• Pan Am Railways For Sale?

  • 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

  • 903 posts
  • 1
  • 50
  • 51
  • 52
  • 53
  • 54
  • 61
  by b&m 1566
 
BandA wrote: Thu Sep 24, 2020 1:57 pm MBTA also needs a second platform at Worcester (& more layover space there?) which I think requires negotiating with CSX for a bit of their Worcester yard.
I'm not sure how much more they need but I wonder if they've ever considered the P&W land along side I290, where the old B&M railyard use to be, between Garden St and Millbrook St.
  by NYC27
 
That is still B&M land. That is why the old Northbound Main is still in place between Millbrook St and Barbers (also B&M).
  by gokeefe
 
BandA wrote:The railroads are state chartered I think, so probably severable (I think/guess) at the state line.
The original corporations that were granted state charters have long since been dissolved as a result of bankruptcies in the early 20th century. I encountered this issue while doing research on passenger data in Maine. There was an opinion from the Maine AG that said because of bankruptcies the state charters as originally granted were no longer in force.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk


  by Trinnau
 
b&m 1566 wrote: Thu Sep 24, 2020 2:24 pm
BandA wrote: Thu Sep 24, 2020 1:57 pm MBTA also needs a second platform at Worcester (& more layover space there?) which I think requires negotiating with CSX for a bit of their Worcester yard.
I'm not sure how much more they need but I wonder if they've ever considered the P&W land along side I290, where the old B&M railyard use to be, between Garden St and Millbrook St.
MBTA plans for a new Worcester platform are well underway. Layover still could use expansion.
  by A215
 
Internal rumors have narrowed to 2 railroads and 1 investment firm. G&W is supposedly touring the property. Unsure of the other railroad and investment firm.
  by Mikejf
 
I am betting there is a reason 507 got painted the colors it did.. And not for heritage either.
  by Rockingham Racer
 
And what colors would those be?
Last edited by MEC407 on Sat Sep 26, 2020 5:57 am, edited 1 time in total. Reason: unnecessary quoting
  by gokeefe
 
A215 wrote:Internal rumors have narrowed to 2 railroads and 1 investment firm. G&W is supposedly touring the property. Unsure of the other railroad and investment firm.
So Fortress (maybe), G&W and either NS or CN.

Hang on to your ticket Mr. Norman!

I'm clutching my "Maple Leaf Special" stubs in the hopes that Grand Trunk still has some kick left in him.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

  by newpylong
 
Mikejf wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 10:47 am I am betting there is a reason 507 got painted the colors it did.. And not for heritage either.
I've noted the purpose of the repaint several times.
  by pnolette
 
Maybe Junior is gonna get it after all..
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
newpylong wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 11:49 am
Mikejf wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 10:47 am I am betting there is a reason 507 got painted the colors it did.. And not for heritage either.
I've noted the purpose of the repaint several times.
Mr. Newpy, I made a search through the site's tool and could not locate any posting regarding that engine by you.

So, I'm of enquiring mind wants to know status.

I did learn that engine MEC 507, a GP-40 with a cowl cab, was badly damaged in a fire, and was "contracted out" to be rebuilt. It returned to service wearing the Pan Am livery. Now it appears that the engine has been reliveried back to a Guilford livery, apparently on the eve of the For Sale sign going up.

Now with everything else on that road, away from the "Executrain", looking like junk, I think it is a just inquiry. So with your extensive knowledge of this outfit, both from within and without, could you reiterate your thoughts?
Last edited by Gilbert B Norman on Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
  by johnpbarlow
 
Interesting article from Friday's Athol Daily News with more discussion about Mass legislators proposing that the Commonwealth get involved in the Pan Am disposition. Which of these 2 excerpts do you agree with?
TransitMatters, a nonprofit that advocates for improved transit in and around Boston, last month published that “Pan Am and its corporate predecessor Guilford are notorious for paring service and infrastructure investment to an absolute minimum while offloading as many costs as possible onto the public sector.”
or
Pan Am Railways Executive Vice President Cynthia Scarano said she disagrees with TransitMatters’ comments, saying the company’s customers are thrilled with the service.

“We’ve made a lot of investments in our infrastructure over the last five years,” she said.
As the Chico Marx character in the Marx Brothers' "Duck Soup" movie" famously asked
Chicolini: Well, who ya gonna believe me or your own eyes?
https://www.atholdailynews.com/Local-le ... e-36445528
  by MEC407
 
If I give you two million dollars and you choose to invest it, you can truthfully say you've made millions of dollars of investments.

Ms. Scarano was very careful with how she crafted that sentence. She has a bright future in politics if she ever decides to get out of the transportation business.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
gokeefe wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 11:42 am
A215 wrote:G&W is supposedly touring the property. Unsure of the other railroad and investment firm.
So Fortress (maybe), G&W and either NS or CN.
Messrs. A215 and O'Keefe, matters not if the boys and girls from G&W take a joyride around the Pan Am, so long as the STB holds to their competitive rail philosophy, they "ain't a gonna get it".

The STB Members hold five year terms having been appointed by the President. But Trump has already made appointments, including the Chairman, so if he wants to back away from the competitive rail philosophy he has had time to start that initiative. During a possible second term, he has more opportunity to shape that Board (again; fixed term, not "at his pleasure").

If G&W gets Pan Am, only the B&A represents competition - and they don't exactly hit ME and NH on their own rails. Sure with the CP-M back in SOO/CP (to my knowledge, all CP properties in the USA are SOO) hands, it is still a ramshackle property of FRA Class 2 and can't really be called competition at present. Even if SOO commits to a fix up enough to be Class 3, it is still handling its traffic to/from Canada.

Now so far as the developments reported by the Athol newspaper:

Election Year; people=passengers=votes.

Again I note; the people are along the B&A, and West of Worcester, Chessie "tolerates" the "one a day Amtrak", but extended "T" service would likely be met with "claws" and not "purrs".
  • 1
  • 50
  • 51
  • 52
  • 53
  • 54
  • 61