That's true. But theoretically a company could do a service with similar amenities but with long-distance trains. However I will say it would be a lot harder to match Brightline's strategy with long distance.
Private operation of long distance trains?
- Thread starter TheCrescent
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
joelkfla
Engineer
It's Miami to Orlando. The WPB-Orlando segment is under construction, scheduled to open next year.
Ryan
Court Jester
Don't even bother talking about Brightline until they're fully up and running for a few years. First of all, they haven't even started service to Orlando. Secondly, yeah, they're giving good service now to attract customers. Once they have a customer base and then they have a few quarters with lower than expected traffic, and then they realize, like the airlines, that they can make more money by cutting service standards, they'll do just that.
toddinde
OBS Chief
Great point. We know that the privatization of the infrastructure, Railtrack, failed. So yes, it was the Torries under Thatcher and Major that starved BR from investment, then when the scheme to privatize left the system in a mess, the government took it back over and rebuilt the infrastructure.
Absolutely! Brightline shut down entirely during the pandemic. They haven’t even operated long enough to know if they’ll be successful. I wish them well, but it’s far to early to determine whether that model will work.
west point
Engineer
We have no idea if Amtrak's LD trains could come close o break even. The PRIIA studies are deleted and I unfortunately did not have enough storage to save them when they were still available. The studies showed that for each additional coach added approximately $700,000 a year would be added to bottom line over expenses. That was for the 3 Silver services, Crescent to ATL, and LSL.
That will come much closer to above rail cost but not meet them if say 3 - 5 more coaches added to each of the above. Do not recall what additional sleepers would do
That will come much closer to above rail cost but not meet them if say 3 - 5 more coaches added to each of the above. Do not recall what additional sleepers would do
I do, and they don't.
joelkfla
Engineer
Then why would say that they don't qualify as intercity and "wish them well" between MIA & WPB when you know they will be running intercity in about a year?
I never said they don't qualify as "intercity." I said MIA-WPB is not long distance. I don't think MIA-ORL is either.
Just so I understand your point, you consider MIA-ORL, which is about 250 miles and is supposed to take what, 2-3 hours (and maybe eventually another 80 miles and an hour to get to TPA) to be "long distance"?
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
I think all of that would be characterized as "intra-state corridor", but inter-city. Specially with planned daily frequency of 8-12 runs, it would not resemble any LD anything.
Neroden would disagree with you, especially if you use the "avoidable cost" metric as opposed to loading up the cost column with all sorts of unverifiable overhead chearges.
Um, the NEC service, with all its old stations, creaking infrastructure, old rolling stock and so forth competes very well with airlines, and is a much better way to travel than bus or car. The only improvement over NEC service that I can see from peoples' description of Brightline operations is that the trains are newer. You really don't need much in the way of service on a 2-4 hour trip, just a comfortable seat and a conductor that comes by to scan your tickets quickly and who is ready and available to help in case of emergencies.
joelkfla
Engineer
No, I consider MIA-ORL intercity, which is the way Brightline has characterized their service. Not LD, but similar to NEC. Sorry I misread your post that way.
joelkfla
Engineer
- Seats are selectable when booking for both classes of service.
- Spacious, comfortable, and well-equipped waiting lounges for all passengers at all stations (so far).
- Self service snacks and drinks in Premium Class lounges, including beer & wine at no charge (more than just chips).
- At seat snack & drink service on the train, which is included for Premium Class, available for purchase for Smart Class.
- Generally cheerful staff, who apparently are required to wave goodbye from the platform.
- Coordinated pre-booked first- & last-mile transportation within 5 miles of the station. I think it's still complimentary, but they've said they will start charging for it at some point.
And, as the NEC shows, you really don't need all that stuff to be competitive for corridor travel. Remember, we're talking a 2-4 hour trip at the most.
1. Not everybody likes the idea of assigned seating. I'm of mixed opinion about it myself.
2. Partly true, (a lot of Amtrak stations are pretty spacious - 30th St. in Philly comes to mind) but then, as lot of people on heavily traveled short-distance corridors show up shortly before departure and don't wait around in the station. But, again, the NEC is very competitive even if the seating in their stations isn't as nice. I hope as more of the NEC stations get remodeled (hello, Baltimore), they'll follow the lead of Moynihan Train Hall and put in seats with padded benches.
3. Free wine and beer for Premium class, that's like eating your profits. Aside from increasing the chance of hassles from drunken behavior. And all this nonsense about free food. It just adds to costs, and once management figures out it's not necessary to attract passengers, it will be gone with the wind. Anyway, most riders aren't going to be riding Premium class.
4. Come on, most people are taking 2-3 hour trips. When I ride Acela First class, half the people on board don't bother to take advantage of the free food. Most passengers in coach do quite well providing themselves with food purchased at the station. Most of the cafe car business is alcohol and snacks. Again, the main point of the service is to transport people, not feed them. Unlike long-distance trains, it's a very short time before the trip is over and one is in the station where food is available.
5. Actually, NEC staff are generally cheerful, too, but then, you really don't have to interact with them too much.
6. I live 8 miles from my station with pretty flaky public transportation options. I have no problems with arranging rides with Lyft/Uber (or my wife) for both first-mile and last-mile transportation, and I don't see any advantage to having that stuff "coordinated" (whatever that means) and pre-booked with Amtrak. Not only is there Lyft/Uber, there is also a line of taxicabs waiting right in front of the station. No coordination is needed -- just walk to the taxi line, wait your turn, and get in the next cab. I mean, why is Brightline even bothering with this?
Like I said, we'll see how many of these bells and whistles last once the business stabilizes and management realizes they don't need them to attract paying customers.
west point
Engineer
That is the whole metric in a nutshell. Amtrak and Brightline will need to see what is needed to attract passengers. As well Brightline, Amtrak if it ever makes its trains long enough to need to attract new passengers.
Last edited by a moderator:
joelkfla
Engineer
You said you didn't see how Brightline provided better service than Amtrak, so I listed the ways I could think of. Even if you and 50% of the riders don't take advantage of them all, there's the other 50% who do. And IMHO it's all about appearances. Brightline wants to present itself as a pleasurable and relaxing experience in contrast to driving, which may in fact be less expensive in many cases.
1) You really don't see a benefit in avoiding the mad rush for "good" seats at NYP? Admittedly with Brightline's current passenger load that's not really an issue down here, but I like knowing I'll have a forward-facing seat, and a single seat if I'm traveling Premium.
3) I'm sure the costs are built into the Premium fare. I haven't been on since the pandemic shutdown, but I've seen reports that the lounge now uses an automated tap which restricts riders to 1 or 2 alcoholic beverages. Fans coming from sports venues are the bigger drunkenness problem.
4) Not everyone will want a bag of chips or candy bar on the train, but most will appreciate a soda or coffee delivered to their seat.
6) I think studies have identified first- & last-mile transport concerns as a common reason for avoiding train travel. Taxi ranks are not common in the south except at airports, and Uber/Lyft are not always reliable and can get expensive at peak times. Having end-to-end transportation all booked at once, coordinated to get you to the station on time and meet you when the train arrives, seems like a good idea to me. As to why Brightline is doing it, again it's all about attracting riders.
I think "avoidable cost" accounting can be used as a guide to reducing some of the losses attributed to long-distance trains, but I'm not sure whether it can be used to argue that long-distance trains are actually profitable. The fixed costs of the overall system have to be deducted from revenues somewhere, Otherwise you'll have a hard time explaining why a corporation that only runs "profitable" trains still requires a subsidy.
Ryan
Court Jester
That's sort of a binary "do we want Amtrak or do we not" argument.
If you wanted to cut every LD train, the fixed costs of the overall system would remain unchanged by definition.
So you've just increased the amount of subsidy required to run a lower level of service. Congrats, everyone loses.
The best cure for what ails Amtrak is more Amtrak.. Get more trains out there that cover their avoidable costs and the overall subsidy required to cover those fixed costs go down. Everyone wins.
If you wanted to cut every LD train, the fixed costs of the overall system would remain unchanged by definition.
So you've just increased the amount of subsidy required to run a lower level of service. Congrats, everyone loses.
The best cure for what ails Amtrak is more Amtrak.. Get more trains out there that cover their avoidable costs and the overall subsidy required to cover those fixed costs go down. Everyone wins.
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
The folly lies in first rolling up a bunch of costs that for whatever reason Amtrak is unable to assign individually to trains and then try to allocate them using some goofy algorithm to determine something that is made to smell like marginal account but actually is not. This idiocy is what Volpe invented causing no end of trouble.
lrh442
.
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2018
- Messages
- 106
Folly, indeed. Allocation of fixed costs only makes sense in the context of long-range decisions of a for-profit entity. Amtrak is (now) explicitly not a for-profit operation and will always require subsidy. Per Congress the goal is no longer to reduce subsidy. Endless talk about allocated fixed costs, and attempts to make them favor one train or region over another (I'm looking at you, Amtrak mgt.), are not aligned with the entity's new charter.
Exactly.
If the LD trains were truly "profitable," get rid of Amtrak, transfer Amtrak's rights of freight RR track access to a private operator (and surely there would be quite a few companies willing to do it since it is so profitable), let that operator make a ton of money, and let the Amtraktrains.com posters who believe the hype invest in that company and get rich.
cirdan
Engineer
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Messages
- 3,655
I dislike it too.
But I understand that in the interests of optimizing operations and optimally filling seats, it is a necessity.
