Initial Sleeper Pricing

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.

niemi24s

Engineer
Joined
Feb 11, 2015
Messages
3,105
There seems to be two schools of thought about how sleepers are priced when first offered. Some think when sleepers are first offered (11 months out) they're priced at high bucket. Others think the opposite - the initial offering is at low bucket. A quick tally of sleeper buckets offered during the 16 Sep 2018 through 15 Oct 2018 period for 12 LD trains found initial offerings as shown below (5 = high bucket, 1 = low bucket):

ROOMETTES FAM. BEDROOMS BEDROOMS

• 5 offered 2.2% of the time 78% 14%

• 4 offered 9.8% of the time 22% 10%

• 3 offered 14% of the time ------ 27%

• 2 offered 35% of the time ------ 32%

• 1 offered 39% of the rime ------ 17%

So depending on the type of sleeping accommodation, both strategies seem to be in play.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have watched the sleeper pricing on the west bound SL change several times a month from top to bottom and back again on AMSNAG when east bound SWC remains unchanged at the low bucket.This for a trip this summer. One day the price is low, next is high, next is low, then a few days later it happens again.
 
Lonestar648's post kicked me off top dead center to re-do my tally and include all LD trains in both directions. The new results for the 19 Sep through 18 Oct 2018 period are (5 = high bucket, 1 = low bucket):

ROOMETTES FAM. BEDROOMS BEDROOMS

• 5 offered 9.5% of the time 83% 16%

• 4 offered 9.5% of the time 17% 7.8%

• 3 offered 11% of the time ----- 25%

• 2 offered 29% of the time ----- 38%

• 1 offered 41% of the time ----- 14%

The only thing that stood out like a sore thumb was the Auto Train with all sleepers at high bucket in both direction during this 30 day period and none were sold out. As in Post #1, Family Bedrooms were offered only in the top two buckets.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wait, are you now able to book 12 months out? You should only be able to price up to 11 months out.
I just messed up when typing the months in the post - fixed them.

As for the "why" behind it all - uh - I don't really care. My only interest is in the "how" it is. The factual stuff.
default_tongue.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here's the raw data for those who like to fiddle with numbers:

Initial Bucket Offeringsa.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Very interesting. Now I wonder what the data would show if done just a month, as mentioned in the original post as one of the pricing scenarios. I suspect, if nothing else, the family bedroom pricing will show some lower buckets.
 
Not sure what you mean by...

. . .I wonder what the data would show if done just a month. . .
Do you mean the next 30 day day period? Or some other 30 day period?

(Note that "strategy" has been removed from the thread title as I felt that word implied a reason why those buckets were offered.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I wasn’t clear-what would this look like if same anaysis done just 30 days before travel. I suspect we’d see high buckets for high demand trains and lower buckets than those shown here for lower demand trains and accommodations.
 
After staring at the raw data looking for any remarkable differences between directions for any given train, it was apparent that:

• For most accommodations, the most common bucket offerings were at the same bucket level in either train direction - such as those circled in green, below:

Initial Bucket Offeringsb.jpg

• Five trains showed one bucket differences between directions, two of which are shown by the yellow circles.

• Two trains showed two bucket differences as shown by the orange circles.

• One train showed a three bucket difference as shown by the red circles.

The Bedroom upcharge increase for that jump of three buckets on the CZ is $731. Call it the cost of changing directions in a Bedroom, if you will. Postulations as to the "why" are left to others.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I wasn’t clear-what would this look like if same anaysis done just 30 days before travel. I suspect we’d see high buckets for high demand trains and lower buckets than those shown here for lower demand trains and accommodations.
Could be. Sounds like the same supply/demand stuff from Econ 101 sixty years ago. But the only way to really know is to use... http://biketrain.net/amsnag/amSnag.php ...and do the 32 searches needed to make a chart of the buckets for comparison. Permission granted to copy the chart in Post #8, post the new data to it, scan it and post it here for all to see.
default_smile.png


And it sounds like you realize you'd have to wait until 18 Sep 2018 to do all those AmSnag searches in order to cover the same time period as my search (19 Sep through 18 Oct 2018) - and get the data just prior to the start of that very same period. Data gathered tomorrow for the 23 Nov through 22 Dec 2017 period couldn't realistically be compared.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
IMO, Amtrak's plan to the highest profitability should be to fill all the sleepers on all trips.. With insistence on.initially keeping buckets high and ending up with low occupancy, it doesn't sound like they are maximizing revenue. A trains sales history can certainly be factored in, but what is being ignored, is that when prices rise ridership can drop

For instance, Amtrak has decided to milk the Autotrain for all that its worth, and several friends of mine are now driving. A trip to Florida from Lorton to Sanford is in a late model vehicle is worth about $450-$500 . Food and a nights lodging adds another $200. If your vehicle is several years old the cost drops. Intelligence in marketing dictates that this should be the number that the high bucket sleeper fares are based upon. The end result is; save people money or do it at an equal driving cost and they take your option. If the overnight trip costs $900-$1000 then be aware you are not the only game in town
 
One can always fill every Sleeper if one charges $0. Won’t be much good for profitability. Maximizing load factor is just one parameter in a complex problem. Do you for sure that Amtrak is actually way off from maximizing revenues while keeping costs in control? If so could you please present numeric factual evidence?

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum
 
Not sure how pertinent this might be, but here's a listing of the sleeper buckets (high to low) offered on the AT for the 30 period beginning today:

Roomettes Southbound: 15, 10, 1, 3, 0

" Northbound: 0, 3, 2, 9, 16

Fam. Brms Southbound: 19, 1, 1, 0, 0

" Northbound: 4, 0, 4, 4, 13

Bedrooms Southbound: 1, 0, 8, 19, 0

" Northbound: 0, 0, 1, 17,12

But I've no idea what buckets were offered for this 30 day menu 10 months ago - when they were first offered.
 
One can always fill every Sleeper if one charges $0. Won’t be much good for profitability. Maximizing load factor is just one parameter in a complex problem. Do you for sure that Amtrak is actually way off from maximizing revenues while keeping costs in control? If so could you please present numeric factual evidence?

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum
We have been on many Amtrak trips over the past 15 years and are always in the sleeper. On all but a couple of CZ trips we have always seen vacant bedrooms and roomettes in the sleeper car. Some other trains like the LSL usually fill up but on one Autotrain trip a few years back in May (going South) , there were less than 10 people in our sleeper. Obviously our experience doesn't indicate the revenue numbers vs the sales targets. There is no way of knowing this unless you work at corporate but our observations seem to show something. Point is that price matters there should be a way to sell the service to insure a full sleeper on every LD train, In one example I pointed out that driving is often less expensive than taking the Autotrain. Does that create a missed opportunity?
 
. . . driving is often less expensive than taking the Autotrain. Does that create a missed opportunity?
A little doodling on the back of a bar napkin leads me to believe that for two adults, driving is probably less expensive than most any LD train unless the sleeper is a low bucket Roomette (using the SWC route as the example). But using the same parameters, even a low bucket Roomette on the AT costs more (about $70 more) than driving for two adults.
 
One can always fill every Sleeper if one charges $0. Won’t be much good for profitability. Maximizing load factor is just one parameter in a complex problem. Do you for sure that Amtrak is actually way off from maximizing revenues while keeping costs in control? If so could you please present numeric factual evidence?

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum
We have been on many Amtrak trips over the past 15 years and are always in the sleeper. On all but a couple of CZ trips we have always seen vacant bedrooms and roomettes in the sleeper car. Some other trains like the LSL usually fill up but on one Autotrain trip a few years back in May (going South) , there were less than 10 people in our sleeper. Obviously our experience doesn't indicate the revenue numbers vs the sales targets. There is no way of knowing this unless you work at corporate but our observations seem to show something. Point is that price matters there should be a way to sell the service to insure a full sleeper on every LD train, In one example I pointed out that driving is often less expensive than taking the Autotrain. Does that create a missed opportunity?
I’m inclined to believe actual data shows that ridership isn’t suffering over anecdotes from an occasional traveler that seeks out low prices (and therefore avoiding times of high demand).
 
The Auto Train has a very specific demographic and purpose. It is susceptible to much more than an average market. The snowbirds are dropping off year after without ample replenishment. The price is less of an issue. It is more of an issue of people not maintaining two households. That was a large part of the ridership on that train.

I'm not sure that fits into the purpose(?) of this thread.
 
The snowbirds are dropping off year after without ample replenishment.
But I was under the impression that because people are living longer and longer as time marches on, the quantity of snowbirds would be on the rise? If that's so, then it might explain why Amtrak feels it can charge high bucket for any AT sleeper 11 months from now and still do a decent job of filling the train.

Another factor that might make for generally higher AT fares (and not just what buckets are offered) is economy of scale - the shorter the route the more the cost per mile - and as the AT is the second shortest LD train it's costs per mile are indeed some of the highest:

Costs Per Mile 005.jpg

Even though the dollar figures on that chart are ten months old, I don't think there's been any significant changes in the relative rankings of the trains.

One thing that has me puzzled about the AT is that if snowbirds are heading South for the Winter, why the high bucket offerings on the Northbound AT? Snowbirds going back to get the stuff they forgot to take on the first trip?
default_smile.png
 
The snowbirds are dropping off year after without ample replenishment.
But I was under the impression that because people are living longer and longer as time marches on, the quantity of snowbirds would be on the rise? If that's so, then it might explain why Amtrak feels it can charge high bucket for any AT sleeper 11 months from now and still do a decent job of filling the train.
They are but when they go, I'm seeing a lot of hope for a large replenishment. This is pure speculation on my part, but I'm thinking that with real estate being quite expensive at both ends, you're not going to see the next few generations investing in "cheap land" and owning a home on both ends. Some of the existing homes will be handed down while others will be sold. I expect some of this market to drop off. I will say that I have spoken to a huge number of former snowbirds that threw in the towel and dropped anchor...mostly in Florida. They'd rather deal with the heat than the taxes and cold in the Metropolitan area.

One thing that has me puzzled about the AT is that if snowbirds are heading South for the Winter, why the high bucket offerings on the Northbound AT? Snowbirds going back to get the stuff they forgot to take on the first trip?
default_smile.png
The answer is obvious! It is driven by the disaffected, disgruntled and thoroughly gouged visitors returning home from Disney!
default_ohmy.png
They won't bat an eye at paying a lot for a sleeper. After what they spent down there, Amtrak could charge them whatever they want and it would still be cheaper than what you paid for two hot dogs and two sodas and cotton candy (you'll have to split that!!)
default_blink.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
On the AT people will pay something for not having to drive between Virginia and Florida, which appeals more to people as they get older and who find that the drive wears on them. If someone doesn't want to spend the additional $100 for the convenience of not driving, they probably would drive anyway. One issue maybe that those who were traveling between now live in Florida. I have several friends who used to make the trip, that just moved, tired of traveling between and the cost of winterizing things at home. The newer generation may not want to spend winter in Florida, thus another loss of passengers. The AT may need to refocus its marketing to continue to be attractive.
 
Back
Top