Eastern Railroad Discussion > Ancora's puppet, CSX CEO Steve Angel, speaks to investors

And he basically blames external factors for no growth. Sorry, Steve, even in a low-growth environment (of the broader economy), railroads should be trying to regain market share they have lost to trucking.

The way I see it, his statements at this investor conference are setting the stage for more rounds of cost cutting. PSR! PSR! PSR!!

CSX CEO: Flat industrial results holding back railroad freight growth - FreightWaves

Failure to run trains and service customers stunt growth.  Yup, I said it.

Eng.Shadetree

So true.  American industry has been moving to smaller shipments, faster.  Meanwhile, the railroads are going in the other direction by running super long trains more slowly.  They are worshipping at the alter of "efficiency" and are losing to trucks in a big, big way.  I do not see anything changing.  Wall Street wants super efficiency but not growth.

It is not a good situation.  Shippers are going to continue to reject rail if things do not change, and fast.

How many times has CSX complained the profit margin on intermodal traffic is too thin? They're well on their way to becoming a land barge that carries only bulk freight -- slowly and at lowest possible cost. 

As a friend in the shipping industry astutely said--

"No one is shipping by rail because they want to."

As Chessie1963 pointed out, the industry is on an absolutely divergent path from what its customers want. I'm not at all optimistic about its future.

CSX has already given up on the I195/196 trains it started hardly 6 months ago. I guess because they weren't instantly 15,000 ft trains loaded to the gills with premium containers they had to go in the name of the almighty operating ratio. Whatever was on those trains that stays on rail will go to other existing schedules.

I didn't read his speech but hopefully the word "innovative" was used in there a few times.

Posted from Android

ShortlinesUSA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CSX has already given up on the I195/196 trains it
> started hardly 6 months ago....

Was that pair between Chicago and Jacksonville FL?

What is CSX doing with Savannah and Chicago?

ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ShortlinesUSA Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > CSX has already given up on the I195/196 trains
> it
> > started hardly 6 months ago....
>
> Was that pair between Chicago and Jacksonville
> FL?

Yes.

> What is CSX doing with Savannah and Chicago?

No longer offering single lane service in that market.

And the Wall Street people love what Ancora is doing
Stock price continues to rise every day

Posted from iPhone

giving up on Savannah to Chicago is surprising.  the port has been growing rapidly

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> giving up on Savannah to Chicago is surprising. 
> the port has been growing rapidly

Probably mostly imports for southeastern and Texas metros.

Midwest imports probably land predominantly in VA or NY/NJ.

The CSX Intermodal website still shows daily service in each direction for Bedford Park to Savannah and the port, domestic and international containers.   

pbouzide Wrote:
> Midwest imports probably land predominantly in VA
> or NY/NJ.

Don't forget about Canada as a gateway to the Midwest. The Canadian ports are more reliable than the East Coast US ports. 

My sea freight from Europe lands in Montreal or one of the other Canadian ports, then takes an intermodal train to Chicago, and truck a couple hours to me. 
 

Tss515 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> My sea freight from Europe lands in Montreal or
> one of the other Canadian ports, then takes an
> intermodal train to Chicago, and truck a couple
> hours to me. 
>  

The Greenville Jct Maine railcam generally has a lot of MSC and Hapag Lloyd containers on the morning train. That would be offloaded from ships in Saint John New Brunswick and make its way to Canadian Pacific

Tss515 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> pbouzide Wrote:
> > Midwest imports probably land predominantly in
> VA
> > or NY/NJ.
>
> Don't forget about Canada as a gateway to the
> Midwest. The Canadian ports are more reliable than
> the East Coast US ports. 
>
> My sea freight from Europe lands in Montreal or
> one of the other Canadian ports, then takes an
> intermodal train to Chicago, and truck a couple
> hours to me. 
>  

Good point, Canada->Midwest is significant (particularly Pacific ports).

But does Montreal or Halifax or Saint John combined land the same container volume as NY/NJ, Savannah, or Hampton Roads combined?

No, the word innovation never appeared in the article (though to be charitable, it may passed through his lips and not been reported).

Here's one sample from the article:

“At the end of the day, I’m not sitting here saying, ‘Gee, if you just give me 5% volume, I’ll be fine.’ I’m sitting here thinking I don’t really need that much,” Angel said. “I’ll take it. And if it comes, we’ll capitalize on it. But I think a lot of people in the railroad industry and people in the broader industrial world, generally speaking, have gotten used to having a low-growth environment to work in.”
ShortlinesUSA Wrote:-------------------------------------------------------
> As a friend in the shipping industry astutely
> said--
>
> "No one is shipping by rail because they want
> to."
>
> As Chessie1963 pointed out, the industry is on an
> absolutely divergent path from what its customers
> want. I'm not at all optimistic about its future.
>
>
> CSX has already given up on the I195/196 trains it
> started hardly 6 months ago. I guess because they
> weren't instantly 15,000 ft trains loaded to the
> gills with premium containers they had to go in
> the name of the almighty operating ratio. Whatever
> was on those trains that stays on rail will go to
> other existing schedules.
>
> I didn't read his speech but hopefully the word
> "innovative" was used in there a few times.
>
> Posted from Android

Well, if you treat it as a low growth market, that is exactly what it will be for the rails.  What is really missing are creative ways to get more business.  I do not hear any of that sort of thinking anymore.

Wasn't it Harrison who said something to the effect of, "We will go for traffic that fits the railroad?"  Good marketing is about putting your customer's needs first, not the railroad's needs and desires!  Angel is essentially saying that CSX will change nothing to be more customer focused, and will just wait to see what freight comes to the company.

This attitude is not good.  Railroads will become marginal players if things do not change.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/26/26 04:42 by Chessie1963.

Sales teams, like CEOs, respond to incentives.  If you structure your comp programs properly, you will get the business you want.

Railroads don't seem to want some entire classes of business, and don't engage effectively with developers to put these mega-warehouses near railroads.  When they do, it seems that they can't hold the business.  I'm thinking specifically of NS and its Greencastle PA yard (btw Harrisburg PA and Hagerstown MD).

At least CSX also screws over CPKC haulage trains I165/I166 royally.

Bill Miller
Galt, ON

CCMF Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> At least CSX also screws over CPKC haulage trains
> I165/I166 royally.

The CPKC screws over I165/I166 royally.

Typhoon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CCMF Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > At least CSX also screws over CPKC haulage
> trains
> > I165/I166 royally.
>
> The CPKC screws over I165/I166 royally.

Typhoon— you are so correct in that statement. I work personally with those trains and can attest the problem is not with CSX at least on the east-end.

Posted from iPhone