What is happening to the SWC route?

[BPGallagher]

That reply is from Joe, as I was there when he wrote it. You mention other routes, but those were prior to this administration. Furthermore, how do you fund expansion when they are unwilling to properly fund the present national network? The issue today is funding what exists so nothing more is lost.

 

[Ryan]

That's about 11 million different shades of awesome.

Thanks for sharing that, and that's super awesome of Mr. Boardman to take the time for a personal reply.

 

[printman2000]

I also emailed Mr Boardman concerning the reroute and also the poor performance of the current locomotives. It was clearly a direct response from him from his iPhone.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum

 

[the Duck]

to clear up some misunderstanding about the rejected purchase of the Raton line please digest these facts and ask yourself what you would do in such a circumstance. All that I' m about to say is found on the internet--I found it you can find it. When Martinez took over as Governor--she tried to complete the deal .BNSF would not cooperate-- New Mexico wanted to get on the rail property to examine it so they would know what they were buying oil spills, etc.. BNSF would not allow New Mexico on the property, this went on for a while and the Governor got fed Up. and said no more, According to New Mexico State real estate Law in a deal gone bad purchasing party has a right to ask and receive their earnest money back. It was BNSF that killed the deal.

 

[VentureForth]

Duck - I didn't find any of that in news sources. All I could find was that a) BNSF failed to close on the deal and b) that allowed Martinez to cancel the purchase as she didn't believe that the ROI would be imminent. Yes - BNSF killed the deal, but I think if Martinez wanted it, she could have bought it. Communities along the line were also concerned about the sale to the state, as the state is exempt from property taxes, which would hurt the communities along the route.

But this is just one peg - 190 miles or so out of 600+ that will be cut.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Wow, Amtrak Executives posting on AU and responding personally to members, not using a PR flack!

Outstanding!

 

[printman2000]

That reply is from Joe, as I was there when he wrote it. You mention other routes, but those were prior to this administration. Furthermore, how do you fund expansion when they are unwilling to properly fund the present national network? The issue today is funding what exists so nothing more is lost.

Mr Gallagher, if you have read this thread, it seems to most people (if not all) that the reroute makes a lot more sense for Amtrak. I understand not wanting to abandon the people on the current route, but Amtrak has not made an argument why it makes financial sense (for Amtrak) to stay on the current route.

If the reroute is cheaper and has the potential for higher ridership, how does that not help Amtrak?

 

[the Duck]

Venture Forth: I"l help get you started by suggesting you start by Googling "New Mexico Rail purchase" and work your way to State documents by New Mexico. You won't find the information in major news paper or station. If I have to hold your hand and point it out to you----I charge for that.

 

[Bedford]

Printman2000 asks Mr. Gallagher a key question. "If the reroute is cheaper and has the potential for higher ridership how does that not help Amtrak?" I would be very surprised if Brian or Mr. Boardman would dispute this if the two premises contained therein we in fact true. Printman2000 says "it seems to most people (if not all) that the reroute makes a lot more sense for Amtrak.". Who are "most people"? Are any of them decision-makers at Amtrak or BNSF? Do any of them hold the purse strings in Texas, New Mexico, Kansas or Colorado? How much money did "most people" spend on Amtrak last year? If the reroute is really cheaper and really has the potential for higher ridership how dumb do you think Mr. Boardman and Gallagher are?

 

[jis]

I was wondering too who these most people are. Six most prolific posters on AU do not constitute most people by a long shot. So sorry, a little more supporting evidence both on the most people bit and also the cheaper bit is necessary. Do we really know what exactly is the deal that has been offered by BNSF? If so, how did we come to know of it and what are the actual numbers?

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum

 

[printman2000]

My point is that Amtrak has never shared any information about a possible reroute. All we can do is speculate and most people on this forum feel it is the better option. Until Amtrak tells us how a reroute would be worse or cost more and provide less ridership, most of us will not believe it to be true.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum

 

[printman2000]

It seems most posts on this forum lean towards the reroute being more viable. I guess I could try and make a tally, but it feels that way by what I have read.

Maybe it is not most. But it sure seems that way by what I remember reading.

I guess I should also add that I am referring to people who have put in their opinion.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum

 

[Bedford]

I believe you are correct, sir and you are helping to get to the bottom of this.

 

[jis]

Yes. At most half a dozen most prolific posters have been going on and on about it. But that does not necessarily mean a hill of beans in the real world unfortunately. AFAICT none of them have produced any credible evidence that they know what the finances of the deal involved are. There has just been a lot of speculation and wishful thinking flying around. Just IMHO of course.

It sure would be nice to get some more grounded info. But then again, I am not sure that those in the know are able to share such without running afoul of their fiduciary responsibilities at this point in time.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum

 

[printman2000]

I guess what I should have said was it seems to me the reroute would cost less and have more potential ridership. That is based on just my personal logic of the situation, nothing firm.

So Mr Gallagher, would that true or not? Or has it even been figured out?

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum

 

[Bedford]

printman2000 gets my vote as an honest and honorable person.

 

[Ryan]

Venture Forth: I"l help get you started by suggesting you start by Googling "New Mexico Rail purchase" and work your way to State documents by New Mexico. You won't find the information in major news paper or station. If I have to hold your hand and point it out to you----I charge for that.

Or you can quit being an ass and just post the link if you're actually interested in having an honest conversation.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Is Guest _The Duck_ our old friend trainaddict the troll??

 

[neroden]

Yes. At most half a dozen most prolific posters have been going on and on about it. But that does not necessarily mean a hill of beans in the real world unfortunately. AFAICT none of them have produced any credible evidence that they know what the finances of the deal involved are.

BNSF can try to hold Amtrak hostage for whatever it likes, obviously.
If this were a friendly business deal, it would be obvious that the reroute was better; the technical evidence is clear. But we know that Class I railroads behave badly when it comes to Amtrak. :shrug: What else can we have but speculation?

 

[neroden]

to clear up some misunderstanding about the rejected purchase of the Raton line please digest these facts and ask yourself what you would do in such a circumstance. All that I' m about to say is found on the internet--I found it you can find it. When Martinez took over as Governor--she tried to complete the deal .BNSF would not cooperate-- New Mexico wanted to get on the rail property to examine it so they would know what they were buying oil spills, etc.. BNSF would not allow New Mexico on the property, this went on for a while and the Governor got fed Up. and said no more, According to New Mexico State real estate Law in a deal gone bad purchasing party has a right to ask and receive their earnest money back. It was BNSF that killed the deal.

None of this is true. Martinez did make up some **** excuses.

 

[VentureForth]

If I have to hold your hand and point it out to you----I charge for that.

Ewwww.

:wacko:

 

[VentureForth]

Venture Forth: I"l help get you started by suggesting you start by Googling "New Mexico Rail purchase" and work your way to State documents by New Mexico. You won't find the information in major news paper or station. If I have to hold your hand and point it out to you----I charge for that.

Or you can quit being an ass and just post the link if you're actually interested in having an honest conversation.

Indeed. Sorry, Duck, but I don't have the time nor the inclination to sort through 5,090,000 results of that search term, the first 10 of which result in a partnership with Hinkle Family Fun center, how to purchase NM Railrunner tickets, and two links to Wikipedia on the Gadsen purchase.

If you have something worthwhile, quote it, cite it, post it, link it.

 

[Ryan]

See dude! I'm an equal opportunity [citation needed]. Don't take it so personally when I ask you to back up your claims, maybe?

 

[VentureForth]

I guess what I should have said was it seems to me the reroute would cost less and have more potential ridership. That is based on just my personal logic of the situation, nothing firm.

So Mr Gallagher, would that true or not? Or has it even been figured out?

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum

The point of Boardman's reply is NOT that a route though Amarillo is a good idea, but rather he doesn't want to do it on the backs of losing those between ABQ - Raton - Dodge City. 52,000 passengers embarked or disembarked at stops that would be eliminated. ABQ had 72,000 in 2013.

Let's look at the advantages of keeping the existing route:

1) All those Boy Scouts that go to Raton are, as of this year, paying full adult fare!

2) Raton has about the same passenger count as Lamy (for Santa Fe)

3) It would be about the closest thing to a dedicated passenger route, with no freight (thus schedule) interference

4) Prettier than the Transcon

The disadvantages to the Transcon include:

1) High freight traffic. Even if passenger train speeds are 20 MPH over freight, you can't leap frog if both mains are congested.

2) Could Amarillo make up the 52,000 passenger deficit? 300,000 people???

No matter how it goes, I agree with Mr. Gallagher - Amtrak is just trying to keep the status quo. New routes (or even reroutes) will be difficult. We can always hope. Heck, many of us thought that the FEC deal would have panned out by now.

I totally get it if Amtrak is concerned that if they try to pursue the transcon, they could lose the route outright.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

No matter what you say, it's just opinion unless you back it up with cited facts.