Re: Per Diem and the NYO&W

Tim O'Connor

Guys, the revenue for a 145 mile carload was not THAT small. Even
if it took them two days to get the car over the road, the $5 and change
per diem was more than covered by the $50 or more in gross revenue.

All you have to do is find an NYO&W annual report for the period. It
probably shows the total for revenues and expenditures. On most
railroads of the period, more than 50% of revenues went straight to
wages of employees. I suspect because of its short haul that NYO&W
paid out a higher percentage of wages than other carriers.

To blame the NYO&W's demise on per diem is a real stretch! I note
that the L&NE died just a couple of years later; operated in the same
area; and no one is claiming that per diem killed the L&NE.

Heck we might as well go back to conspiracy theory -- that NYO&W
was doomed because NY wanted its right of way for state highway #7.

Tim O'Connor

-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "John Hile" <john66h@...>
--- In STMFC@..., "Gene Green" <bierglaeser@...> wrote:

Wouldn't the per diem be offset by the NYO&W's share of the revenue
for whatever was being shipped?

Apparently not. Following is from Kalmbach's "The Historical Guide to
North American Railroads"...

"The NYO&W enjoyed a brief postwar surge of business, but NYO&W's
division of the revenue wasn't enough to keep the rest of the road in
business. The originating carrier gets most of the revenue from a
freight move. To make money as a bridge carrier you need lots of
business and a long haul - longer than the 145 miles from Scranton to
Campbell Hall."

John Hile
Blacksburg, VA


Yahoo! Groups Links

Join to automatically receive all group messages.