Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mark Meyer" data-source="post: 864621" data-attributes="member: 15034"><p>The NP/MILW merger is an oft-touted scenario.&nbsp; But it never would have happened.&nbsp; For one thing, NP owned half of the CB&amp;Q (along with GN) and they would hardly give up their half of the CB&amp;Q to merge with the MILW which had a route structure which was highly inferior to the CB&amp;Q.&nbsp; This unlikely &quot;what if&quot; would have logically resulted in the GN purchasing the NP&#039;s half of the CB&amp;Q and merging with the CB&amp;Q.&nbsp; GN already had the superior route between the Twin Cities and Pacific Northwest, and other than Snoqualmie Pass, the MILW had nothing that would have benefited the NP.&nbsp; And a combined GN/CB&amp;Q would likely result in NP/MILW losing a lot of interchange traffic to/from the Pacific Northwest to/from the CB&amp;Q at Laurel, which would move instead via the GN route through Great Falls to the main at Shelby.</p></blockquote><p></p>

[QUOTE="Mark Meyer, post: 864621, member: 15034"] The NP/MILW merger is an oft-touted scenario. But it never would have happened. For one thing, NP owned half of the CB&Q (along with GN) and they would hardly give up their half of the CB&Q to merge with the MILW which had a route structure which was highly inferior to the CB&Q. This unlikely "what if" would have logically resulted in the GN purchasing the NP's half of the CB&Q and merging with the CB&Q. GN already had the superior route between the Twin Cities and Pacific Northwest, and other than Snoqualmie Pass, the MILW had nothing that would have benefited the NP. And a combined GN/CB&Q would likely result in NP/MILW losing a lot of interchange traffic to/from the Pacific Northwest to/from the CB&Q at Laurel, which would move instead via the GN route through Great Falls to the main at Shelby. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Reply to thread

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum: