 |
Re: The mysterious transaction that sent D&H PA's to Mexico
Author: Joe Cullum
Date: 01-14-2021 - 12:42
Fortunately, all four of them were preserved. I believe at least one is in operable shape in the Museum in Puebla.
Exter Joe
Unknown Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Does anyone have the true story on the transaction
> that sent the D&H PA's to Mexico? A search turns
> up much confusion and speculation. Were there
> some shady dealings going on? Was there any ill
> intent or a revenge motive behind this whole
> sordid affair?
>
> Some comments from another board copied below:
>
> "I don't think the D&H sold them to the mexicans.
> I recall reading that these units were still owned
> by a bank, as their new equipment trusts hadn't
> come close to being paid off. They still had some
> decent book value due to the aforementioned fairly
> recent rebuilds. So the bank got a reasonable
> return by selling them to Mexico for much more
> than any preservation group or scrap dealer would
> have been willing to pay."
>
> "I always thought the State of New York owned them
> as they paid for them
> to be rebuilt, thats why I could never understand
> how the D & H sold
> them to Mexico."
>
> "I've been following this story for 23 years since
> I first found out D&H PA's were operating in
> Mexico and I've never seen, heard, nor read a
> thorough, detailed explanation about how the whole
> transaction that sent the PA's to Mexico came
> about.
> Guilford didn't purchase the D&H until 1984, for
> the whopping sum of $500,000. Previous to that
> time, D&H was struggling to survive as an
> independent bridge line railroad deep in Conrail
> territory after being cut loose from Dereco, a
> holding company owned by Norfolk & Western that
> also controlled Erie-Lackawanna. EL was absorbed
> into Conrail, but D&H was not, and so had to go it
> alone.
> In its struggle to survive in the
> financially-ravaged railroad landscape of the
> east, I'm sure D&H was forced to maximize
> financial assets wherever it could. Selling
> surplus locomotives that might have otherwise been
> donated to museums would have been one way to do
> it.
> Previous to going to Mexico, the PA's were leased
> to MBTA for Boston area commuter service, but MBTA
> eventually returned to EMD products, (F10 and GP
> rebuilds, etc.)
> The recently-rebuilt status of the PA's in 1978
> probably worked against them in a way. If they'd
> been tired and worn out, donation or sale at scrap
> value might have been more feasible to the D&H.
> (Of course they might have just ended up as scrap
> at Naporano or Pielet Bros., too.)"
>
> "As I have heard both the terms "leased" and
> "sold" regarding the Mexican transaction I suspect
> they were sold to a leasing company which in turn
> leased them to the Mexican carrier. Let me be
> careful to label this as speculation as that's all
> it is. Not sure it matters much in any case."
Exter Joe
Unknown Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Does anyone have the true story on the transaction
> that sent the D&H PA's to Mexico? A search turns
> up much confusion and speculation. Were there
> some shady dealings going on? Was there any ill
> intent or a revenge motive behind this whole
> sordid affair?
>
> Some comments from another board copied below:
>
> "I don't think the D&H sold them to the mexicans.
> I recall reading that these units were still owned
> by a bank, as their new equipment trusts hadn't
> come close to being paid off. They still had some
> decent book value due to the aforementioned fairly
> recent rebuilds. So the bank got a reasonable
> return by selling them to Mexico for much more
> than any preservation group or scrap dealer would
> have been willing to pay."
>
> "I always thought the State of New York owned them
> as they paid for them
> to be rebuilt, thats why I could never understand
> how the D & H sold
> them to Mexico."
>
> "I've been following this story for 23 years since
> I first found out D&H PA's were operating in
> Mexico and I've never seen, heard, nor read a
> thorough, detailed explanation about how the whole
> transaction that sent the PA's to Mexico came
> about.
> Guilford didn't purchase the D&H until 1984, for
> the whopping sum of $500,000. Previous to that
> time, D&H was struggling to survive as an
> independent bridge line railroad deep in Conrail
> territory after being cut loose from Dereco, a
> holding company owned by Norfolk & Western that
> also controlled Erie-Lackawanna. EL was absorbed
> into Conrail, but D&H was not, and so had to go it
> alone.
> In its struggle to survive in the
> financially-ravaged railroad landscape of the
> east, I'm sure D&H was forced to maximize
> financial assets wherever it could. Selling
> surplus locomotives that might have otherwise been
> donated to museums would have been one way to do
> it.
> Previous to going to Mexico, the PA's were leased
> to MBTA for Boston area commuter service, but MBTA
> eventually returned to EMD products, (F10 and GP
> rebuilds, etc.)
> The recently-rebuilt status of the PA's in 1978
> probably worked against them in a way. If they'd
> been tired and worn out, donation or sale at scrap
> value might have been more feasible to the D&H.
> (Of course they might have just ended up as scrap
> at Naporano or Pielet Bros., too.)"
>
> "As I have heard both the terms "leased" and
> "sold" regarding the Mexican transaction I suspect
> they were sold to a leasing company which in turn
> leased them to the Mexican carrier. Let me be
> careful to label this as speculation as that's all
> it is. Not sure it matters much in any case."
