Tracking FY 2024 Ridership and Finances

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
So, "break even" was always a tangled concept.
Tangled indeed. Doesn't Amtrak calculate break even using "above the rail costs", which means that the NEC is not charged (in break-even analysis) for anything to do with the track? Yet, LD route economics do get an accounting charge for the fee paid to the host railroad for use of the track.

If my understanding is correct, this is clearly tilting the scales in favor of the NEC when it comes to financial reporting.
 
Tangled indeed. Doesn't Amtrak calculate break even using "above the rail costs", which means that the NEC is not charged (in break-even analysis) for anything to do with the track? Yet, LD route economics do get an accounting charge for the fee paid to the host railroad for use of the track.

If my understanding is correct, this is clearly tilting the scales in favor of the NEC when it comes to financial reporting.
If Amtrak is following the rules set by the Northeast Corridor Commission then Amtrak Infra is supposed to levy a trackage charge on the Amtrak NEC Operations BU. Whether they do so or not and whether Amtrak accounts for that in its NEC operations P&L account, I have not verified.
 
Reading the analysis in this thread has been very useful as I'm trying to better understand the route-level financial results that are on the last page of each monthly report.

One question: It seems that operating revenue includes state subsidies to Amtrak, as operating revenue is much higher than gross ticket revenue for the State Supported routes but roughly equal to gross ticket revenue for NEC and LD routes. But, in the case of the Empire Service, operating revenue is substantially lower than gross ticket revenue*. What might explain this?

*In December, the Empire Service gross ticket revenue was $7.1 million and operating expenses were $7.2 million, but operating revenue was only $5.8 million. Comparing gross ticket revenue to operating expenses shows the route near breakeven, while comparing operating revenue to operating expenses shows 80% cost recovery.
 
The New York funding is allocated across Empire West/Maple Leaf, Empire South, Ethan Allen Express, and Adirondack. The way that gets accounted for in the reports astonishes me.
If you go back to the early 2000s, this has always been a mess. Ridership-wise, NYP-ALB rides are dumped to that route, with VT, Adirondack, and Upstate/Maple Leaf rides past ALB going to the respective trains. In the early 2000s it depended on which train you were on.
 
Ridership-wise, NYP-ALB rides are dumped to that route, with VT, Adirondack, and Upstate/Maple Leaf rides past ALB going to the respective trains.
Thank you; the accounting makes more sense to me now. If someone takes the Ethan Allen from NYP to ALB, the gross ticket revenue and ridership both get assigned to "Empire Service," but the operating revenue gets assigned to "Ethan Allen." Is that accurate?
 
Last edited:
Amtrak ridership would have really increased from 2022 except for the problem of LOSSAN shut downs. Amtrak lost ~~ 4 million LOSSAN trips compared 2019 to 2023. State supported only increased by 1.1M rides to 16.5 million rides. FY rides were 32.5 M in 2019 vs only FY 2023 of 28.6 M. So, if LOSSAN had just been same in 2023 as it was 2019 total Amtrak ridership would have equaled its highest FY. Unless Amtrak can get capacity going, this FY 2024 may even be less than 2023.

The problems of LOSSAN, winter cancellations due to lack of locos, Acela-1s slowly dying on the vine for parts
 
Back
Top