Amtrak delivers best operating performance in company history

[tricia]

Might we add another possibility: The goal of Amtrak is to run a national rail passenger network for the benefit of our nation and its citizens.

Perhaps not the goal of current Amtrak management, or the current powers-that-be in DC ... but worth remembering nonetheless.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

Might we add another possibility: The goal of Amtrak is to run a national rail passenger network for the benefit of our nation and its citizens.

Perhaps not the goal of current Amtrak management, or the current powers-that-be in DC ... but worth remembering nonetheless.

That’s kinda what I was getting at. When did the goal change?

 

[jis]

Might we add another possibility: The goal of Amtrak is to run a national rail passenger network for the benefit of our nation and its citizens.

Perhaps not the goal of current Amtrak management, or the current powers-that-be in DC ... but worth remembering nonetheless.

Whatever the goal, it has to be supported by requisite funding. I have seen plenty of utopian goals bandied about for everything under the Sun, and each that was not adequately funded ultimately failed to be met.Just writing down a nice sounding goal is not enough in and of itself. It needs to provide guidance on how much funding needs to be appropriated to meet it based on some plan. Absent those it is just a few nice sounding words on paper , or parchment or stone tablets or whatever.

 

[tricia]

Whatever the goal, it has to be supported by requisite funding. I have seen plenty of utopian goals bandied about for everything under the Sun, and each that was not adequately funded ultimately failed to be met.Just writing down a nice sounding goal is not enough in and of itself. It needs to provide guidance on how much funding needs to be appropriated to meet it based on some plan. Absent those it is just a few nice sounding words on paper , or parchment or stone tablets or whatever.

I dunno. There are many ways to meet goals--in fact, the ways chosen to meet them can change over time without changing the goals themselves. I think HAVING a publicly stated goal, or mission statement, is often key to mustering the resources needed to accomplish anything.

 

[jis]

I dunno. There are many ways to meet goals--in fact, the ways chosen to meet them can change over time without changing the goals themselves. I think HAVING a publicly stated goal, or mission statement, is often key to mustering the resources needed to accomplish anything.

Amtrak does have a publicly stated Mission and Goal. It used to talk about providing a national rail transport system (whatever that might mean). And they are supposed to do so being run as a for profit business. And well.... here we are! However, this was significantly modified by PRIIA 2008.

Here is what Amtrak has communicated as its Goal and Mission:

Amtrak’s Mission and Goals As Defined by the U.S. Congress through the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA) and codified in 49 USC 24101:

Our Mission

“The mission of Amtrak is to provide efficient and effective intercity passenger rail mobility consisting of high-quality service that is trip-time competitive with other intercity travel options.”

Our Goals

Amtrak shall—

1) Use its best business judgment in acting to minimize United States Government subsidies, including— A) increasing fares; B) increasing revenue from the transportation of mail and express; C) reducing losses on food service; D) improving its contracts with operating rail carriers; E) reducing management costs; and F) increasing employee productivity;

2) Minimize Government* subsidies by encouraging State, regional, and local governments and the private sector, separately or in combination, to share the cost of providing rail passenger transportation, including the cost of operating facilities;

*US Government

3) Carry out strategies to achieve immediately maximum productivity and efficiency consistent with safe and efficient transportation;

4) Operate Amtrak trains, to the maximum extent feasible, to all station stops within 15 minutes of the time established in public timetables;

5) Develop transportation on rail corridors subsidized by States and private parties;

6) Implement schedules based on a system wide average speed of at least 60 miles an hour that can be achieved with a degree of reliability and passenger comfort;

7) Encourage rail carriers to assist in improving intercity rail passenger transportation;

8) Improve generally the performance of Amtrak through comprehensive and systematic operational programs and employee incentives;

9) Provide additional or complementary intercity transportation service to ensure mobility in times of national disaster or other instances where other travel options are not adequately available;

10) Carry out policies that ensure equitable access to the Northeast Corridor by intercity and commuter rail passenger transportation;

11) Coordinate the uses of the Northeast Corridor, particularly intercity and commuter rail passenger transportation; and

12) Maximize the use of its resources, including the most cost-effective use of employees, facilities, and real property.

Minimizing Government Subsidies — Amtrak is encouraged to make agreements with the private sector and undertake initiatives that are consistent with good business judgment and designed to maximize its revenues and minimize Government subsidies. Amtrak shall prepare a financial plan, consistent with section 204 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, including the budgetary goals for fiscal years 2009 through 2013. Amtrak and its Board of Directors shall adopt a long-term plan that minimizes the need for Federal operating subsidies.

So there you have it.... straight from the horse's mouth, as communicated by Jason Abrams. Amtrak Corporate Communications.

I just noticed that "national" in the original 1970 act has now been replaced cleverly by "intercity" by PRIIA . Presumably they are now busy executing on said financial plan.

So see what wonders you can get out of cleverly written Mission and Goal? Some of those Goals are indeed quite lofty yet mundane - 60mph system wide average speed, service to all stops within 15 mins of advertised, etc.

 

[user 14106]

What Amtrak should do is see if adding any new routes will lead to ridership growth that exceeds buildout costs and cut out stations and routes that are non profitable. To me, airfares are low enough that for most routes. airplane is more viable. I realize there is still a need for a national rail backbone but costs should be reduced further.

The vast majority of the routes are “non profitable” including the state supported routes, hence “supported.” A subsidy from taxpayers is a subsidy from taxpayers - Amtrak just considers the state ones as revenue. And when you add in capital costs, there really is no such thing as a profitable Amtrak route.

 

[user 14106]

I noted this in the other thread, but it looks like there's a good chance that the "gains" on the LD side were down to Amtrak opening up space in the LD trains SB NYP-WAS (something that wasn't previously the case). Note that a 1% increase in ridership would be around 35k; with 3.5 trains/day affected, it wouldn't be hard to see most or all of the increase "hide" there.

The gain would have been better had it not been for the unnecessary multi day multi route hurricane outage in Florida. Auto Train and both silver routes were up on last year before that.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

If I'm a government and I'm subsidizing a "national" network I might be a little annoyed if the company changes "national" to "intercity" after they take my money. Of course if the government takes the money away amtrak gets to have their way and cancel those annoying Long Distance trains. At this point Amtrak is becoming the nations regional rail operator... which doesn't need to be amtrak since other companies can do that job and have in some regions.

 

[Rail Freak]

Creative Book Keeping? I'm not that knowledgeable!

 

[Qapla]

I guess it all depends on how you view "subsidies".

You could argue that all freight/packages transported by semi-trucks, UPS, FedEx, Amazon and any other business that delivers is "subsidized" - since they drive on Gov't owned roads that they do not directly have to pay to maintain - and these include Federal, State, County and City "subsidies".

If you consider the amount the Gov't spends to maintain the Air Traffic Control system as well as what they spend on airports ... well, you could also say that airlines are "subsidized".

 

[jis]

If I'm a government and I'm subsidizing a "national" network I might be a little annoyed if the company changes "national" to "intercity" after they take my money. Of course if the government takes the money away amtrak gets to have their way and cancel those annoying Long Distance trains. At this point Amtrak is becoming the nations regional rail operator... which doesn't need to be amtrak since other companies can do that job and have in some regions.

The company changed nothing. It is Congress that changed it in PRIIA 2008, which was then crafted into CFR by the FRA which was assigned to do so by the Congress. The government cannot get mad at itself without being considered delusional I would imagine. Amtrak does not write the CFRs. FRA as the designated agency for Amtrak matters does.

 

[Anderson]

The company changed nothing. It is Congress that changed it in PRIIA 2008, which was then crafted into CFR by the FRA which was assigned to do so by the Congress. The government cannot get mad at itself without being considered delusional I would imagine. Amtrak does not write the CFRs. FRA as the designated agency for Amtrak matters does.

The Federal government has so many split personalities that I'm pretty sure it is fully capable of being angry at itself. Witness the spending authorization/spending/debt ceiling disconnects...

Honestly, the Federal government is probably in sore need of in-patient treatment. This isn't the sort of thing you can solve "just" with weekly therapy...

 

[PaTrainFan]

"Mr. Coscia credited the leadership of Mr. Anderson, previously the CEO of Delta Air Lines Inc., and his predecessor Charles “Wick” Moorman, the former chief of Norfolk Southern Corp., for helping the railroad grow its operating revenue while cutting costs."

And, of course, John Mica. Not.

There's apparently no paywall at WSJ this weekend so feel free (literally) to read their take: https://www.wsj.com/articles/amtrak...me-light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel-11573223401

 

[Thirdrail7]

“The best five years of Amtrak’s history have been the last five,” said Anthony Coscia, the chairman of Amtrak’s board of directors, in an interview. “We’re within visibility of earning a profit for the first time in the company’s history.”

"Mr. Coscia credited the leadership of Mr. Anderson, previously the CEO of Delta Air Lines Inc., and his predecessor Charles “Wick” Moorman, the former chief of Norfolk Southern Corp., for helping the railroad grow its operating revenue while cutting costs."

Considering Wick Moorman and the current regime have three years under the belts collectively, I would think he'd also acknowledge the work of the previous regime, which recovered 94% of operating expenses. All this group had to do is close the final 6% gap.

9) Provide additional or complementary intercity transportation service to ensure mobility in times of national disaster or other instances where other travel options are not adequately available;.

Wow. They certainly blow that one out of the water. Hell, this service is one of the first to shut down!

 

[Anderson]

Considering Wick Moorman and the current regime have three years under the belts collectively, I would think he'd also acknowledge the work of the previous regime, which recovered 94% of operating expenses. All this group had to do is close the final 6% gap.

Not only that, they had the benefit of a favorable prevailing trend (the losses have been steadily closing for about a decade) and the Acelas are proving to be highly price-insensitive. When you get to FY19 vs FY18, FY18 also featured a bad accounting loss from the 501 crash (and I think one or two others) that hit all at once. FY19 didn't.

Wow. They certainly blow that one out of the water. Hell, this service is one of the first to shut down!

Which wasn't the case until the recent regime. Yes, Amtrak would often pull the Silvers the day before an incoming hurricane, but the current regime has been a lot more aggressive on that front. Do compare with Brightline, which over Labor Day kept service up until they anticipated winds hitting danger levels and slashed fares. Or, well, Delta (which during Irma dropped a 747 on DTW-MCO and upgauged everything in sight to get people out of FL under hard-capped fares).

 

[Ryan]

Might we add another possibility: The goal of Amtrak is to run a national rail passenger network for the benefit of our nation and its citizens.

Perhaps not the goal of current Amtrak management, or the current powers-that-be in DC ... but worth remembering nonetheless.

Fortunately, we have our good friend 49 CFR 700.2 to tell us what Amtrak's goal is:

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.

 

[seat38a]

The vast majority of the routes are “non profitable” including the state supported routes, hence “supported.” A subsidy from taxpayers is a subsidy from taxpayers - Amtrak just considers the state ones as revenue. And when you add in capital costs, there really is no such thing as a profitable Amtrak route.

So if local government outsources to Bombardier or TransitAmerica its a profit for the company but if they outsource it to Amtrak, it should be a liability???
Hate to break it to you but the a lot of commuter rail is run by third party train operating companies that show the money they make from States and local government tax revenue as a profit. Amtrak is no different than Bombardier or TransitAmerica when it comes to State supported trains.

 

[jis]

Wow. They certainly blow that one out of the water. Hell, this service is one of the first to shut down!

Given that there are a dozen Goals, I find it hard to believe that all of them are or realistically even could be treated with equal priority. It would be nice to see (a) how priorities are assigned to each Goal, and (b) given that some of the Goals potentially impinge on each other, it would be even better to see a balanced scorecard for them and see what the planned Goals are for the balanced scorecards and how the actuals are compared to those.

 

[jis]

So if local government outsources to Bombardier or TransitAmerica its a profit for the company but if they outsource it to Amtrak, it should be a liability???
Hate to break it to you but the a lot of commuter rail is run by third party train operating companies that show the money they make from States and local government tax revenue as a profit. Amtrak is no different than Bombardier or TransitAmerica when it comes to State supported trains.

I would say that service fees paid to operators are "income", which may or may not lead to a "profit" overall.

Actually, the accounting oddity is that the Federal support for Amtrak is shown separately and not treated as a service contract fee, like the support from States are treated. That is entirely to satisfy the political whims and fantasies of some. And as we can even see here, that either purposely or otherwise seems to get some people excited in odd ways.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

I would say that service fees paid to operators are "income", which may or may not lead to a "profit" overall.

Actually, the accounting oddity is that the Federal support for Amtrak is shown separately and not treated as a service contract fee, like the support from States are treated. That is entirely to satisfy the political whims and fantasies of some. And as we can even see here, that either purposely or otherwise seems to get some people excited in odd ways.

Yes!!!
I mean does the federal government just need to set up the same deal as the states and subsidize certain national trains? Then Amtrak can run them “at a profit.”

I mean at that point they can decide on the level of service since the states get to decide what type of service is on Amtrak corridor trains.

 

[seat38a]

Yes!!!
I mean does the federal government just need to set up the same deal as the states and subsidize certain national trains? Then Amtrak can run them “at a profit.”

I mean at that point they can decide on the level of service since the states get to decide what type of service is on Amtrak corridor trains.

But I'm pretty sure the dining car will still be the most controversial issue.
Amtrak is close to making a profit with existing LD trains. I doubt any routes will get axed if they are making a overall profit. Are you talking about adding new routes?

 

[TiBike]

Wow. They certainly blow that one out of the water. Hell, this service is one of the first to shut down!

After the Santa Barbara mudslide a couple years ago, the Surfliner was beefed up to keep people moving while U.S. 101 and local roads were shut down. It was Santa Barbara's only effective link to LA and Ventura County. So there is a role to play, albeit in particular circumstances.

California is looking at its wildfire evacuation procedures, which are a work in progress to put it kindly. So far, nearly all of the evacuations have been in either areas with low population densities or in relatively affluent ones, where people have cars and the means to spend a few nights elsewhere. If it became necessary to evacuate a high density/low income community, public transit, including rail, would have to be quickly redeployed.

This is on the minds of emergency planners, at least in California. This year's big Sonoma County fires are a case study – a few buses were used as back up, with mixed results, and SMART shut down. Those are problems that need to be solved. Rail does have a role to play, but it's early days. That said, I think it's a corridor problem – can't see long distance trains being of much use.

 

[jis]

Indeed, most evacuations whether it be for fire or hurricane are short distance ones, which would normally be considered within the realm of corridor service and not LD.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

Indeed, most evacuations whether it be for fire or hurricane are short distance ones, which would normally be considered within the realm of corridor service and not LD.

But they can use LD infrastructure. New Orleans being a good example.

 

[Thirdrail7]

Rail does have a role to play, but it's early days. That said, I think it's a corridor problem – can't see long distance trains being of much use.

Indeed, most evacuations whether it be for fire or hurricane are short distance ones, which would normally be considered within the realm of corridor service and not LD.

This:

But they can use LD infrastructure. New Orleans being a good example.

As I stated before, the equipment runs point to point. The people? Not so much.

Instead of benching your equipment, muster it and utilize it, truncating the operation as necessary. If you're canceling the train anyway, you can slap an engine on each end of a long-distance train and ping pong it back and forth between other points.

If you have the will. At any rate, it is part of the Cherry Picking of Priia.