posted
It looks like Amtrak has reached the end of the road except for some traffic along the east coast. And I could not care less. This is coming from a travel writer who over the past few years has had many articles on the beauty and fun of long distance travel by train appear in several publications.The decline in service both from number of travel options and personel was getting a little hard to take. The final blow to me happened last April 1st when the entire system went smoke free. Now I can go as long as necessary without a smoking break. That's not the point. That move showed a complete disregard for customers from the top down. All of the coaches that had a smoking area are still in service. Amtrak needs the seats. The move did not save them one penny. It was just a slap in the face for the 25% of their customers who are addicted without any additional appeal to the 75% of their customers who are non-smokers. No one decides to take the train simply because of the no smoking rule, This move only proved to me that Amtrak management is more concerned with running a railroad then with the number of customers they can attract. That was the same mistake the old line railroads made with their passenger service and they killed it.
MOKSRail Member # 3163
posted
No disrespect, fellow, but the lack of smoking seems to be an insignificant reason why to advocate the end of an important transportation choice.
As a travel writer, I'd think you'd realize that.
You seem to have let your personal passions get in the way of common sense here.
Chucky Member # 2263
posted
Sounds like you're having a nicotine fit, buddy: Relax.
Amtrak held on to its smoking policy long after other forms of transportation abandoned theirs. As a non-smoker, I was absolutely delighted by this change of policy because it has made the long distance trains a much healthier environment in which to travel.
Smokers, threatened by the loss of their liberty to foul the public's air, have often sounded economic alarms. They did it in Albuquerque when our enlightened mayor declared that all restaurants should go 100% smoke free. In the end, cash receipts went up, not down.
Ridership on Amtrak has gone up over 5% over last year, despite the smoking ban...But I'm sure you could not care less.
coachclass Member # 2382
posted
I too agree that Amtrak eliminating smoking onboard trains has very limited correlation with Amtrak's current budgetary woes. In my opinion, I do however think that from my discussions with fellow passengers onboard Amtrak trains over the past year or so that the no smoking policy will retain and attract far more customers who favor the clean air atmosphere than it will drive away customers who can't or don't want to wait until the next smoking stop to light up.
traveler Member # 1415
posted
Oh Boy! Here we go again!
traveler Member # 1415
posted
1. "That move showed a complete disregard for customers from the top down."
2. "...25% of their customers who are addicted without any additional appeal to the 75% of their customers who are non-smokers."
Hmmm? Anyone see a contradiction here?
CoastStarlight99 Member # 2734
posted
"A travel Writer"???
You sounds like some person who used to take trains because you could smoke and then you got mad when they changed there polics and you would just love to see Amtrak go down.
JONATHON Member # 2899
posted
This is bad, all those Amtrak Employees will use there jobs
Pojon Member # 3080
posted
Dear Grumpy#1, you are a dummy and an ingrate! Is that a reason to wish Amtrak the worst because YOU could not smoke where you wanted too! For shame--you are stupid! This from a guy who says he is a writer of travel articles. Go back to sleep and keep your mouth shut! Your smoke may have helped cause cancer in someone else! Wow!
Ken V Member # 1466
posted
quote:Originally posted by grumpy1: It looks like Amtrak has reached the end of the road except for some traffic along the east coast. And I could not care less. This is coming from a travel writer who over the past few years has had many articles on the beauty and fun of long distance travel by train appear in several publications.The decline in service both from number of travel options and personel was getting a little hard to take. The final blow to me happened last April 1st when the entire system went smoke free. Now I can go as long as necessary without a smoking break. That's not the point. That move showed a complete disregard for customers from the top down. All of the coaches that had a smoking area are still in service. Amtrak needs the seats. The move did not save them one penny. It was just a slap in the face for the 25% of their customers who are addicted without any additional appeal to the 75% of their customers who are non-smokers. No one decides to take the train simply because of the no smoking rule, This move only proved to me that Amtrak management is more concerned with running a railroad then with the number of customers they can attract. That was the same mistake the old line railroads made with their passenger service and they killed it.
I am a smoker yet I also strongly disagree. The ex-smoking cars may still be in service but they're a lot cleaner now. Have you ever been in one of these coaches when smoking was allowed? Even with my desensisified sense of smell, I could notice the stench even before entering one. For the the other passengers in that coach it was surely not a plus.
There may have been other options, such as a separate, isolated, ventilated coach at one end of the train with a smoking surcharge to cover cleaning and other expenses. I would pay extra for that if given the choice.
As it is, I would rather not smoke onboard than discomfort my fellow passengers. That said, I don't take the train anymore for long-distance trips.
posted ![[Frown]](frown.gif)