Railroad Forums 

  • Why does the Auto-Train Service Approach being Profitable?

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

 #1464963  by Alex M
 
One reason would be that it is a simple point A to point B operation with only a crew and service stop in Florence. No stopping at various stations along the way. If it were marketed right and not have its amenities nickeled and dimed, it could be a lucrative operation.
 #1464971  by SouthernRailway
 
1. It's a long train. Trains have huge overhead: fuel and locomotive-related costs, among other costs. Once those costs are covered, it's easy to make a profit.

Most Amtrak long-distance trains have such high overhead (including paying for locomotives that could haul much longer trains than they do), but are so short that they don't carry enough passengers to generate ticket revenues to come close to covering these overhead costs. The Auto-Train does: car after car of passengers and autos.

2. Few stations. Stations add to trains' overhead. If airlines had to operate airports for just 1 flight a day, they'd lose a ton of money, too. The Auto-Train has only 2 stations.
 #1464989  by gprimr1
 
Think about all the extra revenue from the cars. All they need is someone to unload them and load them, no need for onboard staff.

I've always wondered how much more money the train could make if it had a second terminus in Massachusetts or New Jersey.
 #1464997  by Backshophoss
 
Parts of I-95 south of Richmond Va can get congested,always under construction,etc Gas pricing near an interstate will be higher then the rest of
the local area high price.
You wind up wasting time at "tourist traps" like "South of the Border",stuck waiting in line for fast food,restaurant seatting,etc........
 #1465004  by R36 Combine Coach
 
gprimr1 wrote:I've always wondered how much more money the train could make if it had a second terminus in Massachusetts or New Jersey.
Not sure if the NEC could handle autoracks, so might have to go CSX (B&O/RDG) main line all the way. Ridgefield Park/Jersey City seems have the ideal location for a future Auto Train terminal.
 #1465005  by east point
 
SouthernRailway wrote:1.

2. Few stations. Stations add to trains' overhead. If airlines had to operate airports for just 1 flight a day, they'd lose a ton of money, too. The Auto-Train has only 2 stations.
Actually believe Florence is also considered a station. Servicing personnel at Florence cost are divided there between auto train and Silvers.
 #1465053  by Tadman
 
Mod Note: While the concept of extension up-Corridor is interesting and perhaps profitable, we have discussed it ad nauseum and I believe it has its own thread. If you wish to discuss such, please take it to that thread.

Thanks and have a safe week, especially if you're in the Northeast.
 #1465076  by rohr turbo
 
I don't really think the lack of en route stations is the reason for the good financial performance. Actually mid point stations on the LD network probably add more incremental revenue than they cost Amtrak.

I believe AT fills a unique market niche that cannot be addressed by any other transportation company. Therefore they can command a higher fare and yet still fill the train.
 #1465166  by Tadman
 
Seems logical to me. If their demand pricing algorithm works well, full trains automatically means premium fares. Further, if they know the train will be full months in advance due to historical data (IE December - April), can they override the algorithm at the early booking end of things and make those pricey as well? That's what it appears the Acela fare algorithm does.