Amtrak Long Distance Trains Under Attack

[C855B]

http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2018/08/27-amtrak-says-it-will-not-run-trains-on-routes-without-ptc#.W4Qbr-sNhEw.email

[eric220]

Well f**k.

Freight roads don’t want Amtrak, Amtrak won’t operate on non-PTC routes, drag the heels a little more and let the routes die. No rat here.

[MK]

Wow, all this affected!

Southwest Chief: between La Junta, Colo., and Dailies, N.M., and through Topeka, Kan.
Cardinal: over the Buckingham Branch Railroad between Orange and Clifton Forge, Va.
California Zephyr: 152 miles of UP’s Green River subdivision west of Grand Junction, Colo.
Texas Eagle: 110 miles of UP’s Desoto subdivision south of St. Louis, Mo.
Downeaster: north of Haverhill, Mass., to Brunswick, Maine., on Pan Am Railways
Vermonter: north of Springfield, Mass., on the New England Central
Ethan Allen: on Vermont Railway east of Whitehall, N.Y.
City of New Orleans: a total of 18 miles on Canadian National around Memphis, Tenn., and New Orleans

[MK]

Wait!  I just noticed they named a train after a furniture store (second from bottom)????   

[Philip H]

Many of those are signature routes with regional support. My guess is the game here is trying to force the railroads to finish up PTC installations where the railroads have been foot dragging. And yes - PTC is an “unfounded” mandate the railroads have to deal with from the government but the could easily have been done by now if they were willing to sacrifice a couple percent a year of profit.

[C855B]

Actually the game here is to dismantle the Amtrak overnight train network. It has nothing to do with PTC. It's a common policy ploy that if you want something gone, you declare it a public safety problem. PTC may be a mostly specious unfunded mandate, but a very convenient one to draw on in this case.

Amtrak detractors in the administration and Congress have been trying hard to kill long-distance train service for a while, and up to this point the strategy has been death-by-a-thousand-cuts making the service less attractive. However, this is the first serious blow to major cross-country routes and connections. Thankfully, there was some Congressional push-back in a funding bill after the announcement was made about plans to bus-bridge the Southwest around Raton, but rallying legislative support in light of this new strategy is going to be far more difficult, all considered.

[pedro]

The PTC deadline will almost certainly be pushed back again, so this will probably be a non-issue. Even BNSF has filed for an extension, despite having basically 100% implementation, because the connecting carriers can’t provide PTC-equipped locomotives, and that includes Amtrak. They just started testing on #5/6 this week, at least in Chicago. I’m guessing they really are just making noise to ensure an extension.

[John]

Many of those are signature routes with regional support. My guess is the game here is trying to force the railroads to finish up PTC installations where the railroads have been foot dragging. And yes - PTC is an “unfounded” mandate the railroads have to deal with from the government but the could easily have been done by now if they were willing to sacrifice a couple percent a year of profit.

As a shareholder, why should I give up my dividend?   Oh, this will cost you a few percent?  before you know it, when everyone gets you to give up a couple of percent . .there won't be any percent left ..

[eric220]

As a shareholder, I’d much rather see the railroads investing money in physical plant and long-term upgrades than giving out dividends. But then again, as a Pennsy modeler, I would think that way, wouldn’t I? Realistically though, with the profits that I see on my statements, they should be able to get this done and continue passing out fairly healthy dividends.

[Philip H]

As a shareholder, why should I give up my dividend?   Oh, this will cost you a few percent?  before you know it, when everyone gets you to give up a couple of percent . .there won't be any percent left ..

The longer the railroad delay implementing PTC claiming cost basis, the longer they are exposed to litigation risk for running trains in "dark" territory.  Someone will eventually figure that out, and and enterprising young lawyer will make hay out of it.  A few percent profit - which could easily come from the CEO's compensation package, and not shareholder dividends - would relieve that burden.

[C855B]

Plus... as another shareholder in UP and BNSF (B-H), I consider Amtrak to be part and parcel of their responsibilities as corporate citizens. After all, the railroads were given a pass on directly supporting passenger service so as to secure their long-term profitability, which it did. So it follows that it should be incumbent on the RRs to return the favor, with the real costs (not MBA hocus-pocus) amounting to pocket change in the grand scheme.