night. I figured that was because the Portland sleeper was booked from Chicago to Spokane, so the only way to do it was to take the Seattle sleeper to Spokane and then move over. Then I tried the same dates for Chicago to Seattle. And again, the only way to get a room was to transfer at Spokane. That doesn't seem to add up. What am I missing?


Just one Portland sleeper so you have 13 roomettes, 5 bedrooms, 1 handicapped room and 1 family bedroom at most (I do not know whether the cafe LSA and coach attendant get roomettes, so it might be just 11). When they're gone, they're gone.

Seattle section has at least two sleepers. I don't know if they are running two sleepers and a transdorm like they did in the summer pre-COVID, in either case, there is somewhat more sleeper capacity in the Seattle section.

The inventory is handled as two completely separate trains due to limitations of Amtrak's antique reservation system, Arrow, and Spokane is set up in the system as the connection point between the two "trains" in Arrow. So there are no through rooms available in 27, but there is a room open between some intermediate point and Portland and a room available on 7 between Chicago and Spokane but not between Spokane and Seattle. so you are being offered to "connect" at Spokane.

Mid May is _really _late to be booking sleepers for mid July. Sell outs are to be expected at this late date.


----------



## jis

zephyr17 said:


> Just one Portland sleeper so you have 13 roomettes, 5 bedrooms, 1 handicapped room and 1 family bedroom at most (I do not know whether the cafe LSA and coach attendant get roomettes, so it might be just 11). When they're gone, they're gone.


Two Roomettes are reserved for OBS on 27/28.



> Seattle section has at least two sleepers. I don't know if they are running two sleepers and a transdorm like they did in the summer pre-COVID, in either case, there is somewhat more sleeper capacity in the Seattle section.


7/8 has a Transdorm. It will supposedly get 2 Sleepers in the summer, but currently only one.


----------



## zephyr17

jis said:


> Two Roomettes are reserved for OBS on 27/28.


In addition to room 1 for the SCA, right?


----------



## jis

zephyr17 said:


> In addition to room 1 for the SCA, right?


Of course. Room 1 is more or less always for SCA.

As an side interestingly on Viewliner II Sleeper on Roomette is almost always reserved for storage, as they forgot to include storage closets while designing those cars.


----------



## zephyr17

Here is a scenario:

27 is almost fully booked with one roomette still open between GPK-PDX and another CHI-PSC.
7 is almost fully booked with several roomettes still open CHI-SPK and another WFH-SEA

There are rooms available CHI-SPK and WFH-SEA on 7 and rooms available CHI-PSC and GPK-PDX on 27. But there are none through CHI-SEA on 7 or CHI-PDX on 27. Since the trains "connect" at SPK, you are being offered a transfer there.


----------



## zephyr17

jis said:


> Of course. Room 1 is more or less always for SCA.
> 
> As an side interestingly on Viewliner II Sleeper on Roomette is almost always reserved for storage, as they forgot to include storage closets while designing those cars.


You are talking like linens and supplies, not passenger luggage storage? Really?


----------



## jis

zephyr17 said:


> You are talking like linens and supplies, not passenger luggage storage? Really?


Yes.


----------



## zephyr17

jis said:


> Yes.


Oy vey.


----------



## jis

zephyr17 said:


> Oy vey.


Indeed! What were they thinking, or perhaps not thinking! Total disconnect between people who have to use the thing from people designing it. And to boot the VL-Is actually do have closet space, albeit somewhat slim. They could have simply copied it in toto.


----------



## enviro5609

jis said:


> Indeed! What were they thinking, or perhaps not thinking! Total disconnect between people who have to use the thing from people designing it. And to boot the VL-Is actually do have closet space, albeit somewhat slim. They could have simply copied it in toto.


I think (and this is just speculation) that the idea was that it would all be stored in the dorm cars-- of which there were supposed to be many, many more. With the original order, every Viewliner route would have had a dorm/bag/storage car. Until CAF had build and quality problems which left many shells unusable for anything more than just baggage cars. And we ended up with only 15 dorm cars. only 10 dorm cars.


----------



## jis

enviro5609 said:


> I think (and this is just speculation) that the idea was that it would all be stored in the dorm cars-- of which there were supposed to be many, many more. With the original order, every Viewliner route would have had a dorm/bag/storage car. Until CAF had build and quality problems which left many shells unusable for anything more than just baggage cars. And we ended up with only 15 dorm cars.


That is quite plausible, since there were supposed to be 25 Dorms, essentially the same number as Diners and Amfleet II Lounges which were supposed to be in all single level LD trains. Finally we got only 10 which now serve on two trains. 15 were converted to pure baggage cars and most of those are sitting in mothballs now.


----------



## Cal

zephyr17 said:


> In addition to room 1 for the SCA, right?





jis said:


> Of course. Room 1 is more or less always for SCA.
> 
> As an side interestingly on Viewliner II Sleeper on Roomette is almost always reserved for storage, as they forgot to include storage closets while designing those cars.


Wouldn't it be two total? I thought that 27/28 only had two OBS; The SCA and LSA for the cafe. And mid-way through typing this I am now remembering the coach attendant. Nevermind.


----------



## joelkfla

jis said:


> Of course. Room 1 is more or less always for SCA.
> 
> As an side interestingly on Viewliner II Sleeper on Roomette is almost always reserved for storage, as they forgot to include storage closets while designing those cars.


Ah, that explains why I saw a stack of cases of bottled water in one on the Meteor last October -- but the sleepers weren't very full back then, anyway.


----------



## CCC1007

zephyr17 said:


> Here is a scenario:
> 
> 27 is almost fully booked with one roomette still open between GPK-PDX and another CHI-PSC.
> 7 is almost fully booked with several roomettes still open CHI-SPK and another WFH-SEA
> 
> There are rooms available CHI-SPK and WFH-SEA on 7 and rooms available CHI-PSC and GPK-PDX on 27. But there are none through CHI-SEA on 7 or CHI-PDX on 27. Since the trains "connect" at SPK, you are being offered a transfer there.


In other words, no single roomette is free the whole route end to end, as they are booking into and out of all rooms at least once enroute.


----------



## IndyLions

zephyr17 said:


> You are talking like linens and supplies, not passenger luggage storage? Really?





jis said:


> Indeed! What were they thinking, or perhaps not thinking! Total disconnect between people who have to use the thing from people designing it. And to boot the VL-Is actually do have closet space, albeit somewhat slim. They could have simply copied it in toto.


Of course, the people “using the thing” get their revenge in that they refuse to use any new feature built into the VLIIs that they don’t feel like utilizing.

One example is the shower room towel rack which sits there on the wall gathering dust while SCAs “stack” towels either on the seat or on the floor in a completely chaotic fashion. To complete the aesthetic, they “place” a garbage bag full of packaged soap on the countertop for good measure.

Another example is the really nice coffee and ice station which is basically in the location where the linen closet used to be. They refuse to use that at all either. If you want coffee, go to the diner. If you want ice, go to the diner.

Don’t get me wrong, I have found the Miami crews to be among the best I have seen. It just shows how bad management must be if they can’t get even the best employees to use the amenities and equipment so that customers get a better/nicer experience.


----------



## JC_620

Can anyone post or repost the bucket fares once again for the Zephyr eastbound? Or direct me to which post # it was? 
Thanks!


----------



## daybeers

JC_620 said:


> Can anyone post or repost the bucket fares once again for the Zephyr eastbound? Or direct me to which post # it was?
> Thanks!


That's in the bucket thread here.


----------



## JP1822

Take this for what it is worth, but I have met a LOT of SCA's and even LSA's on the Lake Shore Limited that are not fond of the Viewliner II Sleepers. They've held criticism with the lack of storage (e.g. the linen closet), the way the shower is setup (storage presumably again), and even the Handicap bedroom with how the sink juts out into the room/couch and the toilet not being in the enclosed shower area where it had been. Again, only the messenger and relaying.


----------



## joelkfla

JP1822 said:


> ... and even the Handicap bedroom with how the sink juts out into the room/couch and the toilet not being in the enclosed shower area where it had been. Again, only the messenger and relaying.


I can understand their annoyance with the sink. IIRC, it actually overhangs the edge of the lower berth. It probably necessitates some contortions to make up the lower berth.


----------



## thully

zephyr17 said:


> Mid May is _really _late to be booking sleepers for mid July. Sell outs are to be expected at this late date.


I had waited until now to book for my EB+Canadian trip due to various concerns (and I’m glad I did, as my originally planned dates would not work), and I’m definitely finding that - Empire Builder seems to be sold out most days in June or July. Surprisingly, it seems VIA with their twice weekly schedule has more availability for cabins for 1 than Amtrak has roomettes. Guess I could fly one way, though at this point I’m somewhat inclined to just ride the VIA corridor this summer (pretty easy for me since Windsor isn’t too far away) and hold off on the Canadian until COVID is more under control and Cascades is running SEA-VAC. Could look at other Amtrak routes, though may just do some non-overnight trips there as well (since most of those sleepers are booked up too) and just do my big sleeper trip for the Gathering in October…


----------



## JC_620

So, can anyone provide me with some helpful advice on if it is even remotely possible to try and snag a low bucket on #6 and #448 for mid-December between Reno and Boston? Alternatively, we are just trying to look for a room between Chicago and Albany-Rensselaer and then just do coach between Albany and Boston to save a few bucks. But the #6 between Reno and Chicago is the problem right now as both roomettes and bedrooms are already in high bucket. 

Any thoughts would be welcomed.


----------



## zephyr17

JC_620 said:


> So, can anyone provide me with some helpful advice on if it is even remotely possible to try and snag a low bucket on #6 and #448 for mid-December between Reno and Boston? Alternatively, we are just trying to look for a room between Chicago and Albany-Rensselaer and then just do coach between Albany and Boston to save a few bucks. But the #6 between Reno and Chicago is the problem right now as both roomettes and bedrooms are already in high bucket.
> 
> Any thoughts would be welcomed.


"Already in high bucket" implies that there had been allocation into low buckets and that allocation has been sold out. Under Amtrak's current yield management practices, that almost certainly is not what happened. They now appear to be initially allocating inventory only in the higher buckets when inventory is released 11 months out. And they do not revisit it for months. At some point, which appears to be 5-7 months out to me, they look at sales and start adjusting their inventory allocation and perhaps allocating some to lower buckets.

The days of lowest fares 11 months out is long past.

I have a NYP-SEA trip planned for November and everything is currently high bucket through my travel window. But we are only now getting into the time that might change. Same goes for your trip.

My advice is to do what I am doing, keep checking, they are likely to break out some lower buckets at some point in the next month or two. You don't have any advantage in buying now, high bucket won't go higher (barring a bucket reprice) and buying also encourages them not to reallocate some inventory into lower buckets as it is just showing demand at high bucket.


----------



## Sidney

The SW Chief and the Eagle/Sunset have some low buckets for October and November. Getting low buckets on the Zephyr and Builder is more difficult. Again,as many have said the sweet spot to grab those fares are 3 to 5 months out. I must have got lucky for two upcoming trips this summer. $550 from Chi to Sac for July and $623 from Sea to Chi roomettes. You havd


----------



## Sidney

Sidney said:


> The SW Chief and the Eagle/Sunset have some low buckets for October and November. Getting low buckets on the Zephyr and Builder is more difficult. Again,as many have said the sweet spot to grab those fares are 3 to 5 months out. I must have got lucky for two upcoming trips this summer. $550 from Chi to Sac for July and $623 from Sea to Chi roomettes. You havd


You have to manually check dates. Wish Amtrak's web site had a month at a glance feature like Southwest


----------



## Amtrak709

I know that there are many patrons of this forum that are always very knowledgeable ref sleeping car "buckets". My travels are very frequently ATN-WAS-ATN on the Crescent, but I am almost clueless these days about what is a good low bucket fare or a ridiculous high bucket fare. I realize ATN is not a popular station. I also am really specially interested in Viewliner Bedroom fares. Could anyone who has any data choose a popular endpoint trip (NOL-NYP or ATL-WAS or such) and make a very simple comparison? Thanks!


----------



## flitcraft

I know we've had a number of posts regarding Amtrak sleeper prices, and I do appreciate that, in times where everything is getting pricey, Amtrak sleepers have priced themselves beyond many of us. But, here is one little data point: We are taking our nine year old daughter to Disneyland from Seattle to Los Angeles as a special treat. I was assigned the job of booking the one way train journey southward, and my husband the job of booking the flight back to Seattle. Cost for the three of us in the family bedroom was $1533. I just filed our credit card statements, where I discovered that the cost of three of us coming back in coach from LA is $1170. That's coach, not economy plus or first class... Add in the price of the hotel for a night and the meals for two days that we won't have to buy to the flight fare, and Amtrak gets us there cheaper, even in a sleeper. 

I'm honestly surprised, and I realize that high bucket would have made a difference. But, at least on occasion, Amtrak isn't more than airfare would be. And I know the three of us will enjoy the train trip vastly more than seats 21 DEF on the flight back!


----------



## PRR 60

flitcraft said:


> I know we've had a number of posts regarding Amtrak sleeper prices, and I do appreciate that, in times where everything is getting pricey, Amtrak sleepers have priced themselves beyond many of us. But, here is one little data point: We are taking our nine year old daughter to Disneyland from Seattle to Los Angeles as a special treat. I was assigned the job of booking the one way train journey southward, and my husband the job of booking the flight back to Seattle. Cost for the three of us in the family bedroom was $1533. I just filed our credit card statements, where I discovered that the cost of three of us coming back in coach from LA is $1170. That's coach, not economy plus or first class... Add in the price of the hotel for a night and the meals for two days that we won't have to buy to the flight fare, and Amtrak gets us there cheaper, even in a sleeper.
> 
> I'm honestly surprised, and I realize that high bucket would have made a difference. But, at least on occasion, Amtrak isn't more than airfare would be. And I know the three of us will enjoy the train trip vastly more than seats 21 DEF on the flight back!



Why would flying back to Seattle from LA require you to stay in a hotel for an extra night or buy extra meals? Wouldn't you get back home a day earlier?


----------



## Sidney

flitcraft said:


> I know we've had a number of posts regarding Amtrak sleeper prices, and I do appreciate that, in times where everything is getting pricey, Amtrak sleepers have priced themselves beyond many of us. But, here is one little data point: We are taking our nine year old daughter to Disneyland from Seattle to Los Angeles as a special treat. I was assigned the job of booking the one way train journey southward, and my husband the job of booking the flight back to Seattle. Cost for the three of us in the family bedroom was $1533. I just filed our credit card statements, where I discovered that the cost of three of us coming back in coach from LA is $1170. That's coach, not economy plus or first class... Add in the price of the hotel for a night and the meals for two days that we won't have to buy to the flight fare, and Amtrak gets us there cheaper, even in a sleeper.
> 
> I'm honestly surprised, and I realize that high bucket would have made a difference. But, at least on occasion, Amtrak isn't more than airfare would be. And I know the three of us will enjoy the train trip vastly more than seats 21 DEF on the flight back!


With the price of virtually everything soaring,I'm surprised there are still some low buckets out there several months ahead. I'm concerned Amtrak will raise the price of low buckets anytime,so I booked my favorite "best bang for the buck" ride LAX to Bloomington Il for $448 for next January. Three nights,8 meals. I'll fill in getting to LA and back East later on. Did notice in mid January a one person roomette on the 30 and 48 from Chicago to DC or NY is well over $600.

Imagine driving from LA to Chicago for under $500 factoring in meals and hotels!


----------



## MARC Rider

OK, I did a test booking for August 15. BAL - EMY (Coach in Northeast regional to Washington, Roomettes on the Capitol Limited and Zephyr) for 2 people. Fare quoted was $1,801. I also checked Southwest Airlines, full flexible fares BWI - OAK (Oakland) range from $400 a person ($800 for 2) to $715 ($1,430 for 2). The nonrefundable "Wannagetway" fares were about $100 a person cheaper, but there were only a few left, and some flights are already sold out. No nonstop flights.

Obviously, these are different products, as one can fly the distance, however uncomfortably, in 7-8 hours, plus 3 or so hours dealing with check-in and clearing the airport upon arrival, whereas the train takes 3 nights and part of 4 days. On the other hand, all you get on the plane is a bag of pretzels and a soft drink, and not even that if there's enough turbulence, whereas on the train you get 3 dinners, 3 breakfasts and 2 lunches, even if a dinner and breakfast are Flex meals, that's better than the last breakfast I had flying Southwest airlines, which was a hard-boiled egg and a Kind bar I bought at the airport newsstand. 

The other alternative is driving. Baltimore to Oakland is a 2,800 Mile drive that my mapping software says can be done in 39 hours, 40 minutes. Let's say 40 hours just to be realistic. Actually, no. that's an *average* speed of 70 mph. I never average 70 mph, even on roads with 75 mph speed limits. The best I can do is 55-60 mph. At 55 mph average speed, those 2800 miles will take 50 hours. Driving 10 hours a day (which is about my limit), means this is a 5 day trip. Five days, one after the other driving 10 hours a day. By the end of the 5th day, I'd roll into Oakland pretty ragged out, and having to deal with Bay Area rush-hour traffic. As to cost, the IRS gives an allowance for operating costs of an automobile at 58.5 cents per mile, so it costs $1,638 to drive the 2,800miles (that includes gas, but maybe not at current gas prices). In addition, there are 4 nights of hotels, plus meals to consider. All of a sudden, that $1,800 train fare doesn't look so expensive. If anything, from a policy perspective, airline fares are too cheap, although I can't see any politically viable way of increasing them, such as a carbon tax.

Buses would be the other alternative. A through express bus that makes its intermediate stops along the highways and doesn't go into all the cities would probably be a lot faster than the train, and if it was configured with roomy 2x1 seating might be reasonably comfortable, although one would have to be willing to sleep in a recliner, not a bed. But nobody seems to run through long-distance buses anymore, so at the current time, a coast-to-coast trip involves changing a lot of buses at inconvenient times, and long-distance buses just aren't an alternative anymore.


----------



## Ryan

flitcraft said:


> I know we've had a number of posts regarding Amtrak sleeper prices, and I do appreciate that, in times where everything is getting pricey, Amtrak sleepers have priced themselves beyond many of us. But, here is one little data point: We are taking our nine year old daughter to Disneyland from Seattle to Los Angeles as a special treat. I was assigned the job of booking the one way train journey southward, and my husband the job of booking the flight back to Seattle. Cost for the three of us in the family bedroom was $1533. I just filed our credit card statements, where I discovered that the cost of three of us coming back in coach from LA is $1170. That's coach, not economy plus or first class... Add in the price of the hotel for a night and the meals for two days that we won't have to buy to the flight fare, and Amtrak gets us there cheaper, even in a sleeper.
> 
> I'm honestly surprised, and I realize that high bucket would have made a difference. But, at least on occasion, Amtrak isn't more than airfare would be. And I know the three of us will enjoy the train trip vastly more than seats 21 DEF on the flight back!





PRR 60 said:


> Why would flying back to Seattle from LA require you to stay in a hotel for an extra night or buy extra meals? Wouldn't you get back home a day earlier?


Presumably, they're planning their vacation the way that I do - to be home on a certain day (say Sunday, to be at work on Monday). If I'm flying home, I'm paying for meals Sat/Sun and paying for my hotel room Saturday night. If I'm taking the train, I'm leaving Saturday to be home on Sunday, and those costs are instead captured in the train fare paid.

Even if I'm leaving on Saturday either way and don't care when I get home, I'm still going to eat for the period of time that I would be on the train and thus would incur the cost of those meals.


----------



## flitcraft

PRR 60 said:


> Why would flying back to Seattle from LA require you to stay in a hotel for an extra night or buy extra meals? Wouldn't you get back home a day earlier?


No, it's the difference between the train time and far and the air time and fare. Sure, we could simply cut our vacation by a day and save the money by staying home. Who needs vacation time, right? Well, we did enough staying-at-home the last couple of years that we wanted to maximize our vacation time. We're thinking of the train time as a day of vacation, whereas we would need hotel and meals unless we cut that day out from the vacation two weeks.

Edited to add: Yeah, Ryan explained this better than I did...


----------



## joelkfla

MARC Rider said:


> On the other hand, all you get on the plane is a bag of pretzels and a soft drink, and not even that if there's enough turbulence, whereas on the train you get 3 dinners, 3 breakfasts and 2 lunches, even if a dinner and breakfast are Flex meals, that's better than the last breakfast I had flying Southwest airlines, which was a hard-boiled egg and a Kind bar I bought at the airport newsstand.


And you also still get your pretzels & soft drink at the Chicago lounge.


----------



## fengshui

Amtrak709 said:


> I know that there are many patrons of this forum that are always very knowledgeable ref sleeping car "buckets". My travels are very frequently ATN-WAS-ATN on the Crescent, but I am almost clueless these days about what is a good low bucket fare or a ridiculous high bucket fare. I realize ATN is not a popular station. I also am really specially interested in Viewliner Bedroom fares. Could anyone who has any data choose a popular endpoint trip (NOL-NYP or ATL-WAS or such) and make a very simple comparison? Thanks!


The bucket fare list is here. This chart shows end-to-end fares in each bucket and fare class for each train. If you're not riding the train end-to-end, you can usually tell what bucket your partial fare is in by getting pricing for end-to-end on that train and then comparing that to the chart. In most cases, the partial distance fare will be priced at the same bucket level as end-to-end.


----------



## Willbridge

MARC Rider said:


> OK, I did a test booking for August 15. BAL - EMY (Coach in Northeast regional to Washington, Roomettes on the Capitol Limited and Zephyr) for 2 people. Fare quoted was $1,801. I also checked Southwest Airlines, full flexible fares BWI - OAK (Oakland) range from $400 a person ($800 for 2) to $715 ($1,430 for 2). The nonrefundable "Wannagetway" fares were about $100 a person cheaper, but there were only a few left, and some flights are already sold out. No nonstop flights.
> 
> Obviously, these are different products, as one can fly the distance, however uncomfortably, in 7-8 hours, plus 3 or so hours dealing with check-in and clearing the airport upon arrival, whereas the train takes 3 nights and part of 4 days. On the other hand, all you get on the plane is a bag of pretzels and a soft drink, and not even that if there's enough turbulence, whereas on the train you get 3 dinners, 3 breakfasts and 2 lunches, even if a dinner and breakfast are Flex meals, that's better than the last breakfast I had flying Southwest airlines, which was a hard-boiled egg and a Kind bar I bought at the airport newsstand.
> 
> The other alternative is driving. Baltimore to Oakland is a 2,800 Mile drive that my mapping software says can be done in 39 hours, 40 minutes. Let's say 40 hours just to be realistic. Actually, no. that's an *average* speed of 70 mph. I never average 70 mph, even on roads with 75 mph speed limits. The best I can do is 55-60 mph. At 55 mph average speed, those 2800 miles will take 50 hours. Driving 10 hours a day (which is about my limit), means this is a 5 day trip. Five days, one after the other driving 10 hours a day. By the end of the 5th day, I'd roll into Oakland pretty ragged out, and having to deal with Bay Area rush-hour traffic. As to cost, the IRS gives an allowance for operating costs of an automobile at 58.5 cents per mile, so it costs $1,638 to drive the 2,800miles (that includes gas, but maybe not at current gas prices). In addition, there are 4 nights of hotels, plus meals to consider. All of a sudden, that $1,800 train fare doesn't look so expensive. If anything, from a policy perspective, airline fares are too cheap, although I can't see any politically viable way of increasing them, such as a carbon tax.
> 
> Buses would be the other alternative. A through express bus that makes its intermediate stops along the highways and doesn't go into all the cities would probably be a lot faster than the train, and if it was configured with roomy 2x1 seating might be reasonably comfortable, although one would have to be willing to sleep in a recliner, not a bed. But nobody seems to run through long-distance buses anymore, so at the current time, a coast-to-coast trip involves changing a lot of buses at inconvenient times, and long-distance buses just aren't an alternative anymore.


Ten hours on duty is the motor carrier safety rule. The State of Colorado even imposes this on transit operators, including pieces of work that have a long recovery time here or there. The same state puts up 75 mph speed limits and invites tourists to drive thousands of miles to get here.

When I think of who is on the highway with me, I remember having coffee in Watkins, Colorado with a trucker who had driven straight through (with pit stops) from Bangor, Maine. He was angry because it was Saturday, and he was going to have to wait for Monday to drop his load of steel at one of those eternal Glenwood Canyon projects. He was a nice guy, but it was only the calendar that kept him off of the toughest part of his trip after exhausting himself.

The IRS driving cost includes insurance on the predictable results of mixing barely compatible types of vehicles and driving styles on the same roads.

Next time try the train.


----------



## jis

Now the next question to figure out an answer to is what does Amtrak train fare have to do with motor carrier safety rules


----------



## TheCrescent

When I was looking to buy a ticket for a room on the Crescent for an upcoming trip:

1. 3 rooms were available, with the lowest price of around $700 for a roomette.

2. A day later, only 1 room was available, but the lowest price had dropped to about $375.

3. Now 3 rooms are available, and the lowest price has increased to around $700 for a roomette.

I don’t understand this: wouldn’t the price (from Amtrak’s perspective) ideally go up significantly, with just one room available a few days before departure?

Thanks.


----------



## enviro5609

TheCrescent said:


> When I was looking to buy a ticket for a room on the Crescent for an upcoming trip:
> 
> 1. 3 rooms were available, with the lowest price of around $700 for a roomette.
> 
> 2. A day later, only 1 room was available, but the lowest price had dropped to about $375.
> 
> 3. Now 3 rooms are available, and the lowest price has increased to around $700 for a roomette.
> 
> I don’t understand this: wouldn’t the price (from Amtrak’s perspective) ideally go up significantly, with just one room available a few days before departure?
> 
> Thanks.



“Rooms available” means rooms available at that price/bucket, not how many rooms are available total.

It’s confusing, and perhaps intentionally so.


----------



## pennyk

TheCrescent said:


> When I was looking to buy a ticket for a room on the Crescent for an upcoming trip:
> 
> 1. 3 rooms were available, with the lowest price of around $700 for a roomette.
> 
> 2. A day later, only 1 room was available, but the lowest price had dropped to about $375.
> 
> 3. Now 3 rooms are available, and the lowest price has increased to around $700 for a roomette.
> 
> I don’t understand this: wouldn’t the price (from Amtrak’s perspective) ideally go up significantly, with just one room available a few days before departure?
> 
> Thanks.


It is likely that the bucket changed when there was only 1 room available (lower bucket because of a cancellation). After that room was sold, it went back to bucket you first saw. I see this quite often when pricing rooms on the Silvers.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

enviro5609 said:


> “Rooms available” means rooms available at that price/bucket, not how many rooms are available total.
> 
> It’s confusing, and perhaps intentionally so.


On the website it does say "3 left at this price" once you click on the rooms box and the drop down shows what rooms are available. Maybe someone working on the app thought it would save "space" on our phones be leaving out the "at this price".


----------



## west point

Try booking at number more than listed as available.


----------



## daybeers

AmtrakBlue said:


> On the website it does say "3 left at this price" once you click on the rooms box and the drop down shows what rooms are available. Maybe someone working on the app thought it would save "space" on our phones be leaving out the "at this price".


Or they did it on purpose; would be a good tactic for people to buy earlier than they otherwise would


----------



## F900ElCapitan

Well it appears the Coast Starlight has seen a fairly large jump in bucket prices in the last few days. According to the last chart, the top two buckets for roomettes were 680 and 765. for todays train (9/20) I’m seeing 846 (yes, just one occupant) and for the train I’ll be riding on the 30th 775. I’ve only seen one fare for bedrooms of 1776, up from 1626. That comes out to be just over a 9% increase. 
I haven’t dug too much further, but todays EB bedroom prices are the same as the chart.


----------



## trimetbusfan

F900ElCapitan said:


> Well it appears the Coast Starlight has seen a fairly large jump in bucket prices in the last few days. According to the last chart, the top two buckets for roomettes were 680 and 765. for todays train (9/20) I’m seeing 846 (yes, just one occupant) and for the train I’ll be riding on the 30th 775. I’ve only seen one fare for bedrooms of 1776, up from 1626. That comes out to be just over a 9% increase.
> I haven’t dug too much further, but todays EB bedroom prices are the same as the chart.


For those interested, I made a similar post with my findings on a different forum.


Long Distance Train Coach & Sleeper Fares (Buckets)

I think the only other route that has had a fare increase is the auto train. I hope the fares do not significantly increase on other routes.


----------



## zephyr17

trimetbusfan said:


> For those interested, I made a similar post with my findings on a different forum.
> 
> 
> Long Distance Train Coach & Sleeper Fares (Buckets)
> 
> I think the only other route that has had a fare increase is the auto train. I hope the fares do not significantly increase on other routes.


That is probably just a matter of time since they've apparently kicked off the process of reviewing and resetting accommodation charges. And likely not very much time.


----------



## SwedeC

Someday, someone will define "bucket" prices and "bucket" trips so the newer participants can understand.


----------



## zephyr17

SwedeC said:


> Someday, someone will define "bucket" prices and "bucket" trips so the newer participants can understand.


Amtrak yield manages their fares, similar to airlines, but more simply. "Buckets" are yield management price points, Amtrak uses five for sleepers. I do not know the origin of the term, but you can imagine a bucket filling up and spilling over into the next one in line. Amtrak's yield management team allocates inventory across those buckets, and may reallocate that inventory as sales progress. Let us say a given departure of the Seattle sectioppn Empire Builder has an inventory of 17 revenue roomettes, 13 in the 30 car, 4 in the 32 car (transdorm). Let's call the buckets B1-B5, low to high.

When inventory is released for sale, 11 months before, an optimistic yield management team, well aware of the restricted inventory, since in more normal times the Builder ought to have 30 revenue roomettes (13+13+4), allocates inventory in higher buckets:
B1: 0
B2: 0
B3: 0
B4: 2
B5: 15

At about 5 months before departure, they review sales and see (no B1-B3 shown since no inventory was released for sale in those buckets):
B4: 2(2 sold)
B5: 15 (1 sold)

The inventory isn't selling well at those price points. Their objectives is to maximize revenue, and empty space earns no revenue, on the other hand, they want to sell for the maximum obtainable price. Based on sales and the historic trends of that travel period, they reallocate as follow:
B1: 0
B2: 2 (+2)
B3: 2 (+2)
B4: 7 (+5) (2 sold, 5 open)
B5: 6 (-9) (1 sold, 5 open)

The next day, I, planning a trip but unwilling to pay high bucket and checking fares regularly, see second lowest bucket show up and make a reservation. I know lowest bucket offerings are few and far between, so I grab that second lowest.
B1: 0
B2: 2 (1 sold, 1 open)
B3: 2
B4: 7(2 sold, 5 open)
B5: 6(1 sold, 5 open).

When someone tries to price a room, the display will show:
"Roomette:$(B2). 1 available at this price". The website will only show the lowest bucket price with available inventory.

A "bucket trip" is something entirely different, "bucket" in that context being a trip you want to take before you kick it.


----------



## SwedeC

zephyr17 said:


> Amtrak yield manages their fares, similar to airlines, but more simply. "Buckets" are yield management price points, Amtrak uses five for sleepers. I do not know the origin of the term, but you can imagine a bucket filling up and spilling over into the next one in line. Amtrak's yield management team allocates inventory across those buckets, and may reallocate that inventory as sales progress. Let us say a given departure of the Seattle sectioppn Empire Builder has an inventory of 17 revenue roomettes, 13 in the 30 car, 4 in the 32 car (transdorm). Let's call the buckets B1-B5, low to high.
> 
> When inventory is released for sale, 11 months before, an optimistic yield management team, well aware of the restricted inventory, since in more normal times the Builder ought to have 30 revenue roomettes (13+13+4), allocates inventory in higher buckets:
> B1: 0
> B2: 0
> B3: 0
> B4: 2
> B5: 15
> 
> At about 5 months before departure, they review sales and see (no B1-B3 shown since no inventory was released for sale in those buckets):
> B4: 2(2 sold)
> B5: 15 (1 sold)
> 
> The inventory isn't selling well at those price points. Their objectives is to maximize revenue, and empty space earns no revenue, on the other hand, they want to sell for the maximum obtainable price. Based on sales and the historic trends of that travel period, they reallocate as follow:
> B1: 0
> B2: 2 (+2)
> B3: 2 (+2)
> B4: 7 (+5) (2 sold, 5 open)
> B5: 6 (-9) (1 sold, 5 open)
> 
> The next day, I, planning a trip but unwilling to pay high bucket and checking fares regularly, see second lowest bucket show up and make a reservation. I know lowest bucket offerings are few and far between, so I grab that second lowest.
> B1: 0
> B2: 2 (1 sold, 1 open)
> B3: 2
> B4: 7(2 sold, 5 open)
> B5: 6(1 sold, 5 open).
> 
> When someone tries to price a room, the display will show:
> "Roomette:$(B2). 1 available at this price". The website will only show the lowest bucket price with available inventory.
> 
> A "bucket trip" is something entirely different, "bucket" in that context being a trip you want to take before you kick it.


Ah, so!! Thanks for the great explanation.


----------



## Sidney

I have found four to six months out is the sweet spot for finding the lowest fares on sleepers. You have to manually punch in each date to find the low bucket. If that low price comes up often,that is low bucket.


----------



## zephyr17

Sidney said:


> I have found four to six months out is the sweet spot for finding the lowest fares on sleepers. You have to manually punch in each date to find the low bucket. If that low price comes up often,that is low bucket.


Agreed, me too.

Once they do the initial inventory allocation at 11 months out, they don't appear to start touching it for at least 5 months (6 months before departure). And that initial allocation is usually all in the highest or second highest buckets these days.


----------



## Railmonkey

I booked a roomette on the SWC from LA to Lamy, NM and it cost me $600.00. I kept checking the price and sure enough just two weeks later it dropped $150.00. I modified via the app and got a quick refund of the difference. My room/car number changed. So I guess it's technically a rebooking and not just a modification. Thankfully, I went from the lower level room 14 to upper level room 6. Car 430.

Prices for the sleepers go up and down over time on the same train. I don't try to figure it out I just keep watching the price pretty much daily. 

Trip is next week looking forward to it.


----------



## Sidney

Railmonkey said:


> I booked a roomette on the SWC from LA to Lamy, NM and it cost me $600.00. I kept checking the price and sure enough just two weeks later it dropped $150.00. I modified via the app and got a quick refund of the difference. My room/car number changed. So I guess it's technically a rebooking and not just a modification. Thankfully, I went from the lower level room 14 to upper level room 6. Car 430.
> 
> Prices for the sleepers go up and down over time on the same train. I don't try to figure it out I just keep watching the price pretty much daily.
> 
> Trip is next week looking forward to it.


$600 is low bucket on the full run of the SW Chief(senior). Even $450 is pretty steep considering you are only on for less than 24 hours,but you do get three decent meals.


----------



## Winecliff Station

trimetbusfan said:


> Thanks for putting this together. Sad to see even the low bucket is up over $150 for a roommate and over $200 more in a bedroom.


Not only that, but I used to find it economical to book two roomettes Lucy and Ricky style instead of a bedroom for hubby and me, but it’s looking like that’s no longer any savings.


----------



## dlagrua

We seem to be in a era now where Amtrak has raised the sleeper prices to an all time high. You can't argue with that logic if they keep selling out but eventually you reach the breaking point where first class air becomes far less expensive. I am sometimes taken back by the cost of sleepers but the loss of many of the former amenities bothers me most. Full service dining (eastern Routes), the after meal chocolates, ice cream, flowers on the table, morning paper, ice/juice in the sleepers, and coffee availability have all been cut or eliminated.


----------



## Winecliff Station

dlagrua said:


> We seem to be in a era now where Amtrak has raised the sleeper prices to an all time high. You can't argue with that logic if they keep selling out but eventually you reach the breaking point where first class air becomes far less expensive. I am sometimes taken back by the cost of sleepers but the loss of many of the former amenities bothers me most. Full service dining (eastern Routes), the after meal chocolates, ice cream, flowers on the table, morning paper, ice/juice in the sleepers, and coffee availability have all been cut or eliminated.


I haven’t been in a sleeper for about a year…..when you say no more coffee, do you mean they removed the swill in the hallway toward the rear of the roomette section? I didn’t mind it but I’m not a coffee snob like hubby is lol.


----------



## trimetbusfan

Winecliff Station said:


> I haven’t been in a sleeper for about a year…..when you say no more coffee, do you mean they removed the swill in the hallway toward the rear of the roomette section? I didn’t mind it but I’m not a coffee snob like hubby is lol.


When I rode this summer, coffee was available in the mornings on all trains I rode.


----------



## 33Nicolas

dlagrua said:


> We seem to be in a era now where Amtrak has raised the sleeper prices to an all time high. You can't argue with that logic if they keep selling out but eventually you reach the breaking point where first class air becomes far less expensive. I am sometimes taken back by the cost of sleepers but the loss of many of the former amenities bothers me most. Full service dining (eastern Routes), the after meal chocolates, ice cream, flowers on the table, morning paper, ice/juice in the sleepers, and coffee availability have all been cut or eliminated.


I was thinking the same. I want to take the Palmetto to DC at night and stay in business since I don't sleep much, work, and don't care about being forced to pay for a sleeper I don't really need. It seems Amtrak has removed business at night and conveniently only has sleepers and coaches.


----------



## Sidney

If only a business class car was on every long distance(overnight) train. A nice bridge between Coach and outrageously priced sleepers. Why was it taken off the LSL? Only overnight with BC is the Coast Starlight.


----------



## lordsigma

dlagrua said:


> We seem to be in a era now where Amtrak has raised the sleeper prices to an all time high. You can't argue with that logic if they keep selling out but eventually you reach the breaking point where first class air becomes far less expensive. I am sometimes taken back by the cost of sleepers but the loss of many of the former amenities bothers me most. Full service dining (eastern Routes), the after meal chocolates, ice cream, flowers on the table, morning paper, ice/juice in the sleepers, and coffee availability have all been cut or eliminated.



Flowers on the table (Auto Train and western routes), ice in the sleepers, and coffee I believe have all been returned. I don’t drink coffee so I don’t always look for it but I’m pretty sure they had it on the auto train.


----------



## Bob Dylan

lordsigma said:


> Flowers on the table (Auto Train and western routes), ice in the sleepers, and coffee I believe have all been returned. I don’t drink coffee so I don’t always look for it but I’m pretty sure they had it on the auto train.


Just had my first LD Trip on Amtrak in 3 years on the Sunset Ltd Route between LAX and SAS.( I used Points, got an Excellent Fare of 18,000 SAN-AUS/ which turned out include Bustitutions between SAN and Irvine and SAS and AUS, neither Amtraks Fault!)

Very nice, clean Rehabbed Superliner I Sleeper,New Bedding, Traditional Meals served in the Diner and our SCA James had Coffee made by 530AM each morning, and was delivering Meals to the Rooms regularly,even though he had to walk the "Green Mile" between the Diner and our Tail end Sleeper.

And then there's the "Rest of of the Story", the Orphan Trains The Eaglette, The CONO,The CAP and the Food Service on the Eastetn Trains @ Outrageous Buckets!.


----------



## jis

MODERATOR'S NOTE: A gentle reminder that this thread is for discussing fares, not general travel experiences.

Thank you for your understanding, cooperation and participation.


----------



## irv818

Back to the original topic: I'm amazed that Amtrak long-distance service has survived as long as it has. Most people have to consider the cost of a trip now days.

I've been all over the country on Amtrak - usually in bedrooms - but the high priced fares and low class service have pretty much put an end to that as something to enjoy. 

I want to go from ATL to LAX in Dec. Cheap airplane seat is $101, Amtrak seat is $181.
My rear end can manage a cheap seat and a soft drink for 5 hours, 71 hours of sitting and eating cafe food would be a lot harder. Add in a sleeper and the price jumps to nearly $2,000 but the food doesn't improve.

Not to mention that on Amtrak, an overnight hotel is nearly mandatory, since there's a 12 hour transfer in a town that's not exactly the safest town in the USA. That adds another $100 - $200. 
Total $280 - $380 for cheapest train, cheapest flight $101.
First class airfare around $600, sorta first class train, $2,000.


----------



## zephyr17

irv818 said:


> Back to the original topic: I'm amazed that Amtrak long-distance service has survived as long as it has. Most people have to consider the cost of a trip now days.
> 
> I've been all over the country on Amtrak - usually in bedrooms - but the high priced fares and low class service have pretty much put an end to that as something to enjoy.
> 
> I want to go from ATL to LAX in Dec. Cheap airplane seat is $101, Amtrak seat is $181.
> My rear end can manage a cheap seat and a soft drink for 5 hours, 71 hours of sitting and eating cafe food would be a lot harder. Add in a sleeper and the price jumps to nearly $2,000 but the food doesn't improve.
> 
> Not to mention that on Amtrak, an overnight hotel is nearly mandatory, since there's a 12 hour transfer in a town that's not exactly the safest town in the USA. That adds another $100 - $200.
> Total $280 - $380 for cheapest train, cheapest flight $101.
> First class airfare around $600, sorta first class train, $2,000.


Well, the sleeper load factors are pretty high, often sold out. Some of that is due to capacity constraints imposed by an equipment shortage caused by Amtrak's inept management of the COVID crisis. However, on a train like the Builder to Seattle, that is the difference between 10 Bedrooms and 30 Roomettes in normal times and 5 Bedrooms and 17 roomettes now. Even the "normal" capacity doesn't represent an abundance of inventory.

Amtrak yield manages their fares. If they could not get the get their high bucket fares, they can and do drop. But even low bucket sleeper fares are pretty pricey.

Amtrak is not trying to sell something at a price they cannot get. They can get these prices for a perishable product (perishable in the sense that if a room goes out empty, that revenue is gone forever), so why sell it for less?

You make valid arguments for not traveling in sleepers, although you are wrong on food these days for the western trains. The dining car food on the western trains (except the Eaglette) is better than it's been in at least 10 years, it is quite good now by any standard, and considerably better than the cafe. I agree that OBS service is highly variable and too often poor, and trains are often late, and equipment frequently shabby. An Amtrak sleeper is generally not a First Class experience.

However, sufficient numbers of people are not swayed by those arguments or ignore them that Amtrak maintains a high sleeper load factor, despite the admittedly high price. People are riding sleepers to near capacity, Amtrak sleeping car service is not in want of passengers. If anything, it is in want of cars.


----------



## zephyr17

An addendum on my personal practices that contribute to the apparent lack of elasticity and price sensitivity in sleeper demand.

1. I won't pay more the middle bucket. I'll move travel dates, change modes, or not go rather than pay high bucket. However, I am usually able to find at least a middle-low (second) bucket, but I have to kind of work at it.
2. I know damned well flying is cheaper, even flying First Class is often cheaper than even lower Amtrak roomette buckets. I ride Amtrak despite that.
3. There are now trains I will not ride due to severe service degradation. These include the Eaglette, the Crescent and the Cardinal. These are mostly due to staffing and lack of amenities, one LSA handling both flex dining and cafe, closing cafe service during meal service, reports of OBS demanding sleeper passengers remain in their rooms even for meals on at least some trips. I will not tolerate that. Flex dining alone doesn't deter me. I found the LSL quite a pleasant ride last November despite Flex. I especially enjoyed being able to use the V II diner as a lounge, a happy change from the lack of decent lounge space on eastern trains.


----------



## PeeweeTM

Datapoint for May 2023. (If needed, feel no shame to move this post to the 2021/2022 long distance prices thread).



This seems a relatively low bucket.


----------



## pennyk

Viewing the bedroom fares for the Silver Meteor and Star for several dates in October 2023 (11 months out), Silver Meteor 98 started in low bucket, whereas Silver Star 92 started in the highest bucket. Silver Meteor 97 started in the next highest bucket and Silver Star 91 started in the highest bucket.


----------



## Sidney

Glad I am retired and flexible. I have never paid more than low bucket for a roomette in my many years of traveling. A bit of work,but you have to keep checking. I'm flying to Fort Lauderdale next week from BWI. I thought of taking the train back. Even looking at roomette fares months in advance I could not justify paying $700.one way. No way I will do Coach,so a round trip flight at $238 r/t it is.

On the other hand,when Amtrak had their points sale a few months ago,I grabbed their best deal. Bloomington Il to LA and return on the Eagle/Sunset for 20,000 points. Coach to and from Chicago for $13.

Price has always been my top priority in riding. I'm one of those who just enjoy the journey,regardless of the destination. Still riding and enjoying it for over thirty years.


----------



## Mr.Technician

I am reviving this thread as the trip it relates to has been pushed back a year.  I am currently trying to find cheap SWC and CZ buckets in early May 2023. The former is easy to find, but I can't find a single day where the CZ is less than $1000, either direction (early-mid May). I am suspecting that due to high demand, Amtrak hasn't made any of the cheap buckets available yet...

The question then is whether I ought to wait for a cheaper bucket on the CZ or get the cheap SWC bucket while it is available.


----------



## zephyr17

Mr.Technician said:


> I am reviving this thread as the trip it relates to has been pushed back a year.  I am currently trying to find cheap SWC and CZ buckets in early May 2023. The former is easy to find, but I can't find a single day where the CZ is less than $1000, either direction (early-mid May). I am suspecting that due to high demand, Amtrak hasn't made any of the cheap buckets available yet...
> 
> The question then is whether I ought to wait for a cheaper bucket on the CZ or get the cheap SWC bucket while it is available.


We are right at 5 months out from early/mid May. There isn't a set date when Amtrak reallocates buckets if sales are not meeting projections, but we are in the window.

What I would do in your situation is check availability. Do a dummy reservation for 8 people with 8 roomettes (the max that the website will take). If 8 are available at high bucket, I'd sit tight. There is a reasonable chance they may reallocate. If you cannot get 8 at high bucket, that means they're selling and Amtrak likely will not reallocate inventory to lower buckets.

The CZ should have about either 17 roomettes for revenue passengers if one sleeper (13 + 4 in transdorm) or about 30 if two sleepers (13+13+4). Note the 4 in the transdorm is not a hard number, they could sell more. Traditionally, it was usually 4.

Finally, bear in mind that Amtrak typically only allocates one or two roomettes to a lower bucket when they allocate inventory to them. So there is a case for grabbing a low SWC bucket while it is available. You might want to do the 8 roomette dummy reservation to see how many there actually are available at that bucket.

When you are doing research, remember the website will start to lock you out/not respond after a certain number of dummy reservation attempts. IIRC, it is around 10. In any case 10 is pushing it. Plan your attempts carefully, and you might have to do over a few days if you run into the limit 

It is all a gamble. Do everything you can to gather information with dummy reservations, assess your risk tolerance and date flexibility, then take your best shot.


----------



## MccfamschoolMom

I have until the end of the 3rd billing period on my new FNBO AGR credit card (the no-annual-fee version) to spend $1,000 & get 12K bonus AGR points. Roughly $850 worth of spending to go after 1 billing period, so I plan to book a fall roundtrip on the California Zephyr for hubby & me at the beginning of January. That far out, we shouldn't have any work commitments to complicate scheduling a train vacation -- but I can certainly double-check dates and fares every so often between January and the fall, to make sure our car hasn't been cut from the consist, and to see if the price improves, especially if it's still possible for us to be flexible on the dates of our trip.


----------



## fengshui

> at this point it's more like "open high, if it sells slowly we can lower them and sell tickets 5-6 months out". Sometimes that happens, and sometimes because of demand the prices just stay high and they successfully sell the train out at higher fare levels (particularly in this day and age of reduced capacity).

The worrisome part of this setup is that it means that the lower-bucket fares sold later are much more likely to be in the second sleeper, and thus get cancelled due to equipment or staffing issues. YMMV, but to be sure you get base sleeper, you may need to book at high bucket, then try to get a partial refund if/when prices drop as your departure approaches.


----------



## zephyr17

fengshui said:


> The worrisome part of this setup is that it means that the lower-bucket fares sold later are much more likely to be in the second sleeper, and thus get cancelled due to equipment or staffing issues.


I have been riding a long, long time and have not really figured out how Amtrak distributes space as they sell it. But one thing I know for sure the algorithm is not a simple "fill up one car, then start on the next" one. It appears to distribute passengers between standard sleeper car lines as sales progress. It does appear to sell rooms in transdorm car lines last, though.

So I would not be concerned that waiting for a bucket drop would result in winding up in a non-base sleeper. In my experience, you can be assigned to any non-transdorm car line in the consist no matter when you buy.

The reason I know this is I am picky about roomette location, and several times I have asked for a different room from the one initially brought up automatically. That has sometimes resulted in initially being offered a room in the 31 car from automatic assignment, then the agent finding a "better" (for me) room in the 30. I always know what room I'll have before completing the transaction. Note this was prior to the current Charlie Foxtrot and removing a car with sold inventory was unheard of, except in the rare case of last minute mechanical failure, so base versus non base sleeper was not something that concerned me. BTW, we did not really have any terminology to differentiate the likelihood a car line would actually run prior to this mess, and pretty much adopted "base" as an easily understand shorthand. Before this, it was like Amazonian Indians not having a word for "snow". We did not have a word for something we had never seen.


----------



## TheCrescent

Given how high sleeping car fares are, Amtrak had better be making a profit on sleeping car rooms. If not, why in the world is it good public policy to use taxpayer dollars to subsidize a handful of people who could fly for less?


----------



## n3rdg1rl

The price I paid for a roomette in the Eaglette next month makes me make a face every time I bring the ticket up to check if it's still running.


----------



## Ryan

zephyr17 said:


> I have been riding a long, long time and have not really figured out how Amtrak distributes space as they sell it. But one thing I know for sure the algorithm is not a simple "fill up one car, then start on the next" one. It appears to distribute passengers between standard sleeper car lines as sales progress. It does appear to sell rooms in transdorm car lines last, though.


To my understanding, you've got it basically right. This is going from memory on a post somewhere around here that someone may find value in taking the time to dig up. 

Roughly speaking, rooms are put in some order from "most desirable" to "least desirable". For simplicity, let's talk about "normal" bedrooms on a Superliner train that runs with 3 sleepers numbered 30, 31, 32. Let's assume that the order is Room E through A of desirability. Also for simplicity let's say that 5 rooms are allocated to each of the top three price buckets when they're initially loaded into inventory. There are fare codes associated with these, but let's just call them Buckets 3, 4, and 5 (1 and 2 being the lowest priced rooms that aren't used) mostly because I can't remember/find them.

With those assumptions, here's your inventory as it gets initially loaded into the system:

Bucket 3: 30E(car 30, room E), 31E, 32E, 30D, 31D
Bucket 4: 32D, 30C, 31C, 32C, 30B
Bucket 5: 31B, 32B, 30A, 31A, 32A

There's your order of sales. This was explained in the context of "why do sometimes agents say it costs more to pick a room when you call". Say you're the first person to call and book a room on this train, but you really want Room C because it's equidistant from the end of the car and the mid-car stairs. A less trained agent will go in there and pick 30C, but you can see that it's up in bucket 4, where as the system would assign the first available room down in bucket 3. A more-trained agent would see the inventory situation and be able to swap inventory around so that you get the room you want at the "correct" price. After that happens, the inventory would look something like this (assuming that the agent just swapped the rooms:

Bucket 3: *30C*, 31E, 32E, 30D, 31D
Bucket 4: 32D, *30E*, 31C, 32C, 30B
Bucket 5: 31B, 32B, 30A, 31A, 32A

There are other places where this order can get scrambled. Say the next person to call doesn't care what room they get (or they just book online and the system picks the next room), so mark 31E off of your list:

Bucket 3: 30C, *31E*, 32E, 30D, 31D
Bucket 4: 32D, 30E, 31C, 32C, 30B
Bucket 5: 31B, 32B, 30A, 31A, 32A

Now the next caller wants two bedrooms, and wants them to be adjoining, and they want it to be the B/C pair because they don't want to be next to the stairs. The agent can't just pull two rooms, because they're in different cars and the wrong rooms to boot. Again, the more trained agent will shuffle to get two rooms at the correct price:

Bucket 3: 30C, 31E, *31C, 31B*, 31D
Bucket 4: 32D, 30E, *32E*, 32C, 30B
Bucket 5: *30D*, 32B, 30A, 31A, 32A

Obviously, this gets even more complicated in real life, as all the while revenue managers are reallocating inventory to pricing buckets to try and match supply and demand, and perhaps less-trained agents just selling out of order. Quickly no discernible pattern can emerge. Again, take this with the appropriate grain of salt - I do wish I remember who had posted this, because their explanation was probably a whole lot better than this.


----------



## Trogdor

Ryan said:


> To my understanding, you've got it basically right. This is going from memory on a post somewhere around here that someone may find value in taking the time to dig up.
> 
> Roughly speaking, rooms are put in some order from "most desirable" to "least desirable". For simplicity, let's talk about "normal" bedrooms on a Superliner train that runs with 3 sleepers numbered 30, 31, 32. Let's assume that the order is Room E through A of desirability. Also for simplicity let's say that 5 rooms are allocated to each of the top three price buckets when they're initially loaded into inventory. There are fare codes associated with these, but let's just call them Buckets 3, 4, and 5 (1 and 2 being the lowest priced rooms that aren't used) mostly because I can't remember/find them.
> 
> With those assumptions, here's your inventory as it gets initially loaded into the system:
> 
> Bucket 3: 30E(car 30, room E), 31E, 32E, 30D, 31D
> Bucket 4: 32D, 30C, 31C, 32C, 30B
> Bucket 5: 31B, 32B, 30A, 31A, 32A
> 
> [dot dot dot]



There is an order of sales, but it is not true (and never has been, as far as I can tell) that rooms are pre-assigned to a bucket.

It has been a while since I’ve been in a position to check, but IIRC, there is an order of “preference” in the system that tells the system to sell room 1 first, then room 2, then room 3, etc (it may not literally be that order, but basically it’s something like that on a room number level). When you have multiple sleeper lines, there will be multiple rooms 1, multiple rooms 2, etc. I think it just goes in order of car line number.

Buckets, on the other hand, were set to be available “up to x% sold.” Historically, they’d just pick certain percentages (perhaps varied by specific departure) and then they would rarely change. Nowadays, it seems they more actively manage that availability.

So if you have a hypothetical train with 20 rooms, with 4 buckets, the lowest one of which is available up to 20% sold, then the next up to 50%, then up to 60%, then up to 100% (just making them up for example): the first four rooms booked would be at the low rate. There is nothing linking the bucket to any rooms at that point, just the natural order in which the rooms get sold based on a preference programmed in Arrow.

When booking a room, Amtrak doesn’t give you a choice, it just pulls the next one in line. When an agent books a room, there are actually two ways to do it. One is to pull the next one in line, the other is to specify the room desired. The default method that virtually every agent uses is to pull the next one in line. However, once they do so, it comes out of inventory (even if they don’t end the transaction) and the percentage sold changes until the room is released. Since there can be very few rooms available at a particular bucket, it is often the case that the one they picked is the last one to be sold at the lower bucket.

When they then try to specify, the fare appears higher because the system thinks it has fewer rooms available and thus needs to bump into the next bucket. If they direct-specify the room wanted in step 1, you will absolutely get the lowest available bucket. It’s just that most agents don’t do that (and to purge the booking and start over would take too long and/or they don’t realize they’re supposed to do this, as they likely have never really been trained on how the revenue management system works, just on how the booking system works).

If Arrow could divorce the room assignment process from the fare bucket process it would probably be better for a number of reasons.

Another little-known fact is that Arrow is also designed, by default to preference already-sold rooms for downline sales, in order to preserve through-rooms as much as possible.

So if you book a room out of preference order CHI-DEN, for example, the next person to book DEN-EMY on that train will likely be auto-assigned the same room.

Since bucket availability is based on % sold, the other effect is that if you book a low-bucket room on a train that subsequently fills up, and then you cancel, the room goes back into inventory at the then-available bucket, because the train now exceeds the % sold threshold for that particular accommodation type.


----------



## Ryan

Thanks, I had hoped that someone with more direct experience would come along and make it right. Nominated for Post of the Year.


----------



## fengshui

Trogdor said:


> heck, but IIRC, there is an order of “preference” in the system that tells the system to sell room 1 first, then room 2, then room 3, etc (it may not literally be that order, but basically it’s something like that on a room number level)


Do you have any sense what the order of preference is? I've been put in room 14 when room 9 was available, which seems like the opposite of what I expected: upstairs first for better views, etc. I know some people like the quiet of downstairs, but I would still think Amtrak would rank upstairs as "more preferred".


----------



## Trogdor

I don’t know the actual preference order. Assuming you were traveling end-to-end and not partway, with someone else having booked your room for a different segment and preferred lower level, then it’s possible that the end rooms above the trucks and by the end doors are given lower preference due to ride quality and door noise.


----------



## Bob Dylan

fengshui said:


> Do you have any sense what the order of preference is? I've been put in room 14 when room 9 was available, which seems like the opposite of what I expected: upstairs first for better views, etc. I know some people like the quiet of downstairs, but I would still think Amtrak would rank upstairs as "more preferred".


"Amtrak" doesn't care, your just a Number to their Computer System!


----------



## Barb Stout

Bob Dylan said:


> "Amtrak" doesn't care, your just a Number to their Computer System!


We're just trying to figure out the algorithm of the "automatic room assigner" of the computer system. I too have wondered.


----------



## Ryan

@AlanB provides a clue from the great beyond...



AlanB said:


> No, it's not an unreasonable conclusion at all. And in fact many years ago I too believed that a bucket what attached to each room. But then several trusted friends who work/worked for Amtrak debased me of that notion. It's also not tied to what level the room is on either.
> 
> *For example, last I knew the current booking order for rooms was 2, 3, 4, 11, & 12. *After that, I'm not sure where they went next. Now, if for example you were booking the Texas Eagle with only 1 sleeper and there were 4 rooms placed in the low bucket by revenue management. Then rooms 2, 3, 4, & 11 would all go for low bucket. Room #12 however would sell at the next bucket level. If there were 5 rooms in the low bucket, then of course room #12 would also sell at the low bucket price.
> 
> There are 5 bucket levels in total. Revenue management (RM) initially picks how many rooms are placed into each bucket. And there is no requirement that each level actually have a number placed into the bucket. In other words, it is possible for RM to put 5 rooms in low bucket, skip the next bucket, put 2 in the mid-level, 5 in the next highest, and the remaining in the highest bucket. Additionally, nothing is set in stone either. RM or the computer can move the quantities of available rooms left around at will as they please. Well the computer of course follows certain rules, but a RM manager can do what they think best. So for example, around Thanksgiving I wouldn't bet on any rooms being placed in the low bucket and a very low number in the next bucket.
> 
> All of that said, a regular agent can if they know what they're doing, essentially swap a room for anyone at the same bucket level if they know what they're doing. Upper level, lower level, current bucket level for selling rooms are all irrelevant if the agent knows what to do and how to override things. Another trap that agents fall into is forgetting how to request a specific room. Under normal circumstances, an agent pretty much does what Amtrak.com does when making a reservation, they just request the next available room and ARROW provides the next room based upon the pre-approved order of rooms being sold in the car. And note that with more than 1 sleeper, ARROW also spreads rooms out across the available cars. It doesn't sell all the rooms in the first car, before moving on to the second car.
> 
> But agents do have a way to bring up all the available rooms and to pick a specific room within a specific car. The problem is that too many forget how to do this, or think it's too much work, or what ever. So instead what they do is request next available room. If that's the room that the person wanted, great! If not, they hold that room and request the next available room. And they repeat that until they get what the person requested. This method has too problems, first, you start running through all the buckets because you're holding all those rooms open. Second, the RM computer sensing a run on that train starts moving more rooms into higher buckets because it thinks sales are going through the roof and it wants to maximize revenue. It doesn't realize that an agent is causing this issue and when they're done, the agent is going to release all those rooms back into inventory, save the one that they really wanted.
> 
> I hope that this helps to explain things a bit.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Barb Stout said:


> We're just trying to figure out the algorithm of the "automatic room assigner" of the computer system. I too have wondered.


I realize that, but since fingshul mentioned that Amtrak should rank upstairs as more preferred, just thought I'd point out that the Computer assigns the Rooms, ie the algorithm just plugs in a rez as it's received on line, unless you call and have a knowledable agent make your choice of rooms happen!


----------



## Ryan

You're still missing the point, Jim. There is an order that the rooms are programmed to sell in, and that order is based on supposed human preferences that sell good rooms before bad rooms. Alan provided a clue as to what that order is programmed into the computer.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Ryan said:


> You're still missing the point, Jim. There is an order that the rooms are programmed to sell in, and that order is based on supposed human preferences that sell good rooms before bad rooms. Alan provided a clue as to what that order is programmed into the computer.


Touche!


----------



## joelkfla

Fare oddity: on the Cardinal, the fare from CHI to ALX is higher than the fare from CHI to WAS. ALX is the stop before WAS. Can anybody explain?


----------



## TheCrescent

joelkfla said:


> Fare oddity: on the Cardinal, the fare from CHI to ALX is higher than the fare from CHI to WAS. ALX is the stop before WAS. Can anybody explain?


The Crescent also often has higher fares between the Northeast and the Carolinas than fares between the same Northeastern cities and Atlanta. I’d like to think that Amtrak monitors the competition and charges based on comparable competitor prices but I doubt it.


----------



## Railspike

In past years has Amtrak lowered their fares during January and February? If so, when do they normally start to post them? I'm noticing that the fares currently posted for those months have not been lowered.


----------



## flitcraft

Gulped hard and booked our train trip for this summer for us and our 10 year old granddaughter--Keystone to NYC, Lake Shore Limited to Chicago, Southwest Chief to LA, and Surfliner to San Diego. (With a flight back to Seattle in time for the All Star Game--though she is more excited about the Home Run Derby than the actual All Star Game.) LD legs in a bedroom and a roomette.

Two observations--first, whoever recommended that you book via phoning AGR rather than via calling the regular Amtrak phone line was 100% correct. When I called the Amtrak line, after I dismissed 'Julie,' the agent who answered my call got the itinerary wrong twice, despite my repeating it carefully and slowly, and told me that there were no bedrooms for one leg of our preferred dates, though the website claimed that there were two available at the list price shown. Also, she kept warning us that Amtrak forbids minors under the age of twelve from occupying a roomette by themselves--which we assured her that we had no intention of doing. After the third such (unnecessary) warning, I made the mistake of saying, "Yes, you did warn us about that already, and we wouldn't have done it anyway," and she got huffy and said, "Well, it is my job to inform you of this. If you get caught violating this rule, your remaining legs of the trip will be cancelled without refund!" So, I told her that we'd think about it for now, and called back about fifteen minutes later only to get the same agent!

As a result, I waited to book till the next morning, via AGR, and the agent there couldn't have been more helpful. I gave her the choice of the three potential starting dates and the layovers we planned, and she actually found one set of trains that saved us several hundred dollars! (And she noted that the leg that the previous agent claimed was sold out, wasn't.) Given the contrast in agents, I asked if there was some way we could send in a report praising her professionalism and helpfulness. She first said no, but when I pressed, said that she could put her supervisor on the line. I waited for a bit, got the supervisor, who I told that I wanted to report the excellent customer service provided by the agent in question, not mentioning that she'd found me a significantly cheaper itinerary, in case that might get her in trouble! The supervisor thanked me for providing the review, and noted that most people are quick to complain but slow to praise, and that a note would be placed in the agent's personnel file. So all's well that ends well, at least till my credit card bill comes due!

My second observation: Holy, moly, have hotels gotten expensive! The same hotels that we had booked pre-pandemic for 100-150 dollars were all over 300 dollars a night! I booked anyway because the layovers are part of the overall 'special adventure,' and I wanted to be sure we got convenient rooms in acceptable places, leading me to book places we'd stayed in before. But, given the increase in hotel prices, I might think twice about our common practice of booking a night in Chicago or LA just to be sure we wouldn't miss the ongoing leg of a trip.


----------



## trimetbusfan

Railspike said:


> In past years has Amtrak lowered their fares during January and February? If so, when do they normally start to post them? I'm noticing that the fares currently posted for those months have not been lowered.


These are the lower demand months, so Amtrak will usually sell the rooms for cheaper during these months. They will open up at high bucket but about 4-5 months before departure they can drop.


----------



## pennyk

MODERATOR NOTE: several posts in this thread discussed hotel rates near Amtrak (rather than long distance fares) and have been moved to a new thread. Please limit the discussion in this thread to long distance fares. Please discuss hotels in the new thread.






Hotels convenient to Amtrak


Gulped hard and booked our train trip for this summer for us and our 10 year old granddaughter--Keystone to NYC, Lake Shore Limited to Chicago, Southwest Chief to LA, and Surfliner to San Diego. (With a flight back to Seattle in time for the All Star Game--though she is more excited about the...




www.amtraktrains.com





Thank you for your understanding, cooperation and participation.


----------



## zephyr17

Railspike said:


> In past years has Amtrak lowered their fares during January and February? If so, when do they normally start to post them? I'm noticing that the fares currently posted for those months have not been lowered.





trimetbusfan said:


> These are the lower demand months, so Amtrak will usually sell the rooms for cheaper during these months. They will open up at high bucket but about 4-5 months before departure they can drop.


True, although when they reallocate some inventory into the lower buckets when they evaluate actual sales and inventory distribution sometime in that 4-6 month period before departure, they seldom allocate more than a couple of rooms to the lowest bucket they decide to stock. When those are sold, we're back in the higher buckets.

Remember, they aren't dropping fares, they're reallocating inventory across the various buckets. The fares offered will go up again once the new allocation to the lower buckets are sold. To get them, you need to monitor fares regularly in that 4-6 month window.


----------



## west point

It may be that fares this winter will not go down very much. Pent up demand along with reduced capacity may mean thee will be passengers loads very close to this past summer. Who knows?


----------

