Western Railroad Discussion > Santa Fe + Frisco, Why didn't they?

During another boring night at work, I got to thinking about train related things as I usually do. I got to wondering, Why didn't the Santa Fe merge with the Frisco instead of the BN acquiring it? It seems to me that such a merger would have worked better and the two roads would have fit together nicely! I also was wondering this since the ATSF was always dying to get into St. Louis. With such a merger Santa Fe could have gained both the St. Louis and Memphis gateways. Under the BN merger the ex Frisco lines in Missouri east of Springfield(with the exception of the Thayer Sub)have become the backwaters of the system(especially the Cuba Sub).

This brings me to ask why does the Cuba Sub have only 4 DAILY trains? Such paltry use seems to be a waste of this lines potential. This line would seem to me to make a nice bypass of Chicago from the east to the southwest.

Thanks for any answers, opinions or commemts.

I could see it now. Lots of intermodal and general merchandise trains SCREAMING down Kirkwood Hill through Valley Park!.....SIGH

It seemed to me that the Santa Fe and the Frisco always worked well together. If memory serves correctly they handed off a lot of trains to each other at Avard, OK. I also believe that it would have made more sense for Frisco to have merged with Santa Fe than with BN. Now I'll get up on the soapbox and provide my humble opinion. I never was a BN fan. BN seemed to only appreciate their CB&Q and GN heritage but didn't care much about the other lines that were taken into the system. The Frisco seemed to be quickly forgotten and swept under the rug. I quickly grew tired of cascade green. While it was sad to lose the Santa Fe as an independent railroad it was probably the best thing for BN when Santa Fe took it over and formed the Big New Santa Fe. I'm done with the soapbox now. Someone else's turn.

Going into the modern merger movement that started in the late fifties or early sixties, Santa Fe was, IIRC, either the largest or one of the largest railroads. Though Frisco would have been a good fit, ATSF got preoccupied with trying to get a piece of the Rock. They also at one time tried to get a piece of the WP. Both efforts came to naught, but the CRIP case I think was a big distraction for years.

In the eighties, of course, ATSF kept their failed merger attempt losing steak going with the ill-fated SPSF.

Imagine on top of SP+SLSF, that if the Frisco had not been mandated by the Feds in the early '60s to dispose of its control of the Central of Ga.

I imagine that Frisco/CofGa hookup had it been allowed to go through, it would have been a real attactive merger alternative to the ACL for the Seaboard Air Line to consider. Now that combo might have been attractive to the ATSF!

We then might have 3 different majors in the southeast today. (1: SLSF/CofG/SAL, 2: Southern/?, and 3:ACL/L&N/NC&STL/A&WP/GA)

Technically... BN bought Santa Fe, not the other way around. Sorry.

Unrelated... anyone remember the failed SP-SCL merger?

But the Santa Fe did buy the Frisco, it was just in the previous centrury! Another merger that failed after the transaction. Btw, I read an article the other day that spoke of the BN-SLSF merger saying that the SLSF had taken over the BN! It was a shock to me, too.

Technically....the Southern Pacific bought the Union Pacific, but they went ahead and renamed it the Union Pacific. So let us live by our double standards and enjoy the Big New Santa Fe. In fact, after calling it the Santa Fe for so many years, its hard to break an old habit, but ofcourse, not really trying either.
And I still think the KCS got the royal shaft from the government, when they wanted to take the SP. My opinion, ofcourse

rustedflange wrote:
>
> Technically... BN bought Santa Fe, not the other way around.
> Sorry.
>
> Unrelated... anyone remember the failed SP-SCL merger?

Hey Rustedflange, you mean the "Biaggini Blunder" of 1977? We had a good discussion on that topic about six months ago on here, and as I remember, the SCL rebuffed the SP in its attempts to "marry up." Maybe someone else can share some more information on that one. Would have been an interesting pairing...

I realize that "technically" the BN bought the Santa Fe, BUT it's soooo much more fun to reverse it. Gets the BN guys blood pressure up. All of that aside...the loss of the Frisco was sad. It was a great railroad.

I realize that "technically" the BN bought the Santa Fe, BUT it's soooo much more fun to reverse it. Gets the BN guys blood pressure up.


Teehee... that's evil, man. :)

'Technically', the BN took over both the Frisco and the Santa Fe. What prompted both of those takeovers was BN's investors wanting a new management team. When BN 'took over' Frisco, it was Frisco's management team that was put in charge. Same thing with Sante Fe. And, as with the Frisco merger where the BN side eventually 'won' the war of attrition, prompting their investors to look for a new and improved management team to import, the BN side is doing the same thing at BNSF. Maybe the third time will be the charm when they sell out to the CN as they attempted to do before all major mergers were put on hold.

As to why only 4 trains/day on the Cuba sub, I read awhile back that it's the St. Louis gateway they are avoiding. Speculating here that BNSF wants all transcons either thru Birmingham or Chicago not to short haul themselves. Also, NS doesn't want to exchange traffic in St.Louie when they can do it in KC. You would think BNSF could generate more than 4 just off their STL ramp and from CSX (they had proposed many more when the merger papers were filed), but keep in mind the UP doesn't originate that many from Dupo either. And UP has a stranglehold on all the western auto business.

As to the SP-SCL, this one was doomed anyway from the start. Even if both parties had been madly in love, the ICC would have shot it down since it would have created a transcon and led to a domino effect.