Discount Tuesdays now includes Churchill

Went to the VIA site to see if they still did Discount Tuesdays on the Canadian during peak season now that it's approaching, and found that they expanded the sleeping car discounts to the Winnipeg-Churchill route!

Seems strange to me that they are doing this on a "remote service", that route has the highest subsidy per passenger at US$1255 (2014 data) The Canadian is US$679, the Ocean US$551.

EDIT: Looks like there's only northbound Churchill trips on there, and also the Skeena in both directions.

Note, though, that while travel to Churchill is discounted, you have to pay full fare if you want to leave there.

Ispolkom said:

Note, though, that while travel to Churchill is discounted, you have to pay full fare if you want to leave there.

Click to expand...

And getting out of Churchill ain't easy! LOL

Train2104 said:

Went to the VIA site to see if they still did Discount Tuesdays on the Canadian during peak season now that it's approaching, and found that they expanded the sleeping car discounts to the Winnipeg-Churchill route!

Seems strange to me that they are doing this on a "remote service", that route has the highest subsidy per passenger at US$1255 (2014 data) The Canadian is US$679, the Ocean US$551.

EDIT: Looks like there's only northbound Churchill trips on there, and also the Skeena in both directions.

Click to expand...

This is hardly strange. If VIA can add more pax, then the subsidy per passenger drops. The same likely applies with most "remote service" routes: Load factors are so low overall (probably not anywhere near 100% even in peak season) that virtually any added revenue from additional pax is a win.

Anderson said:

Train2104 said:

Went to the VIA site to see if they still did Discount Tuesdays on the Canadian during peak season now that it's approaching, and found that they expanded the sleeping car discounts to the Winnipeg-Churchill route!

Seems strange to me that they are doing this on a "remote service", that route has the highest subsidy per passenger at US$1255 (2014 data) The Canadian is US$679, the Ocean US$551.

EDIT: Looks like there's only northbound Churchill trips on there, and also the Skeena in both directions.

Click to expand...

This is hardly strange. If VIA can add more pax, then the subsidy per passenger drops. The same likely applies with most "remote service" routes: Load factors are so low overall (probably not anywhere near 100% even in peak season) that virtually any added revenue from additional pax is a win.

Click to expand...

Makes sense, though it seems unexpected to me that the Skeena isn't filling Touring Class during the summer.

Also, the Trains Magazine article about VIA Prestige Class from a few months back mentioned that they have trouble filling the berths and single rooms at peak, so I guess discounting those makes sense too. It's the double rooms that sell out fast and command a huge premium

The "forced overnight" in the middle of the route probably hurts the Skeena. The other thing that jams it is the fact that there isn't exactly a good way to get away from Prince Rupert except to take the train back to Jasper, not to mention that the train connections in Jasper aren't great (though admittedly they could be worse, IIRC the Skeena doesn't connect with the Canadian either way, so you've got either one or two nights in Jasper if you're trying to do your trip entirely by train).

Honestly, if you wanted to improve the performance of the Skeena you'd either [A] restore the link with the Canadian in some form, tweak the ferry system to allow some effective way out of Prince Rupert, or [C] extend the train to Edmonton (which at least has a decent airport to speak of). Doing that should pick up some decent Edmonton-Jasper traffic as well as making the tourist trip on the train a bit more workable insofar as it wouldn't require extremely wacky transfer games to get to a decent airport.

 

Edit: Well, I checked the schedules, and none of the Canadian-Skeena connections work and you have a bunch of two-day connections. The Skeena arrives after both have departed and departs before either arrive. If there's anything that could kill the Skeena's performance I'm going to suggest that this is a big one. So...

 

Skeena arr. Jasper 1830 (Thurs, Sat, Mon)
EB Canadian dep. Jasper 1730 (Sat, Mon*, Wed)(no connection)
WB Canadian dep. Jasper 1430 (Fri, Sun*, Tues)(no connection)

Skeena dep. Jasper 1245 (Wed, Fri, Sun)
EB Canadian arr. Jasper 1600 (Mon*, Wed, Sat)(no connection)
WB Canadian arr. Jasper 1430 (Tues, Fri, Sun*)(no connection)

If I arrive on Tuesday's Canadian from Toronto, I can take the Skeena on Wednesday. If I arrive on Friday's, I have to wait until Sunday; if I arrive on Sunday I have to wait until Wednesday. If I arrive from Vancouver on Monday, I have to wait until Wednesday; a Wednesday arrival dictates a wait until Friday and a Saturday arrival at least allows a next-day departure on Sunday.

 

Arriving on the Skeena, to board the EB Canadian I have to wait two days, full stop. The only set of the four connections that is really at least passably sensible is boarding the WB Canadian: In all three cases, I can board the next day's Canadian bound for Vancouver.

 

FWIW, Charlie Hamilton and I have wanted to do the Skeena for a few years. This discussion should give y'all a hint as to why it has not happened, and I highly doubt that we're the only ones in our boat.

For what it's worth, somebody asked this in the 2013 Annual Public Meeting:

Why does train #1 arrive in Jasper 15 minutes after train #5 has left on Fridays and Sundays – and one has to wait two or three days for the next train #5 if making connections from the East?

When consulting our customer base surveys, it is clear that the passengers from train #1 to train #5 prefer a layover in Jasper compared to same day connection.

Click to expand...

As for the forced no-accommodations-provided overnight, it makes the route cater almost exclusively to tourists, neglecting the mandatory service role and categorization of the route. Maybe separate summer and winter schedules, the latter without an overnight, should be considered.

That response seems specious as only a bureaucrat could spawn or love. How would making a connection from #1 to #5 available prevent a layover for those who want it? Even if I did want to layover, I would enjoy watching a train leave the station.

I think restoring the link idea between the Canadian and the Skeena is tricky at best. Recently, we passed westbound Canadians running 12 and 22 hours late, respectively.