 |
Re: Link to FRA Notice of Proposed Rule Making
Author: Earl Pitts
Date: 07-02-2016 - 10:30
Keith Ode Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OPRRMS Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Keith Ode Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > tundraboomer Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > >
> > >
> >
> [seekingalpha.com]
>
> >
> > >
> > > > rol-is-a-failure-for-railroads
> > >
> > > "They threw billions of dollars in the Remote
> > > Control Locomotives industry that not only
> > slowed
> > > their car count to a crawl, but also spent
> more
> > in
> > > technology than they did in a human being
> with
> > > full benefits."
> > >
> > > So OPRRMS and theconductor, you were saying?
> >
> > I can't speak for theconductor, but I will say
> > this.
> >
> > Firstly, the story you've linked is apparently
> a
> > blog that's related to the stock market, and is
> > from 2009. The complete story isn't readable
> > unless the App is downloaded, which I'm not
> > inclined to do, and without being able to read
> the
> > full story, it's unwise to comment on it, much
> > less place much truck in it. After all, anyone
> > can write anything on their blog, based on
> one's
> > own opinion regardless of the actual facts -
> same
> > as they can here on AP.
> >
> > Secondly, you might remember that 2009 was in
> the
> > midst of a recession and financial instability.
>
> > The railroads - including Union Pacific - were
> not
> > immune. Asssociating that to RCL is quite a
> > stretch.
> >
> > Your move . . .
>
>
> How does anything you just said invalidate the
> claims of the article? You need to argue with
> evidence.
I don't see any evidence. I see a 7-year old story by some stock blogger with no solid figures in it to back up the claims. Bandying about things like "billions of dollars" or "slowed to a crawl" is hype, not evidence.
Show us cars handled per engine hour or exact dollar figures for equipment, installation, and maintenance.
The first 2 are one-time costs. Compare those to the ongoing, never-ending cost of a 3rd crew member.
You've presented no evidence of anything so far. About as plausable as your previous claim of 50 supervisors per employee.
-------------------------------------------------------
> OPRRMS Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Keith Ode Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > tundraboomer Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > >
> > >
> >
> [seekingalpha.com]
>
> >
> > >
> > > > rol-is-a-failure-for-railroads
> > >
> > > "They threw billions of dollars in the Remote
> > > Control Locomotives industry that not only
> > slowed
> > > their car count to a crawl, but also spent
> more
> > in
> > > technology than they did in a human being
> with
> > > full benefits."
> > >
> > > So OPRRMS and theconductor, you were saying?
> >
> > I can't speak for theconductor, but I will say
> > this.
> >
> > Firstly, the story you've linked is apparently
> a
> > blog that's related to the stock market, and is
> > from 2009. The complete story isn't readable
> > unless the App is downloaded, which I'm not
> > inclined to do, and without being able to read
> the
> > full story, it's unwise to comment on it, much
> > less place much truck in it. After all, anyone
> > can write anything on their blog, based on
> one's
> > own opinion regardless of the actual facts -
> same
> > as they can here on AP.
> >
> > Secondly, you might remember that 2009 was in
> the
> > midst of a recession and financial instability.
>
> > The railroads - including Union Pacific - were
> not
> > immune. Asssociating that to RCL is quite a
> > stretch.
> >
> > Your move . . .
>
>
> How does anything you just said invalidate the
> claims of the article? You need to argue with
> evidence.
I don't see any evidence. I see a 7-year old story by some stock blogger with no solid figures in it to back up the claims. Bandying about things like "billions of dollars" or "slowed to a crawl" is hype, not evidence.
Show us cars handled per engine hour or exact dollar figures for equipment, installation, and maintenance.
The first 2 are one-time costs. Compare those to the ongoing, never-ending cost of a 3rd crew member.
You've presented no evidence of anything so far. About as plausable as your previous claim of 50 supervisors per employee.
