Railroad Forums 

  • More Business For The Port of Halifax.

  • Discussion relating to the Canadian National, past and present. Also includes discussion of Illinois Central and Grand Trunk Western and other subsidiary roads (including Bessemer & Lake Erie and the Duluth, Missabe & Iron Range Railway). Official site: WWW.CN.CA
Discussion relating to the Canadian National, past and present. Also includes discussion of Illinois Central and Grand Trunk Western and other subsidiary roads (including Bessemer & Lake Erie and the Duluth, Missabe & Iron Range Railway). Official site: WWW.CN.CA

Moderators: Komachi, Ken V

 #296158  by lock4244
 
Interesting. I sure hope traffic increases. Though I have been under the impression that CN was one of the main reasons the Port of Halifax has been in a slump for years. Poor service. There was a somewhat public spat regarding this a few years ago.

CN Halifax - Chicago intermodal trains #148/149... the long distance locals!

 #296326  by murray83
 
Your correct,CN will not add any new trains to the halifax area and for years have sent crappy service to the port.They've become the "we'll shunt it when we feel like it" railroad.

Now if CN could improve service to and from the port of Saint John,i'd be happy.

 #296604  by lock4244
 
This is why I have no faith in CN being able to serve the Port of Price Rupert in a way that will help the fledgling container traffic there. They will likely serve it with a PR to Edmonton train, as opposed to running a dedicated train to any major terminal. The real question is that as traffic (hopefully) grows, will they add a train to Chicago? Likely not, all traffic will be stuffed onto trains 118/119 at Edmonton, and traffic to/from eastern Canada would likely go on 111/112 or 113/114.

I've watched CN combine three trains into one in the Halifax - Chicago corridor serving Chicago, Detriot, Toronto, Montreal, St. John, and Halifax... that being 148/149. Used to be 136/137, 146/147, 148/149. Sure, 120/121 still serve the Halifax - Toronto corridor, but they will need a dedicated Halifax - Chicago train without making several stops to improve service out of Halifax.

 #296774  by murray83
 
can it get any worse?

service here has gone to pot,it takes 12 hours to shunt our container terminal and hand the double stacks to CN to go to Moncton and on to Montreal and their service is worse than the NBSR.

so whats our other choices? good old Guilford "oh umm sorry sir your cars have been misplaced,we'll try our best to find them as soon as we can",thats the line customer service gave my forman on 25 double stack cars we needed the bloody day before couple years back.

and the MMA has not been all that great either

and our port isn't that busy for rail traffic,i feel so sorry for time sensitive moves in Halifax which is 3 times busier than us.

i will give some credit to CN on the better service on the potash trains but the general freight train to and from Moncton needs to improve

 #328650  by CROR410
 
I'm optimistic that there will eventually be enough traffic in/out of Halifax that the market will demand a 2nd RR to competitively serve the area.

 #329022  by lock4244
 
CROR410 wrote:I'm optimistic that there will eventually be enough traffic in/out of Halifax that the market will demand a 2nd RR to competitively serve the area.
I doubt highly that this will ever happen. Unless another RR builds a new line to Halifax, there won't be another RR serving Halifax. Anything else would amount to forced access and CN would fight that to the ends of the earth... and so they should. No Gov't has a right to force a private company to open up it's tracks to another competitor. This would open a Pandora's box, not just for RR's but all businesses. Inspite of any benefits that might flow from it, it tramples private property rights.

Now should there be another round of mergers and CN grants another RR access as a concession, well that would be quite possible. I'm sure CN would give whoever a nice slow run ;-)

 #329155  by murray83
 
Haha another rail line in Halifax? when pigs fly possibly..........

Just to bring a few up to speed,container traffic will be way down this year I'm hearing 30%,since out of the 4 major shipping lines that call on Halifax 2 merged with the others (CP lines with Hapag Lloyd and Maersk with P&O or the other way around?) so kiss those glory days bye bye.

CN's poor poor service east of Montreal is also a major factor in the issues with the port of Halifax.

 #329161  by lock4244
 
murray83 wrote:CN's poor poor service east of Montreal is also a major factor in the issues with the port of Halifax.
What, you mean those long distance locals 148/149 aren't helping to attract new traffic? Will they do better out of Prince Rupert... likely not.

 #329220  by CN9634
 
If the State of Maine was smart, they'd rebuild the former CN bridge in Portland and use the EXISTING container port to steal away Halifax traffic on the SLR to Montreal. Maybe they could even hook onto the CP at Lennixville. :wink:

 #329259  by CROR410
 
lock4244 wrote:No Gov't has a right to force a private company to open up it's tracks to another competitor. This would open a Pandora's box, not just for RR's but all businesses. Inspite of any benefits that might flow from it, it tramples private property rights.
Says who?

The govt forced the incumbent telephone companies to open up their infrastructure, let new competitors come into their buildings and use their equipment to take away their customers.

Result? We now have the lowest telecommunications fees we have ever seen, and we have a very high level of innovation that we never saw before. That's not Pandora's box....that's wonderfull!!!

 #329652  by lock4244
 
I believe comparing telecom to railroads is like comparing apples to oranges. The telecoms are regulated while the railroads in Canada aren't (AFAIK). Bell opened up to competitors, but I believe this was tied into getting permission to enter the TV game, again a regulated arena. That, I believe, is why I get all those ads for Rogers home phone and Bell eXpressview TV all the time... and comparing them, there is no real savings between one or the other. The CRTC sets the rates, so it really isn't going to get competitive in terms of price. Bell wanted into TV, Rogers wanted into phone service... they both got it. And I don't think the cable companies have opened up their infrastructure... just Bell. I can't get anything but Rogers from my cable line.

Now we have Cable companies offering phone service and Phone companies offering TV.

Those discount long distance providers aren't hurting Bell... from what I've heard Bell loves to sell to them. They pay alot for their T3 line (or whatever it is called), and over subscribe it to make it pay. I had a professor that used to buy that service from Bell in a previous job... they would take an interested buyer out for a rather expensive dinner in order to get the $20,000 or so dollar contract. Bell gets paid and the buyer deals with the customers complaints.

If the railroads were regulated then it would be a level playing field... but it isn't. There are millions of customers of telecom services, but few for RR's in comparission. Statistically, telcoms can afford to loose a certain percentage, and that is offset by the new business they are allowed to enter. Now let's say that CP were given forced access to Halifax and scooped most of the business from the port? CP has all the customers and CN gets to pay to maintain the track? What incentive is there for CN to maintain the trackage? It is entirely likely that a tenant RR could get 90% of the business and leave the host with 10%. You then get a sitiation where the host lowers rates to get the business back, and rates keep dropping and margins slip. Innovation requires investment. Instead of innovation you get deferred maintenance, loss of investment. There is a limit to how much costs can be cut before it becomes pointless to continue to function. The industry I'm in is there now, and nobody is making their cost of capital. When you can't invest in your industry, your industry becomes outdated and service goes down the tubes. Atleast the telecoms can rely on getting a certain amount of $$$ for a given service.

Railroads do not have a monopoly on the transportation game. They may for certain customers, but in general, anything a train can carry, so can a truck. Telecoms had a monopoly on their service and it is very expensive for a competitor to enter the market buy building new. It isn't cost prohibitive to enter the trucking game, and public roads exist already, so there is no infrastucture to build. There is modal competition to rail. Heck, a RR can use a truck to serve a customer served directly by another rail competitor... just haul the trailer to their intermodal yard. It happens all the time. And if a container shipping line wants rail competition, they can (and do) go to another port. Most ships visit more than one port upon arrival to North America as we speak.

I don't think the analogy of telecoms and railroads applies.

 #329734  by murray83
 
CN9634 wrote:If the State of Maine was smart, they'd rebuild the former CN bridge in Portland and use the EXISTING container port to steal away Halifax traffic on the SLR to Montreal. Maybe they could even hook onto the CP at Lennixville. :wink:
I'm really hope your just joking......There is NO WAY Portland can even compare to Halifax's international shipping and geography placing,the next best port would be New York since the infastracture is already in place and Montreal requires the extra travel.

Tonight we were taking about Halifax's issues and our terminal's owner just sold its Halifax container terminal "Halterm" to save face,its come to the point now that most non important container runs to and from Halifax are in question,I wish I had whatever CN is smoking.....

 #330225  by CROR410
 
lock4244 wrote:If the railroads were regulated then it would be a level playing field... but it isn't. There are millions of customers of telecom services, but few for RR's in comparission. Statistically, telcoms can afford to loose a certain percentage, and that is offset by the new business they are allowed to enter. Now let's say that CP were given forced access to Halifax and scooped most of the business from the port? CP has all the customers and CN gets to pay to maintain the track? What incentive is there for CN to maintain the trackage? It is entirely likely that a tenant RR could get 90% of the business and leave the host with 10%. You then get a sitiation where the host lowers rates to get the business back, and rates keep dropping and margins slip. Innovation requires investment. Instead of innovation you get deferred maintenance, loss of investment. There is a limit to how much costs can be cut before it becomes pointless to continue to function. The industry I'm in is there now, and nobody is making their cost of capital. When you can't invest in your industry, your industry becomes outdated and service goes down the tubes. Atleast the telecoms can rely on getting a certain amount of $$$ for a given service.
Again I can pick those points apart:

First to suggest or assume that a tenant RR would get 90% and leave 10% for the host is entirely fabricated. It could work out to 50/50, it could work out to 10/90 in favour of the host....it all depends on who offers the most value for the dollar, with value being in the eyes of the shipper/customer not you, me or the RRs.

There is not millions of RR customers, but there is a few customers with millions of stuff to move, versus millions of customers with only a few 'stuff' to sell to. So 10 x 10,000 = 10,000 x 10.

If CP was given access to CN, they would have to pay a substantial rental costs.....and since they would be essentially starting fresh in the market again those first few months, upwards towards 12 will not bring in a lot of revenue yet they still have to pay that whopper fee to CN customers or none....so right there CP will be in a neagtive cash position for a while.

Rates only go so low and then they level off....this is the benefit of competition. If a company can't find that sweet spot between being competitive and profitable then let em go under I say. Besides CN is a publically traded company, there mind set is 3 month quarters so maximum profits to the shareholders come first.....reinvestment into the company is a low priority.

And if you know any thing about telcom then you know that margins are thiner then thin, and VoIP is threatening the very concept of charging revenue to make the phone go ding a ling. Imagine, a telephone company saying "we will charge you $40/mth to make your phone work" when you the customer know that Vonage will make it work for $19.99 plus a ton more features (and they can do so cause they are using VoIP on the Internet) and in a matter of a few years when MSN, Yahoo, ICQ, Skype, FWD, and more to come all offer free VoIP/telehone service. What are you going to tell the telecom company? "Nope".....and what is the telecom company going to do? What ever they do it better be pretty innovative and valueable cause otherwise the market will tell em to go stick it in their pipe.

I know telecom very well, and I know RR pretty good too. I think I can compare the two in a very good light.

PS, as of very recently the CRTC announced that they are loosening the telecom market in Canada even more with VoIP being the catalyst. The industry is already very unregulated compared to what it was before the mid 90s.......the next few years will spell death for many, and success for the few who have the vision and can execute it.

If CN needs a monopoly in a market to survive in that market then that tells you already how innovative their business plan is.

 #330377  by CN9634
 
murray83 wrote:
CN9634 wrote:If the State of Maine was smart, they'd rebuild the former CN bridge in Portland and use the EXISTING container port to steal away Halifax traffic on the SLR to Montreal. Maybe they could even hook onto the CP at Lennixville. :wink:
I'm really hope your just joking......There is NO WAY Portland can even compare to Halifax's international shipping and geography placing,the next best port would be New York since the infastracture is already in place and Montreal requires the extra travel.

Tonight we were taking about Halifax's issues and our terminal's owner just sold its Halifax container terminal "Halterm" to save face,its come to the point now that most non important container runs to and from Halifax are in question,I wish I had whatever CN is smoking.....
Oh yeah it doesn't even compair, however Portland has or has had the potential to be a big port. (Open Deep Water Port is it not?)