best ways for Amtrak to cut its operating losses?

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.
MIRAILFAN said:
I say reduce the long distance train frequency .
Click to expand...
From what? Once per day to three times per week? I think not. Amtrak has been posting record ridership numbers and has increasing demands for MORE service.
 
The business-like solution is to grow Amtrak. A growth strategy is more often successful than cut and run.

Fortunately, the idea of cutting trains has been discredited among the decision makers. Orders for new equipment, and on-going upgrades to corridors that overlap long distance routes mean that future growth is pretty much baked in the cake for Amtrak.

But please. If you think you are the first to make this insightful suggestion, let me say, Ha ha ha ha. Many commenters here much smarter than me have discussed how to cut losses and improve Amtrak's reach. Why don't you read some other threads and educate yourself, before opening your mouth to say something totally unoriginal and not very smart. Good luck.
 
MIRAILFAN said:
I stand corrected on the LD trains thanks.. :) How do we cut that 1.2bilion deficit though?
Click to expand...
Why are worried about pennies? The Defense Department budget is counted in HUNDREDS of billions. Somewhere in there is a chance to save $1.5 billion. Why don't you be the one to pinpoint that waste?

Anyway, when you do get around to reading up on the subject to spare yourself further embarrassment, you will see a fairly clear trend line of growing revenues, better on-time performance, innovation in services such as eTicketing, new electric locomotives that will cut costs for LD trains on the NEC, new diners and sleepers to eliminate huge maintenance costs, etc, all pointing to a declining need for operating subsidies -- if the remainder of the old fleet can be replaced with more efficient equipment.
 
No big deal. Don't have an answer on how to solve the problem. Many suggest cut here or there, but if you do that, you will also lose some riders, defeating the purpose. Some suggest raise the prices, again you will lose riders, because the prices already can be high, especially for sleepers. Amtrak is for a certain group of people, but I do think that it is growing. My thought is that some are really tired of dealing with flying, or now they have extra time and want to ride the train instead. I do know that the first summer we rode the train, 2009, there was hardly anyone waiting for the train here, and the trains were not full. In 2012 and 2013, there was large crowds waiting to board here, and each train we rode was packed full, coach and sleepers both!
 
I tried to book a trip for my sister, my mom and me on the Empire Builder/Coast Starlight/California Zephyr for early July and couldn't because room H and the roomettes were sold out six months in advance. I ended up booking for three weeks later. Sure sounds to me like the LD frequencies need to be reduced. LOL

Suggestion to OP: Do your homework before posting.
 
How to cut the deficit (starter list):

Invest government money in long-term improvements that save money (any action whose payback is ten years or less e.g.)

Take the politics out of Amtrak decisions. Too many politicians have their hands in the decision making as to what is done at a low level.

Enforce the rules requiring RRs to give Amtrak priority.

Add rules requiring RRs to allow new Amtrak trains with an arbitrator deciding costs.

Holding RRs financially responsible when they fail to give Amtrak priority and make it somewhat punitive.

Require Amtrak to improve onboard service and give them more authority to terminate non-complying employees.
 
MIRAILFAN said:
I do my homework.http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/01/amtrak-loses-a-ton-of-money-each-year-it-doesnt-have-to/
Click to expand...
If your "homework" is reading one random article on Washington Post, sorry that won't get you even passing grade.

The earlier link you shared, if you sort the routes by ridership, notice a trend? The most profitable routes are the ones with multiple frequencies per day. If anything, that would mean you want to increase the frequency, not decrease it.
 
That's poor "homework".

The correct question is "How much is it worth to us to have a functional and healthy passenger rail system in the US?"

Then figure out how to get Congress to pay that bill, and stop the foolish notion of "Amtrak should make a profit".
 
Even airlines don't make a profit. The idea is to have Amtrak break even.

People are still mad they removed the Sunset Limited between New Orleans and (umm... help... Atlanta? Florida?), and that was years ago. Cutting service is not the answer, especially since many LD trains sell out months in advance.
 
me_little_me said:
How to cut the deficit (starter list):

Invest government money in long-term improvements that save money (any action whose payback is ten years or less e.g.)

Take the politics out of Amtrak decisions. Too many politicians have their hands in the decision making as to what is done at a low level.

Enforce the rules requiring RRs to give Amtrak priority.

Add rules requiring RRs to allow new Amtrak trains with an arbitrator deciding costs.

Holding RRs financially responsible when they fail to give Amtrak priority and make it somewhat punitive.

Require Amtrak to improve onboard service and give them more authority to terminate non-complying employees.
Click to expand...
All well and good, but every form of public transportation is subsidized by government, so why should Amtrak along be required to make a profit?
 
I think one of the easiest ways would be to address the personnel costs. No, I'm not talking about train crews, station crews, maintenance personnel, all of which contribute to revenue production; but rather, the extensive administrative positions, including too many vice presidents of this and that...

IMHO, there are too many analysts and similar bloating the headquarters....
 
Unless something changes, the current flow is strongly towards the operating subsidy need dropping steadily year over year. The main question at the moment is how much it drops by due to some funding rules changes (involving states picking up most of the tab for shorter-distance trains) and how much of the drop comes down to increased traffic and fares on certain routes. On some level, the way for Amtrak to do better is to simply not screw anything up.
 
I think Amtrak is kind of hamstrung in the market that they can really exploit-the 200-300 mile corridor runs. Any trip that takes 5 hours or less is very attractive competition to airline travel. The fact that these now have to be funded by the states eliminates Amtrak starting, and making successful, these routes, then selling that operating cost to the states after showing value for that state on those routes. In the current fiscal climate, very few state governments are going to stick their budgets out there to subsidize an untested route. If PRIA could be tweeked to allow this, it might open up new markets for corridor rail and eventually high speed rail in some corridors. The time people spend in airport lines make these shorter routes very attractive.
 
railiner said:
I think one of the easiest ways would be to address the personnel costs. No, I'm not talking about train crews, station crews, maintenance personnel, all of which contribute to revenue production; but rather, the extensive administrative positions, including too many vice presidents of this and that...

IMHO, there are too many analysts and similar bloating the headquarters....
Click to expand...
And what is your knowledge of headquarters staff based on? Do you have an org chart of HQs staff.....how many vice presidents & how many analysts are there? There has been a "cleaning" over the past few months of senior Amtrak execs and if you are not aware, there are vice presidents and senior staff in the field that are absolutely necessary for the day to day operation of the railroad. You sound like many critics who sound-off with no actual knowledge of your subject.
 
Slasharoo said:
I think Amtrak is kind of hamstrung in the market that they can really exploit-the 200-300 mile corridor runs. Any trip that takes 5 hours or less is very attractive competition to airline travel. The fact that these now have to be funded by the states eliminates Amtrak starting, and making successful, these routes, then selling that operating cost to the states after showing value for that state on those routes. In the current fiscal climate, very few state governments are going to stick their budgets out there to subsidize an untested route. If PRIA could be tweeked to allow this, it might open up new markets for corridor rail and eventually high speed rail in some corridors. The time people spend in airport lines make these shorter routes very attractive.
Click to expand...
Just about all Amtrak growth in the short distance markets has occurred because of state support. The state-supported routes have thrived. It's the best way to launch new services. If local government isn't interested, then their states lose out. It's not fair to the states that support their local services to give free rides to those that don't want to back up their desires with money.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top