posted
I'm sure that the following will be viewed as pure fiction, by many. As a strong supporter of the Amtrak LD train, I would have to agree the changes suggested aren't likely to happen, especially for economic reasons not only with reference to Amtrak but reference to the whole country:
Even if you think the article is unrealistic, I think the article does bring up some interesting points. A quote from the article:
"Amtrak has often found itself in an identity crisis. On the one hand, there has been a corporate sentiment Amtrak is an agency of government, subsidized by government, and therefore should serve the lowest common denominator of passenger. At times, on the other hand, Amtrak’s managers have realized high revenue first class passengers, particularly on long distance trains, bring in enough profits that help pay for other low revenue services the railroad operates. Amtrak has never been able to come to grips with these two profiles, and, as a result, has never really offered a consistent product that attracts repeat, high revenue passengers". ***************
They make some interesting suggestions, such as dividing the coach passengers into 3 classes as well as having meals served 6:30 AM till 10:00 PM.
Richard
Posts: 1909 | From: Santa Rosa | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
That article is 9 years old! Yes, it's speculative despite the tone but some ideas could be explored further. I can't help thinking that four classes of travel would be a nightmare to administer, not to mention costly time-wise.
The article suggests lengthening the trains would be unproblematic. Not so: many stations aren't long enough so the need for double or even triple spotting would increase which costs time and thus money - especially with four classes to load!
I don't quite get the distinction between short haul coach passengers and long haul (non-premium) coach passengers. The only difference appears to be a partition! Now, if it said higher density seating for short haul then that makes sense. What if there are more of one type of passenger on one segment than on another? The more classes you have, the less flexible you can be unless you start doing upgrades, which adds a whole new layer of complexity.
All this varied equipment type though. Chances of failure increase, as do chances of set swaps with inappropriate equipment. I think we currently have baggage-transition-sleeper-diner-lounge-coach (6 types). He seems to be suggesting baggage-transition-sleeper-diner1-diner2-lounge-premCoach-longCoach-shortCoach (9 types), assuming the dining cars will be different to cater for normal meals and 24-hour service. This also assumes the sleeper lounges referenced are rooms within the existing cars rather than separate cars.
-------------------- Geoff M. Posts: 2426 | From: Apple Valley, CA | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
Yes, the article is 9 years old, but I think it does bring up some interesting concepts to think about.
I do agree that doubling the length of the train doesn't mean costs are doubled.
I keep wondering, say if all Amtrak long distance trains are eliminated, what, if anything, might take their place?
Possibly their point about major franchises, such as the hotel chains, could be a factor in bringing back some LD trains, even though the number of LD trains might be limited to just a few. Possibly only deluxe excursion trains such as PRJ or a US equivalent of the Rocky Mountaineer might be the lone remnant.
Richard
Posts: 1909 | From: Santa Rosa | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
Just a couple of quick points: the article points to the American Orient Express and the Grand Luxe as examples of successful long haul first class operations. Well, where are they now? And The Canadian has to be subsidized by the Canadian Gov't.
Also, I question their assertion that the first class portion of the train can support itself. I have seen no numbers, but just intuitively, based on the level of support necessary to field one sleeper car, I sincerely doubt that sleeper car fares cover the cost. Look at Mr. Ellis's operation between NOL and CHI. Initially, the cost for one passenger was in the thousands of dollars, presumably that price point covered his costs. That's quite a premium over other options to get between the two cities, or to take other vacation options (you can take a week's cruise for that kind of money).
I don't like their survey, either...one train? Hardly a market profile.
Finally, I think there are many arguments that can be made in favor of LD first class service. And I wish they would be made, but these guys are out to lunch. Tom
Posts: 518 | From: Maynard, MA, USA | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I too question the real profitability of sleeper service.
Considering how much space each sleeping car passengers uses and the cost of having a dining operation that takes up an entire car that stays empty much of the time, I harbor suspicions.
In my experience, relatively few coach passengers enjoy "dinner in the diner" and they (at least me) would probably be happy in a "coffee shop" setting that could operate throughout the day and evening. I bet this type of service would lose less money too.
I would love financials on real profitability--in other words ones that do not allot the energy and maintenance costs of moving sleeping equipment to the entire train, the revenue lost by having too few chair cars available, etc.
I quite agree that "high revenue, first class passengers" (in sleepers) have not sufficiently helped pay for the "low revenue" (coach) passengers, but I think that was a concept that Amtrak had. I really would like to see some sort of an Amtrak light- meal bistro car open 12-16 hours.
I imagine there were several reasons why the American Orient Express, and, later, the Grand Luxe, failed. Many delays, dirty car interiors, travel, at times, by night (as to the Grand Canyon) and a lack of a central hub, for boarding, may have been among many reasons for the failure. Not to mention cost. I'm not sure about the American Orient Express, but wasn't the Grand Luxe a "tag-along" train in back of Amtrak?
I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think Pullman Rail Journeys will last. High costs and, as of yet, no really scenic train routes might do it in. Again, I would love to see PRJ be successful.
I have always thought a US version of the Rocky Mountaineer would be successful. Daylight only, it could start in Seattle and/or Portland with a stop near Spokane. Then on to Glacier Park. I think it would draw people from all over the west coast and country. With RM-like dome cars, services, gourmet meals, etc, I think it would be popular even with high costs, catering to the unabashedly higher income set (although the RM "red leaf" service cost is fairly reasonable, in my opinion).
I think I may have posted a reference to the article when it first appeared, nine years ago. Pardon my absentmindedness in doing so. I guess, for old guys like me, it comes with age. It least that's the excuse.
Richard
Posts: 1909 | From: Santa Rosa | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
Totally agree with you on a USA Rocky Mountaineer.
In opinion, it would be most successful if anchored by cities with major airports--international airports--at both ends, e.g.,
Seattle - Portland (receive passengers) - Columbia River Gorge - Crater Lake (by bus) - Feather River Canyon - Emeryville (two night stay - Napa stay option) - Los Angeles, with overnight stops in appropriate places.
This itinerary would also be ideal for cruise passengers--a prime market for such a train.
As for Ed Ellis, I believe that his passenger operations are a labor of love. Financials are not his primary consideration.
In my experience, relatively few coach passengers enjoy "dinner in the diner" and they (at least me) would probably be happy in a "coffee shop" setting that could operate throughout the day and evening. I bet this type of service would lose less money too.
While many major East-West trains, once offered a 'coffee shop' economy Diner and some had a distinct motif for such, quite simply in the Amtrak era, they have been replaced by a microwave oven and one Attendant in a Snack Bar (whoops; Cafe)
Posts: 9976 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wholly agree with your immediate thought, Mr. Nadeau; and so it would appear as does Amtrak since the Bush/Mineta gang got outta town. Never mind how many 'mega$$$' were squandered converting perfectly useful 380XX Diners as configured into the useless 370XX 'Cross Country Cafe' as a result of their micromanagement. Just as well that program got scuttled before they got to the 330XX Sightseers.
Fortunately today, powers that be accept that Amtrak HQ is at 60 Mass and not 1600 Penn.
Finally, remembering back to my pre-Amtrak joyrides, GN had a Ranch Lounge that had a (surprise) ranch motif (GN Bar was even a registered trademark), which when all was said and done was a Lunch Counter Diner Lounge. The same applied to the NP with their Travelers Rest where the motif was of the Lewis and Clark expedition. Even the maligned Golden State had a 'Fiesta' motif for their Hamburger Grill Lounge and the Sunset had the Pride of Texas Coffee Shop. CZ had the Cable Car Lounge 'Under The Dome'. Denver Zephyr had like arrangement with a Chuck Wagon motif.
Posts: 9976 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
If Amtrak is unable to offer first class meals and service in the diner (and that's unlikely with the current micro managing from all directions), then it should stop pretending to do so with fake china, fake linen, and instant food. I am afraid we have to leave first class service to the Ed Ellis' of the world.
Start over again with a different concept, as suggested by Don. I think GBN suggestions of the lunch counter diner lounge is the direction to go. The great majority of travelers would be perfectly happy with a fast food concept, perhaps cafeteria style but with tables and counters to have the sit down experience. In fact, I have noticed some even seem slightly uncomfortable with the quasi fancy table service.
Just remember to dump your plastic plates and cups in the trash when leaving.
Posts: 2397 | From: Camden, SC | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
We must not loose sight that the Millennial Generation thinks in terms of fast casual food (and here is Marriott changing my preferred brand, Courtyard, to meet that demand - and to my personal chagrin), so maybe the 'Simplified Dining Servive' (aka Diner Lite) may be where they want to go.
But let us have that decision come from 60 Mass, and not 1600 Penn.
Finally, I should write a review of my May stay at a Courtyard in Madison; my thoughts on their Bistro F&B have not changed, but I sincerely appreciate that the General Manager of the property took her time to share thoughts, favorable and otherwise, with me on the new concept.
Posts: 9976 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Norman, you are so correct to bring up the changing meal habits of Millennials and other younger adults. The more financially fortunate of them very much favor more informal dining but also upmarket dining with delicious food.
This trend in my opinion should not to be feared. Formal hotel dining rooms, with a few exceptions such as the Oak Room at the Plaza, are not the venues of choice for most travelers today--young or old.
Instead, as an example, the Hyatt in New Jersey has taken what normally would be its formal room and turned it into a place that people can both relax after work with a drink and snack or have a more substantial meal. In the evening it draws a substantial crowd of non guests from local offices.
Here's what Millennial favored The Standard in downtown LA (not far from Union Station) says about its restaurant:
"24/7 RESTAURANT "Mon-Sun 12am-12am "The Restaurant at The Standard, Downtown LA specializes in organic locally sourced comfort classics which are served all day, everyday in a vibrant brasserie setting. There's a diner style counter great for cocktails or a quick bite, as well as a charming outdoor patio."
I see Amtrak long-distance dining in those terms (well probably not organic due to costs and probably not with an outside patio, although that would be nice ) drawing a limited item menu from the likes of the following:
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
