Passenger Trains > X Train Service to Run on Union Pacific Lines in Late 2

X Train Service to Run on Union Pacific Lines in Late 2013

Nov 20, 2012 7:30:00 AM


NEW YORK, NY -- (Marketwire) -- 11/20/12 -- Las Vegas Railway Express, Inc. (OTCQB: XTRN) announced the signing of a conditional agreement to provide luxury passenger train service between Las Vegas, Nevada and Los Angeles, California over Union Pacific Railroad (NYSE: UNP) lines. This agreement is contingent upon LVRE fulfilling a variety of conditions in a specified time.

Known as the "X Train," the service is currently scheduled for commencement in late 2013. Las Vegas Railway Express has signed a MOU with The Plaza Hotel & Casino on the Vegas strip for 3,100 square feet of space to be used for terminal operations with an additional 1,900 square feet for food preparation. (http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1405227/000109690612001796/ex10-4.htm)

In recent years, luxury train travel has made a reemergence, Amtrak began offering luxury rides on three of its trains, while several well-known European lines, Venice Simplon-Orient-Express and the Danube Express have been seeing increased ridership as many travelers turn to rail as an alternate means to air travel.

Other active railroad stocks are Providence & Worchester Railroad Company (NASDAQ: PWX) and CSX Corp (NYSE: CSX)

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1405227/000109690612001796/ex10-4.htm

The release mentions leasing station space from the Plaza Hotel - the sight of the former UP/Amtrak station. The hotel isn't on the Strip as stated though - its downtown, which is generally considered to be a less desirable location. Not a showstopper in my opinion, in that passengers are likely to have to taxi somewhere regardless of where they arrive, but also not the upscale experience that XTrain hopes to sell.

Dave

Agreed!

So let me see if I have this sized up.

Here on TO, the general rallying cry is "We need more trains".

Then, when someone actually attempts to do it, the rallying cry is "It won't work" or "that's a bad idea".

Is "Amtrak needs more funding" really codespeak for "I wish Amtrak would buy more equipment and hire more people to carry lighter workloads at higher pay"?
Did I miss anything?

We'll the NJ Transit Atlantic City Express is a huge success. Oh wait, nevermind. Once these fly by night companies realize that money can't be made on their services, it will make a stronger case for more Amtrak funding. Luxury trains will have a rough go at it after the tax breaks for the rich (job creators, even though there aren't jobs.) are finally gone.

> In recent years, luxury train travel has made a
> reemergence, Amtrak began offering luxury rides on
> three of its trains


Really? Which ones?

Des-Lab Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So let me see if I have this sized up.
>
> Here on TO, the general rallying cry is "We need
> more trains".
>
> Then, when someone actually attempts to do it, the
> rallying cry is "It won't work" or "that's a bad
> idea".
>
> Is "Amtrak needs more funding" really codespeak
> for "I wish Amtrak would buy more equipment and
> hire more people to carry lighter workloads at
> higher pay"?
> Did I miss anything?


Nope, you're right on Des!

Most of the revenue for the XTRAIN will NOT come from ticket sales. This is where the XTRAIN differs greatly from other projects. Revenue will come from booking hotels, entertainment, etc. just like a travel service company does. XTRAIN believes these numbers will carry the day, which probably cannot happen anywhere but Vegas!

So if we assume the passenger cars will be ex-commuter cars, may I please offer a strong suggestion: Please make sure there is more than one restroom per car, with people drinking and partying (as it is assumed), you can expect long lines at restrooms on board. I suggest you put 4-5 restrooms per car, much like the Superliner Coaches, never any waiting there.

Seriously, please take this issue seriously.

---

Des-Lab Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So let me see if I have this sized up.
>
> Here on TO, the general rallying cry is "We need
> more trains".
>
> Then, when someone actually attempts to do it, the
> rallying cry is "It won't work" or "that's a bad
> idea".
>
> Is "Amtrak needs more funding" really codespeak
> for "I wish Amtrak would buy more equipment and
> hire more people to carry lighter workloads at
> higher pay"?
> Did I miss anything?


Nope, you pretty much hit the nail on the head!

I see. Yeah I thought so. I guess if I saw an opportunity-no matter how long shot the odds of success are-to demand that my workload be decreased while at the same time, my compensation goes up, I'd argue tooth and nail for it too. Human nature I guess. Especially when there is a perception that "others" (such as trucking and the airlines) are getting "a bigger piece of pie and I want one too".

I didn't think it was *really* an urge for a paradigm shift. Like I said: it's all code speak for "I want to protect my livelihood/interests and get paid more for doing less in a more cozy environment (new equipment).

Well I appreciate the honesty. Of course you do realize that every society has its designated winners and losers right-and that rail is the designated one to get the proverbial shaft, right?

Keep crying. The rest of the country will keep on truckin' and Southwestin'

Happy Thanksgiving!

And as one who works in the gas biz, I want to thank everyone for their continued love affair with their cars. We can't even keep up with the demand for our product.

Thanks for the link to the SEC filing.

The agreement is between X train and the owner of the Union Plaza Hotel. That's a real estate firm which is controlled by a Lichtenstein trust. It's not between X train and the Union Pacific. The date is May, 2012.

Basically, it says the hotel owner agrees to a #11 turnout on its land, and construction of a siding in the (current) parking area, the use of about 3,100 feet inside the hotel, and use of a kitchen space. That may be either a current employee dining area, or a part of the banquet kitchen on the second floor. Food prepared on the site may be served only on the X train, not on the property or elsewhere. Space will be made available for shuttle buses, cabs, limousines, etc. Permits to build are the responsibility of the tenant, as is the cost of the siding, turnout, etc which must be to Union Pacific's specs and acceptance. No train or engine maintenance may take place on this property.

The agreement notes that the next steps include about $2mn in improvements to be made by X train, and the securing of the various permits. X train agrees not to construct or use any other sites in Clark County (basically SW Nevada) for five years. That answers the question about a second station on the Strip or near the Strip.

If these terms are met, X train will have a downtown Las Vegas terminal. Based on BidHitter's earlier comments, it's likely the separate Union Pacific agreement references the successful completion of these terms as a condition to UP's agreement on the siding and turnout, discussion of train operations, etc

Of interest is the observation that some trips may be co-sponsored with various gentleman's clubs, or social organizations.

IHC Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > In recent years, luxury train travel has made a
> > reemergence, Amtrak began offering luxury rides
> on
> > three of its trains
>
>
> Really? Which ones?

I'd like to second that. Which ones?

coaststarlight99 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> IHC Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > > In recent years, luxury train travel has made
> a
> > > reemergence, Amtrak began offering luxury
> rides
> > on
> > > three of its trains
> >
> >
> > Really? Which ones?
>
> I'd like to second that. Which ones?

Yeah, me, too. Maybe he is referring the the "Pullman" service provided by Iowa Pacific that recently started up on the CONO. IIRC, they were planning to add their service to 48/49 at some point, too. In any case, that isn't luxury service by Amtrak. It is really no different than a private car charter, although on an ongoing basis.

Des-Lab Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So let me see if I have this sized up.
>
> Here on TO, the general rallying cry is "We need
> more trains".
>
> Then, when someone actually attempts to do it, the
> rallying cry is "It won't work" or "that's a bad
> idea".
>
> Is "Amtrak needs more funding" really codespeak
> for "I wish Amtrak would buy more equipment and
> hire more people to carry lighter workloads at
> higher pay"?
> Did I miss anything?


Yes, you did. You seem to be ascribing your own cultural bias to what others are saying. When I say Amtrak needs more funding its only code for Amtrak needs more funding. While I think Amtrak employees deserve to be treated fairly, I don't think that means doing less work for more money.

As for proposals for privately operated intercity service, I think most passenger rail advocates would love to see operators succeed. Skepticism about specific proposals like XTrain or AAF can be based on logical economic analysis just as easily as preconceived bias toward publicly owned operation. I personally would love to see these companies, and others like Iowa Pacific succeed, but have some doubts about the revenue model supporting the costs. Every business is different, but its worth noting that companies from Auto Train to AOE to Roaring Fork to Transcisco have all found passenger trains to be an unsustainable business based on farebox recovery alone.

Dave



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/21/12 05:46 by DavidP.

<Of interest is the observation that some trips may be co-sponsored with various gentleman's clubs, or social organizations<

Sponsored by gentelmen's clubs? Now it's gettin' interesting. The Spearmint Rhino Rocket, anyone?