Ms. Radke:

I think everyone here would appreciate any comments you may have on this:

Strange - pricing/fare policy wouldn't seem to be an AGR decision at all, other than the downstream impact of earning the 100-point minimum twice?

There are two itineraries to get from SLO to SOL:
Train 774
Train 798 (weekday) or 792 (weekend) to LAX, switching to train 592.

I think what he meant he was told is that because the latter involves two trains, it would require twice the usual point redemption.

Ah, thanks - makes more sense now.

Just picked up AGR tickets today for my sister who's traveling next month on 4798 and 792. I was charged 1,500 points (Special Route - Business Class), though I made the booking a few weeks ago.

I certainly hope this policy change isn't true. It is ludicrous to further penalize passengers for involuntary connections, which already have a hassle factor. Most people would take direct trains if they could. But Amtrak's network is so skeletal that it tends to funnel pax through a few connecting hubs like Chicago, or feed train routes with Thruway coverage.

In the case of the Surfliners, Amtrak California Thruway connections are by design extensions of the trunk routes, as Reindeerflame pointed out in this recent thread. Many tickets with those bus-train connections are priced conjunctively as AAA-CCC (BBB being the connecting point); even the AGR tickets on my desk say "CJ" next to the $.00 fare.

But that's the beside the point that we as pax have nothing to do with the connections Amtrak imposes on us. For the trouble, we should definitely earn AGR points for each revenue segment, and only be charged once for a full one-way AGR redemption itinerary.

I did a CC train (SAC-OKJ), an Ambus (OKJ-SBA) and a Surfliner (SBA-LAX) - all for 1K!^

Yep, she confirmed it in another thread. Hopefully she'll swing by here and comment.

From a customer's perspective, that's completely unsat. I live in MD, so I don't have a dog in this fight, but if a trip can be booked for the same price regardless of connections, then it's pretty basic logic to think that the number of points charged for the two trips would be the same as well. Sounds like a case of a lot of lost goodwill from your most loyal customers (and likely quite a few people that will choose not to travel) for very little upside.

I certainly hope that Amtrak will reconsider this ridiculous policy.

It seems as though the double-redemption policy kicks in only when two trains are involved. So, if someone was willing to use the Thruway connection, there are actually 5 options each day to get from SLO to SOL. The two you mentioned, plus the 3 daily Thruway departures that connect in Santa Barbara with trains 768, 784, and 796.

So of the 5 daily Surfliner itineraries between SLO and SOL, it would seem that one requires a double Special Route redemption, whereas the others are standard Special Route redemptions. What an odd inconsistency.

It's further complicated by the fact that there's a sixth way to go from SLO to SOL each day, and that's on the Coast Starlight, connecting to train 796 in LAX. And that would be a 5500 point redemption. So depending on the time of day you choose to leave, you could use 1000 AGR points, 2000 AGR points, or 5500 AGR points (for coach travel...throw business class or sleepers into the mix, and you get even more levels).

I don't know whether to find this exasperating and "unsat", or whether to consider it one of the many quirks that makes the AGR program so gosh darn lovable.

So should a trip that would cost more cash cost more points, too?

I never said that now, did I?