I am curious why Amtrak lost the mail contract with the Post Office. Evidently, this is a major "set-back" for the corporation----and the "timing" probably could not have been worse.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Huh???
I've seen this addressed at other boards, but no mention of the nature and scope.
Where I have not seen mention is within either general circulation or specialty media (i.e. TRAINS).
Please enlighten; enquiring minds want to know.
[This message has been edited by Gilbert B Norman (edited 08-10-2004).]
Posted by LateShoreLimited (Member # 2025) on :
I wouldnt say Amtrak lost the contract but rather they walked away. Gunn had stated previously that he wanted to turn attention back to the customer first. In his view, the profit made did not outweigh delays it caused. All the roadrailers have been sold to Triple Crown effective Oct 1st. The rumored plan is to go from 38 stations handling mail to just 8. Which would be just end points. You would think that if it made any profit it would be enough but I guess not. There has been no official announcement. Everybody is just going on rumors currently..............
Posted by Geoff Mayo (Member # 153) on :
I'm in agreement with LSL - AFAIK Amtrak didn't want the delays caused by attaching/detaching mail cars so they terminated the contract - not the post office. I thought it was a news item - or maybe just a passing comment - in TRAINS magazine earlier this year but I could be wrong.
Geoff M.
Posted by MDRR (Member # 2992) on :
It is also my understanding that due to the poor otp of several of the long haul trains carrying mail that the penalties that Amtrak was paying the USPS for late arrival of mail was eating up any potential profit to be made.
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
This is interesting. I was under the impression that hauling mail was still a good source of income for Amtrak.