Should (or could) Amtrak Contract out Certain Routes to Private Operators?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

*wheeze*

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


This is easily the funniest thing I've seen posted on this board.

Brightline was a nice idea but it became pretty clear that they didn't have the resilience needed to withstand the pandemic. They've been shut down for the better part of a year now. Amtrak, while losing a LOT of money, was able to chug along (no pun intended) throughout.

Contracting Amtrak operations out to private operators is a complete farce. It's not like they're going to get better terms from the freight operators, run more services, or even have a higher quality of life on board. It's just not gonna happen. Metra has enough problems right now and even they contract out, with services that travel over UP and BNSF lines being operated by those respective carriers. The rolling stock is Metra, but the crews are UP or BNSF. I don't know much about the East Coast commuter operators, but I don't know if they'd want to take this on either.

You wanna solve Amtrak's problems? Here's how:

-ADEQUATE FUNDING: Amtrak needs to have consistent, stable funding in order to operate at the highest possible level. This can be achieved in the form of a trust of sorts. This funding needs to cover actual food/beverage service, not the cheap stuff we've seen, plus equipment maintenance/repair/overhaul as well as capital for starting new services and fleet renewal at fixed intervals. (Say every 2-5 years for new services and 15 for fleet renewal).

-CULTURE CHANGE: It is no secret that Amtrak's culture isn't exactly one of service. We've all heard the horror stories of employees being rude to passengers. It is up to Amtrak to change the culture of their OBS personnel and turn that particular workforce into a happier group of people. Get the unions involved in this, too.

-REBRANDING: I don't mean moving away from the Amtrak name, but rather fixing the current brand. Amtrak would do well to recruit some folks from Delta to help with the "brand experience" from the moment they enter the origin station to the moment they leave the terminating station. Organized boarding processes, clean, happy, and knowledgable customer service employees, etc. Amtrak needs help to get their brand experience and major station operations together.

-EXPANSION, EXPANSION, EXPANSION: The mission of Amtrak, according to Tony Coscia, is to serve the American public, NOT MAKE A PROFIT. To that end, Amtrak needs to start new services and be able to enforce OTP rules.

Private operators are only going to end up giving us an Americanized version of what's happening in the UK: pandamonium.

That was quite a post for your 100th lol.

I would add . Make Amtrak accounting fully transparent. California is starting to raise a stink.

WesternNation wrote: ↑Wed Dec 09, 2020 1:50 pm -EXPANSION, EXPANSION, EXPANSION: The mission of Amtrak, according to Tony Coscia, is to serve the American public, NOT MAKE A PROFIT. To that end, Amtrak needs to start new services and be able to enforce OTP rules.

Richard, where might there be expansion of LD's without interfering with Class I operations?

Surely, you do not suggest the "City of Portland", or the latter-day Amtrak "Pioneer" or the "City of LA" over the Overland Route and LASL. To impose either upon the investor owned Union Pacific would represent a seizure, if not physical, of private property. Forget about any such expansion; start thinking about some "whackin'" as the base of past Congressional support for such leaves for "their last hurrah on K Street" (where there are clients with a few more bucks to play with than NARP/RPA has available).

west point wrote: ↑Sat Dec 12, 2020 2:07 am I would add . Make Amtrak accounting fully transparent. California is starting to raise a stink.

Mr. West Point, may I humbly remind the readers here that Amtrak's Financial Statements have an annual audit by an Independent CPA Firm (E&Y has it at the moment). Included within that audit is a review of Internal Control procedures for adequacy and adherence. Accordingly, if there was a material weakness, say such as allowing maintenance of electric locomotives being charges to a Responsibility Location (that's a Res/Loc in Amtrakese) capturing the costs of, say, the Empire Builder, and such was "material" (a vague term but generally means "5% of anything" within the profession), they would be obligated to report such within the Letter. Both the Statements and the Letter are public documents and are available at the Amtrak website.

Now, as a CPA and recognized as such since 1974, I will acknowledge that within any Responsibility Accounting system in any industry, there is room for "what do you want to see, Big Daddy?" persuasions and resulting decisions. But to materially misstate the costs of an LD to the extent of the advocacy community's constant refrain of "fraudulent accounting" to me lies within the range of the probability of either a Legislative or Judicial overturning of the results of one particular recent Election.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Sat Dec 12, 2020 7:41 amRichard, where might there be expansion of LD's without interfering with Class I operations?

Surely, you do not suggest the "City of Portland", or the latter-day Amtrak "Pioneer" or the "City of LA" over the Overland Route and LASL. To impose either upon the investor owned Union Pacific would represent a seizure, if not physical, of private property. Forget about any such expansion; start thinking about some "whackin'" as the base of past Congressional support for such leaves for "their last hurrah on K Street" (where there are clients with a few more bucks to play with than NARP/RPA has available).

I’d like to see the Pioneer return - maybe limited to the Rose City and Beehive State rather than all the way to Seattle - but we do have to contend with Union Pacific. Maybe Amtrak would need to pay a fairer share for trackage, like whatever a hot intermodal would pay according to the STB, and maybe also a marginal rate for increased maintenance & signal needs. I’m okay with that, for any and all host roads public and private. Within reason I’m even okay with paying for second, third, and/or fourth tracks for passenger use provided they’re designed for a minimum of 80 mph MAS, taking on full maintenance for no-freight segments like the BNSF Raton & Glorieta Subs, or returning routes to service like the UP Phoenix Sub.

I’m not okay with Class I railroads leaving their arrangements with Amtrak to force discontinuance of regional and long-distance service.

I’m also not okay with Amtrak being farmed out, though I’m... less-not-okay with it. It sounds like a boondoggle specifically designed to make companies like Keolis rich and siphon more money out of the Federal till (if not at first, then eventually.) I do recognize that multinational and domestic companies have perfectly good train services, but other national railroads like ÖBB also do excellent work - we should try to build Amtrak to that level of service & comfort before giving up and selling off.

mtuandrew wrote: ↑Sat Dec 12, 2020 1:38 pm Maybe Amtrak would need to pay a fairer share for trackage, like whatever a hot intermodal would pay according to the STB, and maybe also a marginal rate for increased maintenance & signal needs. I’m okay with that, for any and all host roads public and private.

I'm certain the roads would be agreeable to that, such as they were quite so during the '80's. But somewhere during the '90's Amtrak did away with the performance payments sufficient to "keep 'em on time".

mtuandrew wrote: ↑Sat Dec 12, 2020 1:38 pm Within reason I’m even okay with paying for second, third, and/or fourth tracks for passenger use provided they’re designed for a minimum of 80 mph MAS, taking on full maintenance for no-freight segments like the BNSF Raton & Glorieta Subs, or returning routes to service like the UP Phoenix Sub.

"Within reason", that's the key. Whatever governmental or private interest group forced Amtrak to pay for all costs to keep the BNSF Raton & Glorieta Subs active to host a now Tri Weekly, should look themselves and say "We did a bad, bad, thing". Now of course "I'm all in with you" in regions where there is significant demand to warrant multiple frequency service. I think, but do not know because such is part of a bi-lateral agreement exempt from public disclosure, that Amtrak, through a Local passenger train agency, is paying far more than whatever their "incremental cost" provisions are today under the Amended Agreements (again exempt) prevalent today call for.

mtuandrew wrote: ↑Sat Dec 12, 2020 1:38 pm ………. other national railroads like ÖBB also do excellent work - we should try to build Amtrak to that level of service & comfort before giving up and selling off.

Having ridden many more miles/klicks on the ÖBB than Amtrak in recent years and up to COVID, I heartily concur, although I think their change of outside contractors providing on-board Food & Beverage during '18 represented a downgrade.

Mr. Norman. All we want to see is how LD costs in the budget go to what ? I certainly want to know what the snow removal fund for MIA and whole state of Florida actually went ? It may some of these costs are actually sent to other departments or even a slight chance to some black ops operation ?
Does the Pentagon have its own budget or is some money for example come from the B-2 or Gerald Ford operations ?

Is there any chance that the famous MIA snow-removal line was there because 'snow removal' is actually the short name of some category that includes general platform care (clearing up light debris after minor hurricanes, litter pickup, prying gum off the benches, etc)? I know of one country where the word for "condo fees" is "stair washing".

This is getting pretty far OT, because occasional really slow luxury tour trains aren't exactly a privatization of Amtrak lines; they are more or less a different beast. But, for what it's worth, I think the Moab one has merit. It is actually a tourist destination that attracts tourists of various kinds, some of them well-heeled, and I could totally see a prosperous family or couple making the train ride the first or last phase of their vacation trip to Moab, Canyonlands, Arches, etc., especially if the rail tour were to include a decent baggage allowance and trainside delivery of a rental SUV (neither of which is beyond the capacity of a halfway competent tour operator.

The idea of a train tour to Moab might work with the train just standing on the Potash branch line a mile or two northwest of Moab, where the branch is more on the same level as the highway, US191. That branch line gets a train a week, or so, I think (it is amazing to watch from the front gate of Arches, as the train of hoppers goes by on a tiny shelf hundreds of feet up the side of cliff and then disappears into a tunnel); I bet it would be possible to get the track for 48 hours with the right kind of advance notice and payment. The branch is right next to US191 most of the way, which I've driven, so I know it's mostly just a track through sagebrush, but it has views of the tops of the Arches NP formations. Alternatively, take people off the train at Cisco Springs and bus them down UT 128, which goes through yet another spectacular Colorado River canyon; this would also be the route in from Grand Junction. There is indeed a little team track at Crescent Jct where a train might be stored, but no wye, so would need locomotives or at cab cars at both ends.

(A hypothetical company doing this with sleeping cars could have passengers sleep right on the train and hire local companies -- Moab has many -- to offer tours of arches, tours of Canyonlands, slickrock mountain biking, river rafting, lunch at Cafe Eklektica (sp? worth the trip), etc. A good model for a summer day in and around Moab is early morning outdoor activity, long indoor/shady/wet midday rest or activity, evening outdoor activity. Arches NP, in particular, is full of spectacular trails from half a mile to a mile that are really fun when it's cool and hellish at noon; a couple of them, such as "Park Avenue" would be really good for a van tour that would drop people off at one end and pick them up at the other end.)

west point wrote: ↑Sat Dec 12, 2020 8:07 pm Mr. Norman. All we want to see is how LD costs in the budget go to what ? I certainly want to know what the snow removal fund for MIA and whole state of Florida actually went ?

Mr. West Point, over at another site, at which they and I have "mutually parted ways", terms such as "fraudulent accounting" abound in postings over there. The snow removal in Florida is one of their "talking points".

Contrary to what I think some of them would like to have a reader believe, that Amtrak had willfully assigned the cost of snow removal at, say, Trenton, to Miami. I would contend that snow removal had simply been placed in the allocable costs of "stations" and spread Systemwide. There is a cost involved with maintaining a Responsibility Accounting system, the trade off is reliable management information from which management decisions are made. To allocate cost items manually is simply more labor intensive and the snow removal allocation simply represented, what we Accountants call, an immaterial misstatement.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 17, 2020 7:58 pm Contrary to what I think some of them would like to have a reader believe, that Amtrak had willfully assigned the cost of snow removal at, say, Trenton, to Miami. I would contend that snow removal had simply been placed in the allocable costs of "stations" and spread Systemwide. There is a cost involved with maintaining a Responsibility Accounting system, the trade off is reliable management information from which management decisions are made. To allocate cost items manually is simply more labor intensive and the snow removal allocation simply represented, what we Accountants call, an immaterial misstatement.

The question I have, as we're now getting back to this issue... have these "immaterial misstatements" occurred year-to-year? Because when I read "immaterial misstatement" I see "unintentional/mistaken". But if I see it year over year, it's not "unintentional"... it becomes "material".

If this is standard Amtrak MO, then it needs to change.

Sorry I'm late.

-ADEQUATE FUNDING: Amtrak needs to have consistent, stable funding in order to operate at the highest possible level. This can be achieved in the form of a trust of sorts. This funding needs to cover actual food/beverage service, not the cheap stuff we've seen, plus equipment maintenance/repair/overhaul as well as capital for starting new services and fleet renewal at fixed intervals. (Say every 2-5 years for new services and 15 for fleet renewal).

I absolutely agree with you on this point. It's one of the main reasons of why other nationally-funded railroads in Europe and Asia are so successful since they have support from the government. It can also be noted that most of these passenger routes in these nations would be considered commuter or intercity routes, mainly under 750 miles. However, the American Government has not given much funding for Amtrak as it has to be considered on a national scale of funding along with every other agency that the government funds, and Amtrak has been receiving relatively low amounts of funding when compared to other factions such as the military or highways. Not to mention, if Amtrak were to receive a larger amount of funding than it is now, then it would require 1. a decrease in funding for other programs which will be met with political backlash for defunding, or 2. substantially raising taxes; both options would receive harsh opposition from politicians and citizens alike.

-CULTURE CHANGE: It is no secret that Amtrak's culture isn't exactly one of service. We've all heard the horror stories of employees being rude to passengers. It is up to Amtrak to change the culture of their OBS personnel and turn that particular workforce into a happier group of people. Get the unions involved in this, too.

Other than an overall positive mood from Amtrak staff, the U.S. also has a huge car culture which has been going strong since the 50s. This has caused politicians to fund projects involving highways and road infrastructure more than rail transport. In order to gain more support for Amtrak, you would need widespread support form both parties (and the NIMBYs) for any support for rail transportation in general.

-EXPANSION, EXPANSION, EXPANSION: The mission of Amtrak, according to Tony Coscia, is to serve the American public, NOT MAKE A PROFIT. To that end, Amtrak needs to start new services and be able to enforce OTP rules.

For any expansion, Amtrak would need support from politicians in the region of expansion, cooperation from the track owners, years long studies, and a couple million from the state or federal government to pay for the expansion.

To sum up: Amtrak and government-owned passenger rail operations could work if they received much more funding (by much, I mean billions if not trillions) from the federal government, which seems unlikely in the coming years. On the other hand, successful and reliable private operators (which are NOT SUBJECT TO FRANCHISING like Great Britain's privatization effort) such as Brightline can run existing and proposed routes with more quality since 1. the necessary funds required are coming from an almost infinite amount of private investment instead of a limited amount from the feds, and 2. these private corporations can only focus on the regions in which they are operating in, rather than the entirety of the United States. Keep in mind that Amtrak is the national rail network of America, and has to maintain and pay for services for the intercity hubs in the Northeast, Midwest, and West Coast, as well as the rural plains where the LDs roam. Some of these regions (Northeast) understandably receive significantly more funding and attention than others, but this leaves other critical regions with the bottom of the barrel in terms of quality with daily service in cities and regions which used to see up to 20 trains daily (Cleveland, Cincinnati, Denver, Salt Lake City, Minneapolis/St. Paul, Atlanta, etc.) Even though Brightline is not running due to the pandemic, construction is still going strong for their expansion to Orlando International Airport, and they are still developing plans for their Brightline West service from the LA region to Vegas, (and will resume once the market improves) at a much faster rate than Amtrak's proposed service in the coveted corridor.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 17, 2020 7:58 pm SNIP:
To allocate cost items manually is simply more labor intensive and the snow removal allocation simply represented, what we Accountants call, an immaterial misstatement.

I always said "de minimus" when referring to immaterial "differences". That said, it wouldn't be that hard to set an automatic exclusion into their accounting software. Of course, if it's anything like the system the "Great Satan" of tax and accounting uses, it's still based on MS-DOS 3.0 .

Or they could use an SQL system, which I used in conjunction with MS Access to calculate employment tax credits for Fortune 50 companies with a less than 1% error rate, for which I had queries to detect even those errors and correct. This was 12 years ago, when my brain wasn't mush.

<pats self on back>

Of course, Mr. Norman, I also still have 7-column work papers with "Arthur Young" imprinted on them!

Look, everyone, suffice it to say, government accounting uniformly sucks, so why should Amtrak be different? What do you expect from agencies who can allocate costs for toilet seats into the thousands?

I think we've exhausted the original intent of the topic. For continuation of some of the ideas posed here, please find a similar topic, or start a new one.