A 10K investment in Old Dominion in 1996 would be worth about $3.4 million today… so i can understand why some investors are happy with it. Today it appears to be a tad overpriced but still a relatively decent stock I think.
Old Dominion has done a good job of branding itself… which is very important in trucking as most carriers are regarded as pretty much all the same… The branding has allowed them to price their services a little more aggressively than some of their competitors which shows up in their relatively low OR.
I haven’t heard anything about them having problems… at least nothing that would be out of the ordinary.
Speaking of sending packages by bus, there was an interesting wrinkle to the process. Back in the 1960’s when I was working in New Orleans, we used to send and receive parts frequently by bus between our office and Baton Rouge. Occasionally, if we needed to send paperwork in a hurry, we’d send it by bus, but we learned that it was cheaper to send it in a box than an envelop. It was light enough that it was the minimum charge either way, but postal regulations required that the envelop had to have a stamp on it even though the postal service never touched it.
In the early ’ 70s I used to take the train from DC area to Texas and back for college, via Kansas City or NOL, but used to ship my bicycle each time by Greyhound. Had to be boxed, but they even provided the box.
I recall in the early 60s the green REA trucks in my town of Amityville, NY. We once went to the freight house at the station to pick up a package that was my brother’s .22 rifle. Both the station and freight house were torn down when they elevated the tracks in about 1968. I have no recollection of how my father was notified that the package was there. Maybe a postcard? And remember those? Tan cards with Abe Lincoln’s profile printed on them.
That is pretty funny. Even the original service expansion (after that famous quote by Harnden in the early 1840s about express service to the Rockies) was in secure transport of high-value express. In fact Wells and Fargo were initially involved in American Express, and only when that company decided not to prioritize service between the developed eastern and midwestern United States and gold-rush California did they set up their own company – which was involved in “banking” to the extent of securely transporting gold dust, nuggets, etc. from the West Coast, but which by 1866 had acquired by far the latgest fleet of stagecoaches and stage lines anywhere in the world.
I’d be confused too, because I think it was USPS trucks that used to be dark olive or Pullman green. (So were REA’s but I think it’s already been noted that REA or other railroad express “lines” got little if any mention…)
The initial consolidation of express into the “Railway Express Agency” was, if I remember correctly, related to Federal Control in WWI and the aftermath.
One should just be happy that the History Channel actually had programming that had the appearance of history. Even if most of the current HC documentaries are sometimes a bit “loose” with the actual facts and history.
REA was created by the Federal Government prior or during WWI from four private express companies. It was a nationalization that was never undone after the war. Also, I believe the railroads pulled the financial support plug on it as well later towards the end as they did not see that it was profitable and I think that happened in the 1950’s or before. So it really ceased to have railroad sponsorship before most of the mass abandonments of passenger trains.
1917-when the Federal Gov’t took over the railroads, it also took over the 4 express companies-Wells Fargo, Adams, American Express, and Southern Express. They were combined into American Railway Express.
1925-ARE turned over to ownership by the various railroads…renamed Railway Express Agency.
1959-REA recvd permission to use any mode of transportation to move packages-rail shipment decreases.
1960-REA renamed itself to “REA Express”. The various member RRs began to pull out of REA during the 60s-by the early 70s the companies management buys all of REA.
1975-REA shuts down-due to a recession and labor troubles.UPS picks up many of the REA routes.
I noticed that timeline is somewhat selectively edited and you neglected to mention the part about railroads starting to lose interest as far back as the 1940’s-1950’s because REA traffic was considered dead end traffic. Perhaps that was an oversight or deemed not relevant to your response.
However, I believe the quoted part above is a management statement but I don’t have time to look it up. What is relevant to 1975 and missing from your timeline is how long they had been losing money up until that point. I believe wikipedia states “hand over fist” for years. So in my view, thats more management than Unions and a very important factor. While it is true that management may have approached Unions for a cut of some kind towards the end. It’s really their choice to say yes or no based on past management of the company. Given the financial performance of the company prior to 1975 and apparent lack of any successful action previous to address that issue. If I were in a union for REA I would have voted no to any cuts more than likely. So I do not understand at all the earlier post that unions did in the company. Why would I? Status quo seems to be OK with management.
Also on the wikipedia timeline, it just seems to me to be slightly biased in the fact it seems to point to the fact that the company was victimized by changing times and that the Feds rejected their agreement with the airlines. Going to have to take issue with that. The company could have declared bankruptcy a long time before 1975 and filed a decent reorganization plan. They neglected to do so. Sorry if that sounds harsh but to me reading their history it just did not seem like the
azrail
1975-REA shuts down-due to a recession and labor troubles.UPS picks up many of the REA routes.
I noticed that timeline is somewhat selectively edited and you neglected to mention the part about railroads starting to lose interest as far back as the 1940’s-1950’s because REA traffic was considered dead end traffic. Perhaps that was an oversight or deemed not relevant to your response.
However, I believe the quoted part above is a management statement but I don’t have time to look it up. What is relevant to 1975 and missing from your timeline is how long they had been losing money up until that point. I believe wikipedia states “hand over fist” for years. So in my view, thats more management than Unions and a very important factor. While it is true that management may have approached Unions for a cut of some kind towards the end. It’s really their choice to say yes or no based on past management of the company. Given the financial performance of the company prior to 1975 and apparent lack of any successful action previous to address that issue. If I were in a union for REA I would have voted no to any cuts more than likely. So I do not understand at all the earlier post that unions did in the company. Why would I? Status quo seems to be OK with management.
Also on the wikipedia timeline, it just seems to me to be slightly biased in the fact it seems to point to the fact that the company was victimized by changing times and that the Feds rejected their agreement with the airlines. Going to have to take issue with that. The company could have declared b
Reference: Posted by jeffhergert on Friday, August 4, 2023 9:47 PM
I never had thought much about embellishment of facts in HC stuff. Noticed it some, but I guess it can get outta hand. Then, what’s different about “news” coverage today, regardless of one’s political viewpoint. They are all guilty of tilting the table.
As this thread (REA, etc.)continues, the idea of management (poor) comes up. This ties right in w/another thread. (COO) That thread cites the history of an individual who was favored first at IC (Mps) and will enjoy “success” because of his past history of poor management, no. Because he enjoyed favoritism by those over him. Peter Principle is not in play here. Usually when one rises to the level (of incompetence) “over their head&rd