Think AGR Will Give You The Very Last Room?

[PRR 60]

The problem is that Amtrak is unwilling to sell an available room on the Coast Starlight to someone taking a long distance trip even though the room is available. The room in question could be booked for a trip from San Jose to Seattle. Amtrak is unwilling to sell it to a person traveling from Chicago to Seattle because that person would only use it on the Starlight for what Amtrak considers too short a distance. Simply speaking, that's dumb. They would rather see a customer walk away from a premium, 3000 mile trip than apply logic and common sense. It's amazing to me that rail supporters could even begin to defend that kind of stupidity.

By the way, almost all airline frequent flyer programs have way more than six seats a flight open for base level redemptions, and almost all offer the ability to redeem for any available seat at a premium cost in miles (usually 2x). And no airline I deal with would deny a passenger booking from Europe to Buffalo a reservation because they want to hold seats on the PHL-BUF flight for possible bookings from Charlotte.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Perhaps you're right. Maybe they'd never find out they weren't getting anything close to the last empty room. Maybe I'm just more curious that most. Or maybe I'm simply less trusting. If I should happen across another "every last seat" type post I might clarify and qualify that statement a bit. Or not. Either way I'm ready to move on to more interesting topics at this point.

 

[the_traveler]

Alan, you also neglected to specify that award travel must be between cities that Amtrak serves.

You mean I can't get an AGR award from Rockville, RI to Gresham, OR?

 

[AlanB]

The problem is that Amtrak is unwilling to sell an available room on the Coast Starlight to someone taking a long distance trip even though the room is available. The room in question could be booked for a trip from San Jose to Seattle. Amtrak is unwilling to sell it to a person traveling from Chicago to Seattle because that person would only use it on the Starlight for what Amtrak considers too short a distance. Simply speaking, that's dumb. They would rather see a customer walk away from a premium, 3000 mile trip than apply logic and common sense. It's amazing to me that rail supporters could even begin to defend that kind of stupidity.

No, the problem is far more complicated than you would like it to be, sorry!

The AGR agent isn't denying him a room for the reasons you state. The AGR agent would have to take extra extraordinary steps to realize that the rooms are being blocked by revenue management at that point in SAC. I can't imagine any airline agent going to check to see that seats were available from a further city all on their own and then getting permission to override the management controls.

I'm not saying that when confronted with the evidence that AGR would override things, but Texas Sunset never got to that point. But there is a chance that with a supervisor online that perhaps they would override. And while I freely admit upfront that the circumstances aren't quite the same, there is some precedent for what I'm saying. Amamba earlier this year was taking a long AGR trip departing from Boston. As things developed, it turned out that was during one of the bustitutions between BOS & ALB.

The LSL is blocked from sales for points from NYP to ALB. Her Bedroom was in an NYP car out of ALB, meaning that it had to be empty out of NY since it can't be sold due to the revenue management block. So when she tried to rebook via NYP, the agent couldn't do it. After some coaching from us here at the forum, she got a supervisor on the line who quickly realized the logic that the room had to be empty. That supervisor either overrode the block or got someone at Amtrak to override the block, I don't recall which, and Amamba got her room out of NY.

By the way, almost all airline frequent flyer programs have way more than six seats a flight open for base level redemptions, and almost all offer the ability to redeem for any available seat at a premium cost in miles (usually 2x). And no airline I deal with would deny a passenger booking from Europe to Buffalo a reservation because they want to hold seats on the PHL-BUF flight for possible bookings from Charlotte.

I was of course being facetious about the six, although on occasion it sure does seem like it.

And since almost all seats turn over in most cases each time a plane lands, no airline would probably want to do what Amtrak is doing. However, if their circumstances were similar I wouldn't be surprised to see blocks on sellable seats, which again an agent might or might not see and override.

 

[PRR 60]

The problem is that Amtrak is unwilling to sell an available room on the Coast Starlight to someone taking a long distance trip even though the room is available. The room in question could be booked for a trip from San Jose to Seattle. Amtrak is unwilling to sell it to a person traveling from Chicago to Seattle because that person would only use it on the Starlight for what Amtrak considers too short a distance. Simply speaking, that's dumb. They would rather see a customer walk away from a premium, 3000 mile trip than apply logic and common sense. It's amazing to me that rail supporters could even begin to defend that kind of stupidity.

No, the problem is far more complicated than you would like it to be, sorry!

The AGR agent isn't denying him a room for the reasons you state. The AGR agent would have to take extra extraordinary steps to realize that the rooms are being blocked by revenue management at that point in SAC. I can't imagine any airline agent going to check to see that seats were available from a further city all on their own and then getting permission to override the management controls.

I'm not saying that when confronted with the evidence that AGR would override things, but Texas Sunset never got to that point. But there is a chance that with a supervisor online that perhaps they would override. And while I freely admit upfront that the circumstances aren't quite the same, there is some precedent for what I'm saying. Amamba earlier this year was taking a long AGR trip departing from Boston. As things developed, it turned out that was during one of the bustitutions between BOS & ALB.

The LSL is blocked from sales for points from NYP to ALB. Her Bedroom was in an NYP car out of ALB, meaning that it had to be empty out of NY since it can't be sold due to the revenue management block. So when she tried to rebook via NYP, the agent couldn't do it. After some coaching from us here at the forum, she got a supervisor on the line who quickly realized the logic that the room had to be empty. That supervisor either overrode the block or got someone at Amtrak to override the block, I don't recall which, and Amamba got her room out of NY.

By the way, almost all airline frequent flyer programs have way more than six seats a flight open for base level redemptions, and almost all offer the ability to redeem for any available seat at a premium cost in miles (usually 2x). And no airline I deal with would deny a passenger booking from Europe to Buffalo a reservation because they want to hold seats on the PHL-BUF flight for possible bookings from Charlotte.

I was of course being facetious about the six, although on occasion it sure does seem like it.

And since almost all seats turn over in most cases each time a plane lands, no airline would probably want to do what Amtrak is doing. However, if their circumstances were similar I wouldn't be surprised to see blocks on sellable seats, which again an agent might or might not see and override.

You failed to say anything I did not assume in my reply. I was not simply saying that the agent should have known better and found a way to beat the system. I'm saying that the system, being set up so as to not recognize the value of the trip being booked, is at fault: that for this trip, the room should not be blocked from booking. Let's try this one more time.

- Amtrak blocks some rooms on the northbound Starlight for trips that originate from Oakland north in order to hold back those rooms for trips originating on the Starlight from San Jose south. For trips just on the Starlight, I'm OK with that. The problem develops when...

- Amtrak's system blocks those rooms from booking even for connecting customers coming in from, for example, Chicago. That person is paying more than even a Starlight trip originating in Los Angeles. It looks at the Starlight as if it was a standalone trip, not as a part of a multi-segment trip, and shows no availability. This is the problem.

- Someone can be booking a trip from San Jose to Portland, and they would get the room. It meets the criteria for the Starlight.

- Someone booking from Chicago to Seattle connecting from the Zephyr to the Starlight is blocked because the system will not show availability for SAC north. In this case, the system is blocking a long, high value trip to accommodate a possible future shorter, low value trip.

I'm not blaming the agent for not knowing what's going on (even though, they should). I'm blaming the system for for being set up with logic that causes an outcome where lower value trips can get priority over higher value trip. It fails to consider the value of the entire trip. It looks at one segment as if it were the only segment. It's myopic logic, and it's dumb.

 

[AlanB]

I'm not blaming the agent for not knowing what's going on (even though, they should). I'm blaming the system for for being set up with logic that causes an outcome where lower value trips can get priority over higher value trip. It fails to consider the value of the entire trip. It looks at one segment as if it were the only segment. It's myopic logic, and it's dumb.

My apologies then Bill, because that's what it did sound like to me, that you were blaming the agent.

That said two more thoughts. One, I'm sure that what you envision is something that ARROW simply isn't capable of handling. Two, one would actually expect that anyone in Chicago would simply take the direct route. Short of trying to do some sort of mileage points run or being given a cheap yet odd routing, who would get on an airplane to go to Portland from Chicago via Sacramento. Most, baring price or mileage runs, would take the direct flight.

 

[the_traveler]

who would get on an airplane to go to Portland from Chicago via Sacramento.

I would!

I have also flown from Boston to Albany (NY) - about 150 miles - via California!

 

[sechs]

At this point, I'm curious as to exactly what Texas Sunset was trying to do, and exactly what the agent said. Did he check to see if the itinerary was bookable online?

Testing a few random dates, I haven't found one where there are rooms available on the Coast Starlight that the website wouldn't let you connect at Sacramento for one.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I'm not blaming the agent for not knowing what's going on (even though, they should). I'm blaming the system for for being set up with logic that causes an outcome where lower value trips can get priority over higher value trip. It fails to consider the value of the entire trip. It looks at one segment as if it were the only segment. It's myopic logic, and it's dumb.

I'm with PRR 60 on this. There are two main issues I have with my experience so far.

One is a systemic issue that PRR puts into clear and concise terms. If I were a revenue customer this route should be made available for as many rooms as possible as it was priced at something like $1,700 for one roomette. That's good money if you ask me. More than double what you'd pay for first class airfare. It's also substantially more than I'm paying for my cabin on VIA's Canadian. Here on AU our fellow contributors have made it clear that any given room on the CS is rarely booked for the full route and instead is booked by many different folks for relatively small segments, so this seems like the perfect train to allow a routing like that.

The second issue is a general unwillingness on the part of the staff to give the customer the benefit of the doubt and simply make things happen. I know it may seem odd to a non-train person to book such an out of the way routing. It may seem odd to adjust a connection point from one town to another town two hours further down the line. But those are relatively minor requests that are unlikely to have a material impact on Amtrak's sales or operations. If I see a given routing on Amtrak.com then I should not have to challenge the AGR agent as to the mere existence of the routing. It should come up just as easily for them as it does for me. If my request for a change of connection point still allows a full five or six hours of layover time they should at least consider allowing that. Instead I get endless push-back over even the most minor of changes.

The simple fact of the matter is that most of Amtrak's network is not a schedule-driven transportation service. In the case of sleeper customers it's a land cruise, pure and simple. Just take look around the site. That's how we honestly use it. If you take a gander at their own brochures Amtrak seems to get that on some level. But the reservations staff and AGR staff still seem to think they're competing with airlines or something. If I want to be in a major city like Vancouver by a specific date and time I will fly. Even if the flight doesn't make it I can simply tell whoever I'm meeting that I'll be on the next available flight and everyone will immediately understand. If I instead tell them I'll be on the next train nobody will have any clue what I'm talking about or where it goes or when it might arrive.

None of this is the end of the world. That part will have to wait until the trip actually starts and everything is canceled and bustitututed and the bus driver falls asleep as he sends the rest of us off a cliff or something. :lol:

At this point, I'm curious as to exactly what Texas Sunset was trying to do, and exactly what the agent said. Did he check to see if the itinerary was bookable online? Testing a few random dates, I haven't found one where there are rooms available on the Coast Starlight that the website wouldn't let you connect at Sacramento for one.

I always use Amtrak.com's results as my starting point. If it doesn't show up on there I don't expect to get it. The exception this time was the switch of connection points from SAC to EMY as per AU's recommendation. I was originally looking at leaving SAS on July 30th which would have put me on the Starlight the last possible minute of August 2nd. However, if you plugged in LAX > SEA on August 2nd then you originally had six roomettes to choose from. As of this posting that number is now down to three.

 

[Ryan]

If I see a given routing on Amtrak.com then I should not have to challenge the AGR agent as to the mere existence of the routing. It should come up just as easily for them as it does for me. If my request for a change of connection point still allows a full five or six hours of layover time they should at least consider allowing that. Instead I get endless push-back over even the most minor of changes.

That's the problem. The routing that you're looking for to go SAS-SEA does NOT come up on Amtrak.com. You're asking for something that's unavailable because the Texas Eagle arrives in CHI 8 minutes before the CZ leaves. The CZ to CS routing does come up if you put in CHI-SEA and you should be able to book that no problem. Am I misunderstanding what you're trying to do?

The simple fact of the matter is that most of Amtrak's network is not a schedule-driven transportation service. In the case of sleeper customers it's a land cruise, pure and simple. Just take look around the site. That's how we honestly use it.

For you, me (sometimes) and folks around here, that may be true. But we represent the vast minority of Amtrak users. Even the majority of my travel in sleepers is because I want to get from point A to point B, not to take a "land cruise".

 

[PRR 60]

One last point, and then I'll go back to my usual mundane existence.

While Chicago to Seattle via Sacramento is not a common routing, Omaha or Denver to Seattle via Sacramento certainly is.

For a real-world example, try this (tested 6/24):

Trip on August 16 from Denver to Seattle

Depart August 16, DEN to SEA

- #5 8/16 DEN-SAC - Roomette available

- #14 8/17 SAC-SEA - No rooms available

Checking just the Starlight on 8/17 from San Jose to Seattle:

Depart August 17, SJC to SEA

- #14 8/17 SJC-SEA - Roomette available <== Same train with no rooms available for a connection from Denver

 

[Devil's Advocate]

That's the problem. The routing that you're looking for to go SAS-SEA does NOT come up on Amtrak.com.

For me it came up the first time I tried it and every time thereafter. Amtrak.com uses bus 5522 from Springfield, IL to Galesburg, IL in order to guarantee the connection. The part that Amtrak.com does not offer is a connection in EMY, and neither would AGR. Ryan Alan suggested I nest another ticket inside the first in order to spend more time on the Coast Starlight and possibly even get into my room a little early. That sounds like a good enough work around and I have some vouchers that can cover the additional expense.

For you, me (sometimes) and folks around here, that may be true. But we represent the vast minority of Amtrak users. Even the majority of my travel in sleepers is because I want to get from point A to point B, not to take a "land cruise".

Actually I think you're probably right to dispute that phrase. Even an actual cruise would have far better amenities and on-time performance than Amtrak ever has. However, I still strongly disagree that Amtrak is a schedule-driven service. Amtrak moves when the freight dispatchers tell them to move. If there is a truly major disruption or failure en route Amtrak typically can't fix it or replace it or route around it on their own and have to wait until one of the freight railroads decides to do something about it. That's not Amtrak's "fault" per se, but it certainly hinders their ability to keep to any sort of schedule. Even with all their enormous padding they still run late far too often and seem to be getting later all the time.

 

[sechs]

At this point, I'm curious as to exactly what Texas Sunset was trying to do, and exactly what the agent said. Did he check to see if the itinerary was bookable online? Testing a few random dates, I haven't found one where there are rooms available on the Coast Starlight that the website wouldn't let you connect at Sacramento for one.

I always use Amtrak.com's results as my starting point. If it doesn't show up on there I don't expect to get it. The exception this time was the switch of connection points from SAC to EMY as per AU's recommendation. I was originally looking at leaving SAS on July 30th which would have put me on the Starlight the last possible minute of August 2nd. However, if you plugged in LAX > SEA on August 2nd then you originally had six roomettes to choose from. As of this posting that number is now down to three.

Maybe I missed something, but it seems to be working exactly as Alan has said: If you can buy it, you can book it with AGR. You can't buy the itinerary that you want, so AGR cannot book it.
And, by your own word, you should not have expected to get a sleeper on that segment, as none are offered for purchase of that itinerary.

 

[the_traveler]

The routing that you're looking for to go SAS-SEA does NOT come up on Amtrak.com.

It should, if it's a day that the SL operates! There is about a 3 hour layover in LAX from the SL to the CS!

 

[Bob Dylan]

The routing that you're looking for to go SAS-SEA does NOT come up on Amtrak.com.

It should, if it's a day that the SL operates! There is about a 3 hour layover in LAX from the SL to the CS!

Dave is Correct Ryan! If you Check Amtrak.com for the Three Days a Week that the SSL/TE Runs NOL-LAX youll get #421 SAS-LAX #14 LAX-SAS. Ive Ridden it 4 times, Three on AGR Awards! That's How We are Getting to SEA for the gathering in OCT!

 

[Ryan]

The routing that you're looking for to go SAS-SEA does NOT come up on Amtrak.com.

It should, if it's a day that the SL operates! There is about a 3 hour layover in LAX from the SL to the CS!

He's not looking for that routing, he wants to take the TE/CZ/CS routing.

After you said that it came up for you Dax, I went back and checked again and sure as heck it was there. Not sure if I missed it or if it wasn't there the first time I looked. Anyhow, it says "no rooms available" for the CS leg, so the statement that "If you can't book it on amtrak.com you can't book it as an award" holds true.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Yes, I'm doing the TE > CZ > CS route with the bus bridge between the TE and CZ and a very long layover in a hot Sacramento station. I'm not that worried about it. In the end I managed to get the routing I wanted and upper level roomettes on the two trains that actually matter and I have the confirmation email in my possession so I'm pretty happy with the outcome at this point. I'm done debating the "last room on train" and "guaranteed connection" controversies for now. We can resume those discussion another time. The main things on my mind now are how much exploring of the Cascades service I want to do, what to do in Vancouver, and figuring out how VIA's Canadian works.