FY 2012 Final Budget Document

[afigg]

For those interested in such things, the revised final version of the FY 2012 Budget and Comprehensive Business Plan has been posted on Amtrak's website. The budget was revised in January to reflect the FY12 funding provided by Congress in the November deal. The official FY11 Annual Report is also up on the Reports and Documents page, by the way.

Lots of interesting items and tidbits in the FY12 budget document. Some of them:

- The budget goal for net operating loss is $345 million, $121 million less than the $466 million Operating Grant appropriated by Congress for FY12. The net loss for FY11 was $457 million, hence the staffing cuts and getting rather aggressive on ticket prices. The $121 million difference from the Operating Grant will be applied to capital expenditures.

- Total amount provided by Congress for FY12 is $1.409 billion, with $607 million for capital project expenditures.

- A total of 174 employees applied for the Voluntary Separation Incentive Program (VSIP) and the company accepted 161 of the applications.

- The only major new additional equipment purchased planned for FY12 is the purchase of the 40 Acela coach cars. The 130 corridor bi-levels are being brought by the states, so they are not plan of Amtrak's budget.

- the $62.6 million in payments for the 130 CAF Viewliner IIs will be funded by internal revenue.

- The FY2012 update to the Fleet Strategy Plan is planned to be released in February 2012.

- There is $13.7 million budgeted for the launch of WiFi "systemwide".

- assuming the $134 million Early Buyout Option (funded by US Treasury due to the 2008 PRIIA act) was exercised on January 31, 2012 for Trust 98C, Amtrak now owns 107 Superliners outright with no more lease payments. The Early Buyout for the 50 Viewliners of $44 million is due on July 2, 2012.

- Plan is to cut company total employee head-count from 20,076 at end of FY11 to 19,552 by end of FY12.

- Budget goal is a total ridership of 31.38 million, up from the 30.18 million in FY11 for a 4% increase. May be tough to meet that with the increase in ticket prices. On the other hand, if the national average gas price hits $4/gallon by next summer, ridership will be going up. Table on page 97 shows their projections for each train service.

 

[Train2104]

Calculated the farebox recovery ratio, here's some stats:

Profitable:

Acela

Regional

Carolinian

Missouri River Runner

< 40%

Hoosier State (15%)

Sunset Ltd (25%)

Cardinal (35%)

 

[Anderson]

Thoughts on the last sheet off the top of my head:

NEC

-Roughly $200 million in profits on the Acela? If Amtrak can somehow keep this up, we might have a glide path to profitability (though the 4% increase in ridership seems like a stretch). PPR is projected to be about $151.43, though, and YTD it is $152.36.

-The NER, on the other hand, seems to be doing better on ridership than the Acela (up 7% versus a budget of 2%). PPR is projected at about $68.89 versus $67.90 YTD.

Projection at the present: The Regionals beat expectations handily. The Acela falls slightly short on ridership but meets revenue. Together, ridership edges expectations and revenue is ahead of expectations.

Shorts

(1) There is buffer room in here in terms of ridership as follows:

-Lynchburger. Projected to lose 4,000 riders; on track to end the year up about 30,000-40,000.

-WAS-NPN. Projected to lose 8,000 riders; on track to end the year up 40,000-50,000.

-San Joaquins. Here, the "cookie jar" seems to be about another 80,000 or so.

(2) The revenue targets. Do these include state revenue? I ask because if not, ticket revenue is pegged to rise to $42.76 from $28.26. My best guess here is that it includes state grants in the mix.

(3) From all appearances, the Virginia trains are more profitable than the Regionals writ large. Also, the margins on the Lynchburger seem to be about the same as the Acela, just on far lower volume (59% projected Acela vs. 56% projected Lynchburger). My guess is that this inverts on higher Lynchburger ridership than projected.

(4) Again, taking a stab, I think that ridership is somewhat short: The cookie jar of about 200,000 riders noted above gets swallowed up on the Surfliner. I'm guessing ridership up 2% instead of 4.4%, but revenue roughly on target (though I can't compare this meaningfully given the mess of accounts elsewhere).

Long Distance

(1) The Eagle is running very "hot" versus projections. So is the Auto Train. Overall, growth for the year here is projected at about 40,000. We're halfway there as of the end of November.

(2) Overall PPR projected at $118.25 versus $106.43 last year and $103.37. I suspect this is overly ambitious.

(3) My guess here: Ridership edges projections but revenue falls short.

 

[daveyb99]

On Page 15: Call Center Booking Fee.

uh ... NOT

More focus on selecting your own Sleeper.

Viewing 1-800 reservations online also

 

[Anderson]

On Page 15: Call Center Booking Fee.

uh ... NOT

More focus on selecting your own Sleeper.

Viewing 1-800 reservations online also

I do...not see that there. I hope you're joking!

 

[Train2104]

I do...not see that there. I hope you're joking!

I see it. PDF page 15 Uh oh!!!

Also on page 63:

Service Fees - $0.5M: The goal of the Service Fee project is to build the ability to apply a "ticket

fee" based on the channel utilized to perform a specified transaction. This is intended to

influence customer behavior, specifically to encourage customers to use self-service distribution

channels when that option is available to them. It is envisioned that such fees will be applied on a

per-reservation or per-passenger basis.

 

[jis]

On the NER situation, the sooner they get more cars allocated to NER the more they can improve the farebox recovery. There is a pot of money sitting there limited only by available capacity. True of Acelas too, but reallocating the single level fleet from the midwest upon the arrival of the 130 corridor bi-levels is going to be a cheaper proposition than buying 40 Acela cars. Though I am glad that it looks like both will happen. Looking forward to 10 car NERs in a few years! and of course 8 car Acelas too! Once the capital cost is out of the way incremental addition of cars to existing trains is very low cost additional revenue stream.

 

[afigg]

Calculated the farebox recovery ratio, here's some stats:

Profitable:

Acela

Regional

Carolinian

Missouri River Runner

< 40%

Hoosier State (15%)

Sunset Ltd (25%)

Cardinal (35%)

The revenue numbers in the projected budget table on the last page appears to include the state support funds for the corridor services. The total revenue numbers in Table 4 on page 13 show $1,968 million in ticket revenue, $109 million in food and beverage, $193 million from State Support Train Revenue for a subtotal passenger related revenue of $2,270 million. The total projected revenue from the trains on page 97 is $2,284 million which while not an exact match, is pretty close. So the profit or loss for each state corridor train service includes the current state support funding. The numbers in that table says the states will have to cough up around an additional $165 million in FY13 to fully subsidize the state trains, if my probably too simplistic interpretation is correct.

The 3 trains with the poorest cost recovery are the 3 only non-daily or greater frequency trains: Sunset Limited & Cardinal 3 days a week and the Hoosier State 4 days a week. The Hoosier State is projected to take in $0.9 million in revenue and cost $5.9 million to operate. I think the odds of the Hoosier State shutting down this fall are real. The solution, of course, is for the Cardinal to go daily service which should improve the cost recovery for it. But, where Amtrak and Virginia are with respect to addressing and funding the siding length constraint on the Buckingham Branch tracks, there is no information.

The projected $373 loss per passenger for the Sunset Limited sticks out like a sore thumb. If Amtrak is not able to operate the Sunset Limited as a daily service, the SL is a big target for a fatal cut.

Guess one could play with the revenue numbers and monthly reports for the eastern LD trains to guess estimate how much additional sleeper sale revenue those trains could get from the new Viewliner sleeper and baggage-dorm cars when they are delivered.

 

[Anderson]

Calculated the farebox recovery ratio, here's some stats:

Profitable:

Acela

Regional

Carolinian

Missouri River Runner

< 40%

Hoosier State (15%)

Sunset Ltd (25%)

Cardinal (35%)

The revenue numbers in the projected budget table on the last page appears to include the state support funds for the corridor services. The total revenue numbers in Table 4 on page 13 show $1,968 million in ticket revenue, $109 million in food and beverage, $193 million from State Support Train Revenue for a subtotal passenger related revenue of $2,270 million. The total projected revenue from the trains on page 97 is $2,284 million which while not an exact match, is pretty close. So the profit or loss for each state corridor train service includes the current state support funding. The numbers in that table says the states will have to cough up around an additional $165 million in FY13 to fully subsidize the state trains, if my probably too simplistic interpretation is correct.

The 3 trains with the poorest cost recovery are the 3 only non-daily or greater frequency trains: Sunset Limited & Cardinal 3 days a week and the Hoosier State 4 days a week. The Hoosier State is projected to take in $0.9 million in revenue and cost $5.9 million to operate. I think the odds of the Hoosier State shutting down this fall are real. The solution, of course, is for the Cardinal to go daily service which should improve the cost recovery for it. But, where Amtrak and Virginia are with respect to addressing and funding the siding length constraint on the Buckingham Branch tracks, there is no information.

The projected $373 loss per passenger for the Sunset Limited sticks out like a sore thumb. If Amtrak is not able to operate the Sunset Limited as a daily service, the SL is a big target for a fatal cut.

Guess one could play with the revenue numbers and monthly reports for the eastern LD trains to guess estimate how much additional sleeper sale revenue those trains could get from the new Viewliner sleeper and baggage-dorm cars when they are delivered.

I'm guessing it'll pump another $20 million or so into the system net. I'm not sure exactly how much sleeper space will be freed up by the baggage-dorms...but I'm also assuming that you'll have some net downward pressure on average room prices because more capacity will be in the system (i.e. you won't hit top bucket quite as much on some trains, at least in the short run). I'm expecting the same thing to happen on the Acela when the 40 new cars come online as well: Average fares come down because of bucket shifts.

As to the call center fee: So, at the risk of bad phrasing, is there someone we could all get together and hammer on the phone? As much as I love Amtrak, I would very much like to give someone at 50 Mass a few days of being unable to get off the phone with irate riders. At the very least, I find it a bit cathartic.

(Seriously? I don't mind if you raise my ticket price by $5, but if you're going to raise the price then just raise the [bLEEP]ing price and be done with it!)

Edit: I agree that the Hoosier State is probably dead meat sooner or later, at least as an something running independent of the Cardinal. Hopefully the BBRR deal will get done in time so that you won't get a service gap there.

Edit 2: Ok, I just went and checked one key metric overall.

FY11 YTD: $62.75

FY12 YTD: $65.24

FY11 Full Year Actual: $62.67

FY12 Full Year Project: $64.02

It looks like Amtrak is going to come in about $1 ahead of budget on this front.

 

[AlanB]

Keep in mind that one of the bigger reasons for the Hoosier State's existence is hospital train. Amtrak uses that train to ferry cars to/from Beech Grove. But for that, I suspect that the train would have died a while back.

Now I'm not sure how Amtrak will get around the rules that will now require Indiana or someone else to put up funding for that train, but again Amtrak wants this train to continue far more than many other routes.

 

[Ryan]

I'm OK with the call in fee - I wonder if it'll apply to AGR awards that are currently unable to be booked online.

Another more general comment - are there better terms than "profit" and "loss" that can be used when discussing Amtrak's finances? We don't talk about profit and loss when talking about the road networks or the air traffic system. I understand that it makes more sense in the context of Amtrak since they're structured as a company, but it automatically frames the debate in an unfavorable fashion.

 

[Anderson]

I'm OK with the call in fee - I wonder if it'll apply to AGR awards that are currently unable to be booked online.

Another more general comment - are there better terms than "profit" and "loss" that can be used when discussing Amtrak's finances? We don't talk about profit and loss when talking about the road networks or the air traffic system. I understand that it makes more sense in the context of Amtrak since they're structured as a company, but it automatically frames the debate in an unfavorable fashion.

Cost recovery ratios can always be used, as can "increases in revenue net of increases in cost" (much more technical, but it sounds better than "reducing losses"). There's also the issue of revenue per passenger/seat mile...and if you look at all of those metrics, the trends are good across the board.

 

[Train2104]

The projected $373 loss per passenger for the Sunset Limited sticks out like a sore thumb. If Amtrak is not able to operate the Sunset Limited as a daily service, the SL is a big target for a fatal cut.

I wonder how much (if any) they could save by ignoring Sunset East when scheduling the crew rotation. (I believe the current layover at NOL is longer than most other LD's because the train still "continues" to/from ORL on paper)

Keep in mind that one of the bigger reasons for the Hoosier State's existence is hospital train. Amtrak uses that train to ferry cars to/from Beech Grove. But for that, I suspect that the train would have died a while back.

Are cars shuttled to/from Beech Grove on a scheduled basis, or only when repairs are needed/done? It may be cheaper just to wait for the next day's Cardinal.

 

[afigg]

On the NER situation, the sooner they get more cars allocated to NER the more they can improve the farebox recovery. There is a pot of money sitting there limited only by available capacity. True of Acelas too, but reallocating the single level fleet from the midwest upon the arrival of the 130 corridor bi-levels is going to be a cheaper proposition than buying 40 Acela cars. Though I am glad that it looks like both will happen. Looking forward to 10 car NERs in a few years! and of course 8 car Acelas too! Once the capital cost is out of the way incremental addition of cars to existing trains is very low cost additional revenue stream.

The FY12 table for the train services on page 97 projects that the NE Regionals will show a profit this year, above the rails that is. That is an significant improvement because the last monthly reports with the full financial data still showed the Regionals operating at a slight loss.

Table 14 on page 26 of the FY12 budget is the rolling stock count. It shows the total number of active Amfleet Is at the end of FY11 was 458, while the total number of Am Is at the end of FY12 is projected to be 473. That has to be the last of the wreck and miscellaneous Am I restorations to service. What happens to the 95 Horizons is still probably To Be Determined. Whether Amtrak can get to 10 car NE Regionals with what they have, don't know.

As for the purchase of the 40 Acela coach cars, the Acela profit margin is a lot higher per passenger, so those extra 130 seats per train will be a significant bump for Amtrak's revenue. Once they have extended the Acelas and Regionals, Amtrak should be able to lower ticket prices and work to find the price points to maximize overall revenue and increase market share.

What I would interested to see is what NEC trip time improvements Amtrak expects to be able to achieve by, say, 2016, with the NEC projects that have now been funded and the track, signal, power work Amtrak expects to be able to complete with the annual capital grants they are getting. The NEC projects include the 3rd track for the bottleneck in DE, the $450 million for the segment in NJ, Harold Interlocking bypass, CT DOT completing the constant catenary conversion on the New Haven Line by 2015 along with having wrapped up the current 2 tracking for bridge replacement, Niantic River bridge replacement, full implementation of ACSES, and so on. Many of the ACS-64s should be in service by 2016, could that lead to some time trip shaving for the Regionals?

Could we see Acela times of 2:35 WAS-NYP and 3:20 NYP-BOS or better and modestly improved Regional trip times by 2016, 2017? Or is that too much to ask? If Amtrak can show clear progress on faster trip times and reliability, that should grow their business on the NEC. (Gas prices by 2017 could be a big factor too.)

 

[afigg]

Keep in mind that one of the bigger reasons for the Hoosier State's existence is hospital train. Amtrak uses that train to ferry cars to/from Beech Grove. But for that, I suspect that the train would have died a while back.

Now I'm not sure how Amtrak will get around the rules that will now require Indiana or someone else to put up funding for that train, but again Amtrak wants this train to continue far more than many other routes.

Amtrak has been busy this week having just released their FY13 budget request and updated 5 year financial plan. The FY13 budget request is worthy of its own thread. But I'm looking at the 5 year financial plan and it appears that Amtrak is planning on a 5 year incremental increase in state funding to support the state corridors from FY12 to FY16. The methodology is to be approved by the STB, so maybe Indiana does not have to make up the $5 million operating loss for the Hoosier State in FY13. Don't know how much flexibility there is in the 2008 PRIIA act for the state funding of corridor service requirement, although the relative language is quoted in the 5 year financial plan. So, Amtrak may be able to support the Hoosier State with federal subsidy through FY14.

What the Cardinal and Hoosier State route really needs is a state supported Chicago to Indianapolis corridor service with 3-4 daily trains and much improved trip times. Looking at the map, after CHI-STL, CHI-MIL (/Madison), CHI-DET, Chicago to Indianapolis would be a logical corridor for 90 to 110 mph service if the political interest and support was present in Indiana. That may happen if the CHI-STL and CHI-DET 110 mph corridors are seen as very successful and companies start relocating to cities & stops along the 2 corridors, but it will take time.

 

[Anderson]

I just want to add some to my earlier bit on the booking fees. My issue isn't so much the fee in a vacuum (though that does get me); it's a slippery slope problem. If I'm charged to book on the phone, will I be charged to alter my reservation over the phone (particularly if it needs "fixing"...I've had this happen...or if it involves an upgrade redemption)? What if my train gets changed around/delayed/cancelled (schedule alterations do happen, you know)? Do I pay a fee then as well for trying to sort out something that got changed on me? Some things just don't book properly on the website (witness an earlier question concerning NEC discount fare restrictions and declining a "special" fare because of restrictions...I can do this over the phone with some haggling, I presume, but the website isn't always so forgiving, and sometimes Arrow just doesn't want to book something that's a legal reservation)...so am I going to be charged a fee because Arrow is stupid this week?

Now, with the phone, I'm lucky: At home, I'm ten minutes from NPN and in a crunch I am 90 minutes from one of the only "true" 24-hour manned stations in the country in RVR. If I need a ticket, I don't call...I just walk up. But will I face a fee to make a reservation at a counter at this point? And what about folks who live a few hours from the nearest manned station and who are connecting to Amtrak from a plane or bus (or picking up tickets at a Quik-Trak terminal)? They don't have that luxury.

Look, pardon my French, but this is the same **** the airlines have gone through over the last few decades, and I do not like it coming over here. I particularly do not like where it goes, and I would very much prefer to give Amtrak the hardest zap of static possible now rather than letting thing go downhill and then complaining.

 

[Sky Pilot]

I just want to add some to my earlier bit on the booking fees. My issue isn't so much the fee in a vacuum (though that does get me); it's a slippery slope problem. If I'm charged to book on the phone, will I be charged to alter my reservation over the phone (particularly if it needs "fixing"...I've had this happen...or if it involves an upgrade redemption)? What if my train gets changed around/delayed/cancelled (schedule alterations do happen, you know)? Do I pay a fee then as well for trying to sort out something that got changed on me? Some things just don't book properly on the website (witness an earlier question concerning NEC discount fare restrictions and declining a "special" fare because of restrictions...I can do this over the phone with some haggling, I presume, but the website isn't always so forgiving, and sometimes Arrow just doesn't want to book something that's a legal reservation)...so am I going to be charged a fee because Arrow is stupid this week?

Now, with the phone, I'm lucky: At home, I'm ten minutes from NPN and in a crunch I am 90 minutes from one of the only "true" 24-hour manned stations in the country in RVR. If I need a ticket, I don't call...I just walk up. But will I face a fee to make a reservation at a counter at this point? And what about folks who live a few hours from the nearest manned station and who are connecting to Amtrak from a plane or bus (or picking up tickets at a Quik-Trak terminal)? They don't have that luxury.

Look, pardon my French, but this is the same **** the airlines have gone through over the last few decades, and I do not like it coming over here. I particularly do not like where it goes, and I would very much prefer to give Amtrak the hardest zap of static possible now rather than letting thing go downhill and then complaining.

Not sure I'd suggest Tasing them but Amen brother, Amen.

What I don't get is what can't Amtrak figure out that this sort of crap dilutes their brand. What's next, baggage fees? Then Southwest can extend their referee-motif ad campaign to pick up the trains too? Give me one bottom line ticket price, not a teaser with a bunch of a la carte fees.

 

[Anderson]

I just want to add some to my earlier bit on the booking fees. My issue isn't so much the fee in a vacuum (though that does get me); it's a slippery slope problem. If I'm charged to book on the phone, will I be charged to alter my reservation over the phone (particularly if it needs "fixing"...I've had this happen...or if it involves an upgrade redemption)? What if my train gets changed around/delayed/cancelled (schedule alterations do happen, you know)? Do I pay a fee then as well for trying to sort out something that got changed on me? Some things just don't book properly on the website (witness an earlier question concerning NEC discount fare restrictions and declining a "special" fare because of restrictions...I can do this over the phone with some haggling, I presume, but the website isn't always so forgiving, and sometimes Arrow just doesn't want to book something that's a legal reservation)...so am I going to be charged a fee because Arrow is stupid this week?

Now, with the phone, I'm lucky: At home, I'm ten minutes from NPN and in a crunch I am 90 minutes from one of the only "true" 24-hour manned stations in the country in RVR. If I need a ticket, I don't call...I just walk up. But will I face a fee to make a reservation at a counter at this point? And what about folks who live a few hours from the nearest manned station and who are connecting to Amtrak from a plane or bus (or picking up tickets at a Quik-Trak terminal)? They don't have that luxury.

Look, pardon my French, but this is the same **** the airlines have gone through over the last few decades, and I do not like it coming over here. I particularly do not like where it goes, and I would very much prefer to give Amtrak the hardest zap of static possible now rather than letting thing go downhill and then complaining.

Not sure I'd suggest Tasing them but Amen brother, Amen.

What I don't get is what can't Amtrak figure out that this sort of crap dilutes their brand. What's next, baggage fees? Then Southwest can extend their referee-motif ad campaign to pick up the trains too? Give me one bottom line ticket price, not a teaser with a bunch of a la carte fees.

Well, I wasn't quite thinking of that sort of static...but I'm glad to see that I'm not alone. Honestly, I'd say that we start planning, tipping people (through various passenger organizations) to this, and when they announce the fee formally, be ready to jump on them. I hate to be Machiavellian, but I'd like to see to it that this goes as badly as possible for them to try and both fend this off and deter them from trying again.

What is doubly irritating here is that Amtrak is killing its revenue targets year in and year out. $5 million is nothing compared to what they're adding to the mix every year.

 

[bretton88]

I just want to add some to my earlier bit on the booking fees. My issue isn't so much the fee in a vacuum (though that does get me); it's a slippery slope problem. If I'm charged to book on the phone, will I be charged to alter my reservation over the phone (particularly if it needs "fixing"...I've had this happen...or if it involves an upgrade redemption)? What if my train gets changed around/delayed/cancelled (schedule alterations do happen, you know)? Do I pay a fee then as well for trying to sort out something that got changed on me? Some things just don't book properly on the website (witness an earlier question concerning NEC discount fare restrictions and declining a "special" fare because of restrictions...I can do this over the phone with some haggling, I presume, but the website isn't always so forgiving, and sometimes Arrow just doesn't want to book something that's a legal reservation)...so am I going to be charged a fee because Arrow is stupid this week?

Now, with the phone, I'm lucky: At home, I'm ten minutes from NPN and in a crunch I am 90 minutes from one of the only "true" 24-hour manned stations in the country in RVR. If I need a ticket, I don't call...I just walk up. But will I face a fee to make a reservation at a counter at this point? And what about folks who live a few hours from the nearest manned station and who are connecting to Amtrak from a plane or bus (or picking up tickets at a Quik-Trak terminal)? They don't have that luxury.

Look, pardon my French, but this is the same **** the airlines have gone through over the last few decades, and I do not like it coming over here. I particularly do not like where it goes, and I would very much prefer to give Amtrak the hardest zap of static possible now rather than letting thing go downhill and then complaining.

Not sure I'd suggest Tasing them but Amen brother, Amen.

What I don't get is what can't Amtrak figure out that this sort of crap dilutes their brand. What's next, baggage fees? Then Southwest can extend their referee-motif ad campaign to pick up the trains too? Give me one bottom line ticket price, not a teaser with a bunch of a la carte fees.

Well, I wasn't quite thinking of that sort of static...but I'm glad to see that I'm not alone. Honestly, I'd say that we start planning, tipping people (through various passenger organizations) to this, and when they announce the fee formally, be ready to jump on them. I hate to be Machiavellian, but I'd like to see to it that this goes as badly as possible for them to try and both fend this off and deter them from trying again.

What is doubly irritating here is that Amtrak is killing its revenue targets year in and year out. $5 million is nothing compared to what they're adding to the mix every year.

Here is the deal, what Amtrak sees is they have a perfectly good website that people can use to book their trips on that requires almost no labor cost from them. So this is a common tactic used in many companies to steer people to booking via their website so they can free up/reduce labor for other things such as emergencies or AGR stuff. If Amtrak uses the normal approach, they will waive that fee. And by the way, Amtrak views picking your own room as a LUXERY, so therefore you can "pay the fee" for that privilege.

 

[Anderson]

I just want to add some to my earlier bit on the booking fees. My issue isn't so much the fee in a vacuum (though that does get me); it's a slippery slope problem. If I'm charged to book on the phone, will I be charged to alter my reservation over the phone (particularly if it needs "fixing"...I've had this happen...or if it involves an upgrade redemption)? What if my train gets changed around/delayed/cancelled (schedule alterations do happen, you know)? Do I pay a fee then as well for trying to sort out something that got changed on me? Some things just don't book properly on the website (witness an earlier question concerning NEC discount fare restrictions and declining a "special" fare because of restrictions...I can do this over the phone with some haggling, I presume, but the website isn't always so forgiving, and sometimes Arrow just doesn't want to book something that's a legal reservation)...so am I going to be charged a fee because Arrow is stupid this week?

Now, with the phone, I'm lucky: At home, I'm ten minutes from NPN and in a crunch I am 90 minutes from one of the only "true" 24-hour manned stations in the country in RVR. If I need a ticket, I don't call...I just walk up. But will I face a fee to make a reservation at a counter at this point? And what about folks who live a few hours from the nearest manned station and who are connecting to Amtrak from a plane or bus (or picking up tickets at a Quik-Trak terminal)? They don't have that luxury.

Look, pardon my French, but this is the same **** the airlines have gone through over the last few decades, and I do not like it coming over here. I particularly do not like where it goes, and I would very much prefer to give Amtrak the hardest zap of static possible now rather than letting thing go downhill and then complaining.

Not sure I'd suggest Tasing them but Amen brother, Amen.

What I don't get is what can't Amtrak figure out that this sort of crap dilutes their brand. What's next, baggage fees? Then Southwest can extend their referee-motif ad campaign to pick up the trains too? Give me one bottom line ticket price, not a teaser with a bunch of a la carte fees.

Well, I wasn't quite thinking of that sort of static...but I'm glad to see that I'm not alone. Honestly, I'd say that we start planning, tipping people (through various passenger organizations) to this, and when they announce the fee formally, be ready to jump on them. I hate to be Machiavellian, but I'd like to see to it that this goes as badly as possible for them to try and both fend this off and deter them from trying again.

What is doubly irritating here is that Amtrak is killing its revenue targets year in and year out. $5 million is nothing compared to what they're adding to the mix every year.

Here is the deal, what Amtrak sees is they have a perfectly good website that people can use to book their trips on that requires almost no labor cost from them. So this is a common tactic used in many companies to steer people to booking via their website so they can free up/reduce labor for other things such as emergencies or AGR stuff. If Amtrak uses the normal approach, they will waive that fee. And by the way, Amtrak views picking your own room as a LUXERY, so therefore you can "pay the fee" for that privilege.

I don't care about picking my room(ette). I've found that #1 is just as good as #10, and it's not like asking for an even or an odd guarantees you a specific side of the train. Now, there's a caveat there insofar as picking a room(ette) may be useful in terms of keeping a group together...but generally speaking, that's not a "privilege" that I have any use, need, or really desire for, and getting charged "to pick my room" (particularly if I don't care which room I'm in). The prospect of being automatically charged a fee for a service that I have no use for is just plain infuriating. It's not like I'm a Russian arms dealer; I don't need compartment 7 every time.

I'm not even being facetious when I ask whether or not there's likely to be some bucket-ing in the 9310 sleeper versus 9312 at some point in the future...it's an extra 80 feet to the diner and I'm used to walking on the train so again I don't really care, but I can see that as a longer-term consequence.

 

[abcnews]

I have a feeling the call center fee will be for issues that don't need a telephone agent - such as a coach ticket. I'm OK with that - and the money they save by doing this, may actually help to save a train or two from being cut. I would rather see an increase here, rather than cutbacks somewhere else...

Since a sleeper does cost quite a bit more, much like a first class ticket on an airline, I predict no fees for booking a room via telephone. And even if I am wrong, I still think it's a fair idea to offset their loses, If we have a group traveling and we want to be near each other in the same sleeping car - then I'll bite the bullet and pay to have that service. Otherwise - I'm OK with letting the computer assign a room. That's really no big deal...

 

[Donctor]

How do the Hiawathas lose that much? I understand it costs more to run multiple frequencies, but shouldn't the capacity come closer to covering those costs? What does it actually cost to run that service?

 

[AlanB]

Keep in mind that one of the bigger reasons for the Hoosier State's existence is hospital train. Amtrak uses that train to ferry cars to/from Beech Grove. But for that, I suspect that the train would have died a while back.

Are cars shuttled to/from Beech Grove on a scheduled basis, or only when repairs are needed/done? It may be cheaper just to wait for the next day's Cardinal.

Amtrak did just that for years, shuttling things on the Cardinal. When the Kentucky Cardinal came along and ran daily, Amtrak really seemed to like the idea that now they could shuttle anytime that they wanted. When the K-Card died due to the loss of the freight contracts, as well as its sleeper; it was cut back to Indianapolis. That was done not so much because Indiana wanted it; but because Amtrak wanted it to protect that ability to shuttle when they wanted.

In the "State Supported/Short Distance Corridor" category, the Hoosier's have the lowest ridership of any train. Heck, even "Special Trains" whatever that is, carried 2,000+ more passengers than the Hoosier's carried in 2011. The Hoosier's don't exist because Amtrak thinks them a great revenue source or even a major public service; they exist for Amtrak's needs.

Those needs include at least two things; protecting the ability to run daily for the future in that area, the hospital shuttles, and there may be more that I'm unaware of. The fact that Amtrak collects some revenue to help offset the hospital runs is simply a bonus for Amtrak.

 

[AlanB]

How do the Hiawathas lose that much? I understand it costs more to run multiple frequencies, but shouldn't the capacity come closer to covering those costs? What does it actually cost to run that service?

The simple answer is that the States of Illinois and Wisconsin choose to set the price at a level that they hope encourages more ridership, even though they take a bit of a bath in paying for the actual costs.

 

[Anderson]

How do the Hiawathas lose that much? I understand it costs more to run multiple frequencies, but shouldn't the capacity come closer to covering those costs? What does it actually cost to run that service?

The simple answer is that the States of Illinois and Wisconsin choose to set the price at a level that they hope encourages more ridership, even though they take a bit of a bath in paying for the actual costs.

To take a guess, I believe that the hard spike in Surfliner fares is because, with the change in rules, CA had a choice between ponying up a lot more to keep fares down or letting fares rise to fill part of the new gap. They chose the latter.