Agreed, I've seen that a lot.I think that it sometimes takes awhile for a person in Mr. Flynn's position to learn who is giving him the "straight scoop" and who is providing a view more in line with that individual's agenda.
The demand destruction is real: every railfan group I've been in has people coming and saying "Has Amtrak stopped service betweeen Chicago and NY? Has Amtrak stopped service between Chicago and Denver? " etc. because they tried to book and found no trains on the day they picked.
Those who don't bother to join a railfan group will simply leave assuming there is no train service, and that's the end, they won't travel again. Customer lost for years or possibly forever. I'm seeing several per week in every railfan group -- how many customers are being bled out by this idiotic three-a-week nonsense?
It's pretty clear it's going to be more dollars lost than the "cost savings" (which have been documented to verge on the nonexistent). It doesn't take a rocket scientist to calculate what the effect is going to be.
I'm a reasonable person. Vermont decided to completely suspend the trains in Vermont. This actually *does* save money (which the three-a-week nonsense does not). It is also clear and comprehensible. When they restart service, they will make a big "we're back" announcement, and riders will come back. In fact, if Amtrak had done that nationally, I wouldn't like it, but I'd accept it.
But three-a-week is garbage. It drives away even customers who *can* plan their schedules around the three-a-week schedule, because they *expect* a daily train and when they don't find a train on the first day they pick, they assume there's no train at all. And Amtrak has not publicized the schedule.
These trains are going to run empty because only those "in the know" will even realize that they're running. This is sabotage by Amtrak management (probably Gardner).