I think that Amtrak makes money if someone uses the AGR Mastercard or at least signs up for one. I wonder if that source of revenue helps to pay for redeemed awards. Also I think Amtrak does well on Acela sales revenue wise since that seem to charge more than the airlines. Afterall, no one is in direct competiion with Amtrak on the Northeast corridor. The airports are not the same quick option that they used to be. Acela has powerports and many of the shuttle planes do not and all Acela seating is business class or first class.

I do not know that AMTRAK does not make money on NYP-WAS, but I would be surprised if they do. When I say making money, I mean without the federal subsidy -- that the revenue on the line covers the expenses on the line. I would be very interested to see any statistics on this. And I certainly do not have any definitive proof either way; this is just my back-of-the-envelope suspicion.

Full fare DL shuttle (also US) is approx. $200 each way in Y. Full fare on ACELA is about $150 each way NYP-WAS. Corporate discounts can cut these numbers in half.

But then, remember, that AMTRAK runs non-ACELA service on the same tracks. And those prices are a fraction of the ACELA fares. My frequent commute NYP-HFD costs something like $30 each way -- a distance of 125 miles. We run a bit slower than the ACELA, but the schedule doesn't really permit me to take the ACELA in any case. And I get there in 2.5 hours. Perhaps the ACELA could shave off 15 minutes. (For this routing there is still the diesel connection on the Springfield spur).

I am certainly glad for the competition with the airlines. But I doubt anyone makes a killing anymore on these routes. That said, it is nice to have the choice, especially when we have bad weather.

Amtrak Acela/Metroliner is Profitable
 

Amtrak essentially covers its operating costs (or even makes a profit) from fares on the premium NEC services. This does not include capital costs, which of course are extensive.

If one looks at the simple picture, Amtrak does indeed make money off of both the Acela Express trains and the Metroliner service. Acela earned 7 million in Sept '04 and the Metroliner earned 300K for the same month. YTD for fiscal '04 (Oct 03 – Sept 04) the numbers were 65.9M and 5.2M respectively. Regional service however lost 60.5M YTD, wiping out most of the above profit.

This info is based upon the latest numbers, available from Amtrak here. Flip to pages 78 & 79 of the report. Note: You'll need Adobe Acrobat 5.0 or higher to view the report.

Now to further clarify those numbers, by simple picture, I mean operating expenses directly attributed to those respective services. Things like crew costs, maintenance of trains, food services onboard, power to run the trains, and such.

Those profit numbers however don't include capital expenses, things like depreciation expenses on the trains, interest on the loans to buy the trains, station personnel & building repairs and costs, track repairs, catenary repairs, signal repairs, and general overhead expenses like the reservation system and the executive offices.

Do the numbers for Regional service refer to what I think they mean: the non-Acela and non-Metroliner services between Boston/ Springfield and Norfolk, including points in between like NYC, Philadelphia, and Washington?

If I understand the Amtrak lingo correctly, Regional service does NOT include the DownEaster nor the Empire Services, nor the Keystone Services, nor the Vermont Services.

How do the local trains lose almost as much money as the express trains are making in profit?

I am actually curious, because the locals I take are usually rather full. If they are losing all of the profit that the Acelas are pulling in, why not cut some local services, like Tuesday-Thursday services, for example?

Premium vs. Conventional
 

The fares on the NEC Regional Trains (also commonly called "conventional" trains) are much lower, and thus those operations do not pull in the same yield as the premium-priced services.

Now, Downeaster and Keystone are supported by Maine and Pennsylvania, respectively. With these state support payments, it can roughly be said that Amtrak as an entity does not lose much money on those types of services.

That is correct.

Also correct.

Well the operating costs are basically the same for the regional services as they are for the premium service. In fact they might even be a little higher, since some of the regional trains require a change from electric engines to diesel engines. Yet the fares for a regional train are often half what they are for the premium trains. In some cases, the regional fares are even less than half the premium fares.

Cutting service doesn't necessarily save money. First some of the station and yard crews would still need to be there regardless of how many trains arrive & depart. Secondly many of the regionals provide connections for passengers traveling on long distance trains. Without the regionals, you'd loose those passengers and their revenue on the LD trains.

Additionally the loss of the regionals would diminish Amtrak's buying power when it comes to food supplies. Finally, even though it's not considered part of operations, you'd still need to maintain the tracks, signals, and overhead wires.

They can't raise the fares, without loosing business to the Airlines and the buses. So Amtrak incurrs a loss, while still providing an essential service.