I just took the train from DC to NYC. Such an experience.
The problem is marketing. They are and will always be a governmental corporation, run by bureaucrats and politicians…and like any governmental organization they cannot think on a real business basis. They will always be governmental because it’s a pipe dream that a business is going to step in to run a passenger railroad without subsidization, as the airlines get with airport funding, like the highway lobby gets. And so because people complain about the more overt subsidization of Amtrak, it will never get enough money or mandate to…do effective marketing.
How many business travelers (the type who won’t drive from DC to NYC, and who don’t need a car to get around) realize that it’s faster and cheaper to take a train than fly? Especially with the time taken in airport security checks, by the time you go from LaGuardia downtown, the shuttle doesn’t compare…Amtrak puts you off in the heart of the city. And you don’t have to take your shoes off or unload your laptop to get on the train.
Why isn’t there a great advertising campaign about this? Why are the trains so ugly and unappealing? The Amtrak logo, that brand mark represents the wrong customer perception - that of a failing, underachieving, controversial service - they should junk the logo and start another one. Make the trains feel exciting with the design. Play on the allure of train travel, what remains of it. Why can’t you reserve a specific seat, and have a really business class-type of experience on the train, like in an airline? Why is traveling by train such a gritty experience? The problem is marketing, and changing customer perspections, and they just aren’t up to doing it and are thus consigned to the bottom feeding of the transport network.
The long distance train versus the corridor train is a frequent topic on about every Amtrak discussion list. There are pros and cons on both sides. However, one of the issues that has to be accounted for is that many representatives and senators from rural states only continue to support Amtrak if they have a train running through their state. If the long distance trains were completely eliminated, these politicans would no longer support Amtrak and the states in the Northeast, around Chicago and the west coast would have to completely take over the services. While as vital as the Northeast Corridor is, getting the seven states and DC to agree on running this service and how much each would pay would be an impossibility. So, the current mix of long and short distance trains will have to continue as long as there is an Amtrak. Dick…
Note the second paragraph under “Corridor Development.”
To some extent, they’ve alreay made the “dream” a reality, but as Mr Gunn put it, the real problem is they need to bring the railroad up to a “state of good repair” to realize its full potential. Marketing isn’t a priority until that happens.
Hate to agree with you, but you have it right.[#ditto] Amtrak’s creators fought with the Nixon administration over the ability of Amtrak to survive without a sizable subsidy from the government. (See “The Men Who Loved Trains”) Amtrak needs not only to fix the cars it has, but start to find replacements for ALL of them! Amfleet cars are 32-34 years old. AmfleetII cars are closing in on 30 years of service. The first group of Superliners are rotting away in Beech Grove, because there are no funds available to repair them. The second group of Superliners need an overhaul that Amtrak cannot afford to give them at current subsidy levels. AND they will be over a quarter century old. There are no replacement parts for any Amtrak car in any service, anywhere*! THAT is a disgrace![B)] (*note: Acela equipment IS included!)
IMHO durango has hit the nail right on the head with two assumption but perhaps doesn’t do so well with a third:
CORRECT: Amtrak is a government-created, "quasi"corporate body with a monopoly over long-distance train travel. With only a few exceptions* Amtrak goes where no one else is allowed to go. This is rarely the case with airplanes or intercity buses. To put it another way, unlike Hertz vs. Avis, in the absence of competition, I frequently get the feeling Amtrak doesn’t feel it has to “try harder” than it does. Although there are lots of dedicated, proactive Amtrak service employees, whenever I travel with VIA in Canada I am impressed by their sunny attitude up north: the employees actually seem HAPPY to have me on board, instead of taking the attitude that I am just one more (possibly) demanding person to have to cope with.
*(Such as MARC vs. Amtrak from DC to Baltimore or NJT vs. Amtrak from Philadelphia-Penn Station, NYC.)
CORRECT: Amtrak is nonetheless in competition with other modes of travel, particularly within the NEC. The traveler can indeed get from D.C. to NYC by renting a car, driving one’s own car, taking the bus, taking Amtrak, or flying commercially.
DUBIOUS: Durango seems to be making the case that Amtrak should advertise much more to get some of the passengers away from the competition. A noble effort: but this rests on the assumption that a big opportunity for Amtrak is excess capacity; i.e., that Amtrak trains have a real problem with empty berths, parlor cars and seats. Far from it: it’s all Amtrak can do to handle crowds at holidays, (or on many long-distance trains in summer). In fact, Amtrak has pretty well moved away from a system of buy-the-ticket on the spot and crowd onto an NEC train to one in which reservations are involved. And . .
There aint enough Amtrack to be effective. And not enough Government to make it happen.
Imagine NEC replicated across groups of 3 or 4 cities across the USA. Example… Washington, Pittsburgh, Cleveland. Or… Washington, Richmond, -Norfolk and/or Raleigh. And certain cities being hub towns where it will be possible to beat short haul airlines with smaller stations in between to at least get the cars off the over-stuffed highways.
The Europeans and Japanese have it over us in spades as does the UK.
I compare the long distance Trains similar to the old Beige Soviet Model of one train, one track for Siberia. They are nice, but not useful. I did consider Amtrack for a east coast run. Little Rock-Chicago then Chicago to Washington DC is a hard road to travel in either a sleeper (Money) or Coach. I can drive the same distance for less in gas (And less time too.) or have Southwest whisk me into BWI for less. Now if there was a Little Rock, Memphis, Nashville and so on NEC’s direct to DC… maybe worth it at 150-200 mph.
Regarding the attitudes on the trains in the NEC I say it’s typical of the grumpies who reside in the area. You get out here to the South or West you might actually find a little sunshine and more willingness to help you.
Sometimes I wonder if the PRR railroad with it’s world class GG1’s and it’s fast Brokers had it all over the fossilized modern Amtrack.
I understand the need, obviously, to get track, cars and infrastructure up to speed, but buying new passenger cars - essentially the same as the old cars, i suspect (correct me if i’m wrong on this) - absent an effective marketing strategy is a strategy for fingernail-scratching survival, not growth. The Amtrak brand - what does it summon up? The brand, as it’s been positioned, either intentionally or unintentionally -that’s an essential problem. The “vision” for what Amtrak should drive a chunk of the infrastructure requirements - what the new cars would be like, certainly. Until they address the marketing aspect it won’t be right. My proposition is that the Amtrak brand itself is so compromised there is not point in continuing with it, they ought to junk it, get a marketing strategy and create a new impression. A brand is just that, after all, sum of customer perceptions, good and bad, tangible and emotional. Advertising is a part of shaping that, of playing to competitive advantage. It can’t, unfortunately, be effectively done after maintenance costs are taken care of…it’s a question of a comprehensive strategy.
I know that Amtrak did some advertising in the past…but they need an effective agency and get away from that striped logo and representing what is a failed customer experience. Look at what the US military does with its ad campaigns…not to take political stance, but as marketing campaigns, the Army has been, historically, very effective in the volunteer military era. It can be done.
It’s true that the government should asign itself to pick up all infrastructure eneeds not directly related to the customer experience. If they did that, and got the politicians and their bureaucratic employees out of the way, then we might see what “Amtrak” could be.
the Northeast Corridor - yes, it’s a line of Amtrak, kind of a weird su
On last thing (sock out of mouth temporarily!)…a question…on capacity. If demand rose, on a consistent basis, would there be either more revenue or more demand, and coulodn’t they make the trains longer…invest in some more cars? This I’m not sure of, if there are obstacles. But if demand rose and they didn’t want to invest in new cars, couldn’t they raise rates? The demand and price are relative to other options, obviously. For the business travelling segment (which i would propose as the target, just as airlines do)…if they had clean, private car rooms (ala European trains), reservable specific, comfortable seats, and positive business-class style service that got you from DC to NYC in less time and less hassle than an airline…what’s the price point vis-a-vis airlines? This is why they may need a strategy before buying those passenger cars. Maybe they could take a clue on how airlines segment their audiences… When I call United, they ask me at the end if i need a rental car, for instance…there’s an alliance there, at least a well-thought out marketing approach.
Well . . . that’s the Hell of it, isn’t it, Durango? If Amtrak had bigger capital budgets it probably would buy fresher rolling stock for corridor use, create new trains and tap into what is probably still a growing transportation market in NEC. It’s that whole “poor relation” thing: the agency gets just enough money to do things but not enough to do them well. Your drab experience with an NEC trip is not necessarily the result of poor planning by Amtrak–more a matter of them having to devote the lion’s share of resources (after wages, taxes) to keeping the whole movement going.
Many if not most of the time I and others have ridden Amtrak I’ve experienced that “death by a thousand cuts” feeling . . . the Southwest Chief sitting in Union Station long after its departure time with no explanation, and no air-conditioning . . . The sleeping-car “attendant” who appears long enough before the train leaves not to help people with their baggage – and then disappears after supper . . . the upsettingly chilly winter air temp on board Amfleet shells in the Midwest, which has much colder weather on the whole than the East Coast, for which the original Metroliner cars were climate-engineered in the mid-1960s. TRAINS magazine’s recent stats of the absolutely appallingly late arrival of the Auto Train at its destination demonstrate exactly how a star-crossed train can ruin not only a day but a whole vacation. I’m sure many of us have these quasi-horror stories that render train travel not as comfortable or reliable it ought to be – and therefore squandering the natural advantages passenger rail has over other modes of transit, such as being able to plow thru snow and ice storms when the planes are grounded, to stop in remote communities, and to beat the time