What if NYC Lines, LLC was spun off by CSX?

Hypothetically, if New York Central Lines was spun off as an independent railroad, would it still be profitable? Would it be able to survive in the Northeast?

This is an academic discussion that has little to do with New York State.

Moving to the CSX Forum for now, since they own NYC Lines, LLC. CSX has no reason to spin it off, so I don't see what the point of that would be.

-otto-

According to what I know (which I readily admit is not everything), New York Central Lines LLC is not an operating railroad, as such, but merely a "paper" entity that holds railroad assets that are operated by CSX. "Spinning off" would require the set up of an operating infrastructure to make it an independent railroad. In other words, undoing all the intensive (and expensive) work that went into separating NYCL LLC out from Conrail and merging its operations with CSX.

The only scenario (hypothetically) that makes much sense to me would be selling or leasing it to another railroad that already has an operations management structure.

Let's say, perhaps, Union Pacific...

You'd have basically a New York and Boston to St. Louis railroad that would need to rely on other connections to reach Chicago (CSX uses the former B&O as their primary route if I remember right). Sort of like having one half of the old Conrail "X".

I think it would work, but it would be somewhat weak compared to having the connections of both halves of the "X". And I agree that adding a corporate structure to it would cut into the profits pretty good.

You're right. Belay that rumor.

LCJ wrote:According to what I know (which I readily admit is not everything), New York Central Lines LLC is not an operating railroad, as such, but merely a "paper" entity that holds railroad assets that are operated by CSX.

On August 27, 2004, pursuant to a decision on November 7, 2003 by the Surface Transportation Board, CSX and NSR took full actual ownership of the assets previously held by NYC Lines LLC and PRR Lines LLC, eliminating these paper entities. NYC Lines & PRR Lines no longer exist. The former Conrail assets are now directly held by CSX and NSR.

Jim

there was a rumor in 04 or so that union pacific was going to buy the ex conrail territory of csx, but it never happened.

Thanks for the replies!

Erie-Lackawanna wrote:On August 27, 2004, pursuant to a decision on November 7, 2003 by the Surface Transportation Board...

I had forgotten about that. Thanks for the reminder.

http://www.secinfo.com/dsvr4.26Wa.htm

lakeshoredave wrote:there was a rumor in 04 or so that union pacific was going to buy the ex conrail territory of csx, but it never happened.

Never ever ever ever ever ever ever believe rumors floating around the railroad until you see it with your own eyes. I could write a book on the BS info that is passed around

As for the question if the former assets of the NYC were reinstituted, would they be profitable? I'm 100% positive that with the right management they would be. After all, if they weren't profitable right now, wouldn't CSX drop them?

SimTrains wrote: After all, if they weren't profitable right now, wouldn't CSX drop them?

If only it were that simple.

A reading of the SEC link, does not seem to abolish the NYC and PRR operating subsidy companies; merely to transfer control and ownership directly to the parent companies; NSC and CSX.

I tend to agree with some posters here that the most likely scenario is for the NYC LLc. is to be spun off to another parent railroad....although in balance, there is significant savings (wage cuts on a Class II) and tax benefits (running a subsidiary at a loss) that might make up for the cost of creating a new railroad operating structure.

As to the rumors in 2002? I'm convinced that the plan was really afoot and got aborted. A few cars were actually painted/lettered (big lettering) NYC instead of CSX, using CSX blue and yellow paint.

That suggests to me that the leadership in Jax simply changed directions; not that the rumor was unfounded.

A few cars were actually painted/lettered (big lettering) NYC instead of CSX, using CSX blue and yellow paint.

Ah, another conspiracy...

Changing reporting marks is easier than changing/consolidating car numbers/series. I'm convinced that's all there is to that scenario, no matter what color the paint was.

LCJ wrote:

A few cars were actually painted/lettered (big lettering) NYC instead of CSX, using CSX blue and yellow paint.

Ah, another conspiracy...

Changing reporting marks is easier than changing/consolidating car numbers/series. I'm convinced that's all there is to that scenario, no matter what color the paint was.

Respectfully, no.

Reporting marks are one thing. "NYC" reporting marks are out there and will remain, for many very good reasons (not the least of which is the cost/effort of renumbering a fleet of freight cars).

What I'm referring to, is - the cars in question were steel coil cars - the cars painted CSX blue, but instead of the traditional block-serif "CSX" on the sides, the cars had (four-foot-high block typeface but san-serif) "NYC."

This on the coil-covers, NOT on the bodies of the cars.

Now, a lot of cars have been painted in eight years. Many of the Conrail coal hoppers have been repainted in CSX colors, identical to the rest but for the NYC reporting marks. These cars have been stenciled "CSX" - only those few coil cars were graced with "NYC" stenciling.

Point I'm making is, it's hard to chalk up a SERIES of cars' paint jobs in four-foot-high markings, to a mistake or miscue or anything other than an instruction...perhaps one that went out prematurely.

And it's hard to make a "conspiracy" out of it - since it IS their property.

(Edit to clarify)

Interesting.