Railroad Forums 

  • Pan Am Railways, For Sale/Acquisition/Merger?

  • 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

 #1363217  by newpylong
 
It is quite common to spruce something up prior to putting up for sale. Just look at houses. Also, let's not kid ourselves, they aren't exactly emptying their coffers here on this track work. It seems big because most people on these forums just haven't seen it before. But we're talking labor who is already being paid, ballast off their own system, no new rail, etc.
 #1363225  by cvrr5809
 
690 wrote:Why would they put the effort into getting federal grants for upgrades (as well as the upgrades they've done on their own dime, even if it's not that much) between Waterville - NMJ only to dump it? Sure, they might have lost most of the business in the area, but it's still a vital interchange with the CMQ, and indirectly with Irving. East of NMJ? That would make more sense, but I can see Pan Am holding onto it as a way to entice prospective buyers. It's a direct interchange with Irving, and sure, it needs a lot of work, but if you want to cut out the CMQ, then that is what's available.

Also, there is still a NM-1 job for now.
Federal grants pay for the "upgrades" and mean less out of their own pockets! Why wouldn't you take advantage of that as you try to make your property look enticing to potential buyers? If you want to call them substantial upgrades really, like others make it sound. Sure, ties, and some ballast. Barely adequate tamping in the spots that are actually done. Mostly, replaced ties without any replaced or improved ballast and overall restructure under the tracks. Just enough to keep the trains at 10. And really, why would anyone want to avoid the CMQ option via Brownville right now when it cuts so much time off? The PAR right-of-way East of Old Town.....horrendous is putting it mildly. No offense against Downeast Scenic intended, but even some of their UNused ROW above Ellsworth Falls(End of useable track) looks better than the PAR's main in some spots East of OT.

I know we're far from April Fool's Day, but here goes a doozy.....If PAR was to actually scale back to Waterville, have CMQ eventually get the rights to Waterville from NMJ. Strike a deal with PAR to somehow reopen and utilize the rest of the Lower Road to get down to their Rockland Branch directly! Then, the Amtrak Downeaster comes into play if the service gets extended like everyone hopes. NBSR could gain by grabbing the PAR mileage from 'Keag down to Old Town and NMJ and then have two direct connections with CMQ! NBSR could route over the former Maine Central for cars staying mostly in the US while it's moves to Brownville could be exclusively for Canadian points such as Montreal.
 #1363243  by 690
 
newpylong wrote:Also, let's not kid ourselves, they aren't exactly emptying their coffers here on this track work. It seems big because most people on these forums just haven't seen it before. But we're talking labor who is already being paid, ballast off their own system, no new rail, etc.
Where did I say they were spending tons of money? I merely stated that they were spending a bit of their own money to do trackwork, which isn't exactly an everyday occasion on Pan Am.
cvrr5809 wrote:Federal grants pay for the "upgrades" and mean less out of their own pockets! Why wouldn't you take advantage of that as you try to make your property look enticing to potential buyers?
Obviously. That's why they went for them.
If you want to call them substantial upgrades really, like others make it sound. Sure, ties, and some ballast. Barely adequate tamping in the spots that are actually done. Mostly, replaced ties without any replaced or improved ballast and overall restructure under the tracks. Just enough to keep the trains at 10.
It is a substantial upgrade considering they hadn't really done any work on that segment of track before. And they did dump quite a bit of ballast (and mostly tamped it). Lots of the track could probably hold up to 25, but right now there isn't any reason to raise the track speeds.
And really, why would anyone want to avoid the CMQ option via Brownville right now when it cuts so much time off? The PAR right-of-way East of Old Town.....horrendous is putting it mildly. No offense against Downeast Scenic intended, but even some of their UNused ROW above Ellsworth Falls(End of useable track) looks better than the PAR's main in some spots East of OT.
Well yes, otherwise we would still be seeing MABA/BAMA run. But if a buyer wanted to cut out the CMQ, then it exists as an alternative even though the track is currently is terrible shape. Why give another railroad a slice of the pie when, assuming they had the means and motivation to fix it, you could keep it for yourself?
I know we're far from April Fool's Day, but here goes a doozy.....If PAR was to actually scale back to Waterville, have CMQ eventually get the rights to Waterville from NMJ. Strike a deal with PAR to somehow reopen and utilize the rest of the Lower Road to get down to their Rockland Branch directly! Then, the Amtrak Downeaster comes into play if the service gets extended like everyone hopes. NBSR could gain by grabbing the PAR mileage from 'Keag down to Old Town and NMJ and then have two direct connections with CMQ! NBSR could route over the former Maine Central for cars staying mostly in the US while it's moves to Brownville could be exclusively for Canadian points such as Montreal.
Ha
 #1363244  by 690
 
The other thing is why would another railroad want to obtain the 44 miles of track between CPF-66 and CPF-110? That's 44 miles of track with one online customer, to gain what? They would have to get rights on Pan Am to travel that extra mile between 110 and the yard at 111. Even if the CMQ was interested, given Pan Am's history with blocking access to the Rockland Branch, it's unlikely they would grant trackage rights down the Lower Road into Augusta. And even if they did that, then they would have to relay track between Riverside and the east end of the bridge in Augusta. Not to mention deal with DOT to reopen the track along Water St. in Augusta, and get all the crossing gates along the track operational.
 #1363263  by cvrr5809
 
What part of early April Fools didn't quite register?

Simple answer to your question 690.... Taking Pan Am out of the equation in this part of Maine could benefit just about anyone involved. When you consider these recent "upgrades" substantial, it just blows my mind! Pan Am does just enough to get by, which in the eyes of a majority, hasn't been enough for over three decades. "Oh, we'll do just enough to sustain the car numbers we have now, but not make it so it entices MORE business!" That makes a ton of freakin' sense and is a shitty attitude in the modern industry. Sounds like you could have been a great leader for say.... Penn Central! And in reference to the East end mileage and Rockland Branch access, I can't think of anything else to say than, "No shit Sherlock!" It would take money to make money. It will take each road's position in the region to decide how that would happen.
 #1363265  by KSmitty
 
cvrr5809 wrote:And really, why would anyone want to avoid the CMQ option via Brownville right now when it cuts so much time off? The PAR right-of-way East of Old Town.....horrendous is putting it mildly. No offense against Downeast Scenic intended, but even some of their UNused ROW above Ellsworth Falls(End of useable track) looks better than the PAR's main in some spots East of OT.
From a customer point of view, because its not all about time, which I'm not sure is being saved at the dramatic rate everyone implies it is. Its about money. It costs more to ship it NBSR-CMQ-ST than NBSR-ST. To the tune of $1000/car or more. Everyone knows, business is strictly the pursuit of the all mighty dollar. An extra 4, 6, 8 or even 24 hours doesnt seem worth an extra $1000 bucks to me. Railroads and JIT manufacturing dont work. If you need it today put it in a 53' van. If you need it a week from Tuesday you put it in a 50' F plate.

From a Pan Am point of view, because you put your traffic at the liberty of a direct competitor. Your rates, and service, are now dependent upon a competitor who has a competing gateway to the west. CM&Q can effectively raise the price per car on the CMQ-ST routing to the point the all CM&Q routing is cheaper. At which point your WANM-NMWA trains get shorter and shorter.

I understand the savings realized immediately from rationalizng the NMJ-'Keag line, but I also see the negative long term effects of allowing a competitor to control your service and pricing. Its not good for Pan Am or the customers long term. I don't understand how they CANNOT go back to Mattawamkeag.
 #1363267  by cvrr5809
 
Reliability is also a BIG part of the equation, and when it comes to PAR, it's not normally in their vocabulary. Paying a $1000 per car for the product to stay on one mode of transportation for its whole journey would be was less stressful to the suppliers and consumers alike. Less middle men means less hands and less potential damage and spent time which ultimately offsets such a cost per car. Fluidity last time I checked.

It's a damn shame to see the NMJ-Keag mileage virtually dead to road trains. It could be a viable artery in the right hands. Pan Am is what's bad for Pam Am! Once again reliability and consistency, and 10mph over a stretch this long will not sustain such demands!
 #1363295  by Backshophoss
 
Is the Family wanting to cash out? It should be noted EHH was told to take a hike for
the third time this week by NS.
If CP takes over NS,PAS will follow NS into the combined Company,with the possabilty of
of CSX having rights to Keag for interchange to Irving's RR's,maybe a G+W kind of takeover of the PAR remains
follows.

For some reason if CP+NS happens,PAR+PAS plays the "New Haven" in a repeat of a PC styled failure that spans
2 nations.
 #1363336  by gokeefe
 
Looking at the photos of Maine Eastern equipment leaving for New Jersey this past week and reading some of the above discussion I find myself reflecting on the possibility that CMQ is setting themselves up to acquire PAR when/if it comes on the market.

If this is a process that is treated as a long term project then CMQ's actions seem to make sense to me. This of course assumes that there is some value in the combined track of the two operations, an idea of which I am not convinced at all, but it is nonetheless a very interesting combination. One of the prevailing themes to changes in railroad ownership in Maine over the past 20 years has been the constant changes made to the former Bangor & Aroostook system. Parts and pieces of that railroad are constantly changing hands in the apparent pursuit of the right mix of ownership and freight traffic.

CMQ acquisition of PAR would give them a system with endpoints in Montreal, Mattawamkeag, Searsport and Ayer with full control of two out of four of Maine's primary interstate trunk lines and maintaining the core strength of consolidated ownership of the yards and facilities at Rigby, Waterville and Brownville. Seems like a fascinating possibility.
 #1363347  by newpylong
 
gokeefe wrote:Looking at the photos of Maine Eastern equipment leaving for New Jersey this past week and reading some of the above discussion I find myself reflecting on the possibility that CMQ is setting themselves up to acquire PAR when/if it comes on the market.

If this is a process that is treated as a long term project then CMQ's actions seem to make sense to me. This of course assumes that there is some value in the combined track of the two operations, an idea of which I am not convinced at all, but it is nonetheless a very interesting combination. One of the prevailing themes to changes in railroad ownership in Maine over the past 20 years has been the constant changes made to the former Bangor & Aroostook system. Parts and pieces of that railroad are constantly changing hands in the apparent pursuit of the right mix of ownership and freight traffic.

CMQ acquisition of PAR would give them a system with endpoints in Montreal, Mattawamkeag, Searsport and Ayer with full control of two out of four of Maine's primary interstate trunk lines and maintaining the core strength of consolidated ownership of the yards and facilities at Rigby, Waterville and Brownville. Seems like a fascinating possibility.
That would be biting off more than they can chew if you ask me.
 #1363371  by gokeefe
 
CN9634 wrote:FTAI (CMQ parent) is looking at more short line and regional opportunities but as of right now PAR isn't one of them (although another Maine company is)
I think for reference its worth listing the potential options (which aren't many....):

Eastern Maine Railway (a wholly owned subsidiary of Irving which owns and operates Mattwamkeag/Vanceboro),

Maine Northern Railway (a wholly owned subsidiary of Irving which operates MDOT owned mileage),

St. Lawrence & Atlantic (a Gennesee & Wyoming shortline railroad which owns to Danville Junction and operates MDOT owned mileage to Portland),

New Hampshire Northern ("technically" a "Maine company" but only in the loosest interpretation, they own the Conway Branch from to Ossipee)

and that's pretty much it ..... Eastern Maine seems like the only obvious option.

I do have to say that I think PAR is a very interesting scenario later on .... Interesting that CMQ already has operating rights on the Rockland Branch. Not that there's really any real operating "efficiency" to be garnered there or any real online business, unless Dragon diverts significant business to rail.
 #1363372  by gokeefe
 
newpylong wrote:That would be biting off more than they can chew if you ask me.
Is it really that crazy given that these are the same guys that own the FEC?
 #1363383  by gokeefe
 
If CMQ is interested in EMR I wonder if they would buy out PARs track rights to Vanceboro (which I think are still in place from MEC legacy agreements...?)?
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 27