Re: Billboard Reefers

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>

Kurt Laughlin wrote:
Maybe it's the same thing stated another way, but my impression was that it was the small shippers who complained about using cars with their competitor's logos all over them, and argued to the ICC that the free advertising provided by the logos was tantamount to an illegal rebate for the large shippers.
As I stated back in 2002, this aspect was a very small part of the abuses which the ICC stepped in to correct. The free advertising was indeed ruled a rebate, but this is summarized briefly in the ruling, while there are pages and pages on the remainder of the docket issues. (The biggest had to do with mileage-charge abuses by roundabout or unnecessary car movements, and with lease contracts in which shippers had an incentive to create extra mileage.) It is my impression from reading some of the ICC testimony that the assignment of one lessee's cars to another shipper was unusual, but the free advertising, not offered to smaller shippers, was a really big complaint.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroad history

Join to automatically receive all group messages.