Raise the fares on popular routes and times, and offer more discounts on unpopular times.
There are several things which can be done to increase those profits, as the previous poster noted, but the most important is forcing the host railroads to run the trains on time. It is documented from various corridor and commuter rail cases to lead to 50% increases in ridership (with associated greater pricing power) and it also reduces costs. And it does so while making customers happier, imagine that.
The issues with adding sleepers is who's riding then. If I were to ride a train overnight, I'm riding it for the transportation and less so the experience. The sleeper as a product, doesn't appeal to me because I'm just looking for a flat surface to sleep on. Which is why Amtrak needs a budget option for those of us willing to ride the train overnight, but don't really want all the bells and whistles of a sleeper. I fly for the same reason I drive, because I lack an alternative. If I know coach is my only option to go to Denver from California, I'm going to put up with Southwest for 3 hours instead of the train overnight, no matter how much the experience will unsettle me.
Since many of the people who ride coach do so, not because they are riding a short distance, but because the price of coach is much less money.
I respectfully disagree. I think that lie-flat seats are absolutely necessary for a long-distance business class product.I agree that business class should include F&B. Ideally price business class properly in between coach and sleeper and include the dining car meal, soft drinks, and provide pillows and blankets.
I don’t think lie flat seats are needed for BC. 2-1 reserved seats with proper amenities would be a game changer for me personally.
I respectfully disagree. I think that lie-flat seats are absolutely necessary for a long-distance business class product.
Look at this chart of business-class products on long-haul jets. Angle lie-flat seats or flat bed seats are the norm now.
Next sleeper order should include something akin to the slumbercoach! A mix of one and two bed spaces that are private but no-frill ... and affordable.
(The berths of the past probably won't appeal to a lot of Americans today because they're not that private -- especially if sharing a two-person space with a stranger. But two people who know each other would likely not have an issue sharing a two-bed slumbercoach instead of a berth in a section. And singles might like the privacy of the one-bed space.)
Uh, better check out the ridership statistics:
https://www.railpassengers.org/site/assets/files/3435/ld.pdf
These for for the "long distance" business line only:
Coach: 3,640,873 passengers, average trip distance 470 miles
Business class: 149,746 passengers, average trip distance 401 miles
Sleeper: 657,078 passengers, average trip distance 995 miles
Average coach fare: $70, average BC fare $105, average sleeper fare $282
Average yield per mile: Coach $0.015, BC, $0.026, sleeper $0.028
From the graph showing trip length I would estimate (RPA did not beak out separate figures for Coach, BC, and sleeper) that fewer than 1/4 of the coach passengers are traveling more than 600 miles, which is a good surrogate for whether they're taking an overnight trip.
From this I calculate:
Coach: 3,640,873 passenger x $70 = $254,861,110 in revenue
BC: 149,746 x $105 = $15,723,330 in revenue
Sleeper: 657,078 x $282 = $185,295,996 in revenue
Uh, better check out the ridership statistics:
https://www.railpassengers.org/site/assets/files/3435/ld.pdf
These for for the "long distance" business line only:
Coach: 3,640,873 passengers, average trip distance 470 miles
Business class: 149,746 passengers, average trip distance 401 miles
Sleeper: 657,078 passengers, average trip distance 995 miles
Average coach fare: $70, average BC fare $105, average sleeper fare $282
Average yield per mile: Coach $0.015, BC, $0.026, sleeper $0.028
From the graph showing trip length I would estimate (RPA did not beak out separate figures for Coach, BC, and sleeper) that fewer than 1/4 of the coach passengers are traveling more than 600 miles, which is a good surrogate for whether they're taking an overnight trip.
From this I calculate:
Coach: 3,640,873 passenger x $70 = $254,861,110 in revenue
BC: 149,746 x $105 = $15,723,330 in revenue
Sleeper: 657,078 x $282 = $185,295,996 in revenue
My impression from this is that:
1) Long distance trains carry an order of magnitude more coach passengers than sleeper passengers. (Can't really judge business class, because it's only offered on one or two trains.)
2) Most long distance coach and business class passengers aren't taking overnight trips.
3) Business class revenue yield per mile is almost as good as sleeper revenue yield per mile.
4) Total revenue from sleeper passengers is about the same order of magnitude as total revenue from coach passengers, even though sleeper passengers are only 15% of all the Amtrak long distance passengers. In other words, the sleeper passengers are subsidizing the system, to some extent.
5) A relatively small percentage of Amtrak sleeper tickets are in the ranges of "thousands of dollars" as is commonly reported in these forums. (The average sleeper fare is under $300.)
I'm not some sort of business wunderkind, I don't even play one on TV, but if I were in charge, I'd:
1) Implement business class on every long distance train and try to get as many coach passengers as possible to spend the extra $35 (on average) for their short (~400 mile on average) ride.
2) Increase sleeper capacity as much as possible without it driving fares too low. Optimize to maximize total revenue.
To decide how much capacity for premium fare passengers I'd need to increase, I'd need accurate information about the costs associated with providing additional business class and sleeper capacity. These would be direct costs without allocations for overhead. In other words, I would want to see how the direct costs for adding capacity for premium service compare to the increased revenue yields I can expect.
At least some of the food service direct costs should be lumped into the direct costs for providing sleeper service. It's true that a quarter of the 3.6 million coach passengers (or ~900,000) are doing overnight travel, which is more than the current number of sleeper passengers, and thus they are also a market for food service, too. However, we're trying to maximize yield, and sleeper passengers both travel longer distances and yield more fare revenue per mile, so the sleeper and BC passengers are really our primary focus for food service. Of course, maximizing food service revenue is a whole other subject, but decent food service is really necessary to maximize sleeper passengers, and thus maximize total fare revenue.
The strategy is to use the premium fare sleeper and business class passengers to partially subsidize the operation of the train so that it can provide the necessary transportation services to the coach passengers who are taking shorter trips. Rather than being some sort of "frill" giving old geezers "land cruises," maximizing premium service on the long distance trains is actually an important business strategy to ensure that necessary transportation services can be provided to people of modest means (i.e., coach travelers) in rural areas.
You may not be a business wunderkind, but you have a sound business mindset. That approach is correct.Uh, better check out the ridership statistics:
https://www.railpassengers.org/site/assets/files/3435/ld.pdf
These for for the "long distance" business line only:
Coach: 3,640,873 passengers, average trip distance 470 miles
Business class: 149,746 passengers, average trip distance 401 miles
Sleeper: 657,078 passengers, average trip distance 995 miles
Average coach fare: $70, average BC fare $105, average sleeper fare $282
Average yield per mile: Coach $0.015, BC, $0.026, sleeper $0.028
From the graph showing trip length I would estimate (RPA did not beak out separate figures for Coach, BC, and sleeper) that fewer than 1/4 of the coach passengers are traveling more than 600 miles, which is a good surrogate for whether they're taking an overnight trip.
From this I calculate:
Coach: 3,640,873 passenger x $70 = $254,861,110 in revenue
BC: 149,746 x $105 = $15,723,330 in revenue
Sleeper: 657,078 x $282 = $185,295,996 in revenue
My impression from this is that:
1) Long distance trains carry an order of magnitude more coach passengers than sleeper passengers. (Can't really judge business class, because it's only offered on one or two trains.)
2) Most long distance coach and business class passengers aren't taking overnight trips.
3) Business class revenue yield per mile is almost as good as sleeper revenue yield per mile.
4) Total revenue from sleeper passengers is about the same order of magnitude as total revenue from coach passengers, even though sleeper passengers are only 15% of all the Amtrak long distance passengers. In other words, the sleeper passengers are subsidizing the system, to some extent.
5) A relatively small percentage of Amtrak sleeper tickets are in the ranges of "thousands of dollars" as is commonly reported in these forums. (The average sleeper fare is under $300.)
I'm not some sort of business wunderkind, I don't even play one on TV, but if I were in charge, I'd:
1) Implement business class on every long distance train and try to get as many coach passengers as possible to spend the extra $35 (on average) for their short (~400 mile on average) ride.
2) Increase sleeper capacity as much as possible without it driving fares too low. Optimize to maximize total revenue.
To decide how much capacity for premium fare passengers I'd need to increase, I'd need accurate information about the costs associated with providing additional business class and sleeper capacity. These would be direct costs without allocations for overhead. In other words, I would want to see how the direct costs for adding capacity for premium service compare to the increased revenue yields I can expect.
At least some of the food service direct costs should be lumped into the direct costs for providing sleeper service. It's true that a quarter of the 3.6 million coach passengers (or ~900,000) are doing overnight travel, which is more than the current number of sleeper passengers, and thus they are also a market for food service, too. However, we're trying to maximize yield, and sleeper passengers both travel longer distances and yield more fare revenue per mile, so the sleeper and BC passengers are really our primary focus for food service. Of course, maximizing food service revenue is a whole other subject, but decent food service is really necessary to maximize sleeper passengers, and thus maximize total fare revenue.
The strategy is to use the premium fare sleeper and business class passengers to partially subsidize the operation of the train so that it can provide the necessary transportation services to the coach passengers who are taking shorter trips. Rather than being some sort of "frill" giving old geezers "land cruises," maximizing premium service on the long distance trains is actually an important business strategy to ensure that necessary transportation services can be provided to people of modest means (i.e., coach travelers) in rural areas.
The fundamental issue is that if you do any form of lie-flat, the roomettes are actually the most efficient way to do it, geometrically. There is no point in a lie flat product which is less fancy than a roomette, none at all.Slumbercoaches... let them Rest In Peace. A slumbercoach room is not that drastically different than a roomette. The duplex design probably wouldn’t pass current codes, so you would only be able to fit so many in. You’d also have to have an ADA accessible room. Plus the restrooms... I just don’t think it would be worth it. The existing sleeping car design work well.
Makes sense.As far as a budget sleeper option, I would say:
Take a hard look at the cost of providing quality restaurant-style food service to all classes of passengers. Come up with a fair estimate as to how much value that adds, and build that number in to the ticket price for all classes of passengers as a subsidy. Just make sure that the food is worth it (in recent years, it hasn't been!).
Then, with a solid floor of revenue pledged to the diners, have three (four) classes of tickets:
Just MHO.
- Coach. Minimal amenities.
- (opt) Business class. Slightly better seating and free non-alcoholic beverages in the cafe car upon request, along with a snack amenity mid-morning and afternoon. Pay extra for meals, but with an optional meal plan.
- Budget sleeper. You get a private room(ette), and have access to coffee, juice, and perhaps snacks in your sleeper car. Pay extra for meals.
- Premium sleeper. Everything which budget sleeper includes, plus coupons for breakfast, lunch & dinner in the dining car. Coupons include gratuity, and dinner coupons include one serving of choice of alcoholic beverage. If you object to consuming (and paying for) alcohol, book budget sleeper.
Enter your email address to join: