NARP Fall Meeting 2015

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

CHamilton

Engineer
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
5,301
Location
Seattle
The NARP fall meeting is underway in Indianapolis. Here's the agenda. I'm excited about many of the issues we'll be focusing on. For those of you who can't attend, I'd be interesting in hearing what you think the organization's priorities should be, given our limited staff and volunteer resources.
 
Hi Charlie! I enjoyed meeting you at the Gathering and wish you a good NARP meeting.

My priorities to advocate for would be:

A convenient and connected long-distance network across the country (I would be okay with some of it being Amtrak, some of it being others who jump in when they see Iowa Pacific and AAF doing well).

Consistent, good customer service on board from all Amtrak employees.

My least concern is the NEC--even though I live here, I would like to see the rest of the country have what we already do.

Thanks for whatever advocacy you are able to do, and have a great meeting!

Patty
 
One of the priorities I have is to make sure, as new intercity service comes on line, that passengers can easily buy tickets that connect between the different services, and assurances are on place that if a misconnect happens people are assured rebooking at no additional cost to them.
 
Ditto to what the others say Charlie!

Also the food and beverage mess on Amtrak needs to be addressed, if this involves contracting it out, improving the quality and choices offered and allowing LD travelers to order when making their Rez, that would be ideal!

The nickel and dime cuts need to stop, if this requires a new CEO and Executive team @60 Mass, so be it!

Making ridiculous promises, that can't be kept, to the mica- Managers on Capitol Hill is no way to run a Railroad!

Thanks for yalls advocacy and have a ball in Indy!
 
Agreed on some of the food service items. Taking the Cardinal today, I'm seeing just how much they try to push through on their staff - they have one staff member for the dinette serving 50 or so sleeper car passengers (two sleeper cars.) The one attendant was working non-stop trying to get people's orders, get drinks out, prepare, and serve every meal for these 50 passengers, but you could tell he was very overworked. We had to wait 45 minutes (after our reservation) for him to be able to take our order, and it took another 15 minutes for our food to arrive. Our server/attendant was happy and had a good attitude, but there is no escaping that one person cannot serve 50ish sleeper passengers, being waiter, prep staff, and cook, without having to make people wait.
 
Matt Hardision spoke to NARP today at lunch (as of this writing I'm on my way home on the Cap). To say that the speech was not the most informative we've heard is an exercise in tactful understatement. When contrasted with Ed Ellis' speech the day before, the tenor of the two was night and day...and I'm going to dare say that Mr. Hardison's speech is indicative of everything that is wrong with Amtrak.

Frankly, Mr. Hardison's speech was almost straight out of a can. In a few places he adjusted his remarks to the effect of "Ok, I know you all know all of the routes in this video..." rather than simply presuming none of us knew what we were looking at, but besides that there was very little in his speech besides explaining some of the logic of some of the marketing moves (and discussing a few possible innovations down the line that should result from the software restructuring that's going on...more on that in a moment). Granted, he's VP for Marketing (and I believe Anthony's boss's boss) but he was basically giving the same line we got online about AGR 2.0...and there were a lot of people who didn't seem to be buying it in person, though decorum probably saved him from getting too much of an earful. On that, two thoughts jump to mind:

(1) When you're saying "most of the online response to AGR 2.0 was positive" and the line you pull from a blog to back it up is, I am not making this up, "There are a few minor nuggets of good news..." you are doing something wrong. [1] I didn't get a full shot of the slide in question, but I recognized the quote. Resorting to cherry-picking a quote from Facebook and only being able to pull that one off of the blogs...not a great sign and decidedly at odds with the "party line" being offered.

(2) When you're the person presumably in charge of AGR and your response to "Why did sleepers not get a bonus when BC/First got one?" is "I don't know", something is very off. Really, he should have known that question would come up in such an audience and had some sort of answer...so the best guess I can offer for his response is that "I don't know" beats something that would explicitly come off as, in so many words, "we don't care about you". For the record, Mr. Hardison has spoken to NARP in the past so it isn't like he didn't know who he was talking to.

Where I think reasons can plausibly be offered for Anthony's hands being tied, when the head of the organization comes into a meeting full of what he knows to be a bunch of long-distance travelers and gives almost the same canned spiel that we're seeing on FlyerTalk is embarassing.

Ok, back to the rest of what he said:
-Wifi should be rolled out on the Eastern LD trains by January (2016, that is).
-There's talk of providing more on-board entertainment, though the way it was presented (seemingly in context with the newly-designed seats rumored to be in the wings) implied some sort of seat-back system. I suspect this was just the result of lousy stock Power Point work...and dear God I hope so. If I have to start seeing seatback ads like a bunch of taxis show now (or some airlines do as well)...let's just say that at that point I'll be calling some people in Richmond if it's on a VA train.
--Probably a good time to mention the seat situation I heard about through an informal channel down here: There were apparently some focus groups testing out new seats at Union Station...and the new seats had a LOT less padding (and were fixed in place rather than being reversible thanks to plugs). Apparently they weren't terribly comfortable.
-There's also talk of Amtrak being able to sell more "extras", so to speak. Right now there's a real limit there...everything has to list as "seat space" of some sort. With the new system, there's room to add a lot...and it could go well (guaranteeing a meal time/booking a diner meal in coach) or poorly ("booking" your checked bags in advance or getting hit with extra fees, being forced to prepay for a meal or not be able to get one). It's all going to be down to how they handle it (e.g. allowing enhancements over current services vs. "unbundling" existing services).

In general, the comments were rather depressing, un-energetic, and frankly felt like something that, in airline terms, you'd hear from Delta. I'd contrast that with Ed Ellis, whose remarks were candid, enthusiastic...his comments felt more like what I'd expect from Virgin America. For anyone who knows me, those comparisons are purposeful and meaningful.

[1] The Points With a Crew blog was where the quote was from.
 
Thanks for the update Cliff!

Sounds like the usual BS from a Corporate flack!

Hopefully this hack won't be replacing Boardman when he "retires"!

Amtrak copying the Airlines model seems to be picking up speed with no-one @ 60 Mass able to be a voice of reason to counterbalance the Bean Counters schemes!
 
Given what's been happening, NARP should press Amtrak to focus on *quality*. Not luxury, just quality. It's honestly cheap to provide quality, and it makes people pay more for a train than for a bus or a plane.

One aspect of quality is running on time.

Another is being able to provide clear answers to customer questions (no surprises, no gotchas).

Another is spacious, comfortable seats.

Another is a decent selection of decent food.

After that, I truly believe Amtrak needs to focus on the Chicago - East Coast corridors.

This is a set of markets which could be bigger and better than the Florida - Northeast markets, but is underserved due to stupid decisions made decades in the past.

The Cardinal should be daily;

There should be a Chicago-Cleveland-Pittsburgh-Philadelphia train;

There should be a Chicago-Dearborn-Toledo-Cleveland-New York train;

All of these trains (and the LSL and CL) should run on time; and faster than they do now;

Chicago Union Station should have a high platform for the high-floor trains, and improved waiting rooms;

New York should have improved waiting rooms and boarding as well.

Amtrak is finally talking seriously about South of the Lake, but they need to be given encouragement to focus on this.

I believe that the Chicago - East Coast markets can be more profitable than the Florida - Northeast markets, given decent

service, and they will benefit all the connecting services on both ends, as well as any proposed services in the middle

(once Kasich is removed). If a positive feedback can be started here, I think it could lead to political support

for improved rail all over the country.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I believe Ken Pendegrast of All Aboard Ohio was at the NARP meeting (according to the agenda). Here is his proposal.

http://allaboardohio.org/2015/09/22/new-report-restore-passenger-rail/

He mentions the Chi-Keystone route as well as the Chi-Dearborn-Toledo route. It does make sense going through Michigan and servicing Michigan-East Coast travel and Amtrak owns most of the route in Michigan. If they can take care of the Dearborn-Toledo route it certainly makes sense at the very least to reroute one of the CL or LSL over it.

He also mentions a train going across the PGH to PHL route overnight and continuing to Chicago which would arrive in CLE and TOL in regular hours! I'd almost say that would would be better for Lancaster,Harrisburg, Altoona, and Johnstown than what they have now except that they would have to board/leave their Chicago bound train in the middle of the night (see his proposed Three Rivers schedule). Is it better to get on a train at 3am in the morning or wait in PGH between 8pm and 11:59pm?

Assuming all of the equipment and track issues are dealt with (and yes, that is a big assumption), I proposed a train NYP-PHL-HAR-PGH-CLE-TOL-CHI stopping only at those stops, an express service (I would also consider NYP-PHL-BAL-WAS-PGH-CLE-TOL-CHI using the CL route from WAS to CHI). Is that reasonable then? When people tell me it's not and say Amtrak doesn't have the money or equipment, of course I'm going to say why not cut some other route to get the money and equipment? And yes, I'm still bitter about them canceling the Broadway Limited when I feel there were other trains that should've been cut instead.

As almost all of you know, CHI-PHL direct through the Keystone route is my #1 priority. If I don't have it, I ask why not. If we get it and assuming it's not the first thing cut 10 years later like the Three Rivers was, you will probably never hear me bash another train again. I'm glad to see others at least on board despite my selfish attitude.
 
So can someone summarize Ed's vision, also, please?

I'm also curious as to.what the Millennials had to say.
Ed's vision is a bit more complicated (partly because he's currently trying to get two corridors up and running); however, the gist is that he wants fast, frequent, reliable (conventional) service. That was almost exactly what came out of the Millennial panel as well, FWIW. Ed is also pursuing a far more aggressive "upsell" model: The reason he sells "Business Class" on the Hoosier State is that Arrow can only handle "sleepers" (of various sorts), "First Class", and "Business Class"...and Amtrak won't sell "First Class" on any train but the Acela. He wanted to brand it as "Diamond Class" but that wouldn't mesh with Arrow.

Spinning around to the Millennial panel, I think there's a general desire for more classes of service (start thinking what Corridor Capital proposed for the Hoosier State here): Everyone wants/needs wifi of some sort but beyond that there's an obvious demand for "cheap seat" tickets alongside better upgrades than what Amtrak presently offers. There was also a generalized request for transit-accessible development*.

The other "big ask" from Millennials was integrated ticket/farecards (so, for example, a trip from Danbury, CT to White Flint, MD wouldn't require four separate fare media: MNRR, NY Subway, Amtrak, and WMATA). This would be a clunky mess administratively/politically, but it would sure beat all of us running around trying to collect and keep farecards for a dozen cities straight.

*I'm going to differentiate between this and "standard" TOD insofar as I think the request is more to have reasonable access to higher-frequency transit than to all live in "town center" type developments.
 
Key point I came away with on hearing the two presentations is Iowa Pacific sees a market for passengers who value enhanced quality; Amtrak sees there is a demand for low cost travel. Same as what the airlines have found.

My reading on new Amtrak awards program is that you will pay your points on variable scale directly related to the changes in fare. If price bucket goes up then you will spend more points. Just don't know if $ to points ratio is constant and what it is.
 
The ratio is mostly constant. There are a few exceptions, but IIRC it's a 34.5:1 ratio. The exceptions are:
(1) The Acela is more expensive; and

(2) There's an 800-point minimum price for redemptions.

Also, "saver" fares aren't included when looking at what your redemption will cost.

I agree that you've hit the difference on the head; the issue as I see it is that they're both right: There's clearly a market for folks who would, for example, happily travel overnight in a Regional Coach if it cost less than Greyhound. There's also clearly a market for folks who are wiling to pay a pretty good amount for "full service" tickets (e.g. comfortable accommodations, good food, etc.). And there are folks in the middle, who are price-conscious...up to a point, given the lengths of some trips.
 
That may be a bit of a rosy outlook when you're firing employees for trying to unionize and having to cancel a nontrivial number of trips due to using older equipment without spares.

I wish them nothing but the best, but will need to see some more data before considering the business model a success.
 
I was on the same train with Malcolm, and agree with his assessment. Ellis, I think, has a good business model, but it's too soon to say whether it's sustainable. Frankly, he's saddled with equipment even more ancient than Amtrak's. I'd love to see what he could do with the same service model and some modern consists.OTOH, Virginia, North Carolina, Maryland, California (the Comets) and Amtrak itself started with ancient, hand-me-down equipment, and they've gradually improved their rolling stock. But don't be surprised if the train breaks down once in a while. What we have now is like trying to build a new freeway as a one-lane gravel road, and then expand it later.
 
In the US today I would already consider Ellis' business model at least as successful, or failurefull as the Amtrak business model. I am hoping that Ellis will manage to show that he has a more viable business model than Amtrak's for less dense corridors than the NEC. I think it is perfectly appropriate for a private operator to take on the major risk of offering a premium service. I think the issue of whether the employees are unionized or not is a secondary one. The primary thing to look at is what does the compensation package look like for the employees and if it is at par with equivalent jobs in the industry.

AFAICT, the only outfit that will be starting with brand new rolling stock is AAF, other than the new commuter operations of course, and Siemens is the big winner there. We tend to forget the huge commuter operations which have all recently started with new equipment and some older operations have had their entire equipment updated with new equipment within the last 10 or so years. Unfortunately this largess has not fully landed on Amtrak's plate yet, though in bits and pieces it has been happening slowly.

Bottom line.... I am pretty much on the same page as Malcolm and Charlie.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I should have been more specific, I meant successful over a long period of time in a repeatable fashion providing transportation services for a large number of people (where "long period of time" and "large" are admittedly poorly defined). There is a big fuzzy area between "tourist railroad" and "meaningful transportation", I'm looking only at the "meaningful transportation" side of the coin. Obviously, Ed is successful in his more limited rail ventures. He has grand visions, it will be interesting to see if he is able to make them a reality.

I wouldn't say that they are "saddled" with old equipment, that's what they chose to use. Not having spares available is another choice. Some of the reason for cancellations I'm hearing are pretty basic maintenance stuff and unrelated to equipment age. You shouldn't have to cancel your once-daily trip because your wheels have flat spots on them.

Edit to add: I agree that the union status isn't too relevant, depending on the overall compensation package. My statement wasn't on the status of being unionized or not, but on the fact that you're firing workers that are trying to unionize. That's not not a sign of a healthy business, in my opinion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top