low cost bus line to portland, OR to compete against amtrak

Shop deals on ebay
Advertise with us
shop deals on amazon
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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
yarrow said:
low cost bus line to portland to compete against amtrak
Click to expand...
If the experience on NEC is any indication, it will have negligible impact on Amtrak revenues. In effect they serve a somewhat different clientele apparently. I must admit I don't quite understand the dynamics, but I can see the results in financial reports.

Although, one thing that makes the NEC different is the very significant difference in running times. But still, for the life of me I cannot explain the huge differences in fares that appear to be quite sustainable. Oddly enough, this is proving to be true in the UK too even when both the bus and the train service between same points are operated by different subsidiaries of the same company, e.g. First Bus and First Great Western.
 
a month or so ago we booked a bus from vancouver,bc to seattle as part of an amtrak reservation. the bus fare was about the same as rail fare. was very happy with the comfort and the floor to ceiling front windows of the bus. for a 3-4 hour trip it was great. i wouldn't even consider amtrak for a trip of that length if the price differential was as great as the article says. especially for a family
 
yarrow said:
a month or so ago we booked a bus from vancouver,bc to seattle as part of an amtrak reservation. the bus fare was about the same as rail fare. was very happy with the comfort and the floor to ceiling front windows of the bus. for a 3-4 hour trip it was great. i wouldn't even consider amtrak for a trip of that length if the price differential was as great as the article says. especially for a family
Click to expand...
The one thing that the article doesn't emphasize is that very few seats will be sold for sub-$10. Boltbus may offer great introductory fares, but prices will climb over time (although they will always offer at least one $1 seat per bus).

I agree with others that the impact to Amtrak will be minimal. If anything, getting more people out of their cars and on to alternative transportation will help Amtrak in the long run, rather than hurt it.
 
I don't understand the bus service. The $1 advertising was a great way to get people hooked. Also, I never understoood how city's can let these bus companies get away without having a terminal.
 
transit54 said:
yarrow said:
a month or so ago we booked a bus from vancouver,bc to seattle as part of an amtrak reservation. the bus fare was about the same as rail fare. was very happy with the comfort and the floor to ceiling front windows of the bus. for a 3-4 hour trip it was great. i wouldn't even consider amtrak for a trip of that length if the price differential was as great as the article says. especially for a family
Click to expand...
The one thing that the article doesn't emphasize is that very few seats will be sold for sub-$10. Boltbus may offer great introductory fares, but prices will climb over time (although they will always offer at least one $1 seat per bus).

I agree with others that the impact to Amtrak will be minimal. If anything, getting more people out of their cars and on to alternative transportation will help Amtrak in the long run, rather than hurt it.
Click to expand...
The article also neglects to mention what we on here already know, that the bus company's operation is also subsidized by tax money. Trucks & buses do pay road use taxes, but those taxes don't fully cover highway construction and maintenance costs.

IIRC from my Highway Engineering text, an average Interstate highway slab is eleven inches deep, only one inch of which is needed by private passenger vehicles and light-duty commercial trucks. The remaining ten inches of that pavement depth are for heavy trucks & buses; taxpayers bear a portion of that cost.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
benjibear said:
I don't understand the bus service. The $1 advertising was a great way to get people hooked. Also, I never understoood how city's can let these bus companies get away without having a terminal.
Click to expand...

I agree with not having a terminal issue. A friend of mine came to see me on MegaBus when I went with him to catch his return bus, there were several hundred people leaning up against a construction site fence on 9th Ave in NYC just waiting for the bus while 3 employees tried to set up places for people to stand to catch the various busses. it was quite a mess and I have to wonder what happens when that new building opens up will Mega bus just find another block? I also recall seeing the line a couple blocks from CUS when in Chicago. I just can't see this being sustainable
 
Long Train Runnin said:
I also recall seeing the line a couple blocks from CUS when in Chicago. I just can't see this being sustainable
Click to expand...
Yet it has existed in Chicago for over six years now, and has expanded significantly since then.

I don't know what's unsustainable about not having to pay the high cost of terminals, as long as passengers are willing to wait in the open air for their bus to load (which, when you think about it, is exactly what millions of people do every day everywhere in the country when waiting for a local transit bus).

Megabus is able to keep their overhead costs down and they make up for it by selling cheap fares to people who are more interested in getting there than they are in having some fancy terminal.
 
jis said:
Although, one thing that makes the NEC different is the very significant difference in running times. But still, for the life of me I cannot explain the huge differences in fares that appear to be quite sustainable.
Click to expand...
Actually, I think the explanation there is quite simple. The NEC is a HUGE market, with lots of large, dense cities close together, serving significant tourist, college, business/financial, and political markets. You've got everything from Chinatown buses to fast trains to competing air shuttles (though the latter are considerably less relevant than they were a couple of decades ago, mainly thanks to Acela).

If you just want to get there, and don't care about anything else, there's a way to do that. If you want to get there in luxury, and away from the (perceived or real) "riff raff" there's a way to do that, too. There aren't too many (any?) other places in the country where the market for each of those is large enough to sustain each type of travel mode to the level that it does.

It's really the same reason a McDonald's can exist next to an Applebee's which can exist next to a Morton's Steakhouse.
 
I don't think it matters where the passengers want to wait, it is the impact to others where they are waiting. Last time I was in NYC, I walked through an area that a bunch of people were waiting for busses. You can barly get through the crowds and not very pleasant trying to walk through the street. The difference between these busses and public transportation is with public transportation, you may have a dozen people getting on or off at one corner, where these busses there may be hundreds. Also, they are either taking up parking places, for local bussinesses or they are blocking the street to load or unload.
 
Trogdor said:
jis said:
Although, one thing that makes the NEC different is the very significant difference in running times. But still, for the life of me I cannot explain the huge differences in fares that appear to be quite sustainable.
Click to expand...
Actually, I think the explanation there is quite simple. The NEC is a HUGE market, with lots of large, dense cities close together, serving significant tourist, college, business/financial, and political markets. You've got everything from Chinatown buses to fast trains to competing air shuttles (though the latter are considerably less relevant than they were a couple of decades ago, mainly thanks to Acela).

If you just want to get there, and don't care about anything else, there's a way to do that. If you want to get there in luxury, and away from the (perceived or real) "riff raff" there's a way to do that, too. There aren't too many (any?) other places in the country where the market for each of those is large enough to sustain each type of travel mode to the level that it does.

It's really the same reason a McDonald's can exist next to an Applebee's which can exist next to a Morton's Steakhouse.
Click to expand...
Yeah. You are right of course. It just strikes me as interesting to say the least. Afterall haven't railfan's been crying wolf about how no one will ride trains if the fares are raised even a bit for decades? :) I sensed a certain bit of rejoicing in certain corners when the low cost bus service appeared on the NEC - well now we will see how Amtrak fails. And of course none of that transpired and if anything Amtrak's RASM has been rising by leaps and bounds *after* the cheap bus services came on line. Go figure! :

I personally like the way things are going., though again personally some fares are getting a bit out of range. but if Amtrak can find enough customers who will pay enough to enable Amtrak to acquire new equipment based on actual revenues instead of doles from here and there... more power to them!
 
IMHO it is a bit of a misnomer to think that services like Bolt Bus will harm Amtrak.

Do they compete with each other for a segment of the traveling public? Absolutely.

But they also widen the pool of potential travelers by offering different kinds of services.

These quality point-to-point buses have flourished on the NEC and in the Midwest while Amtrak has continued to grow in both markets.

A person is more likely to travel to city A from city B if they have the option of Air, Rail, and Bus and frequent times. The person is also more likely to travel more often.
 
Gratt said:
IMHO it is a bit of a misnomer to think that services like Bolt Bus will harm Amtrak.

Do they compete with each other for a segment of the traveling public? Absolutely.

But they also widen the pool of potential travelers by offering different kinds of services.

These quality point-to-point buses have flourished on the NEC and in the Midwest while Amtrak has continued to grow in both markets.

A person is more likely to travel to city A from city B if they have the option of Air, Rail, and Bus and frequent times. The person is also more likely to travel more often.
Click to expand...
It also opens the eyes to the availability of decent intercity ground transportation. I'll attest that before Megabus, I rarely even considered ground transportation (and, frankly, didn't travel that far that much.) Now that I know about it, I've traveled multiple times on Megabus, have tickets booked for Amtrak trips, and have influenced others to look at those options also.

Before this, I figured that ground transportation would be either too grungy or not much of a savings over flying. Now that I've used it and experienced it, why would I ever fly for leisure again? (I may still fly if there's a time crunch.)
 
I'm going to to reprise what I posted in the thread started last week on the new Boltbus Seattle-Portland service.

So far, there has been no obvious erosion of ridership on any of the Amtrak corridors that compete head to head with Megabus and Boltbus. I think there is an argument to be made that there is an synergy component in having discount direct bus and train service which can grow business for both. I have not seen numbers, but I gather that the new curb side bus services are drawing a lot of their business from people who would normally drive and would never ever consider Greyhound. Many of those first time Megabus and Boltbus passengers discover that they can get around at their destination without a car and like not having to drive. They can surf the net, read, relax, watch movies, etc.

If then they learn that they can also take Amtrak, and can afford to pay a little more, then they may try Amtrak as the "higher" grade option instead. And discover they prefer to take the train over the bus. Amtrak and the discount buses are in competition. But it is not necessarily an either or competition, if they can both grab market shares from driving and air travel.
 
benjibear said:
I don't understand the bus service. The $1 advertising was a great way to get people hooked. Also, I never understoood how city's can let these bus companies get away without having a terminal.
Click to expand...
To everyone who is complaining about Megabus/Boltbus operating curbside without a terminal, I'd say, I have ridden them all and would take the Megabus with curbside pickup over the Geryhound dog from its shady "terminals".

Megabus picks up and drops passengers curbside or from parking garages, but they are conveniently located downtown/in central city squares and the crowd riding these buses is decent- students, backpackers, leisure travelers et al.

The so-called "Chinatown buses" pick up and drop curbside but generally in Chinatown/Asian areas in cities where they exist. I had a pretty interesting experience with these buses. I was once taking a late night service from Washington DC to Philadelphia and arrived at the exact street address mentioned on the ticket to find nothing there- no bus stop, no bus, no signs. Seeing the confused me, a Chinese lady came up to me and without asking anything just directed to a small alley "Go there". The way she did it, I almost told her "No, I don't want any drugs, I am here to take a bus :p " Turns out that small alley was where the bus was parked! Also, once everyone had boarded, the Chinese driver announced "Toilet backside. Only small business, no big business!"
mosking.gif
The "boarding point" in Philadelphia was located opposite the Greyhound terminal in a shop that also sold CD/DVDs of "certain kind" if you know what I mean!

I also had the (mis) fortune of using Greyhound dog a few times and the terminals, especially in small towns are museums displaying everything shady and rundown you'd ever want to see. Given a choice I'd rather stay home than take Greyhound.
 
I have nothing to add here but just have to tell Texan Eagle that this post made me lol so I had to read it aloud to my husband, accents and all - made him lol too
laugh.gif


Texan Eagle said:
To everyone who is complaining about Megabus/Boltbus operating curbside without a terminal, I'd say, I have ridden them all and would take the Megabus with curbside pickup over the Geryhound dog from its shady "terminals".

Megabus picks up and drops passengers curbside or from parking garages, but they are conveniently located downtown/in central city squares and the crowd riding these buses is decent- students, backpackers, leisure travelers et al.

The so-called "Chinatown buses" pick up and drop curbside but generally in Chinatown/Asian areas in cities where they exist. I had a pretty interesting experience with these buses. I was once taking a late night service from Washington DC to Philadelphia and arrived at the exact street address mentioned on the ticket to find nothing there- no bus stop, no bus, no signs. Seeing the confused me, a Chinese lady came up to me and without asking anything just directed to a small alley "Go there". The way she did it, I almost told her "No, I don't want any drugs, I am here to take a bus :p " Turns out that small alley was where the bus was parked! Also, once everyone had boarded, the Chinese driver announced "Toilet backside. Only small business, no big business!"
mosking.gif
The "boarding point" in Philadelphia was located opposite the Greyhound terminal in a shop that also sold CD/DVDs of "certain kind" if you know what I mean!

I also had the (mis) fortune of using Greyhound dog a few times and the terminals, especially in small towns are museums displaying everything shady and rundown you'd ever want to see. Given a choice I'd rather stay home than take Greyhound.
Click to expand...
 
As a Seattle resident and frequent Cascades/Starlight rider, I will predict that this will be gone within a year. Yes, similar services have managed to survive elsewhere, but I dont think it will work here. One of the most obvious reasons is the WEATHER. I rains here from October through June. I seriously doubt passengers will be willing to stand in the open in the rain waiting for a bus more than once. In addition, it RAINS here, and that tends to slow down the traffic on I-5. This route will go through several cities where the commute starts @ 6 AM and ends at 8 PM. Throw road construction, a military convoy to JBLM, or an accident into the mix and you will be lucky to make it between SEA & PDX on I-5 in a bus in under 4 hours. They dont call this trip "The Slog" for nothing. The popular "Shuttle Express" airport van service tried a similar van service, going door to door no less between the two cities a couple years ago. Its gone.

Smart travellers between Seattle and Portland use AMTRAK and will continue to do so.
 
I don't know that weather will have a significant impact on the success or failure of BoltBus or similar services in the Northwest.

Megabus and BoltBus have been rather successful in the Midwest and Northeast, both areas not exactly known for pleasant winter weather. And Megabus shut down its operation in the Southwest, the area with arguably the most pleasant winter weather in the country.
 
Even if they start up the new service, BoltBus will not eat much into Amtrak's ridership. They will probably get passengers who drive or (rarely) fly on a plane. BoltBus does not compete against Greyhound because they are owned by the same company. If they don't get enough pax, they will have to stop the service.
 
benjibear said:
I don't think it matters where the passengers want to wait, it is the impact to others where they are waiting. Last time I was in NYC, I walked through an area that a bunch of people were waiting for busses. You can barly get through the crowds and not very pleasant trying to walk through the street. The difference between these busses and public transportation is with public transportation, you may have a dozen people getting on or off at one corner, where these busses there may be hundreds. Also, they are either taking up parking places, for local bussinesses or they are blocking the street to load or unload.
Click to expand...
Shouldn't it be the job of the city authorities to create ordnances as to where a bus may and may not stop. If the stop is causing a nuisance and dmaging businesses, surely it should be possible to find an acceptable alternative location.

There must also be businesses who like having bus stops outside, because some of those passengers will buy things while waiting. For the same reason you will find commercially operated shops and food outlets in the larger Amtrak stations.
 
EMDF9A said:
As a Seattle resident and frequent Cascades/Starlight rider, I will predict that this will be gone within a year. Yes, similar services have managed to survive elsewhere, but I dont think it will work here. One of the most obvious reasons is the WEATHER. I rains here from October through June. I seriously doubt passengers will be willing to stand in the open in the rain waiting for a bus more than once. In addition, it RAINS here, and that tends to slow down the traffic on I-5. This route will go through several cities where the commute starts @ 6 AM and ends at 8 PM. Throw road construction, a military convoy to JBLM, or an accident into the mix and you will be lucky to make it between SEA & PDX on I-5 in a bus in under 4 hours. They dont call this trip "The Slog" for nothing. The popular "Shuttle Express" airport van service tried a similar van service, going door to door no less between the two cities a couple years ago. Its gone.

Smart travellers between Seattle and Portland use AMTRAK and will continue to do so.
Click to expand...
Not sure I entirely agree with this analysis. First off, the Seattle stop for BoltBus is right beside the Chinatown light rail station. IIRC it shouldn't be too difficult for someone to wait for their bus while out of the rain. The Portland stop looks a little less welcoming, I will admit.

Second, those same rains that allegedly cause slowdowns on I-5 also have a nasty little habit of causing mudslides on the Cascades route...leading to the dreaded BNSF 48-hour moratorium on passenger trains. How many "never agains" do you think each one of those episodes produces?

With no stops, SEA to PDX can easily be done in 3 hours...and Bolt Bus throws in an extra 15 minutes of padding. I'm guessing the vast majority of Bolt Bus trips will operate on or close to schedule. And since Bolt Bus can probably just swap in Greyhound drivers or a Greyhound bus in the event of driver sickness/bus mechanical problems, the operation should be relatively seamless.

Obviously Amtrak will continue to have the advantage of comfort (and will serve intermediate destinations) but I wouldn't write the obituary for Bolt Bus just yet.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Apparently there isn't as much competition between Seattle and Portland as there used to be. I just noticed that another competitor between SEA and PDX -- SeaPort Air -- is no longer flying that route. They had advertised heavily for a while as being inexpensive and convenient, since they flew out of Boeing Field rather than Sea-Tac, but there are no Seattle flights listed on their website. When did that happen?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top