June 2012 Monthly Performance Report

[Anderson]

Well, the report came out about 5 PM today. There's not a whole lot of change since last month in many regards...ridership is up about 3% while revenue is up almost 9%. Part of this is due to the situation surrounding the Empire Builder (which is responsible for a third of the added revenue).

Major notes:

NEC:

-The NEC continues to show Regional/Acela cannibalization. last year at this time, the Acela was out-earning the Regionals; that situation has reversed. The Regionals seem set for about a 6% increase for the year while the Acela will likely be off by about 1%. In terms of revenue, both are doing quite well: The Regionals were up 10% year over year in June and 8% YTD; the Acela is up 1.7% for the month and 2.4% YTD.

Short Corridors:

-The general trend here is modestly upwards. The only big losers of note were the Surfliner and the Cascades; these weighed on the rest of the system a bit more heavily, as they make up about 1/4 of total ridership. Hopefully the worst is past here, though, as the Surfliner was "only" off 3% while revenue was up close to 5%.

-Overall, the trend is also towards hits on revenue and misses on ridership.

-CHI-STL was up sharply...but that's trackwork-related more than anything.

-The Virginia corridors were flat-ish. The Lynchburger has stabilized...but PPR here is up about 6%. The same is true on the Newport News line, with PPR up about 7% (though ridership here is still growing). No idea why the Lynchburger is absolutely flat versus others...but the dip in the Crescent seems likely to be connected.

Long Distance:

-The Silvers were up for the month and seem to be going for a minimal gain overall.

-The Cardinal was actually up noticeably, though I never know if this is because there was a shift of a day in the month.

-The Builder was up sharply. No big surprise there; the same applies to the Zephyr.

-The Chief was off slightly.

-Everything else was up at least somewhat. PPR was also up slightly more or less across the board.

Overall:

-The push towards a 3% bump in ridership and a 6-7% bump in revenue continue apace. I'll be optimistic and say that we can probably break 31 million for the year.

-On the budget front, there was a massive miss on salaries/wages/benefits. Other than that, things look to be coming in respectably close to budget. I'm wondering what caused such a massive miss here, though.

 

[Paulus]

There's also some July info available (at least for CA) given out by LOSSAN.

Ridership year over year

Surfliner: -5.0%

San Joaquin: +0.8%

Capitol Corridor: -3.1%

Coast Starlight: +11.4%

National: +0.8%

Coaster: -2.7%

Metrolink: +7.1%

Revenue year over year

Surfliner: -4.9%

San Joaquin: +2.4%

Capitol Corridor: +1.7%

Coast Starlight: +2.6%

National: -2.1%

 

[Anderson]

There's also some July info available (at least for CA) given out by LOSSAN.

Ridership year over year

Surfliner: -5.0%

San Joaquin: +0.8%

Capitol Corridor: -3.1%

Coast Starlight: +11.4%

National: +0.8%

Coaster: -2.7%

Metrolink: +7.1%

Revenue year over year

Surfliner: -4.9%

San Joaquin: +2.4%

Capitol Corridor: +1.7%

Coast Starlight: +2.6%

National: -2.1%

What disruptions, if any, were there on the Surfliner in July? This would be the first event of a revenue drop on the Surfliners.

 

[Paulus]

Track work between Los Angeles and Fullerton (tie replacement requested by Metrolink and BNSF). OTP dropped pretty badly, the "Express" was under 50% for the month.

 

[afigg]

The big news about the June monthly report is that it has all the financial and route performance data which has been missing from the monthly reports for over a year.

In general, the report is not good for Amtrak's financial goals they set out for the year. They now project that ticket revenue will be barely ahead of budget, the food & beverage sales will be $9.7 million ahead of budget (which should help cut F&B losses), and total revenue will be $54.2 million ahead of the FY12 budget, mostly due to a boost in "other revenue".

The total expenses, however, are projected to be $192.5 million over budget. The largest component is Salaries, Wages, & Benefits which is expected to be $126.8 million over. Digging into the data, Employee Benefits Expenses is the largest part of the overrun and they are carrying 373 more employees total than the budget. Quoting from the report "Salaries, wages and benefits were unfavorable by $81.0M primarily due to non-recurring VSIP payments, merit payments and associated benefit expenses as well as contractual wage increases and increased benefit costs." The increased head count may be due in part to the re-organization. Still, company boards don't look favorably on management that can't control or correctly project employee costs.

The projection is now a cash operating loss of $410.5 million, rather than the $345.3 million target. The FY12 operating grant appropriation was $466 million, so they will still have a margin. But it means less left over from the operating grant subsidy to use to pay for equipment purchases like the CAF Viewliner order. The capital spending forecast for the end of the FY is well less than authorized which is claimed to be due mostly to timing of electric locomotive and single level car payments. Which indicates that CAF and Siemens are behind schedule.

Train ridership and revenue numbers

- Acela ridership was down -2.4% in June, which is attributed to one less business day in June this year. However, Acela ridership is down -1.1% on the year while the NE Regionals are up +8.8%. I wonder if some of it is due to fewer well heeled business travelers on the NEC, while the general public is sticking to the Regionals because they see the Acelas as too expensive. I had to book a WAS-NYP round trip on a Sunday recently on shorter notice than I prefer and I noticed the Sunday evening Acelas were cheaper than the Regionals. I'm sure that changed as more people brought tickets, but it says that many are booking the Regionals w/o checking the Acela prices.

- As Anderson noted, the Lynchburg and RVR-NPN Regionals have really leveled off in growth. Still doing well, but a rather sharp leveling off. Don't know why.

- Service disruptions and delays due to track work are probably a factor in holding down total ridership on the non-NEC corridors. The good news is that the CHI-STL corridor is supposed to be done with the major track work disruption this year. However, CHI-DET and other corridors have barely started on the HSIPR funded track improvements. The disruptions from those projects is likely to hold down the FY13 ridership numbers.

- I suspect the economic slowdown that hit in the spring due to the spike in oil prices and fear over the European crisis contributed to the softening in ridership numbers.

Chief Mechanical Office report

- Bear is behind by 3 cars on the conversion of 11 Amfleet 1 cafe cars to coach cars. Blames delay mostly on missing parts and now expect to not complete the conversion of the 11 cafe cars this FY.

- Behind by 5 cars on the level 2 overhaul of Amfleet I cafe cars due to cars arriving in worse condition than expected.

- Beach Grove is behind on overhaul of various Superliners and Heritage cars, but blames much of it to equipment not arriving as scheduled. Fleet getting stretched too thin?

Route Performance Numbers

- The Acela and NE Regionals are both generating nice profits. The NE Regionals YTD are ahead $73.2 million over operating costs, which are much better numbers than just a year or two ago.

-The Lynchburger and VA Regionals continue to generate small operating surpluses. The start of Norfolk service may bump up operating costs more than revenue for a time, but I think it will turn a surplus once the service gets established and goes to more than once a day service.

-The Keystones lose more money than they should. With PA on the hook to make up for all the operating losses and seeing that the Regionals are running at a surplus, I suspect there will be price increases on the Keystones to improve the cost recovery. The same is likely to apply to the Empire service trains.

-The fully allocated loss per passenger mile for the LD trains is improved YTD (Oct-June) from FY11 loss of 22.9 cents to 22.0 cents in FY12. That is a positive trend.

On-Time Performance

-The good news is that the overall OTP for June is +2.8% better than June 2011 and YTD is 84.2%, a +4.9% over FY11.

- For the short distance, non-NEC corridors, the Heartland Flyer is taking the biggest hit in OTP year to year, down to 45.0% in June.

- The Wolverine went from 0% OTP in June 2011 to 64.4% in June 2012.

- Among the LD trains, the Silvers and AutoTrain OTP continues to be worse than last year. From my checks on Amtrak status maps, the Silvers are frequently getting delayed in central FL where the tracks are getting upgraded for the Sunrail commuter train.

 

[Anderson]

I hadn't even thought to check for the YTD reports on financial performance, they've been missing for so long. Four quick thoughts there:

1) The NEC has basically doubled its above-the-rails profit margin year over year ($246m vs. $127m last year). The Regionals, in particular, finally jumped significantly into the black.

2) Both of VA's trains are deep in the black, something that will likely improve with the addition of the Norfolk train. I'd been projecting this for a while with my scratch-pad calculations (which I actually used as the basis for an editorial a few months back), but it's good to see. This probably means that both routes will end the year deep in the black. State support on the NPN line (for the last WAS-RVR frequency) seems to come to about $1 million on a quick glance, but it's probably closer to $700k once you exclude OBS revenue,maybe even a little less).

3) On a number of state corridors, CR is up sharply. Losses on the Empire Service have been halved, they're off by 2/3 on the Maple Leaf (which makes a credible case for this tipping into profitability...indicated CR is over 90%), and in general there's been a massive improvement for most of the corridor trains operating around NYC. The Carolinian seems to only be in the red outside of state support this year because of the disruptions due to CSX trackwork; failing that, it looks like the state support would be a non-issue. And so on.

4) There is a big jump in net depreciation indicated. About $50m higher YTD vs. last year.

Looking towards the end of the year, this will probably put the NEC's profits somewhere over $300 million. That the NEC is getting most of the growth isn't a big surprise here; the Acela is up to almost a 50% operating margin (42.97% after OPEBs, 44.33% before). This is also key insofar as in order to maintain the nominal amount of profit the Acela sends into the system, they don't even need revenue increases to come close to the rate of inflation. The Regionals are also into the high teens on this front as well.

While Amtrak is coming up short on their (probably a hair overly-optimistic) budget, I would like to present one piece of somewhat comforting math:

NEC Profits, YTD: $246.1m (vs. $127.5m last year)

LD Losses, YTD: $463.6m (vs. $467.8m last year)

Net: $217.1m (vs. $340.3m last year)

It seems entirely plausible that the NEC is going to pull us through the next few years. Though I doubt that next year will see such dramatic improvements, with the cost of the short corridors not falling on Amtrak's cost sheets anymore, a steady improvement of the 30%+ operating margin that it is now showing (versus about 16.5% last year) should prove doable if load factors keep nudging higher and fares can increase at even a hair above inflation (likely due to the aforementioned load factors). I don't like how close it is going to be, but the massive improvement in the Northeast should do a lot for the system in and of itself.

Edit: Ok, a quick follow-up here: Last year, the NEC showed $179.5m in profits for the whole year, leaving $52m for July-September (roughly 29% of the year's profits). This is somewhat distorted, as the Regional was showing a loss until the summer; the Acela was more evenly-spaced-out, but the Regionals' profits were almost exclusively piled up during the late summer ($2.1m through June, $15.2m for the whole year). Still, if this holds, it would put the NEC's profits at approximately $350m. If the LD trains' losses hold more or less steady, non-short corridor losses would be contained to about $265m for the year.

 

[afigg]

3) On a number of state corridors, CR is up sharply. Losses on the Empire Service have been halved, they're off by 2/3 on the Maple Leaf (which makes a credible case for this tipping into profitability...indicated CR is over 90%), and in general there's been a massive improvement for most of the corridor trains operating around NYC. The Carolinian seems to only be in the red outside of state support this year because of the disruptions due to CSX trackwork; failing that, it looks like the state support would be a non-issue. And so on.

Something that I did not really notice on the first read of the June report Route performance tables is the shift in Total Costs (excl OPEB's, Capital Charge) YTD between FY11 and FY12, quite large for some trains. Check the 3rd table page, C-3 on pg 53, in the Route Performance Report for the Variances between FY11 and FY12. The Total Costs for the Acela and NE Regionals have a large drop which is a major contributor to the increased fully allocated operating profit.

Would like to see an explanation of the large cost changes for some routes, but I suspect the FY12 numbers reflect the new agreed to cost allocation rules and FY11 reflects the previous accounting rules?

For the state supported and SD corridor trains, the Empire Service (NYP-ALB) has a $8.8 reduction in total cost YTD, hence contributing to the improved cost recovery. The Maple Leaf and Niagara Falls Empire service trains (RT07) have a $3.3 million reduction in total costs. On the increased costs end, the total cost for the San Joaquins, Capitol Corridors, Cascades now have increased total costs of $4 million or more. I'm ignoring the Lincoln Service trains because the long service disruptions for track work throw any comparisons there out of whack.

The most pronounced changes are for the LD trains. The total costs for all the single level trains are down, while they are up for the Superliner trains. The AutoTrain takes the biggest hit with a total cost increase YTD (Oct-June) from FY11 $70 million to FY12 $82.1 million. The Palmetto now loses the least money per passenger mile at -13.3 cents while the AT is second at -15.6 cents. This is likely to get some upset and have them claiming that Boardman and Amtrak management is out to get the Superliner LD trains. I wonder if the allocation of maintenance and overhead costs for the single level equipment versus Superliners and Surfliners were determined to be over weighted for the single level cars.

What intrigues me is, yes, that the Carolinian and Maple Leaf & Niagara Falls Empire service trains (if I'm interpreting the category correctly for RT07) are now not that far away from breaking even on ticket revenue. Add in some of the funded improvements to the Carolinian route in NC and VA, get the new storage yard built in Charlotte for more space, then add additional Amfleet coach cars for peak demand periods and the Carolinian could be running at a operating profit. NC and VA could use the now unused subsidy funds to start a new daily NYP to Charlotte train via the Crescent route. Which might also break even.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Nice to see the CS and other LDs doing well. SWC price increases really hurt. If we can solve the SWC problem then LD ridership per year could break 5,000,000.

3) On a number of state corridors, CR is up sharply. Losses on the Empire Service have been halved, they're off by 2/3 on the Maple Leaf (which makes a credible case for this tipping into profitability...indicated CR is over 90%), and in general there's been a massive improvement for most of the corridor trains operating around NYC. The Carolinian seems to only be in the red outside of state support this year because of the disruptions due to CSX trackwork; failing that, it looks like the state support would be a non-issue. And so on.

The most pronounced changes are for the LD trains. The total costs for all the single level trains are down, while they are up for the Superliner trains. The AutoTrain takes the biggest hit with a total cost increase YTD (Oct-June) from FY11 $70 million to FY12 $82.1 million. The Palmetto now loses the least money per passenger mile at -13.3 cents while the AT is second at -15.6 cents. This is likely to get some upset and have them claiming that Boardman and Amtrak management is out to get the Superliner LD trains. I wonder if the allocation of maintenance and overhead costs for the single level equipment versus Superliners and Surfliners were determined to be over weighted for the single level cars.

What intrigues me is, yes, that the Carolinian and Maple Leaf & Niagara Falls Empire service trains (if I'm interpreting the category correctly for RT07) are now not that far away from breaking even on ticket revenue. Add in some of the funded improvements to the Carolinian route in NC and VA, get the new storage yard built in Charlotte for more space, then add additional Amfleet coach cars for peak demand periods and the Carolinian could be running at a operating profit. NC and VA could use the now unused subsidy funds to start a new daily NYP to Charlotte train via the Crescent route. Which might also break even.

First of all, what is YTD?

Now, the Palmetto is not really surprising because it has no diner or Sleepers. It's basically a corridor train times three. Does anybody know about how the CONO is doing?

I predicted that the Carolinian would do well. That's why I started that poll on new service NYP-CLT. It's nice to see that somebody else agrees. ML could really use some improved customs and immigration that are done in Toronto and/or other stations.

 

[afigg]

Nice to see the CS and other LDs doing well. SWC price increases really hurt. If we can solve the SWC problem then LD ridership per year could break 5,000,000.

First of all, what is YTD?

Now, the Palmetto is not really surprising because it has no diner or Sleepers. It's basically a corridor train times three. Does anybody know about how the CONO is doing?

I predicted that the Carolinian would do well. That's why I started that poll on new service NYP-CLT. It's nice to see that somebody else agrees. ML could really use some improved customs and immigration that are done in Toronto and/or other stations.

The Southwest Chief ridership is up +1.1% for the first 9 months of FY12. It is not dragging down the LD train ridership. The SWC, however loses the most total money of all the LD trains at $68 million for FY11, edging out the CZ and EB in that category.

YTD is a common acronym, means Year To Date. In this case, it means Amtrak fiscal year to date for October to Jube.

The Carolinian has been doing pretty well for some years. And people have been discussing additional NYP to CLT or Atlanta service options for a long time. A Carolinian that breaks even on operating costs makes those options more viable.

The Maple Leaf has multiple stops in Canada. The customs inspection has to be done at the border. Trains to Vancouver or Montreal can be set up so they only have one station in Canada which allows the customs inspections to be done at the Canadian station.

 

[Gratt]

The Maple Leaf has multiple stops in Canada. The customs inspection has to be done at the border. Trains to Vancouver or Montreal can be set up so they only have one station in Canada which allows the customs inspections to be done at the Canadian station.

I wonder how valuable are those extra Canadian stops on the Maple Leaf Vs removing the inspection point at the border and going straight to Toronto. Does any one have data on how many people used those stations?

The only stop I see with real value is the Canadian side of Niagara Falls. A possible solution for that station would be to make it Pickup/Drop off only (depending on direction) with customs agents waiting for those PAX after they get off or clearing them before they get on.

 

[johnny.menhennet]

The Maple Leaf has multiple stops in Canada. The customs inspection has to be done at the border. Trains to Vancouver or Montreal can be set up so they only have one station in Canada which allows the customs inspections to be done at the Canadian station.

I wonder how valuable are those extra Canadian stops on the Maple Leaf Vs removing the inspection point at the border and going straight to Toronto. Does any one have data on how many people used those stations?

The only stop I see with real value is the Canadian side of Niagara Falls. A possible solution for that station would be to make it Pickup/Drop off only (depending on direction) with customs agents waiting for those PAX after they get off or clearing them before they get on.

Well it would've been easier to drop the other Canadian stops a couple of months ago, but would be nearly impossible now since Via cancelled the other Niagara Falls service and there are no other trains to get to those cities.

 

[PRR 60]

The Maple Leaf has multiple stops in Canada. The customs inspection has to be done at the border. Trains to Vancouver or Montreal can be set up so they only have one station in Canada which allows the customs inspections to be done at the Canadian station.

I wonder how valuable are those extra Canadian stops on the Maple Leaf Vs removing the inspection point at the border and going straight to Toronto. Does any one have data on how many people used those stations?

The only stop I see with real value is the Canadian side of Niagara Falls. A possible solution for that station would be to make it Pickup/Drop off only (depending on direction) with customs agents waiting for those PAX after they get off or clearing them before they get on.

The Canadian stops of the Maple Leaf are not under Amtrak control. In Canada, the Maple Leaf is a regular VIA train: operated, staffed and funded by VIA. Without the intermediate stops between Toronto and the border, VIA would have little reason to fund the train, and Amtrak would have to pick-up the tab.

 

[Eric S]

Right now the Maple Leaf is sort of an Amtrak New York - Niagara Falls corridor train and a VIA Rail Toronto - Niagara Falls corridor train that runs through from one to the other. Eliminate the VIA Rail corridor stops, and the train essentially ceases to serve any VIA Rail purpose; can't imagine VIA Rail funding for the train would continue at that point.

There doesn't seem to be any easy solution to the border crossing issues for trains serving Toronto (whether from New York or restored Chicago service), unlike trains serving Montreal and Vancouver.

 

[AlanB]

There doesn't seem to be any easy solution to the border crossing issues for trains serving Toronto (whether from New York or restored Chicago service), unlike trains serving Montreal and Vancouver.

Actually there is an easy solution, although it is one that's out of Amtrak's control. The US needs to stop making it harder for people to cross the border with one of our best friend's in the world. At the same time much of Europe was going to an open border system, we were busy making it harder to cross the border into Canada. And Canada reciprocated, making it harder to get into Canada. They did that in part I'm sure because of tit for tat, but also because if an American crossed into Canada without the proper paperwork then Canada would be stuck with them until they could sort things out and get back to the states.

Freight on the other hand travels far more easily across the border, we did make that easier. Now we just need to work on making it easier for people to cross.

 

[Eric S]

There doesn't seem to be any easy solution to the border crossing issues for trains serving Toronto (whether from New York or restored Chicago service), unlike trains serving Montreal and Vancouver.

Actually there is an easy solution, although it is one that's out of Amtrak's control. The US needs to stop making it harder for people to cross the border with one of our best friend's in the world. At the same time much of Europe was going to an open border system, we were busy making it harder to cross the border into Canada. And Canada reciprocated, making it harder to get into Canada. They did that in part I'm sure because of tit for tat, but also because if an American crossed into Canada without the proper paperwork then Canada would be stuck with them until they could sort things out and get back to the states.

Freight on the other hand travels far more easily across the border, we did make that easier. Now we just need to work on making it easier for people to cross.

True. I suppose I should have written that there is not an easy solution that can be implemented by Amtrak/VIA Rail/State of New York/Province of Ontario, without help from the American and Canadian federal governments.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Nice to see the CS and other LDs doing well. SWC price increases really hurt. If we can solve the SWC problem then LD ridership per year could break 5,000,000.

First of all, what is YTD?

Now, the Palmetto is not really surprising because it has no diner or Sleepers. It's basically a corridor train times three. Does anybody know about how the CONO is doing?

I predicted that the Carolinian would do well. That's why I started that poll on new service NYP-CLT. It's nice to see that somebody else agrees. ML could really use some improved customs and immigration that are done in Toronto and/or other stations.

The Southwest Chief ridership is up +1.1% for the first 9 months of FY12. It is not dragging down the LD train ridership. The SWC, however loses the most total money of all the LD trains at $68 million for FY11, edging out the CZ and EB in that category.

YTD is a common acronym, means Year To Date. In this case, it means Amtrak fiscal year to date for October to Jube.

The Carolinian has been doing pretty well for some years. And people have been discussing additional NYP to CLT or Atlanta service options for a long time. A Carolinian that breaks even on operating costs makes those options more viable.

The Maple Leaf has multiple stops in Canada. The customs inspection has to be done at the border. Trains to Vancouver or Montreal can be set up so they only have one station in Canada which allows the customs inspections to be done at the Canadian station.

Jube?

Right now the Maple Leaf is sort of an Amtrak New York - Niagara Falls corridor train and a VIA Rail Toronto - Niagara Falls corridor train that runs through from one to the other. Eliminate the VIA Rail corridor stops, and the train essentially ceases to serve any VIA Rail purpose; can't imagine VIA Rail funding for the train would continue at that point.

There doesn't seem to be any easy solution to the border crossing issues for trains serving Toronto (whether from New York or restored Chicago service), unlike trains serving Montreal and Vancouver.

I knew that it was operated by both Amtrak and VIA. I thought that was the problem but it's kinda depressing to know that VIA also cancelled all other Toronto-Niagara Falls service. Now I really am dumbfounded, can't think of any solution with the changes Alan suggested.

 

[Anderson]

There doesn't seem to be any easy solution to the border crossing issues for trains serving Toronto (whether from New York or restored Chicago service), unlike trains serving Montreal and Vancouver.

Actually there is an easy solution, although it is one that's out of Amtrak's control. The US needs to stop making it harder for people to cross the border with one of our best friend's in the world. At the same time much of Europe was going to an open border system, we were busy making it harder to cross the border into Canada. And Canada reciprocated, making it harder to get into Canada. They did that in part I'm sure because of tit for tat, but also because if an American crossed into Canada without the proper paperwork then Canada would be stuck with them until they could sort things out and get back to the states.

Freight on the other hand travels far more easily across the border, we did make that easier. Now we just need to work on making it easier for people to cross.

I've sort of wished that Canada had done what you suggested and more or less thrown up their hands at the problem. Not terribly practical, I know, but it would've been fun to have the Canadian border folks respond to the problem by suggesting that Americans complain to their government about its stupid policy and being very apologetic about the whole thing. Of course, I also wish they'd pointedly decline to enforce the silliness about some of the diving activities, etc. along some of the coastal areas (highly-patrolled sea borders and whatnot)...but then again, this is all me.

I get the situation with the US/Mexico border (where true problems are rampant), but the Canadian situation is a bit of a mess. I suspect that a second part of it, however, is that Canada has a rather quirky admissions policy and this lets them enforce that. Simply going on a drivers' license probably doesn't quite cut it for someone on their "do not admit" list.

Still, it's an obnoxious pain and it restricts cross-border travel in a way that it wasn't ever really restricted before, even at the height of the Cold War (there might have been some restrictions in place during the World Wars, but I'm not sure there; before that, passports were more or less totally optional). It's not the only dumb US gov't policy, but it sure ranks up there.

 

[afigg]

Jube?

I knew that it was operated by both Amtrak and VIA. I thought that was the problem but it's kinda depressing to know that VIA also cancelled all other Toronto-Niagara Falls service. Now I really am dumbfounded, can't think of any solution with the changes Alan suggested.

Typo. June.

As for the Maple Leaf, the best way to improve it in the nearer and medium term is to improve the trip times in NY state. Cut an hour or two off the NYP to Niagara Falls trip time and that makes the customs inspection time at the border easier for passengers to accept.

 

[Anderson]

Jube?

I knew that it was operated by both Amtrak and VIA. I thought that was the problem but it's kinda depressing to know that VIA also cancelled all other Toronto-Niagara Falls service. Now I really am dumbfounded, can't think of any solution with the changes Alan suggested.

Typo. June.

As for the Maple Leaf, the best way to improve it in the nearer and medium term is to improve the trip times in NY state. Cut an hour or two off the NYP to Niagara Falls trip time and that makes the customs inspection time at the border easier for passengers to accept.

One other thing: The "Maple Leaf" line item there covers all of the corridor trains that travel past Albany (the "Empire Service" line covers the NYP-ALB trains). I don't recall for certain, but I think that revenue for NYP-ALB passengers on a through train gets allocated to the Empire Service line, not the Maple Leaf line. This is at least my understanding...it was the other way around until FY2005. Thus, you have the Ethan Allen Express/Ethan Allen going from 111k riders in one version of the 2005 figures and at 37k in the other version: About 74k riders were traveling on the "redundant" section. In all likelihood, the costs are being similarly accounted for, but I'm not certain of this (since the cost allocation formulas have changed repeatedly and the changes tend to be only vaguely comparable).

 

[AlanB]

Simply going on a drivers' license probably doesn't quite cut it for someone on their "do not admit" list.

It didn't seem to stop them from tagging me for extra questioning after they threw me out of Canada for a year. Still get it even now, although now its with an Enhanced Drivers License or EDL.

That said, in some sense I can understand the clamping down on just using a DL. There are far too many fake one's floating around and with 50 states all issuing different licenses, each state having multiple types of licenses, it can get hard to know if the one you're holding is real or fake. And getting a birth cert is easy.

At least with the EDL, the embedded chip brings up all sorts of good info about the person presenting it to the border agent. Same with passports and the other valid documents for crossing the border.

 

[user 1215]

Simply going on a drivers' license probably doesn't quite cut it for someone on their "do not admit" list.

It didn't seem to stop them from tagging me for extra questioning after they threw me out of Canada for a year. Still get it even now, although now its with an Enhanced Drivers License or EDL.

Though I'm sure your cause wasn't funny, I'm imagining a 1 year ban as punishment for crossing the border while shouting "Viva la Amtrak!"

 

[AlanB]

Simply going on a drivers' license probably doesn't quite cut it for someone on their "do not admit" list.

It didn't seem to stop them from tagging me for extra questioning after they threw me out of Canada for a year. Still get it even now, although now its with an Enhanced Drivers License or EDL.

Though I'm sure your cause wasn't funny, I'm imagining a 1 year ban as punishment for crossing the border while shouting "Viva la Amtrak!"

No, it wasn't for shouting that. :lol:

And it was far more serious, including being brought into an interrogation room, thoroughly patted down for weapons, and threatened with jail and the loss of my car and all possessions inside it. Definitely not a fun feeling to watch a border agent flinging the contents of your wallet around the table. And all because they thought that I was trying to work illegally in the country.

 

[Nathanael]

There's some interesting stuff in that June Report. Look on page C-1, under "Reconciling items between National Train System and Consolidated Statement of Operations".

National Train System: Revenue - Expense == ($360.2) million loss

Ancillary Customers: Revenue - Expense = $127.7 million gain

Freight and Other Customers: Revenue - Expense == ($205.8) million loss

"Freight and Other Customers" are losing a lot of money for Amtrak on a fully allocated basis. (I'm assuming that 'Ancillary Customers' is stuff like power line easements, though I could be completely wrong.)

Now the real question is whether they are losing money

for Amtrak on a *marginal* basis, but given the minimal revenue -- $64.4 million versus revenue of $1705.1 million on the national train system -- I think there's a serious question here. Who are these other customers and why are they being indirectly subsidized? Would Amtrak be better off eliminating the freight easements and throwing freight service off the NEC entirely? Or is it the commuter service easements which are causing the losses, and if so would it be better for the federal government to fund SEPTA and NJT directly?

 

[Nathanael]

Other intersting results:

- BNSF is still the best-performing class I.

- CN is getting noticeably better.

- The top cause of delays as measured in minutes of delay is now freight train interference

- but the worst delays to any given route are still caused by slow orders, which are also the second-largest cause of delays in minutes

- Third largest is passenger train interference, which usually means one Amtrak waiting for another (since it excludes commuter trains), and so is probably indirectly caused by other delays

- Fourth largest is signals. Perhaps the PTC mandate will cause the railroads to get their signals working more reliably.

- Fifth-largest is passenger-related delays from Amtrak, which Amtrak should probably work on reducing.

 

[Anderson]

A coin dropped in my mind: Freight/ancillary expenses spiked. I'm wondering how much expense got offloaded from the NEC and onto freight customers on the corridor. With that said, I'm wondering what caused the massive drop in revenue on that front.