WNYP independent of LAL?

The business plan of which we speak did not originate with the woman formerly employed by the WNYP. It came from the powers that be. Or are.

Dave Becker

pablo wrote:The business plan of which we speak did not originate with the woman formerly employed by the WNYP. It came from the powers that be. Or are.

Dave Becker

Thank you for clearing that up Dave...

I wonder what possible agenda existed for such an ambitious plan-- one that some might say bordered on shear fantasy. Hmm.

It's like this, I've reviewed hundreds of business plans, and I've never read one that expected the business to fail , but the overly ambitious, "pie-in-the-sky" plans are usually the work of noobies who are trying to start their own business-- not as much with people who are considered knowledgable, if not well informed about their industry. The WNY&P wasn't the first railroad for many of these folks.

Something just doesn't smell right somewhere.

Since the Livingston paper is not online, here is a link to someone who posted the text elsewhere:
http://forums.railfan.net/forums.cgi?bo ... 1216309933

railwatcher wrote: 1.) Just what you want, a business run by a guy who's been fighting the business for years. "hey Anderson, if you win, there is nothing said about you dropping your case against the business."
2.) Best interest at heart, yeah right. I sold cars once, and every one was perfect. (Catch the sarcasm.)

Without knowing the details of this lawsuit it is difficult to really determine motive. However, even with how slow the courts are there must be some validity in this lawsuit. After 6 years you would think the courts would have thrown it out if it was nothing. Also, the article says it is being done for the benefit of the company. Again without seeing the lawsuit I am guessing, but it sounds like it might be a class action lawsuit meaning it would be for the benefit of those who were stockholders before the last stock split. At one time there were over 1000 stockholders then they did a stock split and got it down to several hundred. The article says it is now down to 40. Reading between the lines perhaps those several hundred would be interested in Mr. Anderson's lawsuit.

Otto Vondrak wrote:

roc wrote:Actually, republishing a newspaper article in whole or part, with proper attribution, on this forum wouldn't constitute copyright infringement. Fair use standards for newspapers are broader than other types of published material.

Pardon me... Copying an article from a newspaper, periodical, or other copyrighted source without the written permission of the editor or author is infringement. Furthermore, the rules of this forum (and site) dictate you post a short summary and a link back to the original article. If you have any questions as to the operation of this web site, please contact me off-forum.

-otto-

Also, acknowledgements need to include the paper and author so proper credit goes to those who did the work.

Wading through this thread several observations come to mind. The historical history of the Erie or LV or any RR in its formative period is rife with this type of knock down, drag out infighting. On the one hand the greedsters ferret out, then take financial posistions in a profitable RR take over and milk it for all its worth. If the shipper and public is lucky somehow the real railroad people will survive to run the property. If not its back to the streak of rust from whence it came. The insatiable greedsters move on to the next victim like rampaging locusts.Truly one of the oldest stories in the book.

I'm sure Jim Fisk and Jay Gould are having a good horse laff over the latest battle to involve the old weary Erie.Most likely there present locale is quite warm. My money, if I had any invested in this present iteration on the tier, is on the Burt combine. Give him time, he will have the Western NY in the black. Aye there's the rub, will they give it to him ? Or will the shareholders be seduced by the other competing interests using the old arguments ? Take the money and run or stick by the visionary management that got you the present healthy share price. We shall soon see.

Greed is only good, profitable at a societal level when it's informed by vision.

The pudding sets later today...

Good Luck to all, today is the date that may be the dawning of a different LAL Family, or not.

Greg Graves

Forthose people interested in that healthy share price, take the time to inquire how much debt the company is now in.

Again and again, we lose sight of the facts: how much money can be lost before the company can show a profit? How long could you personally be in the red before you feel the pain and have to make the tough choices.

Lets also not forget...the Erie and Erie Lackawanna lost money. A lot of it. And often. The Tier had declining car counts for years.

Today will be interesting. I wonder about all of these people claiming one vision is the right way to go, without knowing any details of any other visions. Its quite interesting to see so many play lemming.

Dave Becker

Ah, once again its the Erie, Erie, Erie. By all means, let us look at the "facts". The WNY&P of today is not the WNY&P of 18 months ago in any way, shape or form. The "new" WNY&P is one year old. Is it fair to judge the railroad on only one year? The past history of the Erie and the Tier 30-40 years ago is irrelevant. Lets stick to the here and now and the LAL/WNY&P. As for LAL debt, I've no idea, but I do know that this year's dividend is three times that of just two years ago. So I don't see the LAL as hurting too bad. The irony is this is all happening just as the railroad is finely in a position to actually become profitable. (If its going to.)

I do agree today will be interesting. Somehow I suspect the WHY&P will survive no matter the outcome. I hope.

RS

RS, I merely throw in the "Erie" comments because the line has always, always had a hard time making money, and that's with a major corporation behind it. The past 30-40 years are most certainly not irrelevant either way; you have to be mindful of what little business the line has, or had, just as you have to be mindful of the way shippers were treated that helped it get that way in the years pre-WNYP. You know what they say about those that forget the past.

I'm quite interested to know why a railroad that has been around since 2001 is suddenly "new." Please do tell. Is it the Buffalo line? Why wasn't it "new" when the Meadville line came aboard? Is it because that didn't do much to add to the car counts?

Also...doesn't anyone else here think it's odd that the dividend is so high this year, immediately after a power grab started? No one else thinks that it's so unusual for it to be the highest since the WNYP started...just as a struggle for control began? There is Ron's vision, indeed.

I do hope that the WNYP survives, assuming it is able to. Putting people out of work is bad, just as is taking public money without anything to show for it. Apparently, time will tell.

Dave Becker

pablo wrote:I'm quite interested to know why a railroad that has been around since 2001 is suddenly "new." Please do tell. Is it the Buffalo line? Why wasn't it "new" when the Meadville line came aboard? Is it because that didn't do much to add to the car counts?

In a business where engines last 50 years and rail 100, seven years is new. And, it's been in the last year that the WNYP has finally taken on it's (I assume) final form.

pablo wrote:Also...doesn't anyone else here think it's odd that the dividend is so high this year, immediately after a power grab started? No one else thinks that it's so unusual for it to be the highest since the WNYP started...just as a struggle for control began? There is Ron's vision, indeed.

Why is keeping the railroad running and all the jobs, current and future, that depend on it a "power grab"? And, isn't that preferable to the "cash grab" that is the alternative? What is unclear about an equation where either everyone benefits (including the greedy) or only the greedy benefit?

You've stated and insinuated incorrectly that the WNYP is losing money hand over fist. The WNYP + BL is doing much better than you or any of the other FUD (fear uncertainty doubt) spreaders have said. Moreover, both the LAL and BH have put on a lot of traffic in recent years and are doing very, very well.

Thereupon, it should come as no surprise that a good dividend has been paid.

Further, the dividend could likely have been better as revenue /cost opportunities have been lost or delayed directly due to "issues" related to the proxy fight.

And, does anyone remember last Fall when Burt and others were removed from the WNYP? Whose hands were grasping for power then? And, if they had succeeded at that time, would we even be having this debate now?

If you take a longer view of the situation and the goals of those involved, it's dishonest to say that Burt has been "grasping for power" or that this sorry affair even started with him. Let's hope he finishes it, though.

pablo wrote:Putting people out of work is bad, just as is taking public money without anything to show for it.

If you put the people out of work, how much more public or, for that matter, private investment will be able to attract? What will we lose in tax revenue in the here and now with those companies and jobs gone?

And, it is blatantly false to say that we "have nothing to show for it."

The issue at hand is whether railroad builds on the hard work already beginning to bear fruit or it all gets left to turn to weeds and rust...

Ron, as is always the case when you post, you take things out of context or otherwise ignore obvious facts. My personal favorite is when you copy and paste materials from someone who has in turn copied and pasted them from elsewhere...but as you avoided that one previously, let's deal with your most recent post.

According to you, 7 years is new. Completely ignorant, but fine...let's use the idea that 7 years is new. What is the timeframe that you would consider acceptable? I notice you again ignored the reference as to how long you or I could conceivably go in the red and still keep our house, our cars, etc. What is the timeframe for return on an investment with a railroad? And by the way, Ron, that's a rhetorical question. I know you have no idea. I don't either. But if I had millions invested in something, something that was losing another million a year, well, I would be looking for answers. Or a change. Or both.

Also...there is always more room for the WNYP to grow. Whether or not that is on the table, or ever has been, I don't know.

Regarding the dividend question, you again missed the point, either consciously or unconsciously. Why, after having the WNYP lose over a million dollars last year, and the year before, does a dividend suddenly appear right before the vote to change the Board of the railroad. At the very least Ron, doesn't that strike you as slightly unusual? That entire paragraph you wrote about keeping the railroad running and equations, and all of that, completely ignores this "coincidence."

Regarding the money loss, you are completely wrong. Even your mouthpiece has provided materials that demonstrate that the railroad lost over a million dollars last year. It is only through accounting procedures that he railroad approaches a break even point. Perhaps he has not provided you with this information. I have it, and can e-mail it to you if you would like to see it, assuming your "mac" e-mail address is now working.

There is no doubt that there is more traffic. I can't tell you how much, because I don't know. And neither do you. As I said, the numbers do not lie, and they do not add up. Let me know if you need some details.

I will say this: suggesting that the already inflated dividend could have been better were it not for this fight is absurd. Provide some examples, please.

As I said, you can claim power, you can claim unfairness, but you have yet to fundamentally address the question: how much is too much? Call it a power grab. Sure. But what's the end to the red ink? How much is enough?

And to close, as is often the case with a Carlson missive, I'm quoted out of context yet again. My statement "Putting people out of work is bad, just as is taking public money without anything to show for it" was meant to be taken together. In other words, if the railroad were shut down, there would be many bad things about it, including putting people out of work, the arguable loss of taxpayer money, dooming the entire line to non-existence for good, and so on. Your last line, "weeds and rust", agree with my point; if the line were shut down, there would be nothing to show for it.

I suspect that if the money was coming from your pocketbook (and don't say taxes, because it's not the same), you'd feel quite differently about the whole thing.

The meeting started 20 minutes ago. We'll all know soon.

Dave Becker

pablo wrote:RS, I merely throw in the "Erie" comments because the line has always, always had a hard time making money, and that's with a major corporation behind it. The past 30-40 years are most certainly not irrelevant either way; you have to be mindful of what little business the line has, or had, just as you have to be mindful of the way shippers were treated that helped it get that way in the years pre-WNYP. You know what they say about those that forget the past.

Hum, apparently my last reply didn't make it so I'll try again. In this case the past doesn't matter. Its too long ago and is apples and oranges. Its like saying the PC was a failure so no part of it was worth saving. A "major corporation" is not necessary a plus. If it was there would be few to any shortlines. (Big is not away better.) I'll grant you the WBYP's part of the Erie is thin on local traffic. As I've said before, that's why the BL is such a big deal. It doubles, triples of quadtriples the traffic as well as in many cases adding miles to the railroad's haul, AND cut of the pie. And pie is good.

pablo wrote:I'm quite interested to know why a railroad that has been around since 2001 is suddenly "new." Please do tell. Is it the Buffalo line? Why wasn't it "new" when the Meadville line came aboard? Is it because that didn't do much to add to the car counts?

Bingo! The Meadville line was/is relatively minor. The BL however is big. I've always assumed the BL has always been part of the big picture "plan". (And I could see at least one more part of the plan yet to come, maybe two. Maybe even three! But those would just make it better. Right now the BL is the key and *should* be enough to make the difference between black and red.) If the other possibilities happen then so much the better. More positive developments have happened in the last year than the previous 6 years combined. But there's still a lot to be done. A shop, moving control away from the NS dispatcher, replacing the rental EMD's, etc.

Now, to be a fly on the wall right now....

RS

RS, I typically agree with a lot that you say. Allow me to make some comments.

First of all, I completely disagree with the idea that the past doesn't matter. Sometime, people are correct, but other times, it completely matters...if only for perspective. I choose to think that it matters greatly, and you better believe shippers locally think that, too. That's sentiment has been sprinkled about here time and again by many people.

Regarding the BL, I think there was quite a bit about that deal that was not as good as it was supposed to be, but I can't quote figures or numbers. I'll agree that there's a lot more traffic there.

Lastly, though, that new comment about the "new" railroad misses something. I worked at the railroad from 2003 until 2007. I remember when it was the overhead NS traffic that was going to put the line in the black. And still bills didn't get paid. And then, the Meadville line would be the trick...and still the company cell phones were shut down due to non-payment, while crews were on duty, by the way. And now...the Buffalo line is the next big thing.

You yourself said it: there are more expansion possibilities to be had. You might have even heard some of the same things that I have. So, the point is this: "The Buffalo line will put us in the black. We swear!" And then: "The XXXX line will do it! It will be the trick!" And then...you get my drift, whether or not you agree with me.

I can only tell you what I saw when I was there. I wonder, with all of this dividend talk, and all of the good financial news, if all of the outstanding debt in the Jamestown area from the railroad has been paid. I wonder what Ron thinks about that...and that's not even the debt I was talking about previously.

Dave Becker

roc wrote:And, does anyone remember last Fall when Burt and others were removed from the WNYP? Whose hands were grasping for power then? And, if they had succeeded at that time, would we even be having this debate now?

Honesty, I'd like to know more about the events that happened late last year. (Since I currently know nothing.) I'll also say again I know none of the people involved thus I have no one feeding me info. so I'm probably at a bit of a disadvantage there:-) (I'm not even sure who I should be rooting for!)

pablo wrote:RS, I typically agree with a lot that you say. Allow me to make some comments.

I won't hold that against you:-)

pablo wrote:First of all, I completely disagree with the idea that the past doesn't matter. Sometime, people are correct, but other times, it completely matters...if only for perspective. I choose to think that it matters greatly, and you better believe shippers locally think that, too. That's sentiment has been sprinkled about here time and again by many people.

Yes, but some history matters more than others. In this case re the Erie I don't think it does that much and here's why. You are right, there's little more local traffic to be lured back to the rails. Maybe a reload, maybe (big maybe) gravel if a pit opened up on the NYLE, maybe some logs, etc. But overall there's just not much local traffic, or potential local traffic, to substance the Erie that the WNYP operates. Even I can see that just driving along the line. The NS bridge traffic is good, but I wouldn't want to depend on it. (I even wonder if the pounding the track takes is worth the cost.) Thus what the Erie alone has now is probably what its going to have.

Not sure how or why the Meadville Line was going to be the salvation as, as you would say, the numbers are not there. (Short of the new ethanol plant opening up.) Again, drive it and see. Nothing there except the OC&T interchange and a couple of small customers.

Enter the BL. Lots of traffic, and a lot of it can/was diverted to the Erie. Coal, sand, wax and gravel. Granted not big bucks, but big enough volume to make it up. Plus much of its moving via a Erie-BL route that's good for a decent revenue split. (Much better than previously.) And its not "someday" traffic, its there now. You've mention time and how long should we wait. I don't have the exact answer but I do know this. If the current WNY&P can't make money once it settles down the other possible expansions probably won't either. This is the basic core WNYP that I suspect many envisioned for years. (Maybe not exact, but close enough.) I also know the difference I saw last fall and the previous years. Night and day. I honestly think its within sight. To give up now would be a giant mistake. I'd give it one more year, two at the most. If its not making good money by then I'd agree, give up and run away. Frankly, I'd bet it will be a good money maker by then. (The real money numbers we'll never know such as the most important one, a rate division. Makes all the difference in the world.)

RS