STB finds NS only Class 1 "Revenue Adequate"

STB judges Norfolk Southern “revenue adequate”

(The following article by Gregory Richards was posted on the Virginian-Pilot website on October 24.)

NORFOLK, Va. – The Surface Transportation Board said Monday that Norfolk Southern Railway Co. was the only big U.S. railroad last year earning a rate of return on its investment judged “revenue adequate.”

The board calculated the weighted cost of financing and operations – known as the cost of capital – at 12.2 percent for the railroad industry. That expense mainly consists of the cost of accessing money through the debt and equity markets.

Norfolk-based Norfolk Southern beat that with a 13.2 percent rate of return on net investment, the ratio of railroad operating income to capital investments. The second-best railroad was the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Co. of Fort Worth, Texas, at 10.3 percent. Third was the Soo Line Railroad Co., the U.S. operations of Canadian Pacific Railway, at 8.9 percent.

Being a revenue-adequate railroad can affect the rates charged by the railroads in certain cases, according to the federal Surface Transportation Board.

Norfolk Southern was also the only railroad in 2004 to be revenue adequate, according to the board.

It has been difficult for railroads to meet that standard because until recent years, they’ve been saddled with low rates and slow growth, making it difficult to pay for big investments in track and trains, said Anthony B. Hatch, an independent railroad consultant based in New York.

Norfolk Southern would not disclose its individual cost of capital, company spokesman Richard W. Harris said.

In a separate matter, Norfolk Southern Railway’s parent company, Norfolk Southern Corp., announced Monday that its regular dividend of 18 cents per share of common stock will be payable on Dec. 11 to shareholders of record on Nov. 3.

From BLET Site

If they looked at North America instead of just the USA, CN would rank as the most profitable.

Why would the STB look at the CN?

Because CN has major lines and traffic in the U.S. perhaps?

And because of this statement in the article ?:

“Being a revenue-adequate railroad can affect the rates charged by the railroads in certain cases, according to the federal Surface Transportation Board.”

Why not look at the CN, a large part of their operations are in the USA. GTW, IC, WC, DM&IR.

Barry, Regina, Sk.

CN is a Canadian company. I don’t think they’d have to file any info with the STB except for their US portion. Do they still keep separate books on their US operations? IC, GT, DWP etc. even if they operate under the CN flag?

CP and CN US Subs are required to report their numbers to the STB. Could well be some legal slop between what is Canada and what is US, but on the whole probably wouldn’t skew the results off the chart.

Oh crud,

When Mickey and Dave read this…

Anyone remember where I left my hip waders?

Considering the statement:

it would appear that the STB was taking US operations of Canadian railroads into account.

Then where does Uncle Pete fall into place?

This is another vital service to the nation provided by the STB[:D]. I am so happy the bureaucrats are finding ways to spend my tax dollars at the request of a foolish Congress.

sniff, sniff POLITICS! Danger Will Robinson, Danger! LOL!

CN should be included too. Wonder where they stand.

Evidently their US operations do not rank in the top three, in 2004.

Oops…I missed that part when I was scrolling and reading the document. Still I wonder where UP and CN stand. I’ll dig and try to find it!

Ed, enough with the personal insults.

Bergie

The report was for 2005. It mentions that NS was also top for 2004.

It is vitally important for this information, especially when our tax dollars will be going directly to the Big Six rail companies such as NS in ever larger chunks. NS is being gifted $95 million of our gas taxes for a double stack clearance project. Given that most rail companies achieve double stack clearances in the past without using tax dollars, why does “revenue adequate” NS need such federal aid now?

You can get the same information from any private investment banker or financial anaylist.

Wow, what a response.

First, the STB does include CN and CP in the Class 1 analysis and has in the past declared CN to be “Revenue Adequate” on at least one occasion.

Second, FM, of course NS should get the cash so they can pass it through to important employees and shareholders. Hey the NS just declared a dividend. It’s economics, dummy…LOL

LC

Here’s how the seven Class Is finished in 2005

NS 13.21%
BNSF 10.32%
Soo Line 8.89%
Grand Trunk 8.07%
UP 6.34%
CSX 6.23%
KCS 5.89%