Germany and Italy retained the quasi-national operators, DB and FS. Britain privatized operators totally.
1 Like
Well, the paper ignored Brightline, and the only comment on Brightline West was they were seeking funding for construction, not operation.
Also, concerning the Hoosier train experiment, how is Amtrak doing with it now? Oh, thatâs rightâŚ
1 Like
Amtrak offered to open up the NEC but only got a nibble from a Chinese consortium who wanted to build HSR along the NEC if the feds provided most of the funding. It doesnât sound like anyone would even bid on any Amtrak operation that seemed to follow the DB access model.
2 Likes
When did Amtrak offer to open the NEC to other operators? It appears the Chinese were interested in building a new railway as opposed to running trains on the existing railway.
1 Like
It was in the white paper toward the end they had at least two dates ATK asked for proposals.
1 Like
How long is it estimated to take before Amtrak becomes its own company?
I know Canadian National did something similar since they were a Canadian government-created railway
1 Like
This has been very successful in Europe. Keeps the legacy government owned railways on their toes. I always competed better when I had someone better to compete against.
2 Likes
The British rail privatization had one huge flaw they never fixed. Donât know if it was enshrined in law or they just didnât want to change it.
Basically when someone wanted to bid on a franchise the government discounted the payments streams to net present value using the British government discount rate. That is a risk free discount rate. Silly!
So what the savvy and somewhat dishonest successful bidders did was to accept subsidies in the early years with âcommitmentsâ to pay the government Substantial premiums in the last couple years. Oh! And put in very little % equity into the venture. Instead fund it with debt.
Doesnât take a genius to predict what happened just before the premiums were coming due. Oops. Sorry gov. Weâre not doing well and we fold.
Easy solution. Use a discount rate that matches the equity that the bidder put up. British government rate is about 4%.
If bidder only puts up 10% equity then 4% / 10% is 40%. Use that to discount those rosy premiums in years 9 to 10. At 40% to the 9th and 10th power theyâd be discounted to nothing. Theyâd lose the bid.
Simple math any private business investor would use. Too bad no one in the British railway government must not have learned in school.
3 Likes
How did you determine what discount rate was used to evaluate the bids to privatize some or all of British rail?
1 Like
CN was a viable freight RR. I donât know that anyone considers Amtrak as viable without government support.
2 Likes
As per EYâs latest financial audit report, " the Company has a history of operating losses and is dependent upon substantial Federal Government subsidies to sustain its operations and maintain its underlying infrastructure"
I have read the annual reports for the last 20 years. This or a similar statement appears in all of them.
1 Like
I would have used a risk adjusted rate depending on their percentage of equity. Perhaps roughly risk free rate / percent of equity in venture. So if the only put up 10% equity it would have been roughly 35%. 3.5% divided by 10%.
Simplistic and it would need refinement but basically thatâs the direction I would have taken.
The Brit government used their own gilt rate.
1 Like
Amtrak never made money. Even shortly after its creation Congress was already annoyed that its losses were increasing compared to when the RRs ran the trains.
1 Like
Who is expected to be the money pit to take Amtrak private? Qatar?
1 Like
It would almost have to be âIslamic investingâ â different standards for opportunity cost and no dependence on an interest rate.
1 Like
Finding Greyhound and Trailways buses and bus stations seems to be quite hardâŚWhat was dozens of intercity buses and night between Cleveland and Chicago is now one bus at some out of the way station at 200 am
Sounds like Amtrak.
A quick check of Greyhounds schedule shows 2 buses between Cleveland and Chicago, one leaving at 3:35 am, and the other at 12:15 pm.
Both leave from Clevelandâs bus station, which is just south of downtown.
Last time I checked Iowa bus routes, for all carriers, there seemed to be a couple new ones. Still, a couple routes overlap (different carriers) and itâs a far cry from the service that used to be available. Thereâs only a few stops that arenât in a major city. You used to be able to get on at many small towns, like flag stops on the railroads, and almost every Federal highway had service.
Jeff
Greyhound/FlixBus have 10 daily offerings between DFW and Austin. The average fare is close to $28. Vonlane, which is a luxury bus service, has eight daily trips between DFW and Austin. The fare is $127. Red Coach, which offers a level of service between Vonlane and Flixbus, has four daily schedules between DFW and Austin. The average fare is approximately $37.
The trip takes approximately three hours on Vonlane and approximately 3.5 hours on Red Coach. The time for Greyhound/Flixbus is a tad over 3.5 hours. The Texas Eagle takes approximately 6.5 hours from Dallas to Austin. The coach fare on the Eagle is $16; an economy room is going for $122. All fares are for trips on October 29th.
The buses serve multiple points in DFW, i.e. downtown Dallas, Deep Elum, Plano, Richardson, and DFW Airport. Amtrak serves the station in downtown Dallas.
I have ridden Greyhound, FlixBus, and Vonlane. They have almost always been on time. However, the rail buff in me has taken the Texas Eagle more often than the bus. It is rarely on time.
If passenger rail between DFW and Austin/San Antonio were upgraded so that riding the train would be competitive with driving or taking the bus, I suspect the number of bus schedules would shrink.