Chris:
I was not questioning your integrity at all and I hope my reply did not come off that way.
The NARP figures are revenue per passenger mile, not per seat mile as stated in your post. That is the usual industry measure of "yield". That is why I questioned your source.
Yes, Amtrak's revenue per passenger mile is much higher than the airlines, but comparing Amtrak yield to airline yield is apples and oranges. The nature of the passenger rail business is that you move many more empty seats than the airlines and ticket revenue has to pay for all the seats, not just the occupied ones. In 2004, about 25% of all airline seats were empty and over 50% of all Amtrak seats were empty.
Your original measure per seat mile is actually the correct one for comparing modes. The measure for how well ticket revenue is covering cost is to compare the passenger revenue per available seat mile (PRASM) with the cost per available seat mile (CASM). In this measure, Amtrak does not fare too well against the airlines. Here is how those stats break down for the fourth quarter of 2004:
Amtrak:
Yield (revenue per passenger mile): 23.66 cents
PRASM (revenue per seat mile): 10.82 cents
CASM (cost per seat mile): 24.26 cents
Amtrak loss per seat mile: 13.44 cents
source: Amtrak December 2004 Financial Report
In other words, Amtrak paid 24 cents to move a seat one mile but only collected about 11 cents in passenger revenue.
Domestic Airlines
Yield: 11.22 cents
PRASM: 8.42 cents
CASM: 11.96 cents
Airline loss per seat mile: 3.54 cents
source: Air Transport Association
The airlines paid about 12 cents to move a seat one mile, and collected under 9 cents.
So, even though Amtrak's revenue per seat mile is higher than the airlines, their cost to provide that seat mile is much higher. While the airlines are losing about $3500 for every 100 seats they move 1000 miles, Amtrak is losing $13,000.
