Join the discussion on the following article:
On-time performance woes sink Amtrak’s 2014 ridership
Ugh. Except for the part of the “Northeast Corridor” south of Washington (hey, they described it that way, not me!), and the bit in Connecticut, neither of which Amtrak owns, it’s ALL Amtrak. So that 87% to 77% drop in OTP is all of their own making. Not poor CN dispatching, not oil, not grain.
Sheesh. Amtrak needs to clean up its own house.
Conclusion? The NEC and its extensions work. Ridership and revenue grew >> the economy in general. The rest of Amtrak, not so much.
Think it’s way more than on-time performance problems that are sinking Amtrak’s ridership. Major changes are needed across the entire organization. Everything from new leadership to shutting down routes.
One thing I have never understood is Amtrak’s continuation of long-distance routes. I love trains, “so don’t flog me too hard”, but except for nostalgic reasons, I don’t see where this makes since today especially from a business perspective. (Freight railroads saw the writing on the wall for long distance passenger trains as early as the mid-20th century)
Always wondered if Amtrak has done a serious business study on becoming more of a regional based service concentrating on high population areas such as the Northeast corridor.
In any case, poor on-time performance is just one symptom of a serious problem!
I think you mean total revenue of $2.189 billion.
“Ridership” is a meaningless number when Amtrak’s market share in these markets (including the NEC) is below 2%. Amtrak exists to move people over distance and the ONLY yardstick to measure its performance in moving people over distance is revenue passenger miles, i.e., its output of transportation. By output, the NEC is its smallest division, and the long distance trains its largest (55% greater than the NEC). The NEC is its weakest sector also by market share and only its second largest by load factor. The long distance trains as a group are also #1 in load factor and market share.
All the blather about “ridership” is an Amtrak propaganda smokescreen to mask the chronic underperformance and massive subsidies in the NEC. Bob Johnston should know better than to report it without RPM data.
Worse, the NEC, despite being the smallest and weakest division, is also the most heavily subsidized, in gross and per passenger mile (it takes about $750 million a year in federal grants to keep anything running there). So, if one were to rationalize Amtrak objectively and by reference to economic factors rather than regional politics, what you would get rid of is the NEC. Maybe SEPTA would take it.
Long distance services enjoy significant market share and are depended upon by many small communities far from major airports. The key to increasing ridership and revenue on long distance trains, besides improving on time performance, is to add new markets at minimal additional cost. For example, 2 major destinations for Midwesterners are Las Vegas and Phoenix, both of which could be served at minimal additional cost by sections of the Southwest Chief.
Are we forgetting about the snowstorms that completely terminated service on the NEC for days?!
A big factor in customer loss is loss of faith in the product. Amtrak will leave passengers waiting at stations well beyond acceptable wait times because they refuse to disclose that a train has been involved in an accident or a derailment. They refuse to inform their customers that a delayed train is because of known scheduled track refurbishment. Amtrak has a corporate siege mentality of “say nothing”. They hide behind standard answers like “Train Overdue” or “No Status” or “Service Disruption”, but they do not say train cancelled or ten hour delay when the last station departure was only 10 minutes late. I have witnessed this non-information on the Coast Starlight or the Pacific Surfliner trains for myself. I live just 1000 feet from the UP Coast Division mainline so I know about when the various amtraks should be passing and I check their websites so I can step out to the street and watch their passing. So I see when they are late but the website says No Status. the small unmanned station has a status board but it only tell the progress at the last station. when the SF Bay Area had the earthquake a few month back all of the trains in the Bay Area were halted pending track inspection they sat for hours but during all of that time the southbound Starlight reported 10 Minutes Late because that is when it left Sacramento so all the waiting passengers in Salinas, Paso robles and San Luis Obispo Waited for a train that was finally replaced hours later by a bus. It is this failure to openly communicate and keep customers informed in a timely manner that causes a loss of faith and leads to losing customers and reduces Amtrak’s income revenue.
Peter Laws, how could place the blame on Amtrak when it’s at the mercy of it’s host railroads?
I said this before . . . maybe Amtrak should reroute the Lake Shore Limited via Detroit. It won’t solve every delay but it will avoid some congestion (going through Canada would be even better but probably not possible). And it will open up some potentially big markets (e.g. Detroit - New York).
Mr. Miller, Mr. Laws was talking specifically about the NEC, which Amtrak itself owns and dispatches (mostly). You can’t blame the freight lines for problems they don’t cause.
Mr. Simons and I are on the same wavelength. Amtrak maintains an attitude that says to me “the less you tell a customer the better we’ll look.” Of 4 Amtrak trains my wife and I rode recently, all reached their respective destinations 30 to 60 minutes behind published schedules in dry clear weather. I understand what riding on others’ rails can involve. But invariably Amtrak fails to inform waiting passengers how late they will be. Case in point: At Richmond, Va. the southbound Carolinian was marked on the board “10 minutes late arriving, 5 minutes late departing.” Strange. There’s no way in the world that could happen as there was only an 8-minute wait time scheduled. At 20 minutes late arriving, I went and asked the Amtrak clerk where the train was and how it could be there 10 minutes late. He said, “It’s within range now,” whatever that meant to anyone who might be an uninformed novice. About 5 minutes later the train rolled into the station. Not sure who “departure 5 minutes late” was supposed to fool but it didn’t fool anybody in that crowd. Why seemingly lie about it? What in heaven’s name is to be gained? Yet I see this kind of practice on a rather consistent basis. Airlines used to do it all the time but have pretty much learned it works against them. It works against Amtrak too.
Joseph from Arkansas. I will flog you hard. Ridership has been up until this year when Boardman started to slash on board amenities and not properly work with the other railroads to improve their schedules. He has no real railroad experience and it is now showing. Why would you cut services when ridership has been on the rise and people seem to be enjoying the system? Amtrak needs an experienced railroad person at the top that knows how to run a railroad and not just bow to Congress’s wish to kill the whole system. Boardman’s “strategy” to kill Amtrak seems to now be paying off. Just ask their employees about their morale which is also way down. I totally agree with the commentary that was in the recent “Trains”.
All of this points to the need to get rid of the long distance trains. The NEC, Capitol Corridor, the Surfliners, the various Chicago/Midwest Corridors, the Empire Service, etc., those are the routes that should be maintained and built up to a reliable comfortable service. The only piece of Mr. Selden’s argument that I agree with is that given Amtrak’s miserable market share, none of this makes any difference. Those who argue that flowers on the dining car tables will bring in more passengers have no connection to reality. Even on the short distance routes I wonder how they can get anyone to ride the trains. I was recently in Hartford, CT for a nonrail event. I went to Union Station several times and watched the handful of passengers board the dirty, dented and late shuttle trains to Springfield and New Haven where, in most cases, transfers would have to be made to New York and Washington bound Shore Line trains. While down on the street level large, gleaming, new Peter Pan buses with leather seats and reliable wi-fi filled with passengers who were going to be taken directly to their destinations. How do they even get the paltry 30 million passengers a year, over 50% of whom ride the NEC, to spend a good chunk of their travel time sitting on trains that are 10 and 12 hours late? Not me. On a recent rip to South Dakota, even with a free roomette all the way from Boston to Denver with Guest reward points, I chose Jet Blue. Left Boston at around 9:00 AM and arrived in Denver about noontime. If I took the train, at noon I would be, wait…I’d still be in Boston at Back Bay Station about 2 miles from where I started. I value my time more than that.
Mr. McGuire; what about my family who cannot afford to fly from Dallas to Bloomington, IL? I’m glad flying is a good choice for you and that you are affluent enough to have this option, but why should your abilities cancel my options?
Interesting comments! It would seem that some miss the point. The way I view this is that from a historic standpoint, the Federal Government took on the responsibility when Congress passed the Rail Passenger Service Act in 1970. They allowed the Class I railroads to abandon passenger service due to mounting losses. The premise was to maintain something that would assemble a nation system not some truncated series of regional systems. Sure, Amtrak has always had management issues throughout its history, There are some good people and of course some not so good managers. Many carp about the subsidies Amtrak receives but I don’t hear any of us who also fly complain about how truly the airline industry is subsidized. What would air fares look like if that industry had to truly pay for the FAA, airports and all the infrastructure that goes with it? Think about it. This country needs a balanced transportation system. Eliminating long distance passenger trains does put people who live in very rural states at a disadvantage due to lack of good air or bus service. The commitment should be to appropriate the capital funds for additional equipment so people who want to take Amtrak have the ability. There also needs to be a commitment from the class I’s to assure on-time performance. They benefited from the 1970 Act in order for these railroads to shed their passenger service obligations. Maybe a little history lesson is in order!
When it comes down to it, the 1.5 billion dollar Amtrak subsidy is a paltry sum to maintain a national railroad passenger service. To put it into context, The “flyaway” cost of just two B-2 bombers is 1.47 billion dollars. The cost of the Zoo interchange reconstruction project here in Milwaukee (where I94 intersects I894/US45) is 1.7 billion dollars - for ONE highway interchange! A “modally” balanced transport system for freight and passengers would seem to me to be a desirable policy goal that would be in the interest of the country on many levels and is a generator of long-term economic growth. Other developed and developing nations have seen this opportunity and have invested heavily in updating infrastructure across all modes to maintain economic growth, cut energy usage and environmental impact. I would modestly argue that it would make some sense, given both acute and chronic economic, energy, and environmental issues, to invest in the most efficient mode which is, so far, steel wheel on steel rail. It seems as though we would rather fiddle while Rome burns instead of compromising on clear policies that would benefit us all.
If Japan, China, Spain, France, Germany, Switzerland, etc. can do it, the greatest nation on earth certainly should be able to do it. It’s all in the politics and where the politicians (whom we elect) place their priorities in order to keep getting reelected. If we the people keep these people in office we get what we deserve.
It’s easy to be dismissive of circumstances beyond our control with the phrase “if we keep these people (politicians) in office we get what we deserve” as Mr. Carney observes. In my case there is no “we” to it. Regrettably I live in a red state and I vote blue every time and I lose my votes. Also regrettably my situation won’t allow me to change states. Thus, do I get what I deserve? I didn’t ask for lifelong politicians who put power, prestige and perks ahead of the common good but that’s the result in every election, thanks to those who perceive differently. Speaking for me, I don’t believe I “get what we deserve” and I’m powerless to alter it. It’s ridiculous to make sweeping assessments that suggest we are all personally at fault and should be voting the bums out. I have only one vote. It seldom counts in matters of improved rail transportation…