Railroad Forums 

  • Amtrak Diner and Food Service Discussion

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

 #1479804  by R&DB
 
SouthernRailway » Tue Jul 17, 2018 8:27 am
Hotel restaurants operated by the hotel have the same problem as Amtrak, not operated as a restaurant but as part of a hotel.
He says that they care about distribution to airlines but they couldn't care less about selling items through Amtrak; it's not even on their radar screen.
Is this because of price, volume or bureaucracy?
 #1479809  by Mackensen
 
R&DB wrote:bostontrainguy wrote:
Would be really interesting to expand this concept with a few more hot choices and also as a 24 hour diner as I mentioned earlier in the thread. Maybe the diner could actually become a profit center if it's constantly dishing out meals all day and all night with a 1 - 2 person crew.
An idea which needs a long test period on a route with somewhat busy intermediate stops. Lake Shore and Capitol Limited come to mind.

Now to the accepted "rule" that sit-down dining service loses money, The are hundreds of thousands of establishments across this country that prove this a fallacy. Dining cars on trains should be operated by experienced restaurateurs not railroaders. As others have noted some method of pre-selecting meals from the menu would improve diner patron turn-around time. Yes, labor costs will have to be addressed but so will meal pricing. If your labor cost are higher, your menu prices will be too. Included in those labor costs are crew bases and on-board accommodations. Perhaps a joint effort by a consortium of some of America's most successful chain restaurants should be considered to operate the dining and cafe cars. The experience of the consortium could be reflected in types of service and menu available on each route and each type of car, dining / cafe. And for those concerned about the unions, is it not better for the chefs and food service specialists to be employed at slightly lower wages rather than to be unemployed?
This has been discussed to death in this and other threads. The economies of scale of a sit-down restaurant and a dining car are so completely different that the comparison is useless.
 #1479826  by ryanov
 
I’m on 42 right now. Guess what? There are a whopping two vegetarian options — pizza and the vegan noodle bowl (which last time I had it was frozen) — and neither one was loaded onto the train. Got on at 7:30a, supposed to get off at 4:35p but we’ve been moving slowly because of flash flood warnings.
 #1479831  by R&DB
 
Mackensen » Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:34 am
The economies of scale of a sit-down restaurant and a dining car are so completely different that the comparison is useless.
Let's look at it in a slightly different way. When attending a professional sporting event, does one expect to pay normal prices for food and beverages? The venue has a captive audience. Do people go to dinner between games at a double-header?

Amtrak has a captive audience. On the Regionals cafe service is acceptable, but should be priced with the captive audience in mind. But on the LD trains a full service diner, priced with the captive audience in mind, could be profitable if operated correctly.
The real problem is Congressional mandates, bureaucracy, Union agreements, history and accepted 'norms' that make the "economies of scale" unacceptable.

How about outsourcing all food service and charge the contracted company(s) rent based on the fact that their restaurant is on wheels. (higher initial and continuing costs than land-built real estate) Amtrak would be a landlord and no longer be providing food services obviating Congress's dictates. How the contractor provides a menu is in their best interest to make it profitable. Net gain to Amtrak.
 #1479834  by Mackensen
 
R&DB wrote:
Amtrak has a captive audience. On the Regionals cafe service is acceptable, but should be priced with the captive audience in mind. But on the LD trains a full service diner, priced with the captive audience in mind, could be profitable if operated correctly.
The real problem is Congressional mandates, bureaucracy, Union agreements, history and accepted 'norms' that make the "economies of scale" unacceptable.
This is the reality under which train service operates in this country, and we can't hand-wave that reality away because we find it disagreeable. Congress isn't going away, and neither are the unions. Without Congress there's no statutory right of access at incremental cost to Class I track. Lose that and the LD network is gone instantly, along with a number of state supported routes (some states would pony up the additional money, but there's no way that you'd keep all of them onboard). If the Democrats retake Congress you might see the food service mandates rescinded, but that wouldn't change the economics of the situation. Whether Amtrak would choose to accept losses in that scenario would be up to the management.

The economics of scale issue is that restaurants serve a far higher volume of passengers than a train can. That's a function of the total number of passengers aboard a train, the total amount of food which can be stored on a train, and the area available to prepare and serve that food. You can't compare an 85' x 10' car with a brick-and-mortar establishment (including ballparks). You assert that "a full service diner, priced with the captive audience in mind, could be profitable if operated correctly." No private sector railroad company ever managed this in the modern era. Basic economics dictate that you cannot raise the price indefinitely; people will seek alternatives.
 #1479851  by BandA
 
Pay the chefs & food attendants a percentage of sales & see what happens...

Robotic automat that takes orders over the intranet & heats the entrees. Using lasers.
 #1479870  by SouthernRailway
 
Matt Johnson wrote:Downgrade severely, then upgrade slightly and issue a press release covering only the latter? The true definition of fake news I suppose...

https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/790961002" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Thanks for sharing. That article is totally misleading--and in my professional circles, "misleading" = "lying", so it's full of lies. Shameful.
 #1479877  by bostontrainguy
 
SouthernRailway wrote:
Matt Johnson wrote:Downgrade severely, then upgrade slightly and issue a press release covering only the latter? The true definition of fake news I suppose...

https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/790961002" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Thanks for sharing. That article is totally misleading--and in my professional circles, "misleading" = "lying", so it's full of lies. Shameful.
Well that meal actually looks pretty appetizing. The choice of pictures was interesting and maybe someone will see this article and decide to give the train a try.

I don't know why they rolled this out in the way that they did. The very thought of making "First Class" passengers eat cold meals was really disgusting. If they started this program with a few hot choices at breakfast and lunch/dinner, it would have been so much more acceptable.

I think considering everything (free drinks, room service, private lounge, etc.), if the meals are good (and there are reports that the food is very good), this just may work out well. It's not what we are all used to, but we have probably all had mediocre meals and services in traditional dining cars, right?

Now with the ability to reduce dining car crew to one or two people, Amtrak should be able to realize big savings in food operations and keep those new dining cars operating at least for sleeper passengers.

On the other hand, what would be the financial results of opening up the same process and meals also to coach passengers on a 24 hour basis and charge for the meals? Can't see how this would not even be better for the bottom line.

Anyway, I am willing to give Amtrak the benefit of the doubt and see how things go. It would even be a little bit nicer if the dining car had a selection of snacks and treats like in the Acela Lounges if they are kept for First Class passengers only.
Last edited by bostontrainguy on Tue Jul 17, 2018 6:47 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 #1479881  by Matt Johnson
 
bostontrainguy wrote:
I don't know why they rolled this out in the way that they did. The very thought of making "First Class" passengers eat cold meals was really disgusting. If they started this program with a few hot choices at breakfast and lunch/dinner, it would have been so much more acceptable.
Apparently it was so that they could make it so bad that they could come out with a press release a month later touting upgrades, ignoring the initial downgrade that set the bar so low and the fact that there was proper dining car service just a couple of months back!
 #1479973  by Matt Johnson
 
mtuandrew wrote:Probably tastes good, and it’s more substantial than many fast-casual meals, but it looks like plastic in that USA Today photo.

Basically, Amtrak is going from casual restaurant quality to Marie Callender frozen dinners that you'd pick up in a supermarket.
 #1479990  by Mackensen
 
Matt Johnson wrote:
mtuandrew wrote:Probably tastes good, and it’s more substantial than many fast-casual meals, but it looks like plastic in that USA Today photo.

Basically, Amtrak is going from casual restaurant quality to Marie Callender frozen dinners that you'd pick up in a supermarket.
What, the $10 variety? No, the food was a good deal better than that. Where there's a similarity is that the quality and presentation is consistent, which was always a problem on the old dining cars (especially the eggs for breakfast).
 #1479991  by bostontrainguy
 
Matt Johnson wrote:
mtuandrew wrote:Probably tastes good, and it’s more substantial than many fast-casual meals, but it looks like plastic in that USA Today photo.

Basically, Amtrak is going from casual restaurant quality to Marie Callender frozen dinners that you'd pick up in a supermarket.
Don't think that is the case based on the positive reviews I have read. What are you basing your comment on? Can you verify that these dinners are frozen?
  • 1
  • 57
  • 58
  • 59
  • 60
  • 61
  • 137