Passenger Trains > The Chief and the Transcon

It used to be that the BNSF transcon ran like a Swiss watch.  Traffic was heavy, but everything flowed, including Amtrak trains 3 and 4.  However, so far this year the transcon is operating more like the UP in Nevada and Utah, with the Chiefs taking hours long delays very frequently.

Maybe there have been other posts on this matter, but after seeing #4 over 6 hours late this morning, I decided to pop the question.  Does anyone know the details on the situation in the desert?

Thanks. 

 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/08/24 04:36 by Chessie1963.

You said #6 is 6 hours late but I assume you meant #4.  Anyway, the Transcon has been a mess for awhile, partly due to BNSF's own doing and partly due to a number of outside issues.  The big fire in the Texas Panhandle that closed the line for at least a day really messed up things.  Then add it high winds that forced trains to slow and stop for periods of time didn'tr help either.  A disabled freight train messed up the morning Metrolink commuter trains on Friday and I am sure didn't help the rest of BNSF's trains either.  So just a combination of issues.  Hopefully others can give more insight into the issues.

Chessie1963 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It used to be that the BNSF transcon ran like a
> Swiss watch.  Traffic was heavy, but everything
> flowed, including Amtrak trains 3 and 4.
>  However, so far this year the transcon is
> operating more like the UP in Nevada and Utah,
> with the Chiefs taking hours long delays very
> frequently.
>
> Maybe there have been other posts on this matter,
> but after seeing #6 over 6 hours late this
> morning, I decided to pop the question.  Does
> anyone know the details on the situation in the
> desert?
>
> Thanks. 
>
>  

PSR.

Regards

Posted from iPhone

PSR, Movement Planner, fuel conservation rules, lack of institutional knowledge, Amtraks aging P42s, you name it

Wall Street. Short term returns above all else.

Everything above and also because railroaders used to run the railroads. Experience mattered and technology was used to supplement not replace the value of people who knew their craft. Railroads (and most big corporations as well), no longer depend on knowledgeable employees. They would rather invest in technology and run it into the ground.

Posted from iPhone

lordsigma Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wall Street. Short term returns above all else.
===================================

For fourteen years, BNSF stock has not been traded on Wall Street or anywhere else.  Warren Buffett and his company Berkshire Hathaway acquired all outstanding shares of BNSF in 2009-2010 and took the company private.

GenePoon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> lordsigma Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Wall Street. Short term returns above all else.
> ===================================
>
> For fourteen years, BNSF stock has not been traded
> on Wall Street or anywhere else.  Warren Buffett
> and his company Berkshire Hathaway acquired all
> outstanding shares of BNSF in 2009-2010 and took
> the company private.


True, but Berkshire, is.

Posted from Android

Thanks for the replies.  I appreciate it.

BNSF is going through some cost cutting, I know, at the direction of Berkshire.  The holding company feels that the return is not what it should be at the moment, so even BNSF is not immune to some of the short-term thinking among the Class Is.

 

Here are several paragraph's from Warren Buffet's letter to shareholders in the 2023 annual report:

At BNSF, the outlays in excess of GAAP depreciation charges since our purchase 14 years
ago have totaled a staggering $22 billion or more than $1 1⁄2 billion annually. Ouch! That sort of
gap means BNSF dividends paid to Berkshire, its owner, will regularly fall considerably short of
BNSF’s reported earnings unless we regularly increase the railroad’s debt. And that we do not
intend to do.
Consequently, Berkshire is receiving an acceptable return on its purchase price, though less
than it might appear, and also a pittance on the replacement value of the property. That’s no
surprise to me or Berkshire’s board of directors. It explains why we could buy BNSF in 2010 at a
small fraction of its replacement value.

You can read all of his comments on BNSF starting on page 12: https://www.berkshirehathaway.com/2023ar/2023ar.pdf

He lays it out quite clearly.  I like that.

Seems ok to me.  No real indication of short-term thinking.