Amtrak Downeaster Discussion Thread

I saw in one NNEPRA report someplace the actual point-to-point travel stats between the various stations on the Downeaster line; I'd love to find that again. I know that the two largest travel pairs were Portland-Boston and Exeter-Boston (and vice-versa).

I wasn't sure whether this would go better here, or in the Rail-Related Development thread in New England Railfan, but just as NNEPRA seems prepared to look further into moving the station, the Forecaster is reporting that something else may be happening in the current neighborhood:

The Forecaster wrote: Thompson's Point in Portland to be sold; Red Claws involved?
PORTLAND — Twenty-five acres at Thompson's Point are under contract to be sold.

But Tony Donovan, a broker at Fishman Realty Group, which listed the property, said he is not permitted to identify the potential buyer.
...
Maine Red Claws President Jon Jennings, meanwhile, would neither confirm nor deny persistent rumors that the NBA D-League team is interested in the property for construction of a new arena.

To see the property listing, go to Fishman Realty and search for the ID 1979240. The brochure has a lot of good detail including apparently showing the area NNEPRA recently bought to have extra maintenance space as well as the fact that Suburban Propane apparently owns their lot and isn't moving.

One additional note on Thompson's Point: If you look at the brochures or at the site itself from the water side (say, coming over I-295 from SoPo), you will notice a long barn-like structure near the end of the point. That is actually a portion (I've seen 1/5 someplace) of the original Union Station train shed that was moved here when passenger ops were shut down.

Not to start any conspiracy theories here, but I might point out that Tony Donovan (the tight-lipped rep from Fishman Realty in the article) is also the head of the Maine Rail Transit Coalition... Did anybody else notice the whole spiel in the realty listing about "potential for a transit oriented development"? TOD is Tony's whole MO so I can't imagine him getting excited about the Red Claws unless it really meant something for rail. I sure would like to be a fly on the wall for those negotiations...

Massachusetts already has its hands full, transportation-wise, with paying for the MBTA and the payment on bonds for their share of the BIG DIG and the maintenance on those tunnels and the older Sumner and Callahan tunnels.

New Hampshire has no general income or general sales taxes, so overall state revenue is quite limited and the courts have ruled that the state gasoline tax cannot be used for other than highway costs. As far as paying toward the operation of the Downeaster is concerned, the three communities that have stations, Dover, Durham-UNH and Exeter do pay the costs associated with the stations, including maintenance, liablity insurance and the like.

4266 wrote:Not to start any conspiracy theories here, but I might point out that Tony Donovan (the tight-lipped rep from Fishman Realty in the article) is also the head of the Maine Rail Transit Coalition... Did anybody else notice the whole spiel in the realty listing about "potential for a transit oriented development"? TOD is Tony's whole MO so I can't imagine him getting excited about the Red Claws unless it really meant something for rail. I sure would like to be a fly on the wall for those negotiations...

I hadn't realized that, but a lot of the conceptual drawings they included do revolve around TOD. OTOH, other than the GL and CCL bus services there's no public transit bringing people into Portland from the rest of the state other than the Downeaster corridor, and the two runs to Brunswick will likely do little to change that (I personally doubt we'll see any action whatsoever on the MRT commuter-rail to Lewiston suggestion in the next 10 years). The bottom line is, in my eyes, regardless of what Tony might want to see for TOD, I doubt very much any real estate man would turn up his nose at the commissions on a 9 million dollar sale.

NNEPRA instituted "demand pricing" on the Downeaster earlier this month.
Essentially, it charges more for the morning and early afternoon trains,
while charging less for the late evening train and the early morning train
on the weekend. As far as I know, there was no announcement ahead of time
that these changes would be forthcoming. I suppose some bean counter at
her/his desk in Portland decided that this would increase overall revenues.
I am not sure that is the case, as a $5 increase on some trains between
Boston and Portland may drive some riders away and I don't see many riders
hanging around Boston an extra one to two hours to save the difference.
Possibly the bean counter figures that there will be some drop in ridership
on the peak trains, so that they can drop the fifth car that runs on one set.

I checked the Hiawatha service between Chicago and Milwaukee, which is a
similar service to the Downeaster and they do not use demand pricing. All
fares are the same on all trains. With the Downeaster under the budget gun
in 2011, I don't see this as a good time to make this change without notice,
as fare adjustments might be needed to help retain the service next year
and would be better justified at that time.

Dick H wrote:NNEPRA instituted "demand pricing" on the Downeaster earlier this month.
Essentially, it charges more for the morning and early afternoon trains,
while charging less for the late evening train and the early morning train
on the weekend. ...
Possibly the bean counter figures that there will be some drop in ridership
on the peak trains, so that they can drop the fifth car that runs on one set.

This is not about dropping cars. Its about the best way to raise $. When monthly revenues run $665k, this would raise about ($5 x 21 days x 1014 Maine-Bos pax/day = $100k+ a 16% boost). For this to be a money-loser, daily peak-train ridership would have to fall by something like 10%..which seems unlikely to happen, and easy to detect and reverse if it were going to happen.

Let's count those beans (from the July-Sep 2010 Report) at a time when Weekday Ridership = 1560
65% of riders travelled to/from a Maine station generating 75% of ticket revenue (52% of those passengers traveled to/from Boston...in other words, 1/3 of all riders are full Maine-Boston riders)

Top Trains
Train 680 with 250 passengers per day (early AM inbound)
Train 682 with 234 passengers per day (AM inbound)
Train 685 has 294 passengers per day (PM return)

Already we know that 50% of the day's traffic is on just 30% of trains. They are 2 to 4 times as crowded as the non-peak trains. If you had a choice between raising all fares $2.50 or just peaks by $5, you'd definitely raise just the peak, because the last thing you want is to see those off-peak trains go even more empty. Let's use these numbers to project likely typical loads:

SOUTHBOUND
#680 250
#682 230
#684 80
#686 70
#688 150

NORTHBOUND
#681 100
#683 100
#685 300
#687 180
#689 100

I can't see how NNEPRA would fail to come out ahead on this.

I checked the fares on Concord Trailways from Portland to Boston and return.
Since the quoting fares is not allowed on this web site, let me approach
it this way. A Concord Trailways round trip from Portland to Boston and
return will cost 25% less than a round trip on the Downeaster using trains
#680 or #682 to Boston and #685 returning during the week under the new
demand pricing set up. Concord Trailways is also currently running a further
promotional same day round trip discount for $4 less than the regular round trip.

Whether these differences in bus fares from the Downeaster find many riders
switching to the bus remains to be seen. There have been some more modest
adjustments at some of the intermediate stations, but Portland has taken the
major hit. With Maine footing the bill for the subsidy not covered by federal
grants, the demand pricing may not go down too well in Augusta, as a new
adminstration and legislature takes office in January.

Dick H wrote: A Concord Trailways round trip from Portland to Boston and
return will cost 25% less than a round trip on the Downeaster using trains
#680 or #682 to Boston and #685 returning during the week under the new
demand pricing set up. Concord Trailways is also currently running a further
promotional same day round trip discount for $4 less than the regular round trip.

Whether these differences in bus fares from the Downeaster find many riders
switching to the bus remains to be seen. There have been some more modest
adjustments at some of the intermediate stations, but Portland has taken the
major hit. With Maine footing the bill for the subsidy not covered by federal
grants, the demand pricing may not go down too well in Augusta, as a new
adminstration and legislature takes office in January.

If the goal is to provide service for whatever the bus costs, seems like the bus can do that with no subsidy at all.

If the train can't command a higher fare for its better service, then why run it? And actually it is at rush our (when a bus gets stuck in rush traffic) that the train's service it at its greatest schedule advantage. Its then the train can--and should--charge more.

Maine's public policy goal seems to be to encourage business/work access from Maine to Boston. Higher fares support this in two ways (1) it diverts the backpack-and-flipflop crowd off the peak trains that serve "businesspeople", giving the businesspeople a more businesslike ride..a premium service worth paying for and (2) it means that the NNEPRA has the $ it needs (from the people who use it) to support the two train sets required to run two peak trains, without tapping the non-train-riding-Maine-taxpayer too hard.

And then those two trainsets can continue to run in the off hours at lower prices, cause they're there and crewed anyway.

I just looked at the Downeaster site, and I noticed two things. First, the (3-day advance purchase) same-day return excursion fare is still in place and unchanged from its previous price. That's the one I typically use, but my trips to Boston are for recreational purposes and so I can plan ahead. Second, and perhaps more importantly, looking at a one-way purchase from POR to BON on December 7, they didn't increase the fare on the peak trains, they dropped the fare on the off-peak trains by $5. So I don't see this as an attempt to derive more revenue from the commuters as much as it is an attempt to boost ridership on the off-peak trains by making them more cost-competitive with the bus or driving.

So far as the comparison between the DE and Concord Coach Lines goes, my gut feeling is that the bus is likely more competitive for business travelers due to its terminus at South Station, which is far more convenient to the financial district downtown than is North Station. Conversely, BON is more convenient to most tourist/leisure destinations due to being under the Garden and on the Green Line, which in turn goes to the Common/Fanueil Hall (via Haymarket)/Theatre District/Fenway Park/BC-BU-Northeastern, etc. The only touristy areas I can think of which aren't on the Green Line are Harvard and the Long Wharf-Aquarium area.

Ironically, one twist is that the DE of course doesn't connect to the rest of the Amtrak system. I tried to buy a Flexpass (good for either the DE or CCL) last spring when I was connecting to the Lake Shore, and the attendant actually discouraged me from doing so and advised me that it would be easier to just take the bus directly to BOS. The reason for discouraging the Flexpass was that a lot of people who bought it didn't understand that the buses are unreserved, and so if you're late getting in line and the bus fills up you're out of luck.

markhb wrote:So far as the comparison between the DE and Concord Coach Lines goes, my gut feeling is that the bus is likely more competitive for business travelers due to its terminus at South Station, which is far more convenient to the financial district downtown than is North Station.

I'm with you, although if it makes a difference, BON, with the Green Line, has good/better to Pru/Back Bay, than BOS.

The need for a DE fare premium (and CCL discount) can also be viewed from CCL's standpoint: Being for-profit, CCL wants to raise prices as high as they can. They must have found that they cannot raise them to parity with the DE...when prices are the same, not enough people prefer the bus. So the CCL must peg its prices below the DE whenever CCL's service is less-preferred.

POR-BON business day trips must be one of those times. You can either think of it as CCL discounting (relative to DE) because it needs to, or DE raising prices because it can, either way the place where supply and demand balance and the market is divided between the two appears to be at a place where DEs can cost 25% more for a business trip. Good business for both CCL and DE.

markhb wrote:Second, and perhaps more importantly, looking at a one-way purchase from POR to BON on December 7, they didn't increase the fare on the peak trains, they dropped the fare on the off-peak trains by $5.

This is absolutely true; there was no fare increase, rather it was a fare decrease on select trains. Good for the consumer, and good for NNEPRA.

Arlington wrote:

Dick H wrote: A Concord Trailways round trip from Portland to Boston and
return will cost 25% less than a round trip on the Downeaster using trains
#680 or #682 to Boston and #685 returning during the week under the new
demand pricing set up. Concord Trailways is also currently running a further
promotional same day round trip discount for $4 less than the regular round trip.

Whether these differences in bus fares from the Downeaster find many riders
switching to the bus remains to be seen. There have been some more modest
adjustments at some of the intermediate stations, but Portland has taken the
major hit. With Maine footing the bill for the subsidy not covered by federal
grants, the demand pricing may not go down too well in Augusta, as a new
adminstration and legislature takes office in January.

If the goal is to provide service for whatever the bus costs, seems like the bus can do that with no subsidy at all.

If the train can't command a higher fare for its better service, then why run it? And actually it is at rush our (when a bus gets stuck in rush traffic) that the train's service it at its greatest schedule advantage. Its then the train can--and should--charge more.

Maine's public policy goal seems to be to encourage business/work access from Maine to Boston. Higher fares support this in two ways (1) it diverts the backpack-and-flipflop crowd off the peak trains that serve "businesspeople", giving the businesspeople a more businesslike ride..a premium service worth paying for and (2) it means that the NNEPRA has the $ it needs (from the people who use it) to support the two train sets required to run two peak trains, without tapping the non-train-riding-Maine-taxpayer too hard.

And then those two trainsets can continue to run in the off hours at lower prices, cause they're there and crewed anyway.

I think that just about nails it perfectly. NNEPRA may actually be increasing the available capacity on their most used trains by getting price sensitive travelers to take the 'off-peak' trains. Furthermore the other real question would be whether or not the monthly passes have had a price change. Many of those who ride the peak trains are monthly pass riders anyways, meaning that any change to 'walk-up' fares has little to no effect on them whatsoever.

seems like the bus can do that with no subsidy at all.

For anyone assuming that the bus receives no subsidy, I encourage you to actually check out the buses themselves. Many of them state that they are owned by the State of New Hampshire and operated by Concord Trailways, C&J, etc. That sounds like a subsidy to me. Now, that's not to say that that "evens things up" as far as the costs of bus vs. train go, but it has to be factored in. Also, in cases like Dover, NH, the state built a several hundred space parking lot to provide free parking to commuters. This is now where C&J stops in Dover instead of the downtown station.

FatNoah wrote:

seems like the bus can do that with no subsidy at all.

For anyone assuming that the bus receives no subsidy, I encourage you to actually check out the buses themselves [many] are owned by the State of New Hampshire [and] the state built a several hundred space parking lot to provide free parking to commuters.

I was unaware that NH had subsidized the bus purchase ($6m in one reckoning) and one company got a monopoly on bus service from the park and rides. Certainly in a Concord-Boston rail thread we can make the case that trains should win the next round of such funding.

For the Downeaster, the overall message remains: Inferior (bus) services should cost less and must charge less. Superior (train) services can cost more and should charge more.

For both the Capitol Corridor and Downeaster (or any corridor for that matter), a blended solution is best with trains and buses running complementary schedules is best. Trains are necessary for peak travel times to handle the loads and to bypass highway congestion, but buses make more sense for lower-load times and to supplement train service. An additional benefit is that in the event of a disruption on one mode, infrastructure is in place for the other mode to handle service.