• CSXT possibly seeking to acquire Pan Am; NS objecting to STB

  • For topics on Class I and II passenger and freight operations more general in nature and not specifically related to a specific railroad with its own forum.
For topics on Class I and II passenger and freight operations more general in nature and not specifically related to a specific railroad with its own forum.

Moderator: Jeff Smith

  by John_Perkowski
Read it here

Brief quote
“NS is concerned with CSX’s potential acquisition of Pan Am, specifically its interest in PAS, and is further concerned with CSX’s potential use of a voting trust to acquire Pan Am,” an attorney for NS wrote.
  by Shortline614
Just some initial thoughts of why CSX might want to acquire Pan Am, and how it would fare before the STB.

- CSX is Springfield Terminal's largest connection. (The partnership between the two dates back to the early 90s with Conrail.)
- Intermodal to Portland. (Might be too small of a market. CN tried a few years ago with no success.)
- Intermodal to and from Saint John. (The port there is undergoing a massive expansion. CSX would compete here against CP and CN.)
- Pan Am still has a decently sized traffic base, that could grow even more with the right marketing. (Remember that Jim Foote is a marketing guy.)

NS and CP would oppose this merger (NS already has), in addition to the State of Massachusetts. They don't want one company having near-total control over both east-west lines in their state. What would CSX have to give up before the STB to buy Pan Am?

CSX would have to sell the 50% interest in Pan Am Southern to NS.
CSX would have to sell (trackage rights is another possibility) to NS, or maybe the G&U or MC, all those branch lines in South Mass.

Even then I don't see this passing the STB, or at least not passing easily.
  by Gilbert B Norman
Colonel, needless to say, there is much MUCH more discussion of this proposed transaction over here.

That probably getting too detailed when how physical interchanges from the NYC(CSX) to the B&M will occur, as many of the participants, some working for PAR, discuss "inns and outs".

Both TRAINS and Railway Age have vovered tje story since it "broke" last June, but to date, no nationally circulated media such an Journal or Times, have reported on such.
  by west point
If CSX would get both E - W routes consequences would be bad. If all traffic differed to Springfield route then Amtrak and any inland routes adversely affected by slow downs. If all traffic to pan Am route then CSX no maintenance on present CSX route again bad for Amtrak and inland route..
  by urr304
I know there is a much longer discussion on the referenced link, now 78 pages, too much to go through.

Anyway, perhaps a joint owned comany to take over Pan Am, question is who would be owners. Just NS and CSX or would CP and/or CN included. I can see the N.E. states objecting to only one outside owner [CSX specifically]. A neutral operation giving equal access to region at several connection points would be probably sought by those states.

Of course, I am just an interested observer.
  by Gilbert B Norman
Mr. URR, as I noted at my immediate posting, so many of those guys know the road well - and all the shorthand, e.g. Keag=Mattawamkeag=interchange with both Canadian Pacific and Eastern Maine RR, that gets confusing to "us out of town hands".

All the points you note regarding "one owner", I hold myself. The Surface Transportation Board, a regulatory agency with jurisdiction over railroad combinations, has clearly shown through the '90's merger movement that the board, comprising appointments made by three Presidents, wants competitive railroads, and I highly doubt if they will allow one road, CSX or whoever, to have it all.

Some might say "CP is there"; true, but their line X's Northern Maine and can only move traffic to, or through, Canada.

Best advice: stay tuned.
  by John_Perkowski

With CSXT's announcement today, all further discussion will happen at the Pan Am Forum.

Use this link to get there