Myth? Fact or Fiction? It's easy.... Show Me the Numbers that matter to making a profit?
SC says u r wrong Wrote:
> Charleston, SC to Inland Port Dillan, SC is
> another example of very short haul intermodal
> succeeding. Not just rare single commodity. Add to
> the list posted last month of other lanes where it
> Under 150 miles. The port schedule shows 5 days a
> week each way at Dillon. 23 hours cutoff to
> availability, so not combining days into a 2 or 3
> trains a week option. It runs 5 days a week each
> way. Google overhead shows 49 containers loaded
> on a cut in the Dillon yard.
> Dillon is the Charleston port's follow up to the
> 200 miles successful Greer Inland Port.
SC, may well say I'm wrong, but you have not proven it with this post.
Show Me the Numbers.... The numbers that "matter" to profit or loss.
Your attached "press release" from the Port has no data of any kind on how many folks are getting these containers at Dillon. Just you can do it, wouldn't it be "cool"... What is the number of containers delivered to be unloanding by rail at this "inland port"? This sound a lot like the kind of "spin" I heard from the "inland port" proponents in Victorville for years....
As I noted there are some rare exceptions where this "may" "pencil out", usually involving some kinds of large volunes, usually to specific final destination site taking high volumes of traffic. Your attached "press release" from the Port has no data on how many folks are getting these containers at Dillon.
All of the proposed "short haul or "inland ports" intermodal short haul cofc/tofc proposals I've seen and/or analyzed do not make a profit. And for all of the well documented operational/cost factors I presented.
It's then that my politians (still thinking this is the obvious simple solution to a complex problem) usually ask me how much it would cost to "subsidiize" moving the short distance containers by rail.
I don't need to see just the numbers you have annectdotally provided on the distance in miles to the next "short haul" terminal and/or the fact that it runs five days a week. That tell's me nothing about profit or loss on what yu assume to be "short distance" container hauls.
I need to see numbers on how many containers were carried, was this destnation the final destination what was the average distance for these containers moving from port to the "final destination", on-average how many containers are carride per train are carried, cost per unit hauled, shipping rates, then we can see if they are making money on this "short haul" to "final destination" operation, which would get containers on trains from the LA to Las Vegas logistics market?
Is this taken inland for switching and/or to assemble loads into the trains to actual final destinations markets (like haulers with carloads do to Barstow), or is this really a straight 150 mile haul to final destinations, analogous to the discusion topic of "short haul" cofc/tofc to nearby truck served markets?
So is this "example" from South Carolinas really an actual dedicated short container haul on rail cofc/tofc movement to be unloaded at Dillon South Carolina and deliveed to the shippers door at this distance? This was the situation under discussion in the case of a load from LA to Las Vegas in the I-15.
Or is there a land side port constraint in Charleston which presents limitations in the volumes necessary or facitlies for creating actual cofc/tofc trains to final destinations, which likely means that these containers aren't really "short hauls" but rahter "long hauls" being carried to a distant yard, for further pick ups by through trains heading to final market destination?
Finally, are these supposed "short hauls" (as opposed to these "short hauls" to be switched and/or transloaded to final destinations) or are the RR; making a profit on that short haul to a final destination at the recipeints loading dock?
And, if this is not the case, is the RR recieving a significant side subsidy from a port and/or a "gubmint" (as would be required for this to "work" in Southern California for any of the proposed "Inland" ports Southern California I've dealt with)?
The "myth" is that this post provides any data related to actual short haul cofc/tofc "profitability". You present no data or facts, that contradict my previous post, and fail to prove anything I said about the profitability of short haul cofc/tofc to final destinations was a "myth".
So who's really peddling what to who?