Amtrak’s Losses Widen in Fiscal 2015
- Thread starter George K
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
- Status
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
The article is behind a subscription/pay wall of the Wall Street Journal.
George K
Conductor
If you google the first sentence you can see: "Amtrak said Wednesday its adjusted operating losses in fiscal 2015 widened to $306.5 million from the", you can get around the paywall:
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&as_q=Amtrak+said+Wednesday+its+adjusted+operating+losses+in+fiscal+2015+widened+to+%24306.5+million+from+the&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&lr=&cr=&as_qdr=all&as_sitesearch=&as_occt=any&safe=images&as_filetype=&as_rights=
There's also a story at Fox Business which appears to be identical:
http://www.foxbusiness.com/industries/2015/12/02/amtrak-operating-loss-widened-in-fiscal-year-2015/
All this known prior to the public release of the September monthly performance report? Harrumph!
Uh-oh. I've a hunch that means things will be changing for the worse on the long distance trains. But I'm a card-carrying pessimist.
Last edited by a moderator:
This could be a sign that the September 2015 monthly report will finally be posted soon. Which will not be a positive report for the year. As for the increase in net operating losses for fiscal year 2015, it has been clear that was going to be the case in the August and recent previous monthly reports. The detailed final financial numbers for FY2015 will have to wait for the annual financial report which won't be released for months.
The bar chart in the WSJ article, however, puts the FY2015 net losses in perspective. It was more than FY2014, but still less than FY2013 and prior fiscal years.
WoodyinNYC
Conductor
We could develop more overlapping corridors to improve the LDs performance in those stretches, e.g., Cleveland-CHI, Indy-CHI, and D.C.-Richmond-Petersburg.
We could replace aging equipment and expand the fleet to carry more riders.
We could replace aging locomotives to improve performance and cut costs.
We could make the host railroads deliver better on time performance.
We could add more sleepers to the Viewliner order to add revenue.
Etc etc etc. But the haters don't want to see any of these things happen.
Last edited by a moderator:
WoodyinNYC
Conductor
Bad news should be dumped in a Friday afternoon press release. That forces coverage to go in the almost-unread Saturday papers (or to be stale already the following Monday, for the Wall Street Journal) and to compete with weekend sports for any TV attention.
That didn't happen here. Why?
Perhaps as a courtesy the figures were shared with key CongressCritters. Then the info was leaked to Rupert Murdoch's propaganda machine. Ya know, by haters to haters. ..it happens. Don't be surprised.
No, Amtrak issued a news release dated December 2 that the WSJ and other media organizations are writing about. They should have posted it last Wednesday or even better last Friday, but that might be too obvious an attempt to gloss over a weak year.
Amtrak news release: AMTRAK RIDERSHIP AND TICKET REVENUE STEADY IN FISCAL YEAR 2015.
Last edited by a moderator:
neroden
Engineer
It's very clear that there is no sense in which "the long distance trains" are causing any of Amtrak's financial problems. It's not even a meaningful *category* -- the Silver Meteor is worlds different from the Sunset Limited. It's a pity that a "senior fellow" at the Brookings Institution has done less research than I have, but perhaps at Brookings "senior fellow" is a euphemism much like "senior moment". 
WoodyinNYC
Conductor
Curious. A Google search did not show other media writing about it. On the first page of results for "Amtrak losses" were no stories by AP, CNN, New York Times, Wash Post or others. Only Fox, WSJ, and another Fox affiliate. I was trying to avoid giving Murdoch a click. LOL.
blah blah blah; however, I would reprimand the pressie for using a semi-colon to make an opening sentence more than 40 words long. A period would belong there instead.
Well, maybe the pressie was trying to hide the bad news beneath a river of verbiage, pomposity, and semi-colons. But it didn't work.
And what's with quotes without quotation marks? "Neither Coscia and Boardman got marks around what they allegedly said," Woody said disapprovingly. This hints that perhaps the info was leaked, and Amtrak was forced to rush the release out the door unready.
Last edited by a moderator:
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
Actually if you look at the equivalent of GAAP account after removing one time charges and incomes, overall it does not look that bad. At least Amtrak does not need to do the gymnastics with currency exchange rates.
Well, the PR is almost useless as far as new info (aside from what we already knew, at least). It didn't even throw in a year-end ridership/revenue number.
With that being said, I suspect that most of the "damage" is from the Philadelphia crash (losing PHL-NYP on the NEC for close to a week was a killer, especially since there were at least some knock-on effects) with the second culprit being incessantly low gas prices.
With that being said, I suspect that most of the "damage" is from the Philadelphia crash (losing PHL-NYP on the NEC for close to a week was a killer, especially since there were at least some knock-on effects) with the second culprit being incessantly low gas prices.
west point
Engineer
Also the loss of the wreck of 188 might be included or at least part ?
neroden
Engineer
Don't forget the Norfolk Southern total network failure east of Chicago way back at the start of the fiscal year, hammering the LSL, CL, and Michigan services, damaging their reputations and probably cutting ridership for a year or more, and undoubtedly taking out connecting revenue along with them, and inspiring a very unusual STB letter to NS asking them to explain what they were going to do to fix the problem. And the snowstorms which made that worse and knocked out the Empire Service for days. This was surely large enough to be substantial, so that's a third culprit. (IIRC loss of connecting ridership on the Florida trains was immediately visible; there was probably a connecting-ridership loss on all the trains west of Chicago, all the trains south of DC, and the NEC.)
Most of the other disruptions seemed to be on par with a typical year, but that's two large disruptions, one at the start of the year and one late in the year, plus the low gas prices. Also, with fuel hedging Amtrak probably wasn't getting the benefit of low diesel prices yet.
Last edited by a moderator:
WoodyinNYC
Conductor
Keep scrolling the PR and find unaudited financials with a revenue number. For ridership I only find only the rounded 30.8 million number in the release.
And this in the 2nd paragraph. "... primarily due to service disruptions on the Northeast Corridor, significant weather events and lower gas prices..."
This from the FoxNews story. (Suggesting again that the Murdoch propaganda machine "somehow" got an advance look at this story and the press release was rushed out to chase it.)
- Joined
- May 17, 2015
- Messages
- 2,807
Many of the western LD routes have had major weather issues this year causing either bustitution or cancelation. Many in Congress I found do not want Amtrak to have new equipment because then they are forced to continue Passenger Rail. Many are quietly hoping the equipment wears out so Amtrak has to start eliminating routes and/or passengers become frustrated due to equipment failures and run down cars. Think of the reduced maintenance costs with new equipment and the increased reliability. Major long haul trucking companies replace their fleet once the warranty runs out (350K miles or three years). This eliminates the heavy maintenance costs and has dramatically improved their reliability in making on time deliveries. I would think the same would apply to Amtrak.
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
Well, the new Authorization Bill that is going to be voted on this week says over $400 million per year for the NEC and over $1 billion per year for the rest of Amtrak. This implies they really want to separate out NEC and rest of Amtrak accounting seriously. Of course we will see what actually gets appropriated.
See: http://www.narprail.org/news/blog/passenger-rail-included-in-first-ever-comprehensive-surface-transportation-bill/
See: http://www.narprail.org/news/blog/passenger-rail-included-in-first-ever-comprehensive-surface-transportation-bill/
With regards to the WSJ and Fox News story, that is not how it usually works for press releases. Amtrak likely sent out the press release sometime late on December 1 to the news organizations on their distribution list with an embargo until midnight or some early morning hour. WSJ and Fox News had staff available, so their writers incorporated the press release into an article, called a few contacts for quotes, wrote the story and got it out first. I expect a few major east coast papers, the transportation & business press will have articles on the Amtrak fiscal year results in the next day or so. It is not breaking news or an important news story, so they will have someone regurgitate the press release, mix in a quote or two, and then post it over the next day or two.
I had seen vague numbers in other articles earlier today, but that is the first detailed breakdown of what is in the bill for passenger rail. Thanks for posting the link.
If Amtrak and intercity passenger rail were to actually get funded at close to those amounts with the more rational segmentation into an NEC account and a national network account, it would lead to a healthier Amtrak and passenger rail system. I will be interested to see the specifics of what is covered by the "Consolidated Rail Infrastructure & Safety Improvements", "Federal State Partnership for State of Good Repair", "Restoration & Enhancement Grant" program.
Major trucking companies run 500K on the tractors. (You can get a extended warranty.) Trailers are lasting 15 years in daily service. Part of the early retirement of a tractor is leased equipment, resale market. Amtrak and all other operators do not have a large resale market. Few people or organizations who have the need or want to reuse old passenger equipment.
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
That is one reason that the Brits worked hard to create the ROSCOe (ROlling Stock COmpanies), which provide a more fluid market for both leasing and recycling rolling stock. It is through the ROSCOs that the Brits are able to cascade rolling stock from one operation to another as the richer operations go about acquiring newer rolling stock either themselves or through ROSCOs. Indeed because all TOCs (Train Operating Companies) operate under limited term franchise, they have relatively little motivation to outright own rolling stock, since they would not know what to do with them should they lose a franchise. The fact that there is no such market in US is partly due to the way things are governed or not in that space rather than an inherent lack of need for such.
Last edited by a moderator:
Is the money appropriated for the Northeast Corridor the total for the Northeast Corridor or IN ADDITION TO the NEC operating profit?
Last edited by a moderator:
Honestly, one thing Amtrak might want to seriously examine is re-equipping the Auto Train. Even ignoring the relatively high figures Nathanael (I think) produced for it, it's the one LD service that is doing quite well in terms of direct results. Doing so would allow them to increase capacity; it would also free up a not-insusbstantial amount of capacity (I think...something like 15-17 Superliner sleepers, a few diners, etc.) which could be shifted to the Cap, Builder, etc.
(This is where I go into a rant about needing to seriously look at working out some sort of lease deal with VIA if push comes to shove)
Edit: If Amtrak was getting a steady flow of equipment, you wouldn't dump the old stuff (well, not until it became very old). Amtrak's got something up their NPCU about not selling equipment except for scrap, otherwise you'd probably see them working out arrangements with someone along the lines of IP to promote such services, with an eye towards that group buying "workable batches" of the equipment (Amtrak pocketing a mix of haulage charges and maintenance contracts in the process) in exchange for the third-party operator not undercutting heavily on price.
Even setting aside Amtrak's biases, what you'd do is designate a few tiers of LD trains (let's say "A", "B", and "C"...Amtrak has done this; the Auto Train, Builder, Starlight, and Cap had a sort of A-train designation while the Cardinal, Eagle, CONO, and Sunset seem to occasionally get shafted down to "C" status). The "A" trains would almost always get the newest stuff, and their existing equipment would then cascade down to the others...with their equipment then going to a "surge pool". My guess is that your designations on the present system would be:
Tier 1/Superliner: Auto Train, Builder, Starlight, Cap
Tier 2/Superliner: Zephyr, SW Chief
Tier 3/Superliner: Sunset, CONO, Texas Eagle
Tier 1/Viewliner: Lake Shore Limited, Silver Meteor
Tier 2/Viewliner: Crescent, Silver Star
Tier 3/Viewliner: Cardinal, Silver Palm (if ever restored)/Pennsylvanian thru cars (if they ever happen)
Ignoring the Auto Train as sui generis and a good candidate for a semi-fixed set, Tier 1/Superliner needs 12 sets (possibly reduced to 11 depending on some factors with the Cap). Tier 2/Superliner needs 11 sets. Tier 3/Superliner is a bit more of a headache to calculate...I think you're looking at 9-12 sets depending on some stuff related to the Sunset. To quote a certain Mr. Tucker, that cascade is smooth and Tier 3 being smaller allows for a semi-specific allocation to the surge pool.
On the Viewliners, the breakdown is 6-7 sets, 8 sets, and 10 sets. Might shuffle something there; I like Tier 3 being smaller for supplementing a surge pool. Of course, the LSL and Meteor are also much larger possible sets...
(This is where I go into a rant about needing to seriously look at working out some sort of lease deal with VIA if push comes to shove)
Edit: If Amtrak was getting a steady flow of equipment, you wouldn't dump the old stuff (well, not until it became very old). Amtrak's got something up their NPCU about not selling equipment except for scrap, otherwise you'd probably see them working out arrangements with someone along the lines of IP to promote such services, with an eye towards that group buying "workable batches" of the equipment (Amtrak pocketing a mix of haulage charges and maintenance contracts in the process) in exchange for the third-party operator not undercutting heavily on price.
Even setting aside Amtrak's biases, what you'd do is designate a few tiers of LD trains (let's say "A", "B", and "C"...Amtrak has done this; the Auto Train, Builder, Starlight, and Cap had a sort of A-train designation while the Cardinal, Eagle, CONO, and Sunset seem to occasionally get shafted down to "C" status). The "A" trains would almost always get the newest stuff, and their existing equipment would then cascade down to the others...with their equipment then going to a "surge pool". My guess is that your designations on the present system would be:
Tier 1/Superliner: Auto Train, Builder, Starlight, Cap
Tier 2/Superliner: Zephyr, SW Chief
Tier 3/Superliner: Sunset, CONO, Texas Eagle
Tier 1/Viewliner: Lake Shore Limited, Silver Meteor
Tier 2/Viewliner: Crescent, Silver Star
Tier 3/Viewliner: Cardinal, Silver Palm (if ever restored)/Pennsylvanian thru cars (if they ever happen)
Ignoring the Auto Train as sui generis and a good candidate for a semi-fixed set, Tier 1/Superliner needs 12 sets (possibly reduced to 11 depending on some factors with the Cap). Tier 2/Superliner needs 11 sets. Tier 3/Superliner is a bit more of a headache to calculate...I think you're looking at 9-12 sets depending on some stuff related to the Sunset. To quote a certain Mr. Tucker, that cascade is smooth and Tier 3 being smaller allows for a semi-specific allocation to the surge pool.
On the Viewliners, the breakdown is 6-7 sets, 8 sets, and 10 sets. Might shuffle something there; I like Tier 3 being smaller for supplementing a surge pool. Of course, the LSL and Meteor are also much larger possible sets...
Last edited by a moderator:
There seems to be a part of this legislation that directs, or urges, I'm not sure which, Amtrak to put up to three routes up for bids for private operators to bid on. It also seems to encourage the states that sponsor corridor operations to do likewise. Besides Iowa Pacific, what other operators would want to participate?
That's a Known Unknown. Depending on the specifics of the deal, I have to wonder what would happen if (for example) the operators of the Caledonian franchise walked in and said "Pay to re-equip it with new cars and a longer consist and we'll take the Meteor/LSL/Auto Train for a subsidy of 1/3 of your fully allocated losses". There are plenty of operators in Europe (the UK's franchisees are on the list, as is DB, SNCF, etc.) or Asia (just imagine the political fit there!) who could bid. Heck, I could see someone doing the math and saying "We'll take [insert eastern route here] for either a full re-equipping at 18-20 cars/set or an operating subsidy of $10m/yr if we have to re-equip".
Edit: Actually, if you want a royal fit to break out...I'd like to see the reaction if Russian Railways tried to bid.
Also, as to the corridors...PRIIA 209 implicitly encouraged that.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
St. Paul, Milwaukee, Chicago (TCMC) second daily service
- Latest: Mr.Technician
-
