# Think AGR Will Give You The Very Last Room?



## Devil's Advocate (Jun 22, 2011)

So I was trying to actually book my big epic trip from SAS to SEA. I thought (apparently erroneously) that AGR would hand me the very last unoccupied room no matter what. But that does not appear to be the case. In my situation I'm joining the Coast Starlight at Sacramento. I wanted Emeryville but the lady insisted that's not possible. Anyway, everything was going fine up until this point. The Amtrak website shows this particular CS with at least *SIX* roomettes still available for the whole distance from LAX to SEA. However, from Sacramento to Seattle it shows zero. Zilch. Nada. And that's exactly what I got from AGR.


----------



## AlanB (Jun 22, 2011)

Sounds like capacity controls are in place to keep some rooms available for those who want the full run. And in that case, there are no rooms from SAC to SEA, and therefore no "last room" to give to you.

However, it also sounds like you got either an new agent that doesn't know better or didn't want to be bothered looking into things. Because EMY is a valid transfer point. Additionally, I'm not sure about this, but it may be possible that if you get the right agent that they may be able to break the lock on the capacity controls. No promises though!

One other question, can you book LAX to SAC? I ask because I wonder if what's happening is not capacity control, but what happened to me once where there were no through rooms, but by changing rooms along the way I was able to still book my reservation.

Or you could ride the Chief to connect to the Starlight.


----------



## MJL (Jun 22, 2011)

Sounds like it's time for agent roulette :giggle:


----------



## PRR 60 (Jun 22, 2011)

It looks like the magic break point is San Jose. As an example, for the August 17 northbound departure of the Coast Starlight, there is one roomette open to Seattle for departures from Los Angeles through San Jose. But, from Oakland onward, the site shows no room availability on the same train.

If I stretch my imagination, I can (sort of) see the sense of that for someone booking that train alone, but I see no sense or fairness in denying that room for someone connecting to the Starlight with a trip origination in San Antonio. SAS to SEA is hardly a short trip. The true end points should override any "short trip" contraints.

I wonder of it would be worth calling back one or more times until you get someone who lets logic and fairness prevail and will let you book an available room?


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jun 22, 2011)

I could keep calling, that is true, but it takes quite a while to reach a human and then it takes a while longer to explain why I want to take the much longer route. Normally I'd try to change the days around but I have a pretty specific window in mind due to my job schedule. However, if I give up on the longer route and take the Sunset Limited to the Coast Starlight it still shows availability for a roomette. It's not nearly as much riding as a TE > CZ > CS trip would be but at least it's better than nothing. Maybe if a *seventh* roomette gets freed up on the CS I could exchange the SL > CS tickets for the TE > CZ > CS route? I have no idea what the rules are but it appears the website determines what they'll allow. If the website says no rooms are available then even a half-dozen empty roomettes won't help you much. Oh well, I guess it's my own fault for not reserving this much earlier.


----------



## the_traveler (Jun 22, 2011)

Maybe it is different now, but a few years I went on the (infamous) SDL loophole!




Of the 4 trains, on 2 of them (CL and EB) I got the *VERY LAST BEDROOM*!



(In fact, on the CL all the bedrooms were sold out, but the Family Room was available. I got the Family Room!



)


----------



## amamba (Jun 22, 2011)

Call back. Try booking to EMY and not SAC. Ask for a supervisor.

But at the end of the day, the AGR agents almost always say "we can only book the valid bookings from amtrak.com". So if there is a capacity control that doesn't allow booking from SAC to SEA, that is too bad, but it is what it is.


----------



## sechs (Jun 22, 2011)

PRR 60 said:


> It looks like the magic break point is San Jose. As an example, for the August 17 northbound departure of the Coast Starlight, there is one roomette open to Seattle for departures from Los Angeles through San Jose. But, from Oakland onward, the site shows no room availability on the same train.


I looked at Chico to Seattle on the same date and found available rooms. My feeling is that these rooms are being held for a combination of connecting passengers at Emeryville, Oakland, and Sacramento; and expected traffic from the intermediate stations.


----------



## rtabern (Jun 22, 2011)

AlanB said:


> Sounds like capacity controls are in place to keep some rooms available for those who want the full run. And in that case, there are no rooms from SAC to SEA, and therefore no "last room" to give to you.
> 
> However, it also sounds like you got either an new agent that doesn't know better or didn't want to be bothered looking into things. Because EMY is a valid transfer point. Additionally, I'm not sure about this, but it may be possible that if you get the right agent that they may be able to break the lock on the capacity controls. No promises though!
> 
> ...


I am pretty sure they have capacity controls at some points on the Cardinal too. When the Great Dome was on there last fall, there was 1 room left on the westbound Cardinal (#51). If you wanted to book it from Charleston and points to the east you could -- however it would not let you book it west of Charleston. I mean if the room is open from NYP-CHI, it should be open from let's say CIN-CHI... however it wasn't... so obvious capacity management.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jun 23, 2011)

AlanB said:


> Sounds like capacity controls are in place to keep some rooms available for those who want the full run. And in that case, there are no rooms from SAC to SEA, and therefore no "last room" to give to you.


Just to make sure my head was on straight I did a quick Google search and came up with several posts where you're telling folks that AGR redemptions have no capacity controls beyond the standard blackout dates. I think we have a clear indication that AGR is probably bound by the same capacity controls as any other transaction at this point. In my case I was able to book a total of six roomettes from LAX > SEA right up until the payment screen but could not book even a single roomette from SAC or EMY to SEA. The AGR rep was proffering all sorts of illogical gibberish and when I politely asked to speak to a supervisor she insisted they'd be just as helpless as she was and declined to transfer me. I will give it one more shot later today just to see if I somehow get lucky, but I am not willing to beg for an exception that AGR has no interest in providing. How they run their program is up to them. How seriously I take it in the future is up to me. With the recent increases in base fares most of my trips are rising by about 50% on average. That's so far beyond cost competitiveness with any other transportation method that it effectively leaves AGR as the only reasonable form of payment at this point. If AGR redemptions become restricted to the point that a given train needs _ten_ free rooms in order to release a single room to an AGR redemption then I may have to move along to other options. I don't know who all these $300 day trip people are but they're free to have my roomette if they really want it that badly. Oddly enough this seems to parallel some of the dissatisfaction in China. The trains are there but relatively few folks can afford to actually ride them. What makes our situation so much more absurd than China is that our trains are still just as slow and outdated as the trains of forty years ago. In some cases even slower. And yet Amtrak seems to be pricing them as if they were the latest 200MPH designs on dedicated tracks. I have no idea how they're able to pull that off but in the end it means I probably won't be among those riding them unless I happen to get an AGR trip work out for me.


----------



## Shanghai (Jun 23, 2011)

I think the capacity controls or short distance restrictions mentioned here are similar to

the availability of short distance trips on long distance trains. For example, on the Cardinal,

Silvers, Carolinian and other trains, you cannot buy a ticket from NYP to any stations until ALX.

You may book trips on the Acela or Regional trains for the intermediate stops thereby reserving

the long distance trains for long distance passengers, hence higher revenue opportunities.

I'm not familiar with the West Coast trains, but perhaps there are regional type options available

in lieu of the Coast Starlight.

I think some trains utilize pricing options to encourage / discourage some ridership options.

I once booked a trip from Chicago to Austin, TX, then changed the destination to Dallas. The

trip to Dallas is about three hours shorter (and one meal)than Austin but the fare to Dallas

was about $80 more than Austin.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jun 23, 2011)

I'll be on the Coast Starlight for roughly 21 hours. That's not a tiny segment in my view. And it's on the tail end of _one hundred hours_ of active travel time. The capacity system seems to be setup to penalize folks transferring from the CZ to the CS since even if you managed to swing EMY you'd still fail to meet its requirements for opening up one of the six empty roomettes.


----------



## Ryan (Jun 23, 2011)

Texas Sunset said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > Sounds like capacity controls are in place to keep some rooms available for those who want the full run. And in that case, there are no rooms from SAC to SEA, and therefore no "last room" to give to you.
> ...


I think that you're missing the point - this has nothing at all to do with AGR.


----------



## Ryan (Jun 23, 2011)

rtabern said:


> I am pretty sure they have capacity controls at some points on the Cardinal too. When the Great Dome was on there last fall, there was 1 room left on the westbound Cardinal (#51). If you wanted to book it from Charleston and points to the east you could -- however it would not let you book it west of Charleston. I mean if the room is open from NYP-CHI, it should be open from let's say CIN-CHI... however it wasn't... so obvious capacity management.


You are correct - for example if you're leaving from Chicago, you have to travel at least to Montgomery to get a bedroom:






I didn't notice any capacity controls on roomettes, but I only looked at travel starting at the endpoints, not at the midpoint. That'd actually be an interesting data point to look at starting at each stop to the train's endpoint (rather than the start point to each stop along the way that I did earlier).


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jun 23, 2011)

Ryan said:


> I think that you're missing the point - this has nothing at all to do with AGR.


I read multiple posts stating emphatically that AGR redemptions do not suffer from capacity controls. Here are a few with a quick search.



AlanB said:


> With an AGR award, as the_traveler noted, if there is a seat or a room still available and you call up, it's yours. Even if it is the *very last seat/room on that day's train*. The only exception to that rule is during the few blackout periods. Like you won't get an AGR award on Thanksgiving weekend for example.


&


AlanB said:


> guest said:
> 
> 
> > When I book a roomette with points can I always get it if there is at least one room available? Regardless of the current price for this room?
> ...


&


AlanB said:


> There are only a few blackout dates and *no** capacity controls*. If it's the very last room on that days train when you call up, it's your room.


&


AlanB said:


> Yes, AGR is actually a pretty decent program overall. It has its flaws and pitfalls like any FF program, but when it comes to Amtrak travel its pretty generous. I especially like the limited blackout dates, and the fact that there are *no capacity controls*. If you call up today and it's the very last room on the train, it's still yours.


What point, exactly, was I missing there Ryan?


----------



## Ryan (Jun 23, 2011)

The point is that all of those posts are saying that *AGR *does not impose any capacity controls.

That statement is true, because *AMTRAK* is the one imposing the capacity control. AGR isn't a magic "get around the rules" card to circumvent Amtrak's capacity controls.

Edit: Put another way - AGR will allow you to book any seat Amtrak sells via reward travel, but can't allow you to book a seat that Amtrak won't sell for cash. Your beef is with Amtrak, not AGR.


----------



## Cristobal (Jun 23, 2011)

Texas Sunset said:


> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> > I think that you're missing the point - this has nothing at all to do with AGR.
> ...


Perhaps the date of those posts? Those statements were all made before AGR was brought 'in-house' so there is a chance that some things are done differently now.


----------



## Trogdor (Jun 23, 2011)

Cristobal said:


> Perhaps the date of those posts? Those statements were all made before AGR was brought 'in-house' so there is a chance that some things are done differently now.


It would make no difference.

The others are correct. Someone from revenue management has put an inhibitor preventing the sale of certain segments/city pairs. That means, for the purposes of making a reservation, the capacity is zero.

The "no capacity controls" statement for AGR is in regards to available space (which is different from airlines, which often will have no award availability, but you're welcome to pay cash for the same ticket; the equivalent would be if Amtrak only allowed AGR awards for low-bucket space). In this case, availability has been set to 0, therefore, there is nothing to book, AGR or paid.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jun 23, 2011)

Ryan said:


> The point is that all of those posts are saying that *AGR *does not impose any capacity controls. That statement is true, because *AMTRAK* is the one imposing the capacity control. AGR isn't a magic "get around the rules" card to circumvent Amtrak's capacity controls. Edit: Put another way - AGR will allow you to book any seat Amtrak sells via reward travel, but can't allow you to book a seat that Amtrak won't sell for cash. Your beef is with Amtrak, not AGR.


At this point AGR is completely in-house, so while we can argue the semantics and technicalities all we want the distinction has no practical association. Not that different than what happened with the credit card discussion, only in reverse. :lol:



Cristobal said:


> Perhaps the date of those posts? Those statements were all made before AGR was brought 'in-house' so there is a chance that some things are done differently now.


There were other posts making similar claims more recently but I actually agree with you 100%. My guess is that at one time AGR was a bit more lax about releasing rooms and now those rules or guidelines have been modified. Perhaps it's related to their insourcing but there's no way to know for certain unless someone volunteers that information or we come across a rules change document or something. None of these changes are deal breakers per se, but it's something we should probably look out for and if we see other people experiencing similar lockouts we might want to revise our advice on AGR rewards.


----------



## AlanB (Jun 23, 2011)

Texas Sunset said:


> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> > The point is that all of those posts are saying that *AGR *does not impose any capacity controls. That statement is true, because *AMTRAK* is the one imposing the capacity control. AGR isn't a magic "get around the rules" card to circumvent Amtrak's capacity controls. Edit: Put another way - AGR will allow you to book any seat Amtrak sells via reward travel, but can't allow you to book a seat that Amtrak won't sell for cash. Your beef is with Amtrak, not AGR.
> ...


Trogdor hit the nail on the head and his example from the airlines is spot on. The capacity controls that I was speaking of in all those posts refers to the idea that if Amtrak is willing to sell a room to you for any particular journey, then AGR can get you that room even if it is the last one. In your case Amtrak is *NOT* selling a room for the trip you want, so AGR cannot get that room.

Airline award programs however do implement their own separate capacity controls. They'll only put say maybe 6 seats on a flight for awards. Once those seats are gone, you cannot use an award for a seat. Even though the entire rest of the plane could in theory be empty, to the award agent it shows sold out. That is an award capacity control.

You are not hitting an award capacity control. You are hitting a global inventory management control. No one can book the room you want for the trip you want. It may be a fine line to you, but it is still a line!



Texas Sunset said:


> Cristobal said:
> 
> 
> > Perhaps the date of those posts? Those statements were all made before AGR was brought 'in-house' so there is a chance that some things are done differently now.
> ...


AGR's coming in house hasn't changed anything regarding this matter/rule.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jun 23, 2011)

AlanB said:


> You are not hitting an award capacity control. You are hitting a global inventory management control. No one can book the room you want for the trip you want. It may be a fine line to you, but it is still a line!


The point is that it's a line you *never bothered to mention* in any of those posts.


----------



## AlanB (Jun 23, 2011)

Texas Sunset said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > You are not hitting an award capacity control. You are hitting a global inventory management control. No one can book the room you want for the trip you want. It may be a fine line to you, but it is still a line!
> ...


I didn't think it was necessary to state the obvious.

If they're not selling a room, then how could you possible expect to get an award?


----------



## Ryan (Jun 23, 2011)

Alan, you also neglected to specify that award travel must be between cities that Amtrak serves.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jun 23, 2011)

AlanB said:


> I didn't think it was necessary to state the obvious. If they're not selling a room, then how could you possible expect to get an award?


Trying to explain to you what casual riders probably think "every last room" actually means doesn't seem to be getting through. Or trying to explain that casual riders don't spend their free time trying to dissect Amtrak Guest Rewards from Amtrak. Southwest Airlines had a program called Rapid Rewards, and when Southwest Airlines said "every last seat" they actually meant _EVERY LAST SEAT_ on every published route. They also had a few blackout dates. That's exactly what you made AGR sound like. But in reality AGR is *nothing* like Rapid Rewards. Amtrak might have six more rooms on a published route but they won't give them to you because they have capacity controls in place. What specific group or division decided on which specific controls is not obvious or interesting to casual riders. What they can actually do with their points is probably all they care to know. But I don't think you get that and apparently you never will. Oh well, on to other topics then. :mellow:


----------



## AlanB (Jun 23, 2011)

Texas Sunset said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > I didn't think it was necessary to state the obvious. If they're not selling a room, then how could you possible expect to get an award?
> ...


A casual rider would have never thought to go and do what you did; check to see if there were any rooms from LA to Seattle, after being told no rooms are available from Sacramento to Seattle. Therefore, as far as they are concerned, every last room is gone.

Heck, I'm not even sure that I would have gone to do that and I'm an experienced rider.


----------



## PRR 60 (Jun 23, 2011)

The problem is that Amtrak is unwilling to sell an available room on the Coast Starlight to someone taking a long distance trip even though the room is available. The room in question could be booked for a trip from San Jose to Seattle. Amtrak is unwilling to sell it to a person traveling from Chicago to Seattle because that person would only use it on the Starlight for what Amtrak considers too short a distance. Simply speaking, that's dumb. They would rather see a customer walk away from a premium, 3000 mile trip than apply logic and common sense. It's amazing to me that rail supporters could even begin to defend that kind of stupidity.

By the way, almost all airline frequent flyer programs have way more than six seats a flight open for base level redemptions, and almost all offer the ability to redeem for any available seat at a premium cost in miles (usually 2x). And no airline I deal with would deny a passenger booking from Europe to Buffalo a reservation because they want to hold seats on the PHL-BUF flight for possible bookings from Charlotte.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jun 23, 2011)

Perhaps you're right. Maybe they'd never find out they weren't getting anything close to the last empty room. Maybe I'm just more curious that most. Or maybe I'm simply less trusting. If I should happen across another "every last seat" type post I might clarify and qualify that statement a bit. Or not. Either way I'm ready to move on to more interesting topics at this point.


----------



## the_traveler (Jun 23, 2011)

Ryan said:


> Alan, you also neglected to specify that award travel must be between cities that Amtrak serves.


You mean I can't get an AGR award from Rockville, RI to Gresham, OR?


----------



## AlanB (Jun 23, 2011)

PRR 60 said:


> The problem is that Amtrak is unwilling to sell an available room on the Coast Starlight to someone taking a long distance trip even though the room is available. The room in question could be booked for a trip from San Jose to Seattle. Amtrak is unwilling to sell it to a person traveling from Chicago to Seattle because that person would only use it on the Starlight for what Amtrak considers too short a distance. Simply speaking, that's dumb. They would rather see a customer walk away from a premium, 3000 mile trip than apply logic and common sense. It's amazing to me that rail supporters could even begin to defend that kind of stupidity.


No, the problem is far more complicated than you would like it to be, sorry!

The AGR agent isn't denying him a room for the reasons you state. The AGR agent would have to take extra extraordinary steps to realize that the rooms are being blocked by revenue management at that point in SAC. I can't imagine any airline agent going to check to see that seats were available from a further city all on their own and then getting permission to override the management controls.

I'm not saying that when confronted with the evidence that AGR would override things, but Texas Sunset never got to that point. But there is a chance that with a supervisor online that perhaps they would override. And while I freely admit upfront that the circumstances aren't quite the same, there is some precedent for what I'm saying. Amamba earlier this year was taking a long AGR trip departing from Boston. As things developed, it turned out that was during one of the bustitutions between BOS & ALB.

The LSL is blocked from sales for points from NYP to ALB. Her Bedroom was in an NYP car out of ALB, meaning that it had to be empty out of NY since it can't be sold due to the revenue management block. So when she tried to rebook via NYP, the agent couldn't do it. After some coaching from us here at the forum, she got a supervisor on the line who quickly realized the logic that the room had to be empty. That supervisor either overrode the block or got someone at Amtrak to override the block, I don't recall which, and Amamba got her room out of NY.



PRR 60 said:


> By the way, almost all airline frequent flyer programs have way more than six seats a flight open for base level redemptions, and almost all offer the ability to redeem for any available seat at a premium cost in miles (usually 2x). And no airline I deal with would deny a passenger booking from Europe to Buffalo a reservation because they want to hold seats on the PHL-BUF flight for possible bookings from Charlotte.


I was of course being facetious about the six, although on occasion it sure does seem like it.

And since almost all seats turn over in most cases each time a plane lands, no airline would probably want to do what Amtrak is doing. However, if their circumstances were similar I wouldn't be surprised to see blocks on sellable seats, which again an agent might or might not see and override.


----------



## PRR 60 (Jun 23, 2011)

AlanB said:


> PRR 60 said:
> 
> 
> > The problem is that Amtrak is unwilling to sell an available room on the Coast Starlight to someone taking a long distance trip even though the room is available. The room in question could be booked for a trip from San Jose to Seattle. Amtrak is unwilling to sell it to a person traveling from Chicago to Seattle because that person would only use it on the Starlight for what Amtrak considers too short a distance. Simply speaking, that's dumb. They would rather see a customer walk away from a premium, 3000 mile trip than apply logic and common sense. It's amazing to me that rail supporters could even begin to defend that kind of stupidity.
> ...


You failed to say anything I did not assume in my reply. I was not simply saying that the agent should have known better and found a way to beat the system. I'm saying that the system, being set up so as to not recognize the value of the trip being booked, is at fault: that for this trip, the room should not be blocked from booking. Let's try this one more time.

- Amtrak blocks some rooms on the northbound Starlight for trips that originate from Oakland north in order to hold back those rooms for trips originating on the Starlight from San Jose south. For trips just on the Starlight, I'm OK with that. The problem develops when...

- Amtrak's system blocks those rooms from booking even for connecting customers coming in from, for example, Chicago. That person is paying more than even a Starlight trip originating in Los Angeles. It looks at the Starlight as if it was a standalone trip, not as a part of a multi-segment trip, and shows no availability. This is the problem.

- Someone can be booking a trip from San Jose to Portland, and they would get the room. It meets the criteria for the Starlight.

- Someone booking from Chicago to Seattle connecting from the Zephyr to the Starlight is blocked because the system will not show availability for SAC north. In this case, the system is blocking a long, high value trip to accommodate a possible future shorter, low value trip.

I'm not blaming the agent for not knowing what's going on (even though, they should). I'm blaming the system for for being set up with logic that causes an outcome where lower value trips can get priority over higher value trip. It fails to consider the value of the entire trip. It looks at one segment as if it were the only segment. It's myopic logic, and it's dumb.


----------



## AlanB (Jun 23, 2011)

PRR 60 said:


> I'm not blaming the agent for not knowing what's going on (even though, they should). I'm blaming the system for for being set up with logic that causes an outcome where lower value trips can get priority over higher value trip. It fails to consider the value of the entire trip. It looks at one segment as if it were the only segment. It's myopic logic, and it's dumb.


My apologies then Bill, because that's what it did sound like to me, that you were blaming the agent.

That said two more thoughts. One, I'm sure that what you envision is something that ARROW simply isn't capable of handling. Two, one would actually expect that anyone in Chicago would simply take the direct route. Short of trying to do some sort of mileage points run or being given a cheap yet odd routing, who would get on an airplane to go to Portland from Chicago via Sacramento. Most, baring price or mileage runs, would take the direct flight.


----------



## the_traveler (Jun 23, 2011)

AlanB said:


> who would get on an airplane to go to Portland from Chicago via Sacramento.


I would!





I have also flown from Boston to Albany (NY) - about 150 miles - via California!


----------



## sechs (Jun 23, 2011)

At this point, I'm curious as to exactly what Texas Sunset was trying to do, and exactly what the agent said. Did he check to see if the itinerary was bookable online?

Testing a few random dates, I haven't found one where there are rooms available on the Coast Starlight that the website wouldn't let you connect at Sacramento for one.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jun 24, 2011)

PRR 60 said:


> I'm not blaming the agent for not knowing what's going on (even though, they should). I'm blaming the system for for being set up with logic that causes an outcome where lower value trips can get priority over higher value trip. It fails to consider the value of the entire trip. It looks at one segment as if it were the only segment. It's myopic logic, and it's dumb.


I'm with PRR 60 on this. There are two main issues I have with my experience so far.

One is a systemic issue that PRR puts into clear and concise terms. If I were a revenue customer this route should be made available for as many rooms as possible as it was priced at something like $1,700 for one roomette. That's good money if you ask me. More than double what you'd pay for first class airfare. It's also substantially more than I'm paying for my cabin on VIA's Canadian. Here on AU our fellow contributors have made it clear that any given room on the CS is rarely booked for the full route and instead is booked by many different folks for relatively small segments, so this seems like the perfect train to allow a routing like that.

The second issue is a general unwillingness on the part of the staff to give the customer the benefit of the doubt and simply make things happen. I know it may seem odd to a non-train person to book such an out of the way routing. It may seem odd to adjust a connection point from one town to another town two hours further down the line. But those are relatively minor requests that are unlikely to have a material impact on Amtrak's sales or operations. If I see a given routing on Amtrak.com then I should not have to challenge the AGR agent as to the mere existence of the routing. It should come up just as easily for them as it does for me. If my request for a change of connection point still allows a full five or six hours of layover time they should at least consider allowing that. Instead I get endless push-back over even the most minor of changes.

The simple fact of the matter is that most of Amtrak's network is not a schedule-driven transportation service. In the case of sleeper customers it's a land cruise, pure and simple. Just take look around the site. That's how we honestly use it. If you take a gander at their own brochures Amtrak seems to get that on some level. But the reservations staff and AGR staff still seem to think they're competing with airlines or something. If I want to be in a major city like Vancouver by a specific date and time I will fly. Even if the flight doesn't make it I can simply tell whoever I'm meeting that I'll be on the next available flight and everyone will immediately understand. If I instead tell them I'll be on the next train nobody will have any clue what I'm talking about or where it goes or when it might arrive.

None of this is the end of the world. That part will have to wait until the trip actually starts and everything is canceled and bustitututed and the bus driver falls asleep as he sends the rest of us off a cliff or something. :lol:



sechs said:


> At this point, I'm curious as to exactly what Texas Sunset was trying to do, and exactly what the agent said. Did he check to see if the itinerary was bookable online? Testing a few random dates, I haven't found one where there are rooms available on the Coast Starlight that the website wouldn't let you connect at Sacramento for one.


I always use Amtrak.com's results as my starting point. If it doesn't show up on there I don't expect to get it. The exception this time was the switch of connection points from SAC to EMY as per AU's recommendation. I was originally looking at leaving SAS on July 30th which would have put me on the Starlight the last possible minute of August 2nd. However, if you plugged in LAX > SEA on August 2nd then you originally had six roomettes to choose from. As of this posting that number is now down to three.


----------



## Ryan (Jun 24, 2011)

Texas Sunset said:


> If I see a given routing on Amtrak.com then I should not have to challenge the AGR agent as to the mere existence of the routing. It should come up just as easily for them as it does for me. If my request for a change of connection point still allows a full five or six hours of layover time they should at least consider allowing that. Instead I get endless push-back over even the most minor of changes.


That's the problem. The routing that you're looking for to go SAS-SEA does NOT come up on Amtrak.com. You're asking for something that's unavailable because the Texas Eagle arrives in CHI 8 minutes before the CZ leaves. The CZ to CS routing does come up if you put in CHI-SEA and you should be able to book that no problem. Am I misunderstanding what you're trying to do?


> The simple fact of the matter is that most of Amtrak's network is not a schedule-driven transportation service. In the case of sleeper customers it's a land cruise, pure and simple. Just take look around the site. That's how we honestly use it.


For you, me (sometimes) and folks around here, that may be true. But we represent the vast minority of Amtrak users. Even the majority of my travel in sleepers is because I want to get from point A to point B, not to take a "land cruise".


----------



## PRR 60 (Jun 24, 2011)

One last point, and then I'll go back to my usual mundane existence.

While Chicago to Seattle via Sacramento is not a common routing, Omaha or Denver to Seattle via Sacramento certainly is.

For a real-world example, try this (tested 6/24):

_Trip on August 16 from Denver to Seattle_

Depart August 16, DEN to SEA

- #5 8/16 DEN-SAC - Roomette available

- #14 8/17 SAC-SEA - *No rooms available*

_Checking just the Starlight on 8/17 from San Jose to Seattle:_

Depart August 17, SJC to SEA

- #14 8/17 SJC-SEA - *Roomette available* <== _Same train with no rooms available for a connection from Denver_


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jun 24, 2011)

Ryan said:


> That's the problem. The routing that you're looking for to go SAS-SEA does NOT come up on Amtrak.com.


For me it came up the first time I tried it and every time thereafter. Amtrak.com uses bus 5522 from Springfield, IL to Galesburg, IL in order to guarantee the connection. The part that Amtrak.com does not offer is a connection in EMY, and neither would AGR. Ryan Alan suggested I nest another ticket inside the first in order to spend more time on the Coast Starlight and possibly even get into my room a little early. That sounds like a good enough work around and I have some vouchers that can cover the additional expense.



Ryan said:


> For you, me (sometimes) and folks around here, that may be true. But we represent the vast minority of Amtrak users. Even the majority of my travel in sleepers is because I want to get from point A to point B, not to take a "land cruise".


Actually I think you're probably right to dispute that phrase. Even an actual cruise would have far better amenities and on-time performance than Amtrak ever has. However, I still strongly disagree that Amtrak is a schedule-driven service. Amtrak moves when the freight dispatchers tell them to move. If there is a truly major disruption or failure en route Amtrak typically can't fix it or replace it or route around it on their own and have to wait until one of the freight railroads decides to do something about it. That's not Amtrak's "fault" per se, but it certainly hinders their ability to keep to any sort of schedule. Even with all their enormous padding they still run late far too often and seem to be getting later all the time.


----------



## sechs (Jun 25, 2011)

Texas Sunset said:


> sechs said:
> 
> 
> > At this point, I'm curious as to exactly what Texas Sunset was trying to do, and exactly what the agent said. Did he check to see if the itinerary was bookable online? Testing a few random dates, I haven't found one where there are rooms available on the Coast Starlight that the website wouldn't let you connect at Sacramento for one.
> ...


Maybe I missed something, but it seems to be working exactly as Alan has said: If you can buy it, you can book it with AGR. You can't buy the itinerary that you want, so AGR cannot book it. 
And, by your own word, you should not have expected to get a sleeper on that segment, as none are offered for purchase of that itinerary.


----------



## the_traveler (Jun 25, 2011)

Ryan said:


> The routing that you're looking for to go SAS-SEA does NOT come up on Amtrak.com.


It should, if it's a day that the SL operates! There is about a 3 hour layover in LAX from the SL to the CS!


----------



## Bob Dylan (Jun 25, 2011)

the_traveler said:


> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> > The routing that you're looking for to go SAS-SEA does NOT come up on Amtrak.com.
> ...


Dave is Correct Ryan! If you Check Amtrak.com for the Three Days a Week that the SSL/TE Runs NOL-LAX youll get #421 SAS-LAX #14 LAX-SAS. Ive Ridden it 4 times, Three on AGR Awards!  That's How We are Getting to SEA for the gathering in OCT!


----------



## Ryan (Jun 25, 2011)

the_traveler said:


> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> > The routing *that you're looking for* to go SAS-SEA does NOT come up on Amtrak.com.
> ...


He's not looking for that routing, he wants to take the TE/CZ/CS routing.

After you said that it came up for you Dax, I went back and checked again and sure as heck it was there. Not sure if I missed it or if it wasn't there the first time I looked. Anyhow, it says "no rooms available" for the CS leg, so the statement that "If you can't book it on amtrak.com you can't book it as an award" holds true.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jun 25, 2011)

Yes, I'm doing the TE > CZ > CS route with the bus bridge between the TE and CZ and a very long layover in a hot Sacramento station. I'm not that worried about it. In the end I managed to get the routing I wanted and upper level roomettes on the two trains that actually matter and I have the confirmation email in my possession so I'm pretty happy with the outcome at this point. I'm done debating the "last room on train" and "guaranteed connection" controversies for now. We can resume those discussion another time. The main things on my mind now are how much exploring of the Cascades service I want to do, what to do in Vancouver, and figuring out how VIA's Canadian works.


----------

