Eastern Railroad Discussion > Final 2001 Traffic Data

I just received the final tallies of 2001 carloadings for each of the major North American railroads.

CSX hauled 7,096,000 cars, down 2.9% from 2001 levels.
Norfolk Southern hauled 6,614,500 cars, down 3.3%.

UP hauled 8,896,800 cars, which was ***up*** by 0.2% for the year.
BNSF hauled 8,138,8000 cars, down 0.4%.

Canadian National hauled 3,755,200 cars, down 0.8%.
Canadian Pacific hauled 2,530,200 cars, ***up*** 1.1%.

KCS had 918,800 loads, ***up*** 1.7%.
Wisconsin Central had 518,000 loads, down 1.9%.

So, of the eight big railroads on the continent, only three managed traffic gains, while five had losses. Recession bites, y'know? NS and CSX have a higher concentration of industrial product shipments---steel, autos, paper, etc. than the western carriers, so typically recession hurts eastern traffic more than western. Here's a quick sampling of numbers from the merchandise business, sorted by total loads:

UP: 3,337,800 loads, down 1.5%
CSX: 3,215,400 loads, down 6.5%
NS: 2,608,300 loads, down 8.5%
BNSF: 2,016,000 loads, down 5.9%
CN: 1,906,900 loads, down 1.6%
CP: 989,200 loads, down 4.4%
KCS: 411,300 loads, down 1.5%
WC: 409,100 loads, down 2.4%

If it weren't for coal, the total carloading figures would have been much worse, given how big general merchandise business still is.

BobE

Thanks Bob.

Do they break it down for quarters? It would seem to me, prior to 9-11 car counts were UP in my terminal, then afterwards dropped waaayyy down (from 120 car trains to 40-50 car trains). So I do believe the down 2.9% for the year. Was CSX (or the other RR's) on pace to be UP for the year, prior to the recession?

Have a safe CSX Day

csx_co wrote:
>
> Do they break it down for quarters? It would seem to me, prior
> to 9-11 car counts were UP in my terminal, then afterwards
> dropped waaayyy down (from 120 car trains to 40-50 car
> trains). So I do believe the down 2.9% for the year. Was CSX
> (or the other RR's) on pace to be UP for the year, prior to the
> recession?
>



I have the counts broken down by railroad by quarter...heck, if I search the Salomon Smith Barney website long enough I'd find it by *week.*

Total industry carloads were down 1.6% in the first quarter, 1.1% in the second quarter, 2.3% in the third quarter (9-11 did cause a big dropoff in late September) and incredibly enough industry traffic was up 0.1% in the fourth quarter! The recession was deemed to have started in March by the Powers That Be, so you can see why carloads were down all year long. The fourth quarter rise is attibutable to a big gain in coal shipments and in finished automobiles (thanks everyone for taking advantage of 0% financing! I know I did. Once you buy, they have to build more to put back on the dealers' lots.)

CSX was actually worse than the industry average all year long.
1st quarter: down 4.6%
2nd quarter: down 3.2%
3rd quarter: down 2.4%
4th quarter: down 1.5%

So it's less awful now than it was early in the year, but it's still pretty awful. The good news is that the economy will get better...Mr. Greenspan will see to that!

You asked if there were any carriers that were going to have a gain in traffic before 9/11 and ended the year negative...no, there weren't. UP, KCS and CP were all headed for traffic growth before and after 9/11. NS, CSX, WC, BNSF, and CN were all headed for shrinking traffic before 9/11 and finished there, too.

BobE

Good Day!

If y'all want some more'a try ....

Transmatch.com

then goto the ASI railfax reports....

But then again we could always wait for our resident insider to give us the skinny....

Good luck to all and I wish a positively productive year for our RR's in N. America!

Shawn

Hi Bob

Fortunately, costs at CSXT were much lower than in past years, partially due to lower traffic but also due in large part to the much improved operations efficiency. This actually allowed a gain in net income I believe, not bad for a recession year!

Mike

Rats, I didn't finish my thought...do you have the cost data comparisons for 2001 as well Bob?

Mike

PittsburghMike wrote:
>
> Rats, I didn't finish my thought...do you have the cost data
> comparisons for 2001 as well Bob?
>


It's in the quarterly earnings press releases at csx.com. You are correct that costs have fallen a lot and income is up. I don't quite have time to look it up at the moment, though.

BobE

Hey Bob,

I can find the CSX data easily enough (grins). Was wondering more about the Pony, and the others, and I'm just to lazy to look myself tonight! Have a good weekend!

Mike

PittsburghMike wrote:
>
> Hey Bob,
>
> I can find the CSX data easily enough (grins). Was wondering
> more about the Pony, and the others, and I'm just to lazy to
> look myself tonight! Have a good weekend!



The Pony Distress also has lowered its costs faster than its traffic fell off, so it is also seeing higher earnings even in the recession.
Of course, in the case of both companies, the screw up of Conrail cost them more than the recession is costing. The earnings comparisons would probably be butt ugly if it weren't for the incredible butt ugliness of 1999-2000. The way is now, it's a question of which is the prettiest ugly girl at the dance.

Bob