Why is Coach so expensive?

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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Message to some of you. Not everyone is rich. Not everyone has a Mercedes. And not everyone even has a house. For some people the cost of Amtrak is expensive, especially when you consider all the time involved where the person can't work and can't get paid. America is quickly turning into the land of the haves and have nots. I'm sorry Amtrak is following the same model.
Amtrak is not meant to be bargain basement travel, especially for an extremely lengthy and convoluted trip. Given that round trip flights can be had for $192 for this trip while taking only 6 hours (including layover), it would be absolutely insane to try and pretend that Amtrak ought to be cheaper.
 
Message to some of you. Not everyone is rich. Not everyone has a Mercedes. And not everyone even has a house. For some people the cost of Amtrak is expensive, especially when you consider all the time involved where the person can't work and can't get paid. America is quickly turning into the land of the haves and have nots. I'm sorry Amtrak is following the same model.
^ Just to be clear, the entry I'm quoting above was NOT written or posted by me. I'm not sure if I should be flattered or insulted by the presence of a doppelganger. Anybody else ever have this happen? Seems to be a first for me. Or at least I hope it's the first time.
 
Los Angeles to Chicago on the Southwest Chief, about 43 hours, is only $212 tomorrow for coach one way. Looking at fares a few months out I see it at $169 one way. So I can see how a trip two thirds that distance costing more might be questioned a bit.

I get $193 one way a few months out for KCY to NOL.

Dan
 
Message to some of you. Not everyone is rich. Not everyone has a Mercedes. And not everyone even has a house. For some people the cost of Amtrak is expensive, especially when you consider all the time involved where the person can't work and can't get paid. America is quickly turning into the land of the haves and have nots. I'm sorry Amtrak is following the same model.
^ Just to be clear, the entry I'm quoting above was NOT written or posted by me. I'm not sure if I should be flattered or insulted by the presence of a doppelganger. Anybody else ever have this happen? Seems to be a first for me. Or at least I hope it's the first time.
Hopefully you reported this to the Admins/Moderators Chris! I think there's a way they can trace phoney posts like this??? No excuse for a coward to hide behind someone else's ID!!!
 
Los Angeles to Chicago on the Southwest Chief, about 43 hours, is only $212 tomorrow for coach one way. Looking at fares a few months out I see it at $169 one way. So I can see how a trip two thirds that distance costing more might be questioned a bit.
Oh, THAT. Eastern train tickets cost twice as much per mile as western trains, because demand is twice as high. This will only be fixed when we get twice as much rolling stock in the east.

(This is a very approximate statement, but the gist is correct.)
 
I asked you for a cite on that, when you roll in capital spending (both infrastructure and rolling stock).

I'm still waiting.
It's in their annual reports. Perfectly googleable.
Google is not a source. If you're making a claim that's perfectly Googleable, just provide the main source supporting your claim, instead of just saying it exists so go find it.
 
I asked you for a cite on that, when you roll in capital spending (both infrastructure and rolling stock).

I'm still waiting.
It's in their annual reports. Perfectly googleable.
Google is not a source. If you're making a claim that's perfectly Googleable, just provide the main source supporting your claim, instead of just saying it exists so go find it.
I have far better things to do with my life than go on a link bonanza for a perfectly absurd claim, things like working on actual rail advocacy projects.
 
I asked you for a cite on that, when you roll in capital spending (both infrastructure and rolling stock).

I'm still waiting.
It's in their annual reports. Perfectly googleable.
Google is not a source. If you're making a claim that's perfectly Googleable, just provide the main source supporting your claim, instead of just saying it exists so go find it.
I have far better things to do with my life than go on a link bonanza for a perfectly absurd claim, things like working on actual rail advocacy projects.
But I thought it was "perfectly Googleable." You're the one making the claim that there are many passenger railroads that make money, so back it up with actual linked sources. I assume that you've looked at them before, since you're making the claim that these passenger rail services make money after capital expenses.
 
Ok, I'm going to probably get flamed for this but, "Why is it wrong for Amtrak to charge a price that covers its cost and make a profit?"
Because no passenger carrying rail line does.
SNCF, Renfe, DB Bahn, Taiwan HSR, the various JRs, China Rail, and others would like to have a word with you regarding your misapprehensions.

Ok, you get what you asked for;

Googled

SNCF: From Wikipedia

SNCF (Société Nationale des Chemins de fer Français; "National society of French railways" or "French National Railway Company") is France's national state-owned railway company and manages the rail traffic in France and the Principality of Monaco. SNCF operates the country's national rail services, including the TGV, France's high-speed rail network. Its functions include operation of railway services for passengers and freight, and maintenance and signalling of rail infrastructure owned by Réseau Ferré de France (RFF).
Well it's state-owned and they operate both France's passenger and freight railroads. Freight is where the money's at. We all know that.

Renfe:

Renfe Operadora (Spanish pronunciation: [ˈrenfe opeɾaˈðoɾa]) is the state-owned company which operates freight and passenger trains on the 1668-mm "Iberian gauge", 1435-mm "European gauge" and 1000-mm "Metre Gauge" networks of the Spanish national railway infrastructure company ADIF (Administrador de Infraestructuras Ferroviarias—Railway Infrastructure Administration).
Also state-owned and operates both passenger and freight.

DB Bahn:

Deutsche Bahn AG (DB AG, DBAG or DB) is the German railway company, a private joint-stock company (AG) with the Federal Republic of Germany being its majority shareholder[2] with its headquarters in Berlin.[3] Deutsche Bahn describes itself as the second-largest transport company in the world, after the German postal and logistics company Deutsche Post / DHL, and is the largest railway operator and infrastructure owner in Europe. It carries about two billion passengers each year.

Deutsche Bahn (literally "German Railway" in German) came into existence in 1994 as the successor to the former state railways of Germany, the Deutsche Bundesbahn of West Germany and the Deutsche Reichsbahn of East Germany.[4] It also gained ownership of former railway assets in West Berlin held by the Verwaltung des ehemaligen Reichsbahnvermögens.
The majority shareholder is the Republic of Germany and again DB Bahn is not a passengers only railroad.

In December 2007, DB reorganised again, bringing all passenger services into its DB Bahn arm, logistics under DB Schenker and infrastructure and operations under DB Netze.

The DB is owned by the Federal Republic. By the Constitution, the Federal Republic is required to retain (directly or indirectly) a majority of the infrastructure (the present DB Netze) stocks.
That quote sure does sound like the German taxpayers subsidize heavily the DB.

I could go on but I discern a distinct pattern already.
 
I've had conversations with some pretty high up individuals from within Amtrak and government officials, all of whom have been in this industry for a long time.

I've been told repeatedly that there isn't a profitable passenger only or commuter rail network in the entire world. The every single one is the recipient of taxpayer funding in order to continue operating and offering service.

To this day, I've seen no solid evidence to the contrary.
 
Funny how Japan's JR system is omitted as is India Rail. Both are private and both turn profit (though I think IR is in a bit of a pickle as they can't raise rates without mass protests).

Here is JR East's latest financial report: http://www.jreast.co.jp/e/investor/pdf/2014_presentation.pdf (It's a PDF for those of you who want to know beforehand)

I will concede that JR was essentially "given" the infrastructure that they are utilizing back in 1986 when they were privatized. However, they are still taking on the debt that was left over from JNR. Rather than the US Government spending $1 Bil per year subsidizing Amtrak's debt, JR pays close to that back to the government!

They also seem to get shiny new equipment every 10 years or so...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Freight isn't where the money is in European rail; last I checked SNCF Geodis lost money. There is a reason I specified the annual reports as they break things down by sector. As for being state owned, that's irrelevant.

Also, Amtrak's insistence that all the other railroads need major subsidies is complete balderdash and simple excuse making. Whoever is telling you that simply does not know what they are talking about.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Funny how Japan's JR system is omitted as is India Rail. Both are private and both turn profit (though I think IR is in a bit of a pickle as they can't raise rates without mass protests). Here is JR East's latest financial report: http://www.jreast.co.jp/e/investor/pdf/2014_presentation.pdf (It's a PDF for those of you who want to know beforehand) I will concede that JR was essentially "given" the infrastructure that they are utilizing back in 1986 when they were privatized. However, they are still taking on the debt that was left over from JNR. Rather than the US Government spending $1 Bil per year subsidizing Amtrak's debt, JR pays close to that back to the government! They also seem to get shiny new equipment every 10 years or so...
Japan has roughly half the population of the US living within an area similar in size to California. Japan's construction industry has been massively subsidized by taxpayers for decades, including projects involving passenger rail. Not every line gets new equipment on a regular basis. Not to mention that millions of Japanese people don't even own a private vehicle and are extremely comfortable with (and dependent on) the passenger rail network. These are just a few of the factors that make a direct comparison with Amtrak's finances difficult.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ok, I'm going to probably get flamed for this but, "Why is it wrong for Amtrak to charge a price that covers its cost and make a profit?"
just going to jump in and say I agree..rail service used to be a profitable business (and don't bring up yea, so did being a Blacksmith), and I think it still could be. Now that I jumped in I'm jumping out and running.
 
Listen, I know what money is. I run a retail business. I also know what not being able to afford something is. That does not mean that the item is expensive.

For instance, a few weeks ago I was offered, by a company going out of business, 25,000 jackets at a price of $5 each. It's a really nice jacket. It's actually basically the same as a jacket that sells under a Sears house brand for $75 on a perpetual sale with a $125 'retail' price. The price I was offered was CHEAP.

I was planning on buying them all (the only way I could get them), wholesaling half of them for $15 each, and selling the rest judiciously for $30-40 over a few years. I woulda made a mint. The jacket was cheap. But I couldn't get $125,000 together. Does that mean that the jacket was 'expensive'?
 
Funny how Japan's JR system is omitted as is India Rail. Both are private and both turn profit (though I think IR is in a bit of a pickle as they can't raise rates without mass protests).
I am sure everyone in India will be very surprised to learn that Indian Railways is private, specially this week, when the Railway Minister just presented the Railway Budget to the Parliament for approval on Tuesday.
Indian Railways is owned and operated by the Government of India through the Ministry of Railways. The executive body is the Railway Board which is appointed by the government, and reports to the Railway Ministry. The headquarters is appropriately located at Rail Bhavan (mansion) in New Delhi. Indian Railways is required to pay a set dividend per a long term tradition (and as a matter of law) to the general exchequer. Many years they manage to do so and there are other years when they fall short and have to ask for forgiveness or some other mechanism to make up for the shortfall. How it is handled is typically a political decision. On the whole they earn more than they spend, but sometimes not enough to meet the dividend obligations.

Indian Railways passenger service overall has been non-profitable for decades and is subsidized substantially by freight revenues. Suburban passengers get huge discounts which are not made up by local funding. The prestige trains taken as a separate business do make money, but they are not accounted for as such. In general it is easier to raise freight rates than passenger rates since freight items do not go on strike and block railroad tracks and burn trains if they are displeased like passengers do. Also in general it is easier to raise rates on upper class travel than on lower class. However, when airline fares become lower than upper class ticket prices, that pretty much defines a ceiling on how far that can go without losing ridership in hoards. Arguably raising freight rates has more negative effects on the Indian economy by feeding the inflation, which is an ongoing problem in India. But the effect being indirect, is mostly ignored when push comes to shove.

Trust me, I should know. My cousin works for the Railway Board Financial Cell. This is always a very lively topic of discussion when he and I have a chance to chat.
 
Funny how Japan's JR system is omitted as is India Rail. Both are private and both turn profit (though I think IR is in a bit of a pickle as they can't raise rates without mass protests). Here is JR East's latest financial report: http://www.jreast.co.jp/e/investor/pdf/2014_presentation.pdf (It's a PDF for those of you who want to know beforehand) I will concede that JR was essentially "given" the infrastructure that they are utilizing back in 1986 when they were privatized. However, they are still taking on the debt that was left over from JNR. Rather than the US Government spending $1 Bil per year subsidizing Amtrak's debt, JR pays close to that back to the government! They also seem to get shiny new equipment every 10 years or so...
Japan has roughly half the population of the US living within an area similar in size to California. Japan's construction industry has been massively subsidized by taxpayers for decades, including projects involving passenger rail. Not every line gets new equipment on a regular basis. Not to mention that millions of Japanese people don't even own a private vehicle and are extremely comfortable with (and dependent on) the passenger rail network. These are just a few of the factors that make a direct comparison with Amtrak's finances difficult.
All wonderful information, but irrelevant. The statement was that NO RAILROAD MAKES MONEY. It's a false statement.

jis: You're right. I don't know where my mind was. They are the largest employer (in the world, I believe). My point was not so much that they are private, but that they turn a profit. And I do look at the entire enterprise as a whole. Just like JR, IR is extremely diversified in their revenue, offsetting the losers with winners.

It has been argued that perhaps if IR was privatised, huge improvments could be made. But that is counter argued by the fact that the lowest economic population would never allow for it, as rates would surely increase dramatically. The politics (much like Amtrak) dictate routes & rates - moreso than strict supply and demand. What they absolutely cannot do, though, is separate IR Freight from IR Passenger in a private enterprise.

Was it last year that an effort to raise the fares by like 1c per kilometer could have returned the passenger portion to viability and improve maintenance but it was shot down as being too expensive to the riders?

I would be facinated by those conversations between you and your cousin! ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks jis, facts always trump rhetoric and "info" from the internet!

Should we take a page from India and block tracks and burn trains when Amtrak raises ticket,food and sleeper charges and cuts amenities and service?LOL
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top