4 ms·

This is absurd and easily and trivially disputed. Having a nationwide network absolutely lets you compete with networks that are more regional "If you want to

This is absurd and easily and trivially disputed. Having a nationwide network absolutely lets you compete with networks that are more regional "If you want to use our western routes you have to use us in the east too." > larger network would make things more efficient for shippers LOL > goods can travel coast to coast without changing trains They already can.

gruez 1y ago
>They already can. I'm not a railroad expert, but here's the exact quote from the article, which cites a consultancy: >Going from coast to coast is a greater prize. Avoiding interchanges between networks would mean faster trains and fewer delays. According to Oliver Wyman, a consultancy, the share of intermodal goods in America that travel by rail on journeys longer than 1,500 miles increases from 39% to 65% when served by a direct line. Transcontinental railways would mean fewer lengthy stops in Chicago and may make shorter routes near the Mississippi river more profitable. Maybe Oliver Wyman is on the payroll of UP/Norfolk and this isn't true, but I'd like to see something more reputable than a HN comment of 1-3 word refutations.
- jordanb 1y ago
  "Interchange" means the train going from one company's tracks to another. It does not involve changing trains. It involves a phone call. Additionally, it probably still wouldn't be possible for most origins and destinations from going coast to coast without interchange because will probably have to use shortline tracks at some point, like the Chicago Belt Railway.
  - tallanvor 1y ago
    This depends on the train lines and what trackage rights they have with the others. So it's not a given that one company will haul cargo from the west coast to the east coast. Interchanges will continue to be important since even within a specific train company the goods may have to be changed to a different train at least once.
    - jordanb 1y ago
      This merger will actually make interchange harder because this coast-to-coast mega-railroad will probably start refusing interchange from the other Class Is.
- cma 1y ago
  Very hard to believe freight trains can't go coast to coast in the US and they get unloaded to load on a new train on the same gauge rail.
  - dibujaron 1y ago
    The loaded cars can go coast to coast, but trains are broken up and reorganized often in yards, especially in places like Chicago. this is efficient because two cars from LA headed to Toronto and NYC can travel together until Chicago and only then be split into two new trains. Even within a single railroad this is commonly done.
  - pc86 1y ago
    A train leaving Seattle isn't loaded entirely with cars going to Philadelphia. Some are going to Miami, some are going to Texas, some at going to Chicago. There might even be cars in Chicago that get picked up by that train on its way to Philadelphia. Nobody is talking about taking boxes out of one car and putting them on another, but it seems pretty self-evident that the entire train itself would get broken up multiple times on a cross-country trip.
pc86 1y ago
Disputed does not mean disproven. There are reasonable people who think this merge would be good, and reasonable people who think it would be bad, and perhaps we can discuss pros and cons without acting like asses?
- FollowingTheDao 1y ago
  I agree. So here is a map of who owns the railways so we can ascertain who would be affected by the merger. https://stb.maps.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html?webmap=96ec03e4fc8546bd8a864e39a2c3fc41 https://stb.maps.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html?webmap... I think this is bad becasue it will kill CSX as their lines will be less used for cross country deliveries. CSX already had ana anti-trust suite against Norfolk which was rejected during this administration. https://www.freightwaves.com/news/supreme-court-wont-hear-csx-antitrust-suit-against-norfolk-southern https://www.freightwaves.com/news/supreme-court-wont-hear-cs...
  - jordanb 1y ago
    CSX and BNSF will basically be forced to merge to have any hope of competing against the mega-UPNS
- bigbadfeline 1y ago
  > There are reasonable people who think this merge would be good No there aren't, unless you interpret "good" as "good for extracting monopoly prices from the people". The US economy is overly monopolized as it is even without this buyout. More importantly, no reasonable person would skip the $85 Billion (with B) price tag which is a definite proof of my words above.
  - pc86 1y ago
    "People who disagree with me about a railway company merger cannot possibly be reasonable, and instead must be mustache-twirling villains" is certainly an interesting take. Good luck with that.

gruez 1y ago

>They already can. I'm not a railroad expert, but here's the exact quote from the article, which cites a consultancy: >Going from coast to coast is a greater prize. Avoiding interchanges between networks would mean faster trains and fewer delays. According to Oliver Wyman, a consultancy, the share of intermodal goods in America that travel by rail on journeys longer than 1,500 miles increases from 39% to 65% when served by a direct line. Transcontinental railways would mean fewer lengthy stops in Chicago and may make shorter routes near the Mississippi river more profitable. Maybe Oliver Wyman is on the payroll of UP/Norfolk and this isn't true, but I'd like to see something more reputable than a HN comment of 1-3 word refutations.

jordanb 1y ago
"Interchange" means the train going from one company's tracks to another. It does not involve changing trains. It involves a phone call. Additionally, it probably still wouldn't be possible for most origins and destinations from going coast to coast without interchange because will probably have to use shortline tracks at some point, like the Chicago Belt Railway.
- tallanvor 1y ago
  This depends on the train lines and what trackage rights they have with the others. So it's not a given that one company will haul cargo from the west coast to the east coast. Interchanges will continue to be important since even within a specific train company the goods may have to be changed to a different train at least once.
  - jordanb 1y ago
    This merger will actually make interchange harder because this coast-to-coast mega-railroad will probably start refusing interchange from the other Class Is.
cma 1y ago
Very hard to believe freight trains can't go coast to coast in the US and they get unloaded to load on a new train on the same gauge rail.
- dibujaron 1y ago
  The loaded cars can go coast to coast, but trains are broken up and reorganized often in yards, especially in places like Chicago. this is efficient because two cars from LA headed to Toronto and NYC can travel together until Chicago and only then be split into two new trains. Even within a single railroad this is commonly done.
- pc86 1y ago
  A train leaving Seattle isn't loaded entirely with cars going to Philadelphia. Some are going to Miami, some are going to Texas, some at going to Chicago. There might even be cars in Chicago that get picked up by that train on its way to Philadelphia. Nobody is talking about taking boxes out of one car and putting them on another, but it seems pretty self-evident that the entire train itself would get broken up multiple times on a cross-country trip.

pc86 1y ago

Disputed does not mean disproven. There are reasonable people who think this merge would be good, and reasonable people who think it would be bad, and perhaps we can discuss pros and cons without acting like asses?

FollowingTheDao 1y ago
I agree. So here is a map of who owns the railways so we can ascertain who would be affected by the merger. https://stb.maps.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html?webmap=96ec03e4fc8546bd8a864e39a2c3fc41 https://stb.maps.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html?webmap... I think this is bad becasue it will kill CSX as their lines will be less used for cross country deliveries. CSX already had ana anti-trust suite against Norfolk which was rejected during this administration. https://www.freightwaves.com/news/supreme-court-wont-hear-csx-antitrust-suit-against-norfolk-southern https://www.freightwaves.com/news/supreme-court-wont-hear-cs...
- jordanb 1y ago
  CSX and BNSF will basically be forced to merge to have any hope of competing against the mega-UPNS
bigbadfeline 1y ago
> There are reasonable people who think this merge would be good No there aren't, unless you interpret "good" as "good for extracting monopoly prices from the people". The US economy is overly monopolized as it is even without this buyout. More importantly, no reasonable person would skip the $85 Billion (with B) price tag which is a definite proof of my words above.
- pc86 1y ago
  "People who disagree with me about a railway company merger cannot possibly be reasonable, and instead must be mustache-twirling villains" is certainly an interesting take. Good luck with that.