It appears by placement of stations, that they are going for a mid distance south coast Orlando catchment.

I think that several cities wanted stations further up the coast. But, as these were not critical to the business plan, FEC would not pay for more. And, there is always the potential for more stations in the future, if the demand warrants.

However, like the LA Las Vegas HSR proposal, they clearly wanted something that met the demand in a profitable sweet spot, with an immediate and predictable market penetration and fare revenue stream, in a cost effective manner (e.g. on-time/on-budget).

Now compare that kind of realistic planning, business case, and project delivery, on CA's newest "business' plan", which promises to get you from Chowchilla to Wasco at 220 mph. by 2022, and someday to get you to somewhere near Gilroy, too..... Sometime in the next 25 years....when we figure out how to con the taxpayers and legislature out of the next installment?

A new "alternative" variation of the CAHSRA "project" guaranteed to do absolutely nothing whatsoever for the most of the CA taxpayers and citizens being fleeced to pay for it in the Valley, Bay Area, or Sou Cal, who will still be stuck in traffic on our most congested intercity corridors.

Florida and LA-LV are excellent examples of well planned projects, CHSRA is a perfect example of a project that, has never had good planning. And now, this fiasco has yet another new "business plan", which was based on a sound "new" planning premise, of how to best keep building the runaway "money train", in order to keep shoveling the taxpayer boodle to the contractor...... It's a plan that is based more on achieving the greatest market share for political swag, not the market share of California's travel demands.