Does adding sleepers increase profitability?

[jcl653]

As many of us are well aware, it's common for sleepers to sell out in the summer. This got me thinking: If Amtrak were to have a reserve of spare sleepers, would strategically adding them to routes during periods of high demand increase the routes profitability?

I'm just guessing here, but it seems to me that adding a car to an existing train would be relatively inexpensive compared to the fixed cost of running the train in the first place.

Anybody care to enlighten me?

 

[GaSteve]

As many of us are well aware, it's common for sleepers to sell out in the summer. This got me thinking: If Amtrak were to have a reserve of spare sleepers, would strategically adding them to routes during periods of high demand increase the routes profitability?
I'm just guessing here, but it seems to me that adding a car to an existing train would be relatively inexpensive compared to the fixed cost of running the train in the first place.

Anybody care to enlighten me?

The incremental cost of a sleeper, or a coach for that matter, would be well below the incremental revenue generated, assuming the car a relatively full. The constraint right now is sheer lack of equipment. The stimulus rehabs will help some, but more cars are needed.

 

[AlanB]

If one is adding just one sleeper, the revenue would indeed increase profitability provided that you can sell out at least 3/4ths of the car. However on some trains, adding more than one sleeper might not increase profitability if you didn't sell out the added sleepers totally. This is because on some routes adding more than 1 more sleeper would require adding another dining car to serve all the people.

 

[had8ley]

If one is adding just one sleeper, the revenue would indeed increase profitability provided that you can sell out at least 3/4ths of the car. However on some trains, adding more than one sleeper might not increase profitability if you didn't sell out the added sleepers totally. This is because on some routes adding more than 1 more sleeper would require adding another dining car to serve all the people.

Alan;

Would it not be feasible to position a manned CCC next to the coaches so that the diner does not get swamped? Most coach travelers balk at the high diner prices and would actually settle for a hamburger or a pizza. The CCC would take the pressure off of a full diner and give pax more time to relax while eating.

 

[Cho Cho Charlie]

Would it not be feasible to position a manned CCC next to the coaches so that the diner does not get swamped? Most coach travelers balk at the high diner prices and would actually settle for a hamburger or a pizza. The CCC would take the pressure off of a full diner and give pax more time to relax while eating.

At from my experience, the dining car on the Silvers is kept nearly full just by the sleeper passengers.

 

[haolerider]

If one is adding just one sleeper, the revenue would indeed increase profitability provided that you can sell out at least 3/4ths of the car. However on some trains, adding more than one sleeper might not increase profitability if you didn't sell out the added sleepers totally. This is because on some routes adding more than 1 more sleeper would require adding another dining car to serve all the people.

Alan is absolutely correct on his comment regarding adding an extra sleeper. The issue is always, can you sell enough space to make it make sense. Just because the sleepers are sold out on a route is not a guarantee that adding one more piece of equipment is going to add sufficient revenue to make it profitable. The same holds true for coaches, since adding a one coach to a consist may take it over the limit of what one coach attendant can cover - thus making it necessary to add another coach attendant - and you still don't have the guarantee that you will fill the coach. It is not as easy as some seem to think.

 

[jcl653]

I had not thought of the fact that adding a sleeper could result in a nearly empty car. Regardless, Amtrak should have the capacity to add a sleeper/diner when the extra capacity is justified. They should not be limited by equipment. It's time for our nation to stop nickel and diming Amtrak. Stuff like this ends up costing us more in the long run.

 

[GaSteve]

I had not thought of the fact that adding a sleeper could result in a nearly empty car. Regardless, Amtrak should have the capacity to add a sleeper/diner when the extra capacity is justified. They should not be limited by equipment. It's time for our nation to stop nickel and diming Amtrak. Stuff like this ends up costing us more in the long run.

Many of us have been saying that same thing for over 30 years. Do you belong to a rail passenger advocacy group? Have you ever told that to your congressional delegation? If so, welcome to the fold. If not, just do it.

 

[had8ley]

If one is adding just one sleeper, the revenue would indeed increase profitability provided that you can sell out at least 3/4ths of the car. However on some trains, adding more than one sleeper might not increase profitability if you didn't sell out the added sleepers totally. This is because on some routes adding more than 1 more sleeper would require adding another dining car to serve all the people.

Alan is absolutely correct on his comment regarding adding an extra sleeper. The issue is always, can you sell enough space to make it make sense. Just because the sleepers are sold out on a route is not a guarantee that adding one more piece of equipment is going to add sufficient revenue to make it profitable. The same holds true for coaches, since adding a one coach to a consist may take it over the limit of what one coach attendant can cover - thus making it necessary to add another coach attendant - and you still don't have the guarantee that you will fill the coach. It is not as easy as some seem to think.

What we don't see is the number of pax who call reservations looking for a sleeper room only to be told "sold out." Then, and only then, can numbers be put to adding or keeping the same sleeper space. It's not a guessing game but can be predicted by analytical analysis. IF there is left over space put it up for last minute sale at 25% off; you might not show a profit in the room but the pax may buy a cocktail or two and some souvenirs that are high profit items. Good golly, it took over a year for the weekly specials to re-appear; does anybody at Amtrak intend to crunch the numbers now that we might have some extra equipment coming back on track?

 

[volkris]

I thought I remembered someone here saying that even sleepers aren't sold at a profit. I think it was during a discussion about changing the amenities offered, creating a second class sleeper option.

In the end, if sleepers are being sold out left and right then the prices for sleepers need to be increased right away. If sleepers really are so profitable that adding sleeper capacity would bring in significantly more profit, then Amtrak should be borrowing against future profits to increase capacity without holding out a hand to those "nickel and diming" taxpayers.

 

[Cho Cho Charlie]

Would adding more cars, ever cause a platform length problem at some smaller stations? I mean, adding more sleepers (back to the sleepers first consist), would "push" the coaches even further back.

Another issue that comes to mind, is full occupancy for the entire route. Adding another sleeper might end up having the more sleeper partially empty for either the beginning of the route, or the ending of the route. I am thinking of a Silver before WAS and after ORL.

 

[leemell]

Would adding more cars, ever cause a platform length problem at some smaller stations? I mean, adding more sleepers (back to the sleepers first consist), would "push" the coaches even further back.
Another issue that comes to mind, is full occupancy for the entire route. Adding another sleeper might end up having the more sleeper partially empty for either the beginning of the route, or the ending of the route. I am thinking of a Silver before WAS and after ORL.

It already does on the CS. When they add a fourth coach in the summer, they have to double spot the train at the Van Nuys station and I'm sure at many more.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Does adding sleepers increase profitability?

Possibly. How about changing their anti-railfan attitudes and catering to us instead of running us off the tracks at major stations? That might help convince me to spend more money with Amtrak. Instead they act like they're doing us a favor herding us into tired old waiting rooms away from the action where we stare at posters that glorify trains we're not even allowed to see until the pre-approved boarding window. Then again, wouldn't Amtrak have to post an actual profit before it could increase its profitability? Have they ever posted a profit in their entire existence?

 

[Guest]

Does adding sleepers increase profitability?

Possibly. How about changing their anti-railfan attitudes and catering to us instead of running us off the tracks at major stations? That might help convince me to spend more money with Amtrak. Instead they act like they're doing us a favor herding us into tired old waiting rooms away from the action where we stare at posters that glorify trains we're not even allowed to see until the pre-approved boarding window. Then again, wouldn't Amtrak have to post an actual profit before it could increase its profitability? Have they ever posted a profit in their entire existence?

Where on earth do people get the idea of "a profit" when it comes to any transportation system, let alone Amtrak! Thousands of posters have explained over and over that NO transportation system in the world makes a profit, it's impossible! :blink: And Cruise lines are not transportation systems, they are vaction palaces for those that afford it, and even they use accounting tricks, foriegn labor, flags of convience etc. to avoid paying their fair share of expenses! (the passengers even pay the "port charges"!) Please realize that ALL transportation is subsidized by the tax payers, always will be!

 

[AAARGH!]

Possibly. How about changing their anti-railfan attitudes and catering to us instead of running us off the tracks at major stations? That might help convince me to spend more money with Amtrak. Instead they act like they're doing us a favor herding us into tired old waiting rooms away from the action where we stare at posters that glorify trains we're not even allowed to see until the pre-approved boarding window. Then again, wouldn't Amtrak have to post an actual profit before it could increase its profitability? Have they ever posted a profit in their entire existence?

Huh? What are you talking about?

Tired old waiting rooms.... How about the 4 Club Acela's and the Metropolitan lounge in CHI? Are you complaining about these? If you are refering to the Magnolia Room in NOL, it is in poor shape, but still nice to get into a quiet space.

What you prescribe, opening up the platforms anytime, is IMHO dangerous for certain stations with narrow platforms / heavy congestion and can create security concerns. I am frankly surprised that the LAX platforms are always open.

Besides, what does that have to do with Amtrak's profitibilty and adding sleepers?

Also, why should Amtrak cater to rail fans? It would be nice, but how is it in their intrest to cater to such a small group. We don't provide nearly enough revenue to justify special treatment. I don't see it as anti-railfanning, just pro-doing-what-makes-sense for everyone.

 

[Guest]

The math: Superliner sleepers can hold, at max., 30 fare-paying passengers. Superliner coaches can hold (depending on seating arrangement) up to 86. At full price on the sleepers, they are about as "profitable" as the coaches, and due to much, much more in the way of plumbing/HVAC/electrical that needs to be regularly maintained and/or repaired, the sleepers are more expensive for Amtrak. A simplified sleeper design (like the Talgos that are used extensively in Europe) would be much more likely to see a better bottom line.

 

[AlanB]

Another issue that comes to mind, is full occupancy for the entire route. Adding another sleeper might end up having the more sleeper partially empty for either the beginning of the route, or the ending of the route. I am thinking of a Silver before WAS and after ORL.

Charlie,

A good point and it actually needs to be taken even further. Everyone always thinks about the sold out train that needs an extra sleeper. Most however forget that once you send out that "extra" sleeper, you need to get it back to its original location. So for example on a Silver Service train in the spring, Amtrak might well be able to add 2, 3, or even more extra sleepers northbound to NY, Philly, & DC for the Snow Birds on many trains.

But those sleepers, and the extra crew members, still have to come back south sooner or later. And the odds are good that going southbound that Amtrak won't be able to sell out those sleepers. So if Amtrak isn't making enough profit off those sleepers going northbound to cover the return expenses, then one has to question the wisdom of adding extra sleepers.

 

[AlanB]

The math: Superliner sleepers can hold, at max., 30 fare-paying passengers. Superliner coaches can hold (depending on seating arrangement) up to 86. At full price on the sleepers, they are about as "profitable" as the coaches, and due to much, much more in the way of plumbing/HVAC/electrical that needs to be regularly maintained and/or repaired, the sleepers are more expensive for Amtrak. A simplified sleeper design (like the Talgos that are used extensively in Europe) would be much more likely to see a better bottom line.

No, a maxed out Superliner Sleeper carries 44 passengers, not 30. Granted Amtrak isn't always able to sell every room to capacity, but 30 is not the max. And a Superliner coach holds 75 max, assuming an all seat arrangement.

As for revenues, not true at all. The sleepers will almost always tend to generate more revenue.

While I will admit that I had to make some assumptions, things like: actual bucket prices (I only had the high and low numbers, and estimated the middle numbers), I spread the seats/rooms evenly across the buckets (something that Amtrak doesn't do), and I guessed that a full sleeper would actually carry 38 people to make an allowance for some single occupied rooms.

With those rules established, a full coach would generate $16,308 and full sleeper would generate $18,811 in revenue.

 

[3rd cook]

The math: Superliner sleepers can hold, at max., 30 fare-paying passengers. Superliner coaches can hold (depending on seating arrangement) up to 86. At full price on the sleepers, they are about as "profitable" as the coaches, and due to much, much more in the way of plumbing/HVAC/electrical that needs to be regularly maintained and/or repaired, the sleepers are more expensive for Amtrak. A simplified sleeper design (like the Talgos that are used extensively in Europe) would be much more likely to see a better bottom line.

1/ Superliner sleepers hold considerably more than 30 pax .

2/Even if that was true , all sleeper pax are already paying a coach fare as well as sleeper fees . so at least double your figure .

3/ Sleeper passengers tend to take longer trips , thus adding more revenue miles than coach passengers

4/ Amtrak is turning away high revenue passengers by not having more capacity.

5/ I would prefer to see Amtrak add a second daily train in some of these most popular routes .

6/ None of this is possible unless they receive the funding for equiptment

 

[sunchaser]

Also, Amtrak sometimes allow more than 2 in a roomette or bedroom, depending on the size of the passengers. So that would mean another coach ticket for a child or adult in that roomette or bedroom. Sometimes they will do the same with the family bedroom.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Where on earth do people get the idea of "a profit" when it comes to any transportation system, let alone Amtrak!

Um, the thread title. Did you happen to notice it on the way in? ;-)

Personally, I don't expect Amtrak to turn a profit anymore than I expect I-10 to turn a profit. But, this is America and the prevailing "wisdom" among her citizens is that trains need to either be profitable or abandoned. Don't get me wrong, I've communicated my support to my senators and my congressman, but from what I can tell most Americans don't use Amtrak and don't see any reason to keep it alive. And, honestly, I don't think Amtrak cares to improve much beyond what it already has either. When I heard Obama was big into "high-speed trains" I thought we were going to see a huge upgrade to our ancient system, but instead we got some shoe polish and a stack of cute logos to stick on our current trains.

Tired old waiting rooms.... How about the 4 Club Acela's and the Metropolitan lounge in CHI? Are you complaining about these? If you are refering to the Magnolia Room in NOL, it is in poor shape, but still nice to get into a quiet space...Also, why should Amtrak cater to rail fans? It would be nice, but how is it in their intrest to cater to such a small group. We don't provide nearly enough revenue to justify special treatment. I don't see it as anti-railfanning, just pro-doing-what-makes-sense for everyone.

At my recent visit to Union Station last week in Chicago there was no access to the trains unless and until you were given the boarding call for your specific train. In the mean time you could sit in an overcrowded generic waiting room that would be at home in a doctor's office. Just waiting among a mass of passengers bored out of their minds with no access to or visibility of any of the action occurring all around us. So I avoided the areas that were clearly marked with the no trespassing signs and went through some auto-opening doors to take a look at other tracks. No good, I still got the same old ***** welcome of "What are you doing here?!" and "You'd better delete whatever pictures you took!" before the inevitable brain fart of "Nine-Eleven! Nine-Eleven! Nine-Eleven!" I've seen similar setups at other large stations as well. Amtrak needs to realize that railfans may not mean much on our own but we're the folks who remind the non-fans that passenger rail travel even exists. In June I've been responsible for seven Amtruck trips that never would have occurred without my continued enthusiasm for passenger rail. There may be more to come if Amtrak can get their act together. They can choose to push the fans away but then they're just left with their own non-existent media campaign, which I've never once seen outside of a station or depot in all my life. But hey, maybe what they already have is all they care to handle.

What you prescribe, opening up the platforms anytime, is IMHO dangerous for certain stations with narrow platforms / heavy congestion and can create security concerns. I am frankly surprised that the LAX platforms are always open.

So are you truly surprised that the LAX platforms are open or are you simply surprised that people aren't constantly getting run over or blowing up the station? If Amtrak is going to give us a tired old 1970's train ride the least they can do is give us an unfettered 1970's train spotting experience to go along with it. Instead they take ancient transportation technology and new hyper-inflated security and combine them to make the worst railroading experience possible. True, there are some pockets of advancement in a handful of blue states thousands of miles away from me, but the simple truth is that most of the Amtrak system is a tired old joke. I want it to succeed and become something we can all be proud of, but nothing I've seen here or elsewhere gives me much hope of that ever happening. Meanwhile I watch as more forward thinking countries like China (say what?!) pledge and fund updates for their trains to use the latest and greatest technology and performance while we just sit and mumble about what might have been.

 

[Cristobal]

I guess that I must be spoiled having the Capitol Corridor practically at my doorstep but I've never experienced any of what you are going on about and I've visited almost every station along the line (as well as some limited LD travel). The closest that I've encountered was at PDX a few weeks ago when I stepped off the CS to go inside the station to have a look around. When I decided that it was time to get back on board I was asked to see a ticket stub as I was leaving the station. Oh, the horrors!!!

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I've never experienced any of what you are going on about and I've visited almost every station along the line (as well as some limited LD travel).

So are you saying it didn't happen the way I described it? You want video and audio next time? I'd love to provide some except that after "Nine-Eleven!" the mindless Amtrak drones might go nuts if they caught me willfully videotaping their trains inside a large station, especially if I continued to tape as they kicked me out. But hey, if you didn't experience it then it must never have happened to anyone else. First time I received the Amtrak "Get away from the tracks!" welcome was probably Washington D.C., Chicago's Union Station was just a repeat of the same attitude. It doesn't seem that rare at large stations, at least from my limited (but growing) perspective. I've even gotten that kind of attitude from SAS of all places, but that might have been due to the fact that I was showing interest in Amtrak's controversial freight car traffic. I was just a beginner then, not aware of all the games Amtrak plays and not expecting to get a mouthful of trash talk just for having a curious interest in trains.

 

[Larry H.]

This is an old gripe of mine also. However it would seem that it isn't as hard to figure out when a consist might need added equipment. If we are trying to make reservations for rooms four months out and none are available, then would would assume that another car is called for.

As mentioned previously the reservations that are turned down don't seem to be tabulated in any way that is made known to us? That should also be showing the need if equipment were available. I am always amazed at how the basic operation of a passenger rail which used to be commonly done is now thought of as a problem. If a train sells out and needs additional cars, and your mostly selling round trips tickets, then obviously the same space would be needed for the return. I have personally never taken a rail vacation or trip from which I have failed to return?

If extra cars were available and were in regular use then attendants sufficient to staff them should be also required even if only as "extras" which I believe is still common practice with rail jobs? I see no reason to think that added cars which are full of paying passengers should be the responsibility of the existing crew base. Pullman ran with pullman staff and cars were added at peak times, something that should have always been maintained but hasn't due to constraints placed on amtrak by politicians. And yes, I have written endless thoughts on this to congress people, some of whom agree and some of whom do not.

 

[Cristobal]

I've never experienced any of what you are going on about and I've visited almost every station along the line (as well as some limited LD travel).

So are you saying it didn't happen the way I described it? You want video and audio next time? I'd love to provide some except blah... blah... blah...

Dude...

Re-read my first sentence. I was talking specifically about my experiences with Amtrak and (mostly) the CC line. I've had nothing but enjoyable experiences with Amtrak. You obviously have not. That is all.