Hypothesis: "Thanks, But No Thanks"

From West Hinsdale IL Station (too much lightning to continue my walk)--

Mr. Woodle, although you note "five years" in your Immediate, it seems as if you are setting forth a scenario of some roads, on selected routes, to stay in the passenger business indefinitely.

Some roads, such as "my MILW" would have (here comes MTY Crude WB) petitioned right away - Act be damned (wind & rain getting wild). "The Rock" also would have successfully petitioned.

I doubt if the Commission could have blocked any post five year petition. There'd be nothing away from "ward of the state" PC - and that would only be the Corridor.

Regarding Mr. Ex-Con's, wonder why the first activity Amtrak assumed, as soon as they and BRAC had an agreement, was revenue accounting.

Finally WH is @17.85; my house is @ 18.7, my yard is "lovin' it", but I'm not walking in it (now a tornado warning; so far no sirens. I'll crawl under a bench here)..

Addendum; neighbor is coming to fetch me.

Stay safe there, Mr. Norman. Hope you're back home and hunkered down.

Mr. Wolf, my wonderful neighbor, Lisa (M,3K), of course wondering "what are you doing out at this hour?"; "Dear, it's too hot to walk my three miles in the middle of the day; and I'm not exactly into Barre fitness studio stuff (as is she)" came and gave me a ride home (she and her family are one block North of me).

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Sat Jul 23, 2022 5:44 am Regarding Mr. Ex-Con's, wonder why the first activity Amtrak assumed, as soon as they and BRAC had an agreement, was revenue accounting.

Weren't SCLs cash flow issues in '71 only after Amtrak began carrying passengers?

Mr. Randall W, the SCL Cash Flow issues are Mr. Ex Con's report. but I wholly concur that such could well have occurred.

How does that old saying go? "If someone walks in to pay a bill and someone else yells "fire", you take the money first, then put out the fire'.

RandallW wrote: ↑Sat Jul 23, 2022 4:36 pm

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Sat Jul 23, 2022 5:44 am Regarding Mr. Ex-Con's, wonder why the first activity Amtrak assumed, as soon as they and BRAC had an agreement, was revenue accounting.

Weren't SCLs cash flow issues in '71 only after Amtrak began carrying passengers?

That particular issue didn't emerge until 1971 -- until then SCL had this lovely float occurring every October and November as customers pushed money over the counter for tickets that would not be presented until December.

Mr. Norman, I'm not saying Amtrak began accounting for the money as soon as they got it -- just that that's when they received it. I don't even know when they put it in the bank, which I'd think would be the third thing after putting out the fire ...

UP and ATSF were in a position to make it. Both of them made 10th-11th hour decisions to join. They could have made it to ‘76, but they were glad to be shed too.

BN would have been in serious hurt. SP was more than ready to be shed of the business.

Colonel, I don't know about UP, but I've learned Santa Fe was "eleventh hour".

From a 40 year ago memory, their concern was under the 1919 Agreement regarding access by tenant roads which would have them liable for a proportionate share of the Debt Service -and no participation in the air rights rentals for 10, 120 and 222 South Riverside Plaza (I was gone from the industry to have any knowledge regarding 300).

ATSF was concerned Amtrak would consider that provision "unconscionable" even though Secrion 4.4 of the Agreement said Amtrak would pay "whatever".

There were also operational concerns in that the ATS "shoes" would not clear into CUS. That was resolved by removing the shoes at Shopton (present FMD station) and operating X-Illinois @ 79mph.

This discussion is interesting because there is so much to speculate about. One point which was not touched on was whether any state governments would have subsidized passenger service. Even now many Amtrak routes are subsidized. New York State and neighboring Vermont are two good examples. Even before Amtrak, and the 1970s bankruptcies, many states were subsidizing commuter service. A good example was the T paying B&M. I wouldn't be surprised if NYC got money from NYS.

I've read the book The Men Who Loved Trains. One part was McClellan's time organizing Amtrak. They decided to form a company to take over long distance passenger service. Let's just say that it might have worked to give the railroads a stipend to cover passenger costs. It may have worked like the way Amtrak and NYS paid D&H to operate passenger service semi independently. The same end result may have happened in the end. They probably would have pared things down to the routes which we have today.

Engineer Spike wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 1:22 am This discussion is interesting because there is so much to speculate about. One point which was not touched on was whether any state governments would have subsidized passenger service.

Mr. Spike, this is indeed an interesting point. RPSA70 did have the provision, Section 403(b), enabling partly funded passenger service, which I think was one of the most successful provisions of the Act, resulting in the extensive service in Central and Southern "Cali", as well as NY, PA, VA and NC.

But where would have this gone had the roads said "thanks...."?

The answer I'm afraid is nowhere. First, it was a partial subsidy. The NRPC (Amtrak) was mandated to participate in the funding, but the non-member roads were not. With the possible exception of "the Ward..." PC, over which publicly funded passenger service on the Corridor would somehow have continued, there would have been no mechanics to have a locality, i.e., a state, to fully fund and contract with a road to operate such.

At one time the airlines did not receive credit card revenue until the passenger(s) had finally used their tickets. Is this still the case for airlines and as a same question when does Amtrak receive the fjunds?

I'd image those CC funds are available right away. In today's day and age, the liabilities of re-bookable and/or cancellable tickets is simply handled as a function within the ticketing software. Just keep your hand out of the reserve "cookie jar" in case mass cancellations occur.

One proposal I heard was Cr C companies would with hold some amount back from each transaction until used. 10% was one figure heard but have no idea if it ever happened.

Amtrak was indeed wise to honor "all major" right from the "get go".

There may have been a "bridge" between A-Day and when they assumed Revenue Accounting; I honestly do not recall.

But they did honor Rail Travel Card - know so on that one!!!

west point wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 1:42 pm At one time the airlines did not receive credit card revenue until the passenger(s) had finally used their tickets. Is this still the case for airlines and as a same question when does Amtrak receive the fjunds?

Not true, or at least not in all cases. Established airlines get paid immediately for direct sales, and within a week to a month for travel agency sales (depends on the country). Some newer companies or those who are more financially fragile will see banks holding back a percentage of the credit card sales. If they don't comply with cash reserve targets or otherwise pose an elevated risk of defaulting, the hold back will be instituted or increased.

Most airlines recognize revenue at time of sale, although as recently as 2019 United was still not recognizing sales as revenue in their financial statements until it was actually flown. They had to do a one-time adjustment when their revenue accounting system changed over from a home grown system to a commercially produced/supported one.

Regardless if revenue is recognized at sale or usage, flown and un-flown revenue have to be tracked separately since unflown sales are a future liability until flown.