VIA Rail

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by casper

The Canadian should be forced to evolve into a profitable tourist oriented operation. The subsidy can then be used to open up new shorter routes.

The only way you could force that is to sell it. If someone buys it, they either make it profitable by focusing on its strengths and culling its weaknesses, seeking other profit making uses and taking on debt to fund investment. Or it goes bust, on the private sector's dime.

I doubt you'd find many buyers though, at least any willing to run the entire route. The Rocky Mountaineer could maybe expand its operations to cover some of the route, but they'll be smart enough to realise few care about spending days staring at open prairie.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Sure, but Sackville has Mount A, which I would assume would offer more potential riders for VIA than a large portion of Amherst would.

Mount A is a tiny university though. Even with its entire student base Sackville still has like 2000 fewer people than Amherst. Students would have to take the train 100% more often than the locals to even make it even with Amherst. Not to mention that a lot of the students are local and live in neighbouring towns including Amherst.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Mount A is a tiny university though. Even with its entire student base Sackville still has like 2000 fewer people than Amherst. Students would have to take the train 100% more often than the locals to even make it even with Amherst. Not to mention that a lot of the students are local and live in neighbouring towns including Amherst.

Personally, from my experience riding Orleans/Maritime Bus in NB, the share of university students taking intercity is fairly high. I haven't taken The Ocean very frequently between Moncton and Halifax so I can't speak much to those rider loads but it wouldn't shock me if a fair number of Mount A students used VIA to get to Moncton/Halifax, to say nothing of the students that Mount A is able to attract from elsewhere in Canada and abroad. In my experience here in Ontario, Mount A is more of a known quantity than UNB given the former's liberal arts acumen.

I understand what you're saying about Amherst re: its local size but it simply doesn't have an institution that would spur ridership like Sackville has. A simple train connection between Sackville and Amherst would be great for those that either prefer train or don't have a car. We're talking a 15 minute drive from Sackville to Amherst in the event that the latter isn't serviced on this totally fantasy VIA proposal.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

So that it is empty? To go from nothing to HFR makes no sense out of China, where it is a make work project. Now, ensuring the line can support 90mph service and that it could be built up to high frequency is a good idea, and a good start.

For a Calgary - Edmonton rail line to make sense it needs to be at least one of the following:

• Faster than a plane, taking into account wasted time at airports etc
• Cheaper than a plane
• Cheaper than a bus
• Faster than a car/bus

If you don't make something reasonably fast and frequent to begin with, then it offers no advantage over existing transport other than "being a train". Something using existing infrastructure with low frequency will be slower and less reliable than a bus, car or plane, and more expensive than a car or bus. So who would use it? Low income - take the bus. High income/business - drive or fly

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Personally, from my experience riding Orleans/Maritime Bus in NB, the share of university students taking intercity is fairly high. I haven't taken The Ocean very frequently between Moncton and Halifax so I can't speak much to those rider loads but it wouldn't shock me if a fair number of Mount A students used VIA to get to Moncton/Halifax, to say nothing of the students that Mount A is able to attract from elsewhere in Canada and abroad. In my experience here in Ontario, Mount A is more of a known quantity than UNB given the former's liberal arts acumen.

I understand what you're saying about Amherst re: its local size but it simply doesn't have an institution that would spur ridership like Sackville has. A simple train connection between Sackville and Amherst would be great for those that either prefer train or don't have a car. We're talking a 15 minute drive from Sackville to Amherst in the event that the latter isn't serviced on this totally fantasy VIA proposal.

Either way, I think we can be pretty certain that a HFR service isn't going to have any fewer stops than the current route. The main reason that stops are discontinued is a lack of patronage rather than a desire for additional speed, and HFR would likely drive up demand to the point that if anything, additional stops are justified. My fantasy would be that the train station could actually be re-opened but that might be pushing it lol.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

LOL. If it was too run entirely on a tourist model, it would cease to be year round and probably down to once per week. People here really overestimate the tourist demand for this trip.

I have been on the Canadian. The "expensive" ticket options have ridership in that it is not surprising to see it fully booked for days or weeks. In the summer it could be a few days per week and in the winter it could be once a week.

I have looked at doing Saskatoon to Toronto. In many cases it can't be done in anything other than Economy because there is no space.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by milomilo

The only way you could force that is to sell it. If someone buys it, they either make it profitable by focusing on its strengths and culling its weaknesses, seeking other profit making uses and taking on debt to fund investment. Or it goes bust, on the private sector's dime.

I doubt you'd find many buyers though, at least any willing to run the entire route. The Rocky Mountaineer could maybe expand its operations to cover some of the route, but they'll be smart enough to realise few care about spending days staring at open prairie.

There is a reason, besides their name as to why they only serve the mountains.

Originally Posted by milomilo

For a Calgary - Edmonton rail line to make sense it needs to be at least one of the following:

• Faster than a plane, taking into account wasted time at airports etc
• Cheaper than a plane
• Cheaper than a bus
• Faster than a car/bus

If you don't make something reasonably fast and frequent to begin with, then it offers no advantage over existing transport other than "being a train". Something using existing infrastructure with low frequency will be slower and less reliable than a bus, car or plane, and more expensive than a car or bus. So who would use it? Low income - take the bus. High income/business - drive or fly

So, lets first make it #2. Then once ridership increases, lets make it #4. 1 and 3 are not easily done without HSR

That was easy.

Originally Posted by casper

I have been on the Canadian. The "expensive" ticket options have ridership in that it is not surprising to see it fully booked for days or weeks. In the summer it could be a few days per week and in the winter it could be once a week.

I have looked at doing Saskatoon to Toronto. In many cases it can't be done in anything other than Economy because there is no space.

It sounds like Via is great at making it a tourist draw. now, let's do something to make it a citizen draw.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Either way, I think we can be pretty certain that a HFR service isn't going to have any fewer stops than the current route. The main reason that stops are discontinued is a lack of patronage rather than a desire for additional speed, and HFR would likely drive up demand to the point that if anything, additional stops are justified. My fantasy would be that the train station could actually be re-opened but that might be pushing it lol.

When you take the basic European trains, which are probably faster than most Canadian trains, they have lots of stops and the stops often take only a minute or two.

It would be pretty weird to have a route through the Maritimes that would not bother to stop at an Amherst-sized town. Such stops serve a larger hinterland than just the towns themselves.

I'd imagine a Moncton-Halifax train ideally would look more like commuter rail than a tourist train. Comparatively quick and frequent stops, and lots of people taking it for 30 minute or 1 hour trips somewhere along the route.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

So, lets first make it #2. Then once ridership increases, lets make it #4. 1 and 3 are not easily done without HSR

That was easy.

At least one of those. That one wouldn't stand on its own, it would need to be faster than a car also as well as being cheaper than a plane. My point remains; something using existing infrastructure with low frequency will be slower and less reliable than a bus, car or plane, and more expensive than a car or bus. So who would use it? Low income people would take the bus. High income/business people would drive or fly.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by casper

I have been on the Canadian. The "expensive" ticket options have ridership in that it is not surprising to see it fully booked for days or weeks. In the summer it could be a few days per week and in the winter it could be once a week.

I have looked at doing Saskatoon to Toronto. In many cases it can't be done in anything other than Economy because there is no space.

Full trains doesn't say much about demand, it just means VIA is competent at pricing seats in the same way airlines do - make the price just high enough that there are few empty seats.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Full trains doesn't say much about demand, it just means VIA is competent at pricing seats in the same way airlines do - make the price just high enough that there are few empty seats.

Or maybe they're underpricing their premium seats.

British Airways had this issue with the Concorde initially. They priced it somewhat above first class on a 747. When they conducted surveys to find out what people thought it would cost, the surveys said people thought it was much more expensive than it really was. They subsequently jacked up the price and ran the service at a profit, compared to losing money previously.

If you're filling trains weeks/months in advance in premium class easily, it indicates you're underpricing your product. Airlines have figured out dynamic pricing much better. Airlines do have the advantage of adding/reducing capacity much more easily than a multi-day train service, though.

[Truenorth00]

Basing occupancy on an anecdote rather than any official figures....

Because there's no difference from Summer to Winter?

[casper]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Full trains doesn't say much about demand, it just means VIA is competent at pricing seats in the same way airlines do - make the price just high enough that there are few empty seats.

I have found they always have empty seats in economy.

I just pulled up their schedule and and it has changed quite a bit. They use to have a stop in Winnipeg that was most of the day (with 6-8 hours to explore the city). They have still kept the 3 hour stop in Jasper.

https://www.viarail.ca/sites/all/fil...-Vancouver.pdf

It also looks like due to COVID they have pulled the complementary lounge for sleeper class. So no wine tasting. It also looks like the dome cars are not available. Looks like they have also suspended the live music "Artist on board" program. So no live entertainment.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by milomilo

At least one of those. That one wouldn't stand on its own, it would need to be faster than a car also as well as being cheaper than a plane. My point remains; something using existing infrastructure with low frequency will be slower and less reliable than a bus, car or plane, and more expensive than a car or bus. So who would use it? Low income people would take the bus. High income/business people would drive or fly.

You said it had to be at least one of them. I then listed them in order of what would be easiest, and lowest cost to do. I am guessing you didn't think I could do that. Accept that I met your requirements, or quit grasping at straws as to why it would fail.

First, have this line comparable in cost as airfare. Let it build ridership.
Then, build up the speed to get it faster than the bus.
Eventually, economy fares could be lower than the bus.

Right now, and even with HFR, the Corridor is still slower than flying. True HSR is the only way to beat a plane.

Don't be upset that you don't get it all on opening day.

Originally Posted by milomilo

Full trains doesn't say much about demand, it just means VIA is competent at pricing seats in the same way airlines do - make the price just high enough that there are few empty seats.

Originally Posted by wave46

Or maybe they're underpricing their premium seats.

British Airways had this issue with the Concorde initially. They priced it somewhat above first class on a 747. When they conducted surveys to find out what people thought it would cost, the surveys said people thought it was much more expensive than it really was. They subsequently jacked up the price and ran the service at a profit, compared to losing money previously.

If you're filling trains weeks/months in advance in premium class easily, it indicates you're underpricing your product. Airlines have figured out dynamic pricing much better. Airlines do have the advantage of adding/reducing capacity much more easily than a multi-day train service, though.

Sounds like they should raise the highest fares a little every year. I'll bet they could double those rates and still sell them out.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

First, have this line comparable in cost as airfare. Let it build ridership.
Then, build up the speed to get it faster than the bus.
Eventually, economy fares could be lower than the bus.

Right now, and even with HFR, the Corridor is still slower than flying. True HSR is the only way to beat a plane.

And the status quo on the corridor is unsustainable, hence why VIA's last best shot is HFR. The Ontarian posters will be able to give more accurate information, but with HFR in place it should be reasonably time competitive with driving, and definitely better than a bus. Since it has dedicated lines, it will also be more consistently reliable.

HFR still won't be very competitive for business travel where the ticket cost is fairly unimportant. Which is absurd in a developed country considering we have two actually quite large cities reasonably close together with the capital in between. At this stage in our history, this shouldn't be the conversation we should be having, there should already be a high quality link between Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal, but it is what it is and VIA has to play the hand it has.

If the current service between Toronto and Montreal didn't exist, no one would look at the geography and say you should start with a low frequency, low speed, low quality service between them using busy freight trains, as you propose for Edmonton and Calgary. The business case for decent rail transit between Toronto and Montreal is easily justified by distance and population, the same as would be so (to a lesser extent) between Calgary and Edmonton. So the intermediate step of garbage rail service between these city pairs is unnecessary, and counterproductive.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by casper

I have found they always have empty seats in economy.

Which is pretty damning to the case that people have been suggesting - that to better service us poor westerners deprived of VIA service, we should keep propping up the Canadian. Despite your experience that VIA can barely even give away economy seats to people who might use the service for transportation rather than tourism. Those empty seats are nearly free for VIA, they could likely charge a few dollars and still make money - yet they remain empty, despite there only being a few trains per week to fill.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Which is pretty damning to the case that people have been suggesting - that to better service us poor westerners deprived of VIA service, we should keep propping up the Canadian. Despite your experience that VIA can barely even give away economy seats to people who might use the service for transportation rather than tourism. Those empty seats are nearly free for VIA, they could likely charge a few dollars and still make money - yet they remain empty, despite there only being a few trains per week to fill.

No sane person wants to spend 100 hours in an economy seat.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by acottawa

No sane person wants to spend 100 hours in an economy seat.

No disagreement from me - but they are also not filling up with passengers from the intermediate stops either, it would seem.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by milomilo

No disagreement from me - but they are also not filling up with passengers from the intermediate stops either, it would seem.

It is hard to tell without detailed stats being available (as far as I can tell) but you're probably right.

The intermediate stops seem to have a similar problem. If you want to go from Winnipeg to Saskatoon, it is hard to see spending the night in an economy class seat for 12 hours being a better alternative than the 8 hour drive, or booking a sleeping compartment for more than the cost of a flight being a better experience than a 2 hour flight.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by acottawa

It is hard to tell without detailed stats being available (as far as I can tell) but you're probably right.

The intermediate stops seem to have a similar problem. If you want to go from Winnipeg to Saskatoon, it is hard to see spending the night in an economy class seat for 12 hours being a better alternative than the 8 hour drive, or booking a sleeping compartment for more than the cost of a flight being a better experience than a 2 hour flight.

Yes. This is where it all falls apart - if you need to be there quickly, you either drive or fly, neither of which are very expensive. If you can't afford that, well tough luck as Greyhound pulled out and whatever bus services are around are not great.

I'm definitely sympathetic to the government providing public transportation for those that can't afford a car or plane, but buses along highway 16 and 1 would do a much better job of providing that service than a train. If even buses need to be subsidized by an obscene amount, then one has to question the social utility of these services.