Clearfield wrote:
We're getting off topic, but NJT could, if they chose to, truncate service to Pennsauken instead of Philadelphia. The primary service rationale is to get casino employees to and from work. Gamblers are a secondary consideration. Servicing equipment at 30th St is useful, but passenger service from 30th st is not required.
If someone wants to continue this topic on another board here on railroad.net I'll be sure to follow it.
Bob, NJT may be able to choose many service options, but how would dropping service to the fifth largest city in the US and one of the largest rail hubs in North America affect the bottom line and cost effectiveness of the NJT service? Moreover, since the western stations have PATCO service, the most likely riders to be lost by "truncating" are traveling the furthest distance and thus paying the highest fares. Given this situation, why would you even write something like that?
Transfers reduce market potential up to 40% as compared to direct service. Extending any rail service into the Philadelphia CBD reduces the number of connections required to use it (e.g. reaching the Broad Street Line and north-south buses and also ease of walking to more central locations). That is the reason the original topic discusses Amtrak in the center city tunnel, and it probably applies even more so for NJT service. If SEPTA truncated the PRR routes to 30th and forced a transfer, ridership would drop considerably. Ergo, the opposite effect is likely for services that only serve 30th and not the tunnel - they are probably not achieving maximum potential ridership.