Long Distance Business Class -- A practical idea?

[Ryan]

(Note: 33 1/3% is correct for breakeven, 25% is too low.)

Thanks for that, I thought that I had screwed up the math somehow.
Given that, you're definitely in the 40%-50% premium price require to make it financially viable. Is that supportable? We'll have to see what ends up happening on the west coast.

 

[Paulus]

(Note: 33 1/3% is correct for breakeven, 25% is too low.)

Thanks for that, I thought that I had screwed up the math somehow.
Given that, you're definitely in the 40%-50% premium price require to make it financially viable. Is that supportable? We'll have to see what ends up happening on the west coast.

Should be supportable, there's a 50% premium on the Surfliner's business class and I'm not aware of any patronage issues there.

 

[PupfosterG]

Most LD trains have a single level baggage car preceding the Superliners. Thinking outside the box, why not a newly designed Superliner baggage car? The lower level, completely empty excepts for utilities. The upper level business class and upper level restroom facilities. This would increase the revenue seating without lengthening the train. The car end closest to the locomotive would have a conventional vestibule and a staircase to upper level. Also access to baggage compartment would be made here also. The opposite end would provide high level access to other cars. However, this would bump transition sleepers to opposite end of the train. What would the additional cost in weight to haul bi-level baggage car vs. single level baggage car? Just a few thoughts.

 

[Bus Nut]

I like Ziv's suggestion. Too bad that Amtrak is moving in the opposite direction of reducing seat pitch. Nothing is written saying tray tables must be attached to the seat in front of you. Replacing 7 rows with 6 is a reduction of less than 15%, and would require a markup of less than 20% to break even. I think it likely that coach passengers would pay more than 20% additional charge for complete reclining. (Although the one time I slept in SL coach I found the reclining adequate. However, I was in my early 20s.) You could have a single coach per train with this service, and it might even keep all the overnighters together more too so when the train stops at 2:47am at the nowheresville Amshack the doors don't open and freeze you awake.

2x1 seating might make sense for shorter trip express service business class. But I think from reading a lot of threads like this that what business class people would really pay a true premium for is a nice table to spread out on. As others have said you'd need to jack the fares 33% for 2x1 and I think there would be more demand for the 1's than the 2's. With all the people that get on and off it seems more like a way to lose revenue. Busy corridor routes are usually under pressure to add more seats, not take them away. You can't make the kind of money per passenger you can on an overnight first class sleeper trip. Forget it.

What Amtrak needs to do is get with the program on using seat reservations for a small upcharge, just as they do on the national railways in Europe. Less angry passengers, less stress for conductors, more revenue. What's not to like? The poorer countries (ex Soviet bloc) use paper reservation tags on board, while the richer countries (Germany) have led signs over each seat showing if they are reserved or not. Portland, OR has a big scramble assigning seats before boarding and while that has its issues it seems to work much better than the chaos at New York Penn.

 

[Nathanael]

(Note: 33 1/3% is correct for breakeven, 25% is too low.)

Thanks for that, I thought that I had screwed up the math somehow.
Given that, you're definitely in the 40%-50% premium price require to make it financially viable. Is that supportable? We'll have to see what ends up happening on the west coast.

Should be supportable, there's a 50% premium on the Surfliner's business class and I'm not aware of any patronage issues there.

The key thing to notice here is that the coach class in Long Distance cars (such as Amfleet IIs) already has seat pitch and upholstery similar to the business class in corridor service (such as Surfliners, Amfleet Is, Horizons). We know people will pay a large premium for longer seat pitch and nicer seats. Will they pay that premium when the only benefit is 2-1 seating vs. 2-2?

I guess my point is that, right now, the long distance trains really only have first class and second class; they don't really have coach class. In contrast, the corridor trains only have third class and second class; they don't have first class. I would actually prefer it if Amfleet Is were listed as "third class seating" and Amfleet IIs as "second class seating"; make it clear what you're getting.

Now, ocean liners had a bewildering number of different classes. It's possible that more classes, more market segmentation, would work. On the other hand, in the UK they used to have as many as four classes of (non-sleeper!) rail travel and it slowly got cut down to two. (There was a long period when, confusingly, the two classes were "first class" and "third class", because they eliminated "second" -- by upgrading the fittings of "third class" to be comparable to those of "second class".) It's not clear that it's worth it to have too many different classes; there are benefits from a large, uniform fleet. Slumbercoaches were dropped due to relateively low demand.

 

[Sldispatcher]

I've thought business class seating: 2 x 1; with airline style food trays served is one piece of the puzzle.

For me though, to really make it work you have to remove Roomettes. Either make the Bedrooms ALL bedrooms (with upgraded amenities) or at least pull the roomettes out and replace with the business class.

personally, I'd prefer a dedicated car between the Sightseer Lounge and the Diner

Coast Starlight is the ideal place to try it.

 

[Amtrak Cajun]

I wish they could do a whole business class car. That would make a good separation between the diner and sleepers. Id also like the business class seats on the upper level *whole car idea*, because the views are better on the upper level vs the lower level. Id be willing to pay for BC if the sleepers are sold out, at least you get something extra other than just coach class.

Just my 5 cents. no refunds.

 

[Guest]

yea, the naming scheme needs to be changed.

how about:

standard coach - corridor coach

comfort coach - long distance coach and corridor BC

business class - 2+1 BC

1st class - 1st Acela

sleeper class - sleepers

 

[Ted Bell]

The key thing to notice here is that the coach class in Long Distance cars (such as Amfleet IIs) already has seat pitch and upholstery similar to the business class in corridor service (such as Surfliners, Amfleet Is, Horizons). We know people will pay a large premium for longer seat pitch and nicer seats. Will they pay that premium when the only benefit is 2-1 seating vs. 2-2?

I would pay that premium just to lie down flat to sleep at night.

 

[KrazyKoala]

yea, the naming scheme needs to be changed.
how about:

standard coach - corridor coach

comfort coach - long distance coach and corridor BC

business class - 2+1 BC

1st class - 1st Acela

sleeper class - sleepers

Honestly, they should have 3, coach, business, 1st.

"sleepers" is the most stupid thing I've heard of. That's not even a class of passenger being that all the passengers on the train sleep. You buy a basic ticket, its coach. You upgrade to the highest possible accommodation, anywhere else in the world, that's called first class. Even when leaving the diner to go back to my room the blue sign on the door says "First Class Passengers Only."

 

[fillyjonk]

The one thing that would have to be added to a long-distance "business" class to make it attractive to me would be some kind of "quiet car" provision, or at least enforcement of the after-10-pm quiet hours (or maybe: have half the car as a quiet car, and half for those who want to talk on cell phones).

My major problem with traveling coach LD (well, beyond having gotten a few odd seatmates) was the noise, and the fact that relatively little seemed to be done to reduce it.

A long distance business class, with a bit more incline to the seats and a "quiet" status would make me definitely think twice about taking the sleeper, if the business class were considerably (like $100 or more round trip) less.

 

[KrazyKoala]

If you wanna talk past 10, you're told to go to the SSL. They need more comfortable seats.

 

[VentureForth]

A long distance business class, with a bit more incline to the seats and a "quiet" status would make me definitely think twice about taking the sleeper, if the business class were considerably (like $100 or more round trip) less.

That could be the fear. Amtrak doesn't want to lose the revenue from sleeper services.

 

[TimePeace]

A case can be made that there is not so much difference between 2x2 and 2x1 seating, with similar pitch. For LD travel, a horizontal position is a profoundly different situation, especially for those of us with sore aching joints (read: out of shape or older, or both - which describes the growing majority of Americans).

I see no need for 3, or 4, or especially 5 "classes" - (Class System, anyone? Or more harshly, "class warfare?")

My opinion: I think Amtrtak would be a better railroad if the choices (priced accordingly) included reclined seating and seating that converts to horizontal for overnight trains. Which physical configurations of cars I'll leave to others. Lots of trains in other countries have the horizonatal option that is not necessarily a private compartment.

Food service should be available to everyone on the train, with varying levels of quality and commensurate pricing. Toss out the concept of first class sleeper accommodations with meals included.

Another 2 cents worth, no change back.

 

[jis]

Food service should be available to everyone on the train, with varying levels of quality and commensurate pricing. Toss out the concept of first class sleeper accommodations with meals included.

Just remember that meal was included in First Class Sleeper price in order to save the Dining Car. It happened when the other alternative was to simply get rid of Dining Cars altogether because not enough people were using the Dining Car anymore. This was a way to increase the revenues for Dining Cars by forcing their use. Food became part of the Accommodation charge for First Class Sleepers, and not for Slumbercoaches. Which of course made the Slumbercoach even more desirable for someone like me, who does not necessarily partake of every meal in the Diner in any case, included in charges or not.

"sleepers" is the most stupid thing I've heard of. That's not even a class of passenger being that all the passengers on the train sleep. You buy a basic ticket, its coach. You upgrade to the highest possible accommodation, anywhere else in the world, that's called first class. Even when leaving the diner to go back to my room the blue sign on the door says "First Class Passengers Only."

Most of the Sleeping Cars in the world are not "First Class". They are various other classes with various names, some including the word Sleeper and other not. But generally the monicker "Sleeping Car" is used quite universally to refer to cars that provide a flat horizontal sleeping surface. The abi=omination known as Lie Flat at an Angle was just an airline invention that has never been used extensively on trains, and thankfully is being discontinued in airlines too.
Just to give you an example of the different sort of Sleeping Cars available in a large very intensely used railroad system.... on the Indian Railways there are six types of Sleeping Cars:

Non A/C Sleeper

Non A/C First Class

A/C 3 Tier Sleeper

A/C 2 Tier Sleeper

A/C First Class

On certain elite trains food service is include in the base fare for those trains for all classes available in the train. On others food is not included. There is no Dining or Restaurant Car Service on any LD trains. LD trains carry one or more Pantry Cars which serve food at each passenger's seat at meal times. Food is served even on those trains that do not carry a Pantry Car using the age old procedure in which order is taken for a meal and called forward to a base station. When the train arrives at the base station all the ordered meals are picked up and served on the train. And all this works surprisingly well considering that a typical LD train has 18 to 24 cars, each car carrying somewhere between 50 and 75 passengers, all "Sleepers" on elite trains. Except for the few (one or two) First Class cars which carry as few as 20 people, all other passenger carrying cars are typically 2 or 3 tier Sleepers designated as such in English and as "Shayanyan" in Hindi, which means "Sleeping Car" or more precisely "Lying Down Car".

Oh, and as far as tickets go, the basic ticket is for each designated class using a class specific tariff. There is no separate basic ticket and accommodation charge thing as practiced in the US.

 

[VentureForth]

On the other hand, there with the exception of the taktal scheme, everyone in the same class pays the same rate for the distance travelled. No peak seasons, no off-peak seasons. One irritating factor (to me as an American, and not that of an Indian) is that if you buy a ticket, and the rates increase, the TTE will collect the difference from you onboard. No such thing as a guaranteed price.

That all being said, I have always thought that IR could improve their revenue by basing the fares/tarrifs more on supply and demand than strictly paise/km. I am completely amazed at how many people are coordinated throughout over 2,000 trains DAILY with minimal mistakes.

And, jis or TE, you can correct me on this: When you get a confirmed seat, you get your seat/berth assigned. But if you are waitlisted you may not even know if you can get on the train until literally mere hours before departure.

 

[jis]

That all being said, I have always thought that IR could improve their revenue by basing the fares/tarrifs more on supply and demand than strictly paise/km. I am completely amazed at how many people are coordinated throughout over 2,000 trains DAILY with minimal mistakes.

The integrity and effectiveness of the vast reservation system is indeed mind boggling.
About fares, one needs to realize that all fare decisions, and indeed other tariff decisions on IR are political in nature. As I have mentioned before, the Railway Budget is paid more attention to than the National Budget by the man on the street, and all hell breaks loose if changes that are not seen to be justifiable by the public are put in place. The whole notion of demand based pricing is going to be so hard to explain to the common folks that no politician in their right mind would attempt that. What they might do at most is create a separate class of elite trains that are run more like an airline. But there is no way that they will significantly perturb how the 99% core of the system operates, for a long time to come. The blood bath that one had to go through to raise fares enough to put IR Passenger Service on sound financial ground is a phenomenon to behold.

And, jis or TE, you can correct me on this: When you get a confirmed seat, you get your seat/berth assigned. But if you are waitlisted you may not even know if you can get on the train until literally mere hours before departure.

Yes, reservation for a confirmed seat or berth means an exact seat or berth identified by a specific number in a specific car identified as a car number in a specific train. And absolutely amazingly it works out almost without fail each time. That is what amazes me more than anything else.
AFAICT, and TE can correct me since he is more familiar with the current ways of IR than I am, IR sells two kinds of unconfirmed tickets. They are RAC (Reservation against Cancellation) and Waitlist. RAC confirms you on the train with a chance of getting the accommodation you wanted, but with a guarantee of at least a seat. Waitlist is like regular waiting list, i.e. if after handling all RACs any space remains then people are cleared from the waiting list in FCFS order. For more details of these facilities take a look at for example: http://www.indiamike.com/india-articles/indian-railways-rac-and-indian-railways-waitlists

 

[TimePeace]

Sorry this quote isn't coming out right. Oh well.

Just remember that meal was included in First Class Sleeper price in order to save the Dining Car. It happened when the other alternative was to simply get rid of Dining Cars altogether because not enough people were using the Dining Car anymore. This was a way to increase the revenues for Dining Cars by forcing their use. Food became part of the Accommodation charge for First Class Sleepers, and not for Slumbercoaches. Which of course made the Slumbercoach even more desirable for someone like me, who does not necessarily partake of every meal in the Diner in any case, included in charges or not.

MaineRider said this:

I was not aware of this. Thanks for bringing that part of Amtrak history to my attention. And if it seems like a good idea to keep some "premium privilege" for those paying for private sleeper accommodations, that is no big deal. But if, as you suggest, there could be a sleeper option available which did not inclue "free" meals, but would still allow anyone to pay for a meal in the dining car when they wanted to, I'd be very happy!

 

[Nathanael]

The key thing to notice here is that the coach class in Long Distance cars (such as Amfleet IIs) already has seat pitch and upholstery similar to the business class in corridor service (such as Surfliners, Amfleet Is, Horizons). We know people will pay a large premium for longer seat pitch and nicer seats. Will they pay that premium when the only benefit is 2-1 seating vs. 2-2?

I would pay that premium just to lie down flat to sleep at night.

That would be the roomette premium. In order to genuinely lie flat, rather than at an angle, you have to take up as much space as a roomette. Sooooo....

 

[jis]

The key thing to notice here is that the coach class in Long Distance cars (such as Amfleet IIs) already has seat pitch and upholstery similar to the business class in corridor service (such as Surfliners, Amfleet Is, Horizons). We know people will pay a large premium for longer seat pitch and nicer seats. Will they pay that premium when the only benefit is 2-1 seating vs. 2-2?

I would pay that premium just to lie down flat to sleep at night.

That would be the roomette premium. In order to genuinely lie flat, rather than at an angle, you have to take up as much space as a roomette. Sooooo....

Strictly speaking a roomette premium is a premium for two passengers. There is still room for a lie flat premium for a single person and accommodation suitable for such use. A single lie flat accommodation should cost less than a roomette even if the total number of such accommodation is equal to the total theoretical maximum, i.e. number of berths in a roomette equipped sleeping car.

In other countries the notion of a couchette or that of sections with cubiucles is used to achieve a single berth availability for sale without requiring premium payment for two berths. However, as has been discussed repeatedly, Americans (i.e in the US) south of the Canadian border are inherently inimical to that concept. So some other arrangement is necessary to achieve that.

 

[VentureForth]

The one thing that I wish India Rail offered that isn't (with a technical exception) is a private accomodation. There is the couple coupe in 1AC, but it can't be booked and it's at the discretion of the seat assignment personnell.

I believe there should be the following classes of service:

Coach

Business

Sectional

Premium Sleeper

First

Not all classes would be available on all services. But it would be divided as such:

No additional ameneties:

Coach

Business

Sectional

Includes meals and showers (where applicable):

Premium Sleeper

First

Coach can offer unreserved and unassigned reserved seating. All others would be reserved and assigned.

But that's in my little brain...

 

[Guest]

In other countries the notion of a couchette or that of sections with cubiucles is used to achieve a single berth availability for sale without requiring premium payment for two berths. However, as has been discussed repeatedly, Americans (i.e in the US) south of the Canadian border are inherently inimical to that concept. So some other arrangement is necessary to achieve that.

Has any market research been done on this? I mean we have people who are accustomed to a private bedroom on here that won't go down to a couchette, but the market for a couchette is really coach passengers who want to lie flat but won't/can't pay the upcharge for a current sleeper. I am one of these coach people wanting couchettes, but a lot of times I just fly instead because not sleeping at night in coach sucks.

 

[tricia]

Speaking for myself, the 2-1 configuration would make a huge difference. I'm just not willing, when traveling alone, to sleep overnight right next to a stranger. I'd definitely be willing to pay a premium to be guaranteed a seat to myself, separated from other passengers by an aisle.

 

[KrazyKoala]

You have to think of the whole picture though. 1+2*4 is WAY much better than 2+2*18. The overall fact so it will, hopefully, be way much quieter.

 

[VentureForth]

...Except that by that math, it will probably be harder for 12 occupants to make up the same revenue as 72 passengers. You'd have to charge 6x to break even.