• CSX to acquire Pan Am Railways

  • Guilford Rail System changed its name to Pan Am Railways in 2006. Discussion relating to the current operations of the Boston & Maine, the Maine Central, and the Springfield Terminal railroads (as well as the Delaware & Hudson while it was under Guilford control until 1988). Official site can be found here: PANAMRAILWAYS.COM.
Guilford Rail System changed its name to Pan Am Railways in 2006. Discussion relating to the current operations of the Boston & Maine, the Maine Central, and the Springfield Terminal railroads (as well as the Delaware & Hudson while it was under Guilford control until 1988). Official site can be found here: PANAMRAILWAYS.COM.

Moderator: MEC407

  • 2592 posts
  • 1
  • 162
  • 163
  • 164
  • 165
  • 166
  • 173
  by markhb
 
ElectricTraction wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 12:45 pm
budd6209 wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2021 4:59 pm Just saw on the STB site that there are business are in Connecticut are supporting the transaction. They think that they are having CSX serve them. By the filing Berkshire and Eastern will be serve them instead of CSX.
Do you have a link to those filings? The STB site isn't the most user friendly thing around.
I don't have a link to the filings referred to, but in general if you go to https://prod.stb.gov/search-stb-records/, and then choose Filings (it defaults to Decisions), and then in the Docket Number section pick "FD" in the dropdown and then enter 36472 in the first input box and hit Search, it will bring back the full list of filings (and even the few minor Decisions that have been entered).
  by CN9634
 
Amtrak has public interest arguments but lacks the interest of the STB's primary judgement -- balance of free market competition. They've likely had to develop an aggressive vocabulary with the STB to win any sort of gains or be taken seriously over the years. In any case, nothing to really worry about.
  by gokeefe
 
I am not so confident that they will be dismissed out of hand. I do think this could be a pressure tactic related to the Gulf Coast.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

  by ElectricTraction
 
markhb wrote: Thu May 13, 2021 12:02 am I don't have a link to the filings referred to, but in general if you go to https://prod.stb.gov/search-stb-records/, and then choose Filings (it defaults to Decisions), and then in the Docket Number section pick "FD" in the dropdown and then enter 36472 in the first input box and hit Search, it will bring back the full list of filings (and even the few minor Decisions that have been entered).
Thanks. Yeah, I agree, there is a disconnect somewhere. As I understand it, the B&E would take over the PAS Plainville branch, effectively making it part of CSOR, and the PAS trackage rights on the Springfield Line effectively just disappear because CSOR already has the rights for local service, and the rights to run bridge traffic for CSX to Cedar Hill.

Just looking at this merger, it would make more sense to give the PAS rights south of Springfield to CSX, but then they'd be competing with CSOR, whom they sold the rights to, so it's a rather confusing situation. CSOR/B&E would probably be a massive improvement over Pan Am for those businesses, but they wouldn't exactly get single-line service.

I just don't see any way it makes sense for CSOR/B&E not to get the Plainville branch unless CSX ends up with at least overhead rights to haul their own traffic over the Springfield Line to Plainville and Cedar Hill.
Last edited by nomis on Thu May 20, 2021 5:36 am, edited 1 time in total. Reason: Removed unnecessary nested quoting
  by newpylong
 
Of course they're (B&E) going to get the CT trackage, it's part of PAS and part of the deal.

No changes in rights for CSX or other.
  by ElectricTraction
 
Right, so it effectively will just get absorbed into CSOR or visa-versa. Moving from PAS to G&W may well be a huge upgrade for those businesses, but it doesn't get them single-line access to CSX. I thought G&W was easier for smaller rail-served industries to work with than CSX anyway?
Last edited by MEC407 on Wed May 19, 2021 12:01 pm, edited 1 time in total. Reason: unnecessary quoting
  by FatNoah
 
Amtrak has public interest arguments but lacks the interest of the STB's primary judgement -- balance of free market competition. They've likely had to develop an aggressive vocabulary with the STB to win any sort of gains or be taken seriously over the years

Amtrak certainly starts with a provocative quote:
First, the Proposed Merger is the first railroad merger in which passenger trains, not freight trains, account for the majority of the train operations over many of the rail lines that will be impacted by the transaction
  by MEC407
 
Provocative but true. And if CSX has their druthers — as they've stated in their filings and in the press — they'll run fewer (but longer and faster) freight trains than Pan Am ran... and this would be to Amtrak's advantage, I'd think.
  by CN9634
 
Let's do one better-- who accounts for greater economic impact on that line, Pan Am or Amtrak?
  by newpylong
 
ElectricTraction wrote: Wed May 19, 2021 10:23 am Right, so it effectively will just get absorbed into CSOR or visa-versa. Moving from PAS to G&W may well be a huge upgrade for those businesses, but it doesn't get them single-line access to CSX. I thought G&W was easier for smaller rail-served industries to work with than CSX anyway?
I'm not sure how they will handle it operationally but from a routing/billing/paperwork perspective it will have nothing to do with CSOR.

The point of PAS is to try to preserve access to multiple Class Is, not provide single line access.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
FatNoah wrote: Wed May 19, 2021 11:51 am Amtrak certainly starts with a provocative quote:
First, the Proposed Merger is the first railroad merger in which passenger trains, not freight trains, account for the majority of the train operations over many of the rail lines that will be impacted by the transaction
Love that one, Amtrak.

"Majority of passenger trains"?...well that goes to MBTA; thus far they are silent - or at least publicly.

Now insofar as the Downeaster, doesn't the NNEPRA actually hold the contract to operate such over PAR, and Amtrak is a subcontractor with NNEPRA to provide maintained equipment and Rules Qualified, rested under HOS, Train and Engine crews? (surprise!!!!….I don't know)

The Vermonter....isn't that an issue with a PAS successor G&W?

Well I guess that leaves the one a day Lake Shore. That is a good candidate for a permanent "busteetoot"

I think that law firm representing them had a "political chip" in hand, and just walked up to the window to cash it in.
  by Trinnau
 
The statement is still pretty accurate, it's intentionally general and intends to grab attention so that the board considers passenger operations - note that is how it is phrased, train operations, and they do operate the Downeaster on behalf of NNEPRA. The segments of the Downeaster actually see more passenger train operations than freight on a consistent, daily basis. They run 10 trains a day, Pan Am runs 4 either side of Rigby plus locals and the gravel train part of the week. They'd be hard-pressed to reach the 70 trains in a given week that the Downeaster does.
  by ElectricTraction
 
newpylong wrote: Thu May 20, 2021 5:21 amI'm not sure how they will handle it operationally but from a routing/billing/paperwork perspective it will have nothing to do with CSOR.

The point of PAS is to try to preserve access to multiple Class Is, not provide single line access.
I would think getting G&W service would be to the advantage of the shippers, even though they're not getting CSX. The lines have already blurred a bit between P&W and CSOR. Maybe they'd formally transfer the Plainville/Waterbury operation from B&E over to CSOR, it would make no sense to have two different arms of the same company overlapping each other like that, unless they share equipment, yard, etc in Hartford and just write up the paperwork differently for the different jobs. It would also connect B&E to P&W at Derby Junction, although I don't know if that connection is of much use.
  by NYC27
 
ElectricTraction wrote:I would think getting G&W service would be to the advantage of the shippers
Sure that would be great, but it isn't part of this deal.

G&W will own 100% of CSO and NS and CSX (for now) will own PAS. The twice weekly EDPL will continue to feed cars to Plainville. CSO is tied up in so many paper barriers they won't be able to merge with anyone anyway. The lines may look blurry from trackside but commercially they are separate and distinct carriers. P&W can interchange with whoever the want. CSO has to go through CSX alone. I think long term G&W will definitely buy out CSX and maybe NS. At that point they can merge P&W-NECR-B&E but unless CSO can get free of its paper barriers (as an imposed condition of CSX merging with another Class I or blanket STB action) it will remain separate.
  • 1
  • 162
  • 163
  • 164
  • 165
  • 166
  • 173