Re: Speaking of private car rosters


Dave & Libby Nelson <muskoka@...>
 

-----Original Message-----
From: thompson@... [mailto:thompson@...]
Dave Nelson asks:
As it appears it was a smart move to form all of the reefer and tank car
companies, why didn't other car types and commodities get
addressed this way
too?
Dave, I think the specialized nature of tank car and reefer traffic had
inhibited railroads from wanting to own very big fleets, so private owners
tended to do the job, and got the attractive boost of the mileage payments
instead of per diem. But this didn't and doesn't apply to "plain jane coal
hoppers" or most any other car type.
But wouldn't that fat mileage payment create an opportunity for the
regulated carrier to: a) avoid a capital investment on its books and the
attendant approval process and b) provide the shareholders equal to or
greater return (the greater return comes from non owning roads paying that
mileage fee)? Or were the milage fees and per diem payments roughly
equivalent?

Dave Nelson

Join main@RealSTMFC.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.