Amtrak long distance fares 2021-2023

[Amtrakfflyer]

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

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

 

[Devil's Advocate]

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.

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

@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]

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:

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.

 

[Old MM]

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]

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]

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.