Passenger Trains > Amtrak does extremely well in polls

I'm posting this article from my former home town of St. Louis in order to show just how well Amtrak does in polls.

No matter how some train fans bash Amtrak constantly, apparently the American people love Amtrak and want more of it.

The National popularity of Amtrak as shown in these polls just might save us from any drastic cuts even if the up-coming elections in November puts more anti-Amtrak types in office (which everyone is predicting).

We all know that most politicians live and dye by poll data; and poll data is where Amtrak is shining brightly.

Joe

http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/columns/memo-to-congress-missourians-want-more-amtrak-service/article_9d3a1be2-b79e-5fc2-81b2-a87031cc3064.html

Florida Joe, you are correct for the most part as the majority of folks who take the trains out of the Baltimore area really enjoy them and will ride again. It's usually the folks who have had a really terrible experience, such as those who have experienced breakdowns where they are stranded for hours, that complain and in many cases will not ride again.

John

There's an old saying in marketing that people who like an experience will tell five people, but people who hate an experience will tell 20 people.

Amtrak needs to do a better job getting the word out --from-- the satisfied customers, and trying to do a better job making everyone else happy.

BTW, I notice that the new Acela commercials focused on wi-fi access on the Acela etc are back on the NY TV channels. Mostly the business channels. Has anyone used the wi-fi on Acela or the regionals lately? It was pretty intermittent last year, and the cause of a lot of complaints.

I am neither disputing the popularity or trying to bash Amtrak.
Service out of St. Louis seems to pretty good.
However, as an article:
It is noted as news/opinion. It quotes figures for which there are not cites.
It is written by transportation union executives.

Of note, they mention Missouri service lines but not the service to Chicago which I realize is
mostly in Illinois but certainly service to Missouri.

And two person crews also mentioned.? There have been questions whether through regulation or legislation this
will extend to commuter and Amtrak operations. I mean you are worried about a freight train somewhere so how about
a commuter train loaded with people.

Bob

A lot of things do well in the polls.

But life is about choices, not abstract matters.

How do you think Amtrak would do if people were asked whether Social Security benefits should be increased or whether Amtrak services should be increased?

Most folks want both... but they don't want to pay for either!

Bill Deaver
Tehachapi, CA

reindeerflame Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A lot of things do well in the polls.
>
> But life is about choices, not abstract matters.
>
> How do you think Amtrak would do if people were
> asked whether Social Security benefits should be
> increased or whether Amtrak services should be
> increased?

This is an old trick: remember Mica saying that the costs of Amtrak dining service kept soldiers from having hot meals? You can create any syllogism you want to get the result you want, and the anti-Amtrak crowd is very adept at doing this.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 04/16/14 10:46 by Ptolemy.

reindeerflame Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A lot of things do well in the polls.
>
> But life is about choices, not abstract matters.
>
> How do you think Amtrak would do if people were
> asked whether Social Security benefits should be
> increased or whether Amtrak services should be
> increased?

So what is the relative cost of those increases and what do you get in return? Without that it is a meaningless question and any statistics collected from it would be equally meaningless.

Come on, this board only loves Iowa Pacific/Pullman. Amtrak is a evil, unionized company.lmfao

Posted from Android

Ptolemy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> reindeerflame Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > A lot of things do well in the polls.
> >
> > But life is about choices, not abstract
> matters.
> >
> > How do you think Amtrak would do if people were
> > asked whether Social Security benefits should
> be
> > increased or whether Amtrak services should be
> > increased?
>
> This is an old trick: remember Mica saying that
> the costs of Amtrak dining service kept soldiers
> from having hot meals? You can create any
> syllogism you want to get the result you want, and
> the anti-Amtrak crowd is very adept at doing this.


An even older "trick" is just asking people if they want more Amtrak.

It's like asking people if they prefer world peace.

It's nice if it's free.

reindeerflame Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A lot of things do well in the polls.
>
> But life is about choices, not abstract matters.
>
> How do you think Amtrak would do if people were
> asked whether Social Security benefits should be
> increased or whether Amtrak services should be
> increased?

After yesterday (tax day), I'd just be satisfied if SS benefits weren't taxed!!

Similar surveys, also underwritten by the transport trades unions, have shown similar results in Kentucky, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, etc.

Here's the Iowa version, using almost identical language describing the results. "Americans want more passenger rail, and they want the government to fund it". This one uses the dubious factoid "for every dollar invested in Amtrak, the American public gets back $4". Not otherwise footnoted or explained.

Here's the article from the International Association of Machinists site:

http://www.goiam.org/images/articles/tcunion/legislative-outlook/amtrak.pdf

Gosh, I wonder why the article didn't give any details of the survey. . . things like who they talked to, and what questions they asked?

Let's see. . . .if you do a search for "Amtrak Poll Missouri" the first hit is this article. . .and the second hit is a report by "DFM Research" (http://dfmresearch.com/Home_Page_.html) who appears to have done the "poll" in question. "DFM Research" is headed by Dean Mitchell, who is described as ". . . a political adviser to the Transportation Division of SMART (Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, Transportation), providing consulting and policy research services that the union's senior leadership utilize in their bipartisan legislative lobbying efforts in Congress and in state capitols across the United States."

So. . . it is possible to make the argument that perhaps the "poll" was less of an exercise in determining the true will of the masses and maybe more of a project designed to enhance the Union's lobbying efforts.

But. . .since everybody knows that Unions and PR agents and lobbyists would never, never, prevaricate about things like this and tell anything but the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, this is actually very good news for rail fans.

Since "Amtrak does extremely well in polls", it means that there are obviously hoards of potential rail passengers that don't travel on the rails for the sole reason that there just isn't enough rail service to meet the need. And given their extremely strong support of Amtrak, it also means that they will be quite happy to see a marked increase in their rail fares, knowing that they are investing in the future of rail travel, at least in Missouri.

And with such an increase in rail fares and the massive increase in rail passengers proud to be supporting Amtrak, there will be no need for any further subsidies from any governmental body for rail. . . . .

Right???

That sounds fairly low. I have seen more than $1:20 for airline gate leases; $1:50 for stadiums - damned near EVERY project (off-ramps, electronic tolling, fiber-optic, increasing lanes, converting to LED street lights, new gov. buildings, research labs, etc. etc.) have had very loose ratios applied. Lies, damned lies & statistics - you can make them say anything you want.

I have said it before - I often wondered why Amtrak doesn't use this publicity trick more often. For every dollar spent on Amtrak, you have (theoretically), hotels, hotel staff, janitors, street cleaners, trash collectors, police, fire, bus drivers, taxi drivers, bike rentals, restaurants, rental cars, etc. - all rising with the same tide. You could very easily plot a better than 1:4 ratio.


1:4 is ludicrously low.

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This one uses the dubious factoid
> "for every dollar invested in Amtrak, the
> American public gets back $4". Not otherwise
> footnoted or explained.

Something else about this news story which is headlined, "Memo to Congress: Missourians want more Amtrak." Do the readers realize that Amtrak has abdicated its responsibility for the Missouri services? That if there is to be more intrastate passenger service in Missouri, it will have to be paid for by Missouri (so it doesn't matter to Congress WHAT Missourians want) and that it may not even be Amtrak?

The 1:3 ratio ( that is what the article really says) for what an investment in Amtrak "pours" (creative wording) into the economy was a tidbit thrown out by Boardman several weeks ago in hopes that some in the media would pick it up. It is unsubstantiated. Personally I think it is far too low, and anyone associated with Amtrak who threw out such a low figure failed to make the impact that perhaps was desired. In fact it is relatively simple to find references on the Net that show for certain other State-sponsored services, the economic return has been much greater than 1:3 and is expected to rise. I'll let the readership here do the research that Boardman and his Amtrak handlers failed to do. It was easy enough for me to do yesterday while on a business trip on an intercity bus, bouncing over an undermaintained highway. Problem is it was just too difficult to type a response in a little smart phone screen as the bus bounced along. Why did I not take a train? I couldn't; Amtrak killed the service some years ago.

Neither can I use Amtrak for the next leg, where a weekend would even help make such a long-stage journey more time-competitive. Splitting it into a bimodal trip just for the sake of riding a train partway is impractical. American Airlines, here I come.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/17/14 05:56 by GenePoon.

The ultimate poll on Amtrak is Congress, or, more accurately, the funding Congress provides each year for Amtrak operations. A straw poll by a bunch of union hacks comes across as a glorified journalistic puff piece (in a different guise) and really doesn't matter too much in the grand scheme of things.

Narniaman Wrote:


> Since "Amtrak does extremely well in polls", it
> means that there are obviously hoards of potential
> rail passengers that don't travel on the rails for
> the sole reason that there just isn't enough rail
> service to meet the need.

Well, this is a true statement. It has been proven over and over that the more trains you run, the more people ride them. Of course, with increased frequencies, comes additional expenses. THat is the rub.

billio Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The ultimate poll on Amtrak is Congress, or, more
> accurately, the funding Congress provides each
> year for Amtrak operations...



NOT ONE DOLLAR of which would be for intrastate trains like the Missouri River Runners...they are
wholly State funded, remember Amtrak abdicated that responsibility totally?

P Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Narniaman Wrote:
>
>
> > Since "Amtrak does extremely well in polls", it
> > means that there are obviously hoards of
> potential
> > rail passengers that don't travel on the rails
> for
> > the sole reason that there just isn't enough
> rail
> > service to meet the need.
>
> Well, this is a true statement. It has been
> proven over and over that the more trains you run,
> the more people ride them. Of course, with
> increased frequencies, comes additional expenses.
> THat is the rub.

Yes, but making transfers easy, offering service to places people want to go, etc will make train travel a viable option. The Amtrak Keystones (and pennsylvanian) offer easy access to both Philadelphia International airport (via Septa connection at 30th street) and Newark Liberty (via the Air Train). That can be a big deal for people living in Harrisburg, Lancaster, etc and traveling to Europe, Asia, etc. And, Amtrak offers code shares with United from Newark.

Whether somebody living in Lewistown or Altoona would be so motivated, with one train a day is another question.