i heard something very intresting the other day and i was wondering if there was any truth to it. if amtrak was to sell every seat on every train for the rest of this year amtrak will still not break even or make a profit. assuming amtrak does not add any trains to there lineup. is there any truth to this? or was i lied too?
Yes that is the case in most instances…
so whats the cure? other than raising ticket prices.
Adding More Trains, Changes in how things are ran etc.
in all honesty i was hoping for more detail explanation
I’m not sure I could provide the full detail you’re looking for but here is a start. There are a number of issues. One significant issue is that Amtrak has a problem of having a network with limited frequency. So, for example, resources have to be provided at locations where there are perhaps one or two trains per day. By resources I mean stations, refuelling, train crew etc. Now, while costs go up with a more frequent service, the fixed costs do not, and there are more trains running to pay for them. So a more frequent service across the network would help. Also having extra coaches on trains, so more seats to fill. On most routes though, I believe it would be more sleepers that are needed. How you go about getting a network with increased train frequency is a different matter, but very feasible.
There have been a number of threads more or less on this subject, Sam. The bottom line (perhaps literally!) is that there has never yet been a passenger service of any significance which did not depend on a public subsidy of some form to survive. This is true of airlines (there is a tremendous public subsidy there), busses and cars (you don’t really think that your gasoline tax pays for the highways now, do you?), rail (at one time it was the mail that paid), commuter service, light or heavy, passenger ships (again, the mail picked up the tab), etc. etc.
Sometimes the subdidy is a direct payout. Sometimes it is less direct (e.g. the mail). Sometimes it is hidden in the general budget, such as highways and airlines. But it is always there.
Whether any particular government decides to subsidise any particular mode of passenger service is largely a public policy decision, and often taken on very odd logic.
As to what might help reduce Amtrak’s subsidy per passenger, increased service would help a great deal, as Kevin noted. So would more routes and more equipment. However, the current administration, as well as most previous administrations, have decided to try to kill passenger rail, if at all possible.
- More seats (longer trains)
1a. faster equpment turns
1b. more equipment - Lower cost structure
2a. Get rid of every non-value added activity
2b. Outsource as much of the rest as possible to avoid Railroad retirement/inefficient work rules/high wages
The “how” is the hard part…
NOOOOOOOOOOOO! Not more Amtrak! The two we got allready screw things up enough!
There is no way they could make a “profit”, no matter how many passengers they carry,You know that’s the sad part, often success winds up backfiring on Amtrak. In the New York Soviet Socialist Republic, Jet Blue under cut Amtrak’s best fares and even with intrusive searches, overcrowded airports and bad weather, Amtrak has lost the battle of New York. Now, Albany wants to have Albany-Rensselaer - NY/Penn Sta. or GCT turned over to Metro North! Amtrak is all too happy to leave, too. They fought over the turboliner rebuilding, then squandered the taxpayer’s $$ by killing the project! Ride Amtrak west or north of Albany-Rensselaer now! We may not be able to sooner than we think, if NYSSR screws this up the way they far too often screw things up!
One proposed plan was www.azrail.org/amtrak90 very interasting read.
hey thanks for all of the good information everybody