CENTRAL MAINE & QUEBEC RAILWAY (CMQ) — New Owner of MMA

[oat324]

If the new company wants to compete with the CN, they will need to invest heavily on new rail and ties. Then they will have to convince the NBSR to sink money into their right of way for faster speeds. I hope they don't go the RailAmerica route with the line because those properties were in miserable shape when the Gennessee and Wyoming took over.

[mtuandrew]

If the new company wants to compete with the CN, they will need to invest heavily on new rail and ties. Then they will have to convince the NBSR to sink money into their right of way for faster speeds. I hope they don't go the RailAmerica route with the line because those properties were in miserable shape when the Gennessee and Wyoming took over.

Like gokeefe said, the only way they can make a long-term go of the line is by investing in the physical plant and the interchanges. If they get traffic commitments all the way to Saint John, they'll convince the NBSR to sink the money into line improvements. If they don't, they still have the option of running the Moosehead into the ground and pawning it off on the state. The Montreal-area track might still be worthwhile for CP to repurchase or G&W to buy, and the Bangor-area stuff would fit the Irving system well, so Fortress would still make their money back and then some.

[CN9634]

If the new company wants to compete with the CN, they will need to invest heavily on new rail and ties. Then they will have to convince the NBSR to sink money into their right of way for faster speeds. I hope they don't go the RailAmerica route with the line because those properties were in miserable shape when the Gennessee and Wyoming took over.

When was the last time you were on NBSR/EMRY property? It's pretty much 40 the whole way.

[Highball]

If the new company wants to compete with the CN, they will need to invest heavily on new rail and ties. Then they will have to convince the NBSR to sink money into their right of way for faster speeds. I hope they don't go the RailAmerica route with the line because those properties were in miserable shape when the Gennessee and Wyoming took over.

When was the last time you were on NBSR/EMRY property? It's pretty much 40 the whole way.

To back up what CN9634 quoted ....... NBSR main line trackage, in The Province of New Brunswick, underwent a 286 K compliant project that was first begun in 2009 ...... it is in good shape. I would surmise EMRY ..... Vanceboro - Brownville Jct. received the same attention as well, as the Irving Corp stays on top of its rail maintenence.

[mtuandrew]

CN9634 and Highball (or whoever else knows): is the entire MMA system also 286k compliant? And, are any segments rated up to 315k?

[oat324]

To clarify on the NBSR, I was referring to that line getting welded rail and signals for 60.

If the new company wants to compete with the CN, they will need to invest heavily on new rail and ties. Then they will have to convince the NBSR to sink money into their right of way for faster speeds. I hope they don't go the RailAmerica route with the line because those properties were in miserable shape when the Gennessee and Wyoming took over.

When was the last time you were on NBSR/EMRY property? It's pretty much 40 the whole way.

[shadyjay]

The question that's on my mind is that will the MM&A name remain or will Fortress choose a new name for the operation?

[F-line to Dudley via Park]

The question that's on my mind is that will the MM&A name remain or will Fortress choose a new name for the operation?

Oh, the MMA name is cursed now. That will be retired post haste for something new.


What I want to know is in the scheming for who's going to traffic benefit most from Fortress-RR-to-be-named...do the Irving lines and the VRS lines make a move to unite their various small reporting marks under unified names. VRS in particular is a little baffling being chopped up amongst Clarendon & Pittsford, Green Mountain, WACR, and Vermont Railway when all of them (except for the isolated Montpelier branch of WACR) either touch each other or connect via NECR trackage rights, with the 3 Irving lines being in similar boat and having common MMA connections. Varied destinations aside, it would seem those two companies would want to give themselves a bigger marketing footprint by having united reporting marks. That's one thing I don't quite get about how the lines in VT and Northern ME organize themselves.

[gokeefe]

Sometimes there are legacy reasons for this related to collective bargaining rights and/or corporate taxes/tax breaks associated with the legacy corporations.

To this day no one has been able to give a definitive explanation of why PAR continues to maintain the "Boston & Maine Corporation" and the "Maine Central Railroad" in addition to the "Portland Terminal Company" and of course the "Springfield Terminal Railway". The last one of course everyone understands by now. The others not so much.

[CN9634]

To clarify on the NBSR, I was referring to that line getting welded rail and signals for 60.

If the new company wants to compete with the CN, they will need to invest heavily on new rail and ties. Then they will have to convince the NBSR to sink money into their right of way for faster speeds. I hope they don't go the RailAmerica route with the line because those properties were in miserable shape when the Gennessee and Wyoming took over.

When was the last time you were on NBSR/EMRY property? It's pretty much 40 the whole way.

Why would they get signals or work for 60MPH speed?

[CN9634]

The question that's on my mind is that will the MM&A name remain or will Fortress choose a new name for the operation?

Oh, the MMA name is cursed now. That will be retired post haste for something new.


What I want to know is in the scheming for who's going to traffic benefit most from Fortress-RR-to-be-named...do the Irving lines and the VRS lines make a move to unite their various small reporting marks under unified names. VRS in particular is a little baffling being chopped up amongst Clarendon & Pittsford, Green Mountain, WACR, and Vermont Railway when all of them (except for the isolated Montpelier branch of WACR) either touch each other or connect via NECR trackage rights, with the 3 Irving lines being in similar boat and having common MMA connections. Varied destinations aside, it would seem those two companies would want to give themselves a bigger marketing footprint by having united reporting marks. That's one thing I don't quite get about how the lines in VT and Northern ME organize themselves.

How do reporting marks help marketing? Also VRS connect with CP at Whitehall.

[Ridgefielder]

To this day no one has been able to give a definitive explanation of why PAR continues to maintain the "Boston & Maine Corporation" and the "Maine Central Railroad" in addition to the "Portland Terminal Company" and of course the "Springfield Terminal Railway". The last one of course everyone understands by now. The others not so much.

I'd imagine there might be outstanding indebtedness tied to the B&M/MEC. If you're a creditor of the Maine Central you might not want to consent to also becoming a creditor of the B&M, or vice-versa. Also dissolving the companies would be costly- you'd have to get a new charter in what, six separate states? Cheaper just to let it lie.

And anyway, nobody ever accused PanAm management of *not* being somewhat eccentric-- what with naming their railroad after a defunct airline and all...

[KSmitty]

EMRY is to Irving what MM&A Canada was to Rail World. Its a property owning, non operating subsidiary founded in the other country for taxes and property rights.
MNR was created because who knows why but I'd wager it had to do with requirements laid out in the bidding process. As far as I know MNR owns no land, I think the stretch from Madawaska to Van Buren was sold to EMRY. CN still maintains the WC corporate entity and a few other American subsidiaries for operations in the US. In terms of organization in railroading, most border crossings involve 2 railroads at the paper level, even if only 1 at the practical level.

There are all sorts of reasons companies maintain reporting marks, and corporate entities. Taxes, labor agreements yadayada, if you want an iron clad reason, I'd suggest you write to Mr. Fink, at Pan Am, or his counterparts at VRS, or JDI and ask them, because outside of upper management, their legal and economic teams no one is gonna know. But if its done, its done for a reason.

Reporting marks and Marketing are also 2 different beasts. BNSF still owns and uses the ATSF, BN, GN, NP, SLSF, CBQ, and SP&S reporting marks, and uses most of them on their rolling stock fleet. Union Pacific still has countless cars running around in old marks, but you can be sure when a unit train of old SP hoppers shows up at a mine, the shipper dealt with Union Pacific's marketing department. Likewise, "Vermont Rail System" and "New Brunswick Southern" are marketing names. I don't know, but I would speculate Irving, and VRS, have a single marketing department, where their railroads put in a single marketing package.

[oat324]

Since this will be the Florida East Coast of the north, the Maine East Coast Railroad needs to be 60 mph. LOL

[/quote]Why would they get signals or work for 60MPH speed?[/quote]

[CN9634]

I believe it is all, or at least mostly, 286k. CP did a good job maintaining the bridges. The B&A probably about the same except for the Searsport sub. The bridges down there need some work... Perhaps they'll try to get it so they can run 6-axles down there.