Delta loses $70 per passenger in 2nd quarter

Of course you won't see Delta's loss broken out this way in the business press, but there it is: $1.97 billion, 28.6 million passengers enplaned. Read it here.

Why cite this here? Partly to put Amtrak's annual subsidy in perspective ($1.2 billion for 24 million pax =~ $50), but mainly to illustrate the limited usefulness of this "loss per passenger" statistic frequently tossed around in Amtrak discussions.

(edited to add the word "million" in the first sentence)

OT

Matt, these are interesting figures and I for one thank you for posting this
here. It is just about what was in today's Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel.
At this particular time, I will just make one point regarding Delta Air Lines
and that is that the loss of Delta would be a lot less devastating on our
country and its people than the loss of Amtrak would be.
If Delta were to fold, other airline companies would step right up and fill
most of the gaps and Delta is number one here at Fort Lauderdale in
passengers.
Who is going to fill the gap if Amtrak were to fold?????
Noel Weaver

The loss of Delta ( or any other specific airline) would not mean the end of all intercity air passenger service. The loss of Amtrak would definately mean the end of intercity rail passenger service as we know it. That is a major difference.

I know we "go back a ways together", Mr. Weaver, but I must disagree.

The only place where severe economic impact would result if Amtrak and/or intercity rail passenger service were to fold would be within the Corridor. Hopefully, another agency would step forward, but considering the "great success" that has occurred in States coming together to form multi state agencies over the years, good luck. Surely you recall, during the late fifties, how the public debate over forming a Tri-State commuter agency for New York came to naught.

Therefore, if there were some way to obtain funding for 'what counts" i.e. the Corridor and really nothing else, that would be one thing, but the only way the Corridor can reasonably and practically garner funding is at Federal level. To ensure Federal level funding, there must be a National System, as the Incorporators wisely envisioned, and as such Florida and some 45 other contiguous States "get in on the action".

However, I fail to see the economic impact to SE Florida if 89-98 ceased to call at FLL; I could see much if Delta ceased to call at that land mass to the East along Broward Blvd, and the capacity lost was not expeditiously replaced by another air carrier.

I could see much if Delta ceased to call at that land mass to the East along Broward Blvd, and the capacity lost was not expeditiously replaced by another air carrier.

Those are 2 very big ifs. The consensus I read is that other airlines would immediately rush in to fill the void, possibly even with repainted Delta planes. Remember, this is South Florida we're talking about.

Our economy depends on commercial airline service, but on no single air line company. That's the moral of the ATSB's denial of United's last loan-guarantee application.

If anybody ever thinks that the U.S. Congress is going to continue to
sustain Amtrak soley for the northeast corridor, I think you are sadly
mistaken. Even if you included the corridors in the midwest and in the
west, I still do not think the U.S. Government will be involved in keeping
Amtrak running without a national system.
Amtrak's ridership between the north east and Florida is unique, a lot of
older people who do not fly for one reason or another and a good feeder
business in the area between Jacksonville and Richmond is what keeps
these trains on.
I still say, take away Delta, others will fill the gap.
Take away Amtrak and no one will fill it, they carry several hundred a day
in and out of this state and add the Auto Train to the others and it is even
more.
If Florida and the whole country are paying for service, then the whole
country should be receiving service.
I still say that if there was more financial penalties to the freight railroads
for delaying Amtrak trains, Amtrak's service would improve, their costs
would go down and the business would improve even more. They could
also get better use of their equipment too because it would make its
turns better.
We are trying to run a national rail passenger service with "wind pudding".
Noel Weaver

Eastern Airlines once provided significant service into Florida. When Eastern died, there was Delta ( and some others). I expect the same would be true if Delta folded.
While this is more a social comment than an economic one, air transportation is the primary form of intercity public transportation in this society at this time. While there are many who are perfectly willing to see intercity rail transportation disappear, no one is equally willing to see air passenger service suffer a similar fate. No matter what may happen to any individual airline ( ex. Eastern, National, TWA, Pan AM, etc.etc.etc.) the existence of air passenger service itself, is not in jeopardy the way that rail passenger service is. Whether or not you will ever see an air equivalent of Amtrak is an open question, but there will be something provided by someone, regardless of any present or future cost considerations.

Noel Weaver wrote: Who is going to fill the gap if Amtrak were to fold?????

I dunno. RailBlue??

Just kidding.

Mr Weaver, you and I are on the 'same page"; here is a quote from my earlier posting:

"Therefore, if there were some way to obtain funding for 'what counts" i.e. the Corridor and really nothing else, that would be one thing, but the only way the Corridor can reasonably and practically garner funding is at Federal level. To ensure Federal level funding, there must be a National System, as the Incorporators wisely envisioned, and as such Florida and some 45 other contiguous States "get in on the action'

walt wrote:Eastern Airlines once provided significant service into Florida. When Eastern died, there was Delta ( and some others). I expect the same would be true if Delta folded.
While this is more a social comment than an economic one, air transportation is the primary form of intercity public transportation in this society at this time. While there are many who are perfectly willing to see intercity rail transportation disappear, no one is equally willing to see air passenger service suffer a similar fate. No matter what may happen to any individual airline ( ex. Eastern, National, TWA, Pan AM, etc.etc.etc.) the existence of air passenger service itself, is not in jeopardy the way that rail passenger service is. Whether or not you will ever see an air equivalent of Amtrak is an open question, but there will be something provided by someone, regardless of any present or future cost considerations.

We did have an air equivalent of Amtrak...

...It was called Tower Air.

how much did amtrak lose PER PASSENGER???

Well, not that much, Nip

I don't think that Amtrak lost that much per customer, but I may be wrong, depending on the routes.

ClubCar wrote:

walt wrote:Eastern Airlines once provided significant service into Florida. When Eastern died, there was Delta ( and some others). I expect the same would be true if Delta folded.
While this is more a social comment than an economic one, air transportation is the primary form of intercity public transportation in this society at this time. While there are many who are perfectly willing to see intercity rail transportation disappear, no one is equally willing to see air passenger service suffer a similar fate. No matter what may happen to any individual airline ( ex. Eastern, National, TWA, Pan AM, etc.etc.etc.) the existence of air passenger service itself, is not in jeopardy the way that rail passenger service is. Whether or not you will ever see an air equivalent of Amtrak is an open question, but there will be something provided by someone, regardless of any present or future cost considerations.

We did have an air equivalent of Amtrak...

...It was called Tower Air.

How was Tower Air like Amtrak? Tower got its start flying 747s to Israel and then used them to places like Florida and the West Coast. It certainly wasn't forced to assume a bunch of money-losing operations.

Perhaps Tower was undercapitalized. Many airline start-ups are. JetBlue is a notable exception.

Tower's service drew a lot of complaints. I was on their first flight, and I certainly was unimpressed (especially compared to Virgin which I flew to London a few years afterward). If you want to make comparisons to Amtrak service, I wouldn't go there. Certain participants might accuse you of back-handed Amtrak bashing.

crazy_nip wrote:how much did amtrak lose PER PASSENGER???

Robert Paniagua wrote:I don't think that Amtrak lost that much per customer, but I may be wrong

Been quite a day, hasn't it?