Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

DOT report: High-speed rail would have made more money (Florida)
Tampa Tribune ^ | March 9, 2011 | Ted Jackovics

Posted on 03/10/2011 7:48:47 AM PST by Iron Munro

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-86 next last
To: Hootowl

October 27, 2009 — Forty-one of Amtrak’s 44 routes lost money in 2008 with losses ranging from nearly $5 to $462 per passenger depending upon the line, according to analysis by Pew’s Subsidyscope.

The line with the highest per passenger subsidy—the Sunset Limited, which runs from New Orleans to Los Angeles—carried almost 72,000 passengers last year. The California Zephyr, which runs from Chicago to San Francisco, had the second-highest per passenger subsidy of $193 and carried nearly 353,000 passengers in 2008. Pew’s analysis indicates that the average loss per passenger on all 44 of Amtrak’s lines was $32, about four times what the loss would be using Amtrak’s figures: only $8 per passenger. (Amtrak uses a different method for calculating route performance).

The Northeast Corridor has the highest passenger volume of any Amtrak route, carrying nearly 10.9 million people in 2008. The corridor’s high-speed Acela Express made a profit of about $41 per passenger. But the more heavily utilized Northeast Regional, with more than twice as many riders as the Acela, lost almost $5 per passenger.

Subsidyscope calculated profits and losses per passenger to ascertain which routes cost Amtrak the most to operate. Our analysis is based on a 2005 Government Accountability Office (GAO) critique of Amtrak’s accounting methods, which says the railroad should consider depreciation when calculating profitability. Other capital intensive industries, such as commercial airlines, include depreciation and overhead when looking at route performance. Subsidyscope’s methodology is explained here.

In October 2008, Congress passed legislation reauthorizing Amtrak for an average of $1.5 billion a year for five years. The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act requires that the railroad provide metrics for measuring all long-distance routes and find ways to improve the financial performance of those routes. Amtrak officials say they are considering options to make the Sunset Limited less costly.


41 posted on 03/10/2011 8:53:14 AM PST by stocksthatgoup (Wealth = Net Worth ...........Income = Net Work!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

Yep! If it were really going to be profitable, then the private sector would do it.


42 posted on 03/10/2011 8:54:45 AM PST by ConjunctionJunction
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro

Anybody know where this “author” is getting his info from? I can find nothing on the FDOT home page indicating any kind of independent consulting study let alone a study that indicates a surplus.

We should make a deal. Since the city of Tampa thinks this will be a huge money maker we should allow Tampa to keep any surplus generated by high-speed rail ticket sales. Conversely, Tampa alone should be on the hook should a yearly shortfall exist.


43 posted on 03/10/2011 9:04:31 AM PST by VeniVidiVici (The last Democrat worth a damn was Stalin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: camle

“has there ever been a ridership prediction for any mass transit proposal that was anyway near the actual figure?”

Yes.

http://www.capitolcorridor.org/included/docs/ccjpa/publicworkshops06.pdf

The 1998 ridership of the Amtrak California Capitol Corridor (463,000) exceeded the projections cast in 1991 of 165,000 by a consioderable margin. In 2009 and 2010 the ridership was up to 1.5 million which was well in excess of the 1991 projection for 2010 ridership of 450,000.


44 posted on 03/10/2011 9:12:35 AM PST by MeganC (Soli Deo Gloria)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MeganC

wall i’ll be!;-)

thanx, Meg


45 posted on 03/10/2011 9:14:13 AM PST by camle (keep an open mind and someone will fill it full of something for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants

Rob Hicks of Tampa, I think laid it out well in a post on the Orlando-Tampa HSR line proposed project. I can’t really add more than what he said in a reply to a Heritage Foundation blog on the subject and I present it here for your edification:

Rob Hicks, Tampa, FL on February 25th, 2011 at 9:21am said:

Who is going to be riding this high speed train? A recent Tampa Tribune article says that the price of a ticket from Tampa Airport to the Orlando Airport is project to be $30. Therefore if I take my wife and two kids on the train to visit Disney World for the day, I will be spending an additional $240 for rail tickets, plus bus transportation to Disney. Any time I gained on the train would certainly be used up on the bus ride.

Compare this to driving my car 77 miles to the front entrance of the park. Since I have an SUV I only get 18 miles per gallon on the interstate. At $3.00 per gallon that translates to a total cost of $25 for the round trip. Still, a savings of $215, which would buy a boat load of Mickey Mouse ears. Plus my kids are not missing the fireworks so that we can get back to the train station on time.

Let’s next consider a single business man heading over to Orlando for a business meeting. It is still going to cost him $60 for the round trip, plus transportation to and from the rail station and possibly parking fees for his car at the Tampa end while he is gone. This is more than double what it would cost him to drive.

Until the cost of the more convenient option of driving your own car exceeds the cost of riding the train, with all of its logistic pitfalls, people are just not going to do it!


46 posted on 03/10/2011 9:15:00 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: ThomasThomas

In Texas where private investors wanted to build high speed rail they found themselves the target of an extensive anti-rail PR and legal campaign funded by Southwest Airlines.

So long as SWA is allowed to act to protect their near and growing monopoly on trips of 100-500 miles then high speed rail will continue to scare away private investors.

I suppose one solution would be convincing SWA to run the high speed rail projects.


47 posted on 03/10/2011 9:17:23 AM PST by MeganC (Soli Deo Gloria)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: camle

You’re welcome! One thing I’ll note is that the ‘Amtrak California’ Capitol Corridor is neither run by Amtrak or by CalTRANS - it’s controlled by a joint powers authority composed of local governments who wanted the rail service to continue after Amtrak and CalTRANS did their best to run it into insolvency. The JPA hired the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) District to manage the system and with experienced leadership at the helm the system has prospered to the point that they’re this year beginning to study constructing their own dedicated rail line as opposed to sharing rails with Union Pacific and BNSF.


48 posted on 03/10/2011 9:25:50 AM PST by MeganC (Soli Deo Gloria)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: MeganC
The 1998 ridership of the Amtrak California Capitol Corridor (463,000) exceeded the projections cast in 1991 of 165,000 by a consioderable margin. In 2009 and 2010 the ridership was up to 1.5 million which was well in excess of the 1991 projection for 2010 ridership of 450,000.

And it's still a huge money loser.

49 posted on 03/10/2011 9:26:54 AM PST by VeniVidiVici (The last Democrat worth a damn was Stalin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro

Some how I don’t invision 9,000 people a day thinking...

Instead of taking 90 minutes to drive to Orlando from Tampa.

I’m going to drive 30 minutes to the airport
Pay $10 to park my car
Pay $32 for the train to Orlando
take 60 minutes to ride to Orlando

and then figure out how to get around Orlando.

Where oh where is the $42 in value?


50 posted on 03/10/2011 9:30:20 AM PST by rwilson99 (Please tell me how the words "shall not perish and have everlasting life" would NOT apply to Mary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VeniVidiVici

No one will ride a train from Tampa to Orlando Airport..Tampa has an airport...Plus it will have many stops ..it is not a direct ride..


51 posted on 03/10/2011 9:32:02 AM PST by Hojczyk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: VeniVidiVici

“And it’s still a huge money loser.”

Nope, not at all. The trains were originally implemented as an alternative to a much more costly widening of Interstate 80 from State Route 65 to the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge. By diverting 1.5 million round trips per year from I-80 the Capitols (as they’re called) have saved the taxpayers the approximately $7 billion dollars that was being contemplated to widen the freeway along the same 125 mile route.

The trains were originally supposed to recapture 12% of their costs in fares when the system was (mis)managed by Amtrak and CalTrans. With the JPA running things they’re now recapturing 40% of costs in fares which makes for a net savings for California taxpayers when weighed against costs for rebuilding I-80 to carry 1.5 million additional round trips annually.


52 posted on 03/10/2011 9:35:27 AM PST by MeganC (Soli Deo Gloria)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro

If the line was as successful as they say it is, why hasn’t Amtrak built a line from Tampa-Saint Pete to Orlando yet? It should be very lucrative.


53 posted on 03/10/2011 9:36:36 AM PST by NorthStarStateConservative (I'm just another disabled naturalized minority vegan pro life conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rwilson99

There are no commuter rail lines to connect to the main rail line and the reality is you still have to rent a taxi, take the bus or rent a car at the other end. And that means more $$$ out of your pocket. The reality is until it costs more to operate a car than it does to take the train, people will stick with what they know and all the government studies liberals peddle won’t change it.


54 posted on 03/10/2011 9:39:34 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

what happens when the autodrive car is available.

we now have cars that self parallel park and that is becoming more and more standard equiptment.

it is not a question of if but when.


55 posted on 03/10/2011 9:41:36 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: NorthStarStateConservative

Amtrak has one daily trip along the route from Orlando to Tampa and a coach seat (when available) costs $10.00 to $14.00

This is traditional intercity Amtrak service (meaning the schedule can be delayed due to higher priority freight trains) and is not considered ‘commuter rail’ that would have a better than 95% ‘on-time’ record.


56 posted on 03/10/2011 9:44:35 AM PST by MeganC (Soli Deo Gloria)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: MeganC
With the JPA running things they’re now recapturing 40% of costs in fares which makes for a net savings for California taxpayers when weighed against costs for rebuilding I-80 to carry 1.5 million additional round trips annually.

So the additional 60% needed to cover costs comes from where?

57 posted on 03/10/2011 9:47:04 AM PST by VeniVidiVici (The last Democrat worth a damn was Stalin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro

another offering from Delusional Studies While U Wait, Inc.


58 posted on 03/10/2011 9:59:24 AM PST by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Godspeed .. Monthly Donor Onboard .. Obama: Epic Fail or Bust!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Politicians can tout high speed rail since they don’t have to please customers and they never have to worry about real world costs. Their money isn’t on the line. And if it goes belly-up, they can always sock it to the taxpayers. Political projects are usually always a disaster.


59 posted on 03/10/2011 10:05:08 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: MeganC

I didn’t know that. However, 14 bucks seems a bit too low for a trip from TAM to MCO considering fuel and everything. Methinks there is some subsidy involved.


60 posted on 03/10/2011 10:16:34 AM PST by NorthStarStateConservative (I'm just another disabled naturalized minority vegan pro life conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-86 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson