Giulietti: Bar Cars Not Likely

[Tadman]

While the states are not exactly in the business of providing luxuries or booze, it does beg the question "what is a luxury"?

If they would provide hard subway-style seats and opening windows, the states would save a lot in capital and maintenance costs. Imagine how much cheaper Metro North cars would be without A/C. Nothing to buy or maintain other than a set of opening windows.

Before everybody goes nuts and says "we hafta have AC!!!!" ask yourself is that a luxury? At one time it was. So was padded seats. Given that subway trains still run with hard seats and folks ride them for an hour or so in many cases, the case for padded seats is pretty thin. Same with AC. Quite a few subways run without AC- Buenos Aires and London for example. London just provides signs that suggest passengers hydrate well before boarding trains in the summer, and it is a bit hot to say the least.

Long story short, it's not hard to poke a hole in the "states don't do luxury" argument.

[Ridgefielder]

Does NY State and Conn have a "server responsibility" law on the books? ie Server is held responsible for a DWI passenger after getting off the train,then,
driving a car and caught by local PD? or for "overserving" that passenger.
If there's such a law,Then MN is covering their butts by not allowing the Bar Cars,otherwise the Legal Beagles better have access to Bank to
cover all the costs of lawsuits!

I honestly don't think litigation is the driving factor here. I think it's realization that above all else people want seats. The trains are crowded-- I think MN is hauling more passengers on the New Haven today than at any point in the past, period. Certainly more than at any point in the last 50 years. Removing seating capacity to add bar service probably wouldn't sit well with the general public-- who can (and do, self included) buy drinks in GCT before getting on the train anyway.

And for what it's worth-- we forget, but "back in the day" the Commuter Clubs on the New Haven and NY Central had the ability to piggyback off the NYNH&H/NYC commissary departments supplying those roads long-distance passenger trains. Made setting one of those up a much different proposition than today, when there are no facilities at Grand Central to supply food service cars.

[CarterB]

Bad enough with the "brown baggers" who get on Fri evenings and Sat nights!!!

[CRail]

What's bad about it? I've always detested negativity towards drunks on trains (and, yes, as someone who has to deal with them!), would you prefer they be on the roads?

In my mind, the ONLY valid argument against it is that of seating capacity, but if people are going to be forced to stand anyway, putting a beer (or coke, or bag of chips, etc) in their hand will likely make them mind a bit less.

lets see Metro North says no, CDOT commissioner says no , yet buffs keep fantasizing over a non workable issue ?? really go dream about boy or girl you want to ............................

So the opinion of one person trumps those of a population of people who have expressed a demand for something? Metro North did not say no, actually, they approved M8s with bar cars. I watched the board meeting at which they did, available online, and the commissioner didn't say no either. If you actually read the article, you'd have read that he, "said he can’t see bar cars making a comeback anytime soon..."

Buffs aren't demanding their return, the ridership is. The matter wasn't brought back from oblivion because some train buffs called the Connecticut governer's office and said we want to take pictures of trains that have bars in them.

[DutchRailnut]

No one is prohibiting drinking plenty of providers around GCT and other major stations, it just will not be railroad provided, if a Contractor is willing to buy railcars and offer the Service , Great the contractor would also need to pay the Railroad for hauling its cars.
So in reality no one suggest they head for road.

[TCurtin]

First, I am distressed by the anti-alcohol sentiment I see on this forum, and which I have seen before. Geez, you'd think we lived in some damn dry county in Texas.......

The economics of the situation are easy: it costs MTA, or CDOT, virtually nothing, and maybe absolutely nothing, to equip some cars as bar cars. And that done, everybody knows that the service is profitable!!! The historical record shows that several decades ago, on the very same rail line, the only "black ink" on the New Haven Railroad's books was liquor sales on trains! Also, as previously pointed out, there are plenty of precedents for bar cars on publicly funded lines.

The record (on this forum) also shows that my opinion won't succeed in changing anybody's mind on this. This matter oddly seems to arouse a lot of emotion and people's positions are dug in.

[Ridgefielder]

I'm the farthest thing from anti-booze you can imagine. In fact I enjoy an adult beverage on my ride home on a daily basis.

The thing is, as I said before, you can't compare the NH profit on commuter bar cars with MN. The NH already had all the commissary department infrastructure in place to service the diners, grill cars, etc. on the trains to Boston, Springfield, the Cape etc. etc. The cost of that department was spread across dozens and dozens of trains. The bar car on the 6:11 to New Canaan didn't have to sell many highballs to be in the black.

Today you'd have to set up a commissary department. And then you'd have to go hire bartenders who are members of the appropriate union. That's a lot of fixed costs to cover before you start generating a profit.

[MickD]

I remember pre-NJ Transit when I rode Erie Lackawanna/Conrail
to Glen Rock on both Main Line & Bergen County lines the evening trains had
bar cars but both The Railhead in Hoboken Terminal & Duke's across the street
undercut the onboard bar by 50% which I'm sure contributed it's demise when
NJ Transit took over. Between the staff & insurance that would undoubtedly be
the case and then some for Metro North to restore this service..Package stores obviously have their own overhead
but not what the railroad's would be..Personally I don't see how MN barcars
could compete..plus if you buy before boarding you can get seated and
not get up if you don't have to until your stop..

[R36 Combine Coach]

I remember pre-NJ Transit when I rode Erie Lackawanna/Conrail to Glen Rock on both Main Line & Bergen County lines the evening trains had bar cars but both The Railhead in Hoboken Terminal & Duke's across the street undercut the onboard bar by 50% which I'm sure contributed it's demise when NJ Transit took over. Personally I don't see how MN bar cars could compete.

Hoboken still has a liquor outlet on the concourse.

Is the LIRR's on-board bar service on the summer Montauk service operating "black"?

[MickD]

Yeah..and it's convenient to the higher numbered tracks..
Wasn't there in EL/Conrail/early NJ Transit years though..
Duke's House unfortunately is long gone,,,I miss that place..
It'd been there since at least the 1930's and had a Old Hoboken ambience,
which at that point was still Old Hoboken
They didn't serve mugs at the bar,though only small glasses and bottled beer at the bar
and canned beer at their liquor counter
That's my point though...at the end of NJ Transit barcar service
both Duke's & The Railhead charged $.50 for a 12oz. can of beer
NJ Transit only solid bottles for $1.25
Price ratio would no doubt would be comparative to restart MN bars..
Bottom line...GCT package stores
would always undercut restoration of barcars...

[Backshophoss]

Then the commuter operator gets tangled in the "Server Responsibility" laws of each state,can be sued for over serving a driver,etc, etc .
The "Better call Saul" types will try to grab a "blank Check" off the commuter operators!
NOT WORTH THE HASSLE or EXPENSE!

[CRail]

That argument has been beaten to death. Amtrak doesn’t seem to have an issue with that, nor do any of the ferries or commuter boats that offer alcoholic refreshments on board. Nor did Metro-North before they abolished the service which, it’s worth mentioning again, was abolished do to the age and condition of the equipment, not because there was a problem with the service.

[Jeff Smith]

It doesn't make any difference to me. I hated the old M-2 bar cars. Terrible layout, very uncomfortable. It was also the smoking car back in the day when there was one. And the commuters all had their cliques and were obnoxious; I felt like I needed a passport to get in there.

The economics are different these days than back in the day. As is the pace of operations (especially for commuter clubs). I don't have any objection to the cars, though.

[R36 Combine Coach]

Amtrak doesn’t seem to have an issue with that, nor do any of the ferries or commuter boats that offer alcoholic refreshments on board. Nor did Metro-North before they abolished the service which, it’s worth mentioning again, was abolished do to the age and condition of the equipment, not because there was a problem with the service.

That's apparently why some M-8s (the highest numbers) were delivered with provisions to be converted to bar cars if or when necessary.

[DutchRailnut]

The equipped as bar cars were not highest numbered but 9530/9631 - 9542/9643 (CDOT / married pairs; 95xx numbers only, 96xx odd numbers only) - 14 cars.