WATCO Makes Investment in GLC

[wagnew0923]

So if Watco/AA was to Pick up Coal Trains that would have to be in Toledo not Ann Arbor since there is no interchange in Ann Arbor. Also would Watco buy GLC or partner with it to be able to expand services.

Lastly on a sort of separate issue. Is Wally fianally dead or are they still conducting studies to see if they should conduct more studies.

[Saturnalia]

Lastly on a sort of separate issue. Is Wally fianally dead or are they still conducting studies to see if they should conduct more studies.

Still paying the consultants...

Does black diamonds mean coal and/or oil? I can see the potential for both happening and I have heard both called black diamonds before.

[BerkshireKid]

Coal = Black Diamonds
Oil = Black Gold

[JStryker722]

So if Watco/AA was to Pick up Coal Trains that would have to be in Toledo not Ann Arbor since there is no interchange in Ann Arbor. Also would Watco buy GLC or partner with it to be able to expand services.

Lastly on a sort of separate issue. Is Wally fianally dead or are they still conducting studies to see if they should conduct more studies.

Even if the Ann Arbor interchange still was active,it's too steep for anything like unit coal trains. Better just take it straight up the "original" AA main from Toledo where the trains can be easily forwarded to/from the NS Chicago line.I think Watco is smart to partner with GLC to market and expand the traffic up and down the mainline yet letting GLC management do what they do best without buying them out and still reap the benefits. Kinda like the 85% stake CSX has in INRD WITHOUT buying them out. They let it operate independently but benefit in stock dividends and actual rail traffic from the INRD. All the joy of having the traffic preference mostly to yourself plus money without paying to actually operate it.

[CSX_CO]

Kinda like the 85% stake CSX has in INRD WITHOUT buying them out. They let it operate independently but benefit in stock dividends and actual rail traffic from the INRD. All the joy of having the traffic preference mostly to yourself plus money without paying to actually operate it.

INRD to CSX isn't exclusive. CSX just collects the dividends, exercises no direct control, and if anything, are competitors right now in the Indianapolis Market. INRD just opened an intermodal terminal in partnership with the CN. Been running export grain in containers to port of Vancouver.

The even 'funnier' thing about INRD is that they are VERY hesitant to hire anyone with a background at CSX, despite the fact CSX has a 'majority' ownership. Proof positive that just because another railroad 'owns' a smaller one, doesn't mean its looking to 'control' it.

Practice Safe CSX

[GP-35]

Mr. J.Stryker 722 your very intelligent, I spent many years on the WC, I knew Ed Burkhart very well, great business man. Look at the mi. rail map, you will see all of the pieces come together. Things will start to happen soon on the AA & GLC.

[TrainWatcher]

I would favor a total new Ann Arbor Railroad system and also wouldn't create a little more competition between the northern roads (MQT, LSRC, and GLC/AA) if Watco was intending on getting the Annie re-constructed in the future. IIRC the track is still in place to TC right? Also another question that was raised when 765 went over the Huron River bridge, can it support a 130 car coal train? How long were the old PC coal drags of the 70's?

[Standard Railfan]

IIRC the track is still in place to TC right?

Yes, owned by the State of Michigan and operated by GLC.

[Racer]

The question I have is if the coal trains are existing trains taken off another railroad or is this new coal trains?

[TrainWatcher]

IIRC the track is still in place to TC right?

Yes, owned by the State of Michigan and operated by GLC.

As I was discussing with a few others, and people can call me crazy, but as I remember back a few years ago in the Recession, a lot of Northern communities were looking for other business than just tourism. Now, let's run the old plan that yes, Watco made the investment for the WALLY and passenger service. Now, you have an inflow of passenger capital year round (ski trips in winter as Boyne Falls is also right on the GLC, and summer tourism). There was talk by GLC to run passenger trains back to TC, which would in theory create a tourism boom in the TC, Boyne Falls, and Petoskey area if the plan worked as designed. Still a 2 hour drive to Mackinaw City (via Google Maps routing). Now, if you have a tourism boom, your going to need to get supplies to handle said boom (materials from fuel, wood, etc) year around and quickly. The railroad would be the fastest way to get it there, and I have never heard any horror stories from any of the GLC side of the house.

Now, also add in that Michigan has large amounts of natural gas in the Northern part of the Lower Peninsula. We see how the Dakotas have exploded with natural gas and oil drilling, so much so that it has effected a lot of coal fueled power plants. Now, with the investment by Watco for the Wally (I would venture a guess that money would go to track upgrades, etc) you now have something similar to the yesteryear Ann Arbor, where TC or Petoskey becomes the "end of the line" hub for materials. The farthest north the LSRC goes is Alpena, and the MQT doesn't go as far as the GLC does. This creates the GLC/AA to be in a great position to handle "thru freight" from the area, as well as the passengers. Another tid bit is as the old addage goes "passenger trains don't make money, but freight does".

My point being, is that while this investment maybe minor and not mean anything outside of an essential loan as Mr. TSB has indicated, and he has a lot more experience of this than I do or ever will, it would and could put IMHO GLC in a better future position for increased traffic on their northern routes, and in position to handle a boom in the region if the original plans that were layed out by Federated Railways a few years ago, came to fruition. And, if it would come to this being a future investment for a "economic boom" of sorts for the region (which is needed), the LSRC and even the MQT might have some trouble keeping up.

[JStryker722]

Kinda like the 85% stake CSX has in INRD WITHOUT buying them out. They let it operate independently but benefit in stock dividends and actual rail traffic from the INRD. All the joy of having the traffic preference mostly to yourself plus money without paying to actually operate it.

INRD to CSX isn't exclusive. CSX just collects the dividends, exercises no direct control, and if anything, are competitors right now in the Indianapolis Market. INRD just opened an intermodal terminal in partnership with the CN. Been running export grain in containers to port of Vancouver.

The even 'funnier' thing about INRD is that they are VERY hesitant to hire anyone with a background at CSX, despite the fact CSX has a 'majority' ownership. Proof positive that just because another railroad 'owns' a smaller one, doesn't mean its looking to 'control' it.

Practice Safe CSX

I only used the CSX-INRD as the closest example I can think of to support my last post on the fly. Wasn't supposed to be a perfect statement.

Mr. J.Stryker 722 your very intelligent, I spent many years on the WC, I knew Ed Burkhart very well, great business man. Look at the mi. rail map, you will see all of the pieces come together. Things will start to happen soon on the AA & GLC.

Thank you for the compliment GP-35.wish I could've met Mr. Burkhart although to know him after his PR fiasco with the Quebec accident would make me hesitant to do so. I'm just 21 years old,trying my best in learning what I can and applying my knowledge. Only practical use I've had so far on everything I learn about trains outside of foaming is giving my old HS teacher investing advice on railroads. junior year alone I made him $10,000 sticking with what I know about railroad patterns. I could predict also what commodities to invest in Based on the weekly AAR car loading reports.got rewarded with a Trains Magazine subscription.
I hope I'll eventually not sound stupid on here like I got teased on here for.

[JStryker722]

The question I have is if the coal trains are existing trains taken off another railroad or is this new coal trains?

If it is to somewhere served by another railroad as well,my guess is reroute. Otherwise,new train with either new or recycled symbol from a discontinued train

[JStryker722]

I would favor a total new Ann Arbor Railroad system and also wouldn't create a little more competition between the northern roads (MQT, LSRC, and GLC/AA) if Watco was intending on getting the Annie re-constructed in the future. IIRC the track is still in place to TC right? Also another question that was raised when 765 went over the Huron River bridge, can it support a 130 car coal train? How long were the old PC coal drags of the 70's?

I own the book " Rails Around Michigan " and from what I can figure by the book,given that they used 3-4 units on those trains based on HP ratings of locos then,I'd guess 120-130 cars per train.

[TrainWatcher]

I would favor a total new Ann Arbor Railroad system and also wouldn't create a little more competition between the northern roads (MQT, LSRC, and GLC/AA) if Watco was intending on getting the Annie re-constructed in the future. IIRC the track is still in place to TC right? Also another question that was raised when 765 went over the Huron River bridge, can it support a 130 car coal train? How long were the old PC coal drags of the 70's?

I own the book " Rails Around Michigan " and from what I can figure by the book,given that they used 3-4 units on those trains based on HP ratings of locos then,I'd guess 120-130 cars per train.

Thanks Stryker. What my comment really also asks is the added amount of wear and tear on the Huron River bridge, and to my knowledge I have not seen or can find any referance to any upgrades to the bridge except to the north where there was a wash-out a few years ago. On the other hand, if they can handle 90 car grain trains, I don't think there'd be much trouble aside from maybe needing a push like they used to in the PC days.

[JStryker722]

I would favor a total new Ann Arbor Railroad system and also wouldn't create a little more competition between the northern roads (MQT, LSRC, and GLC/AA) if Watco was intending on getting the Annie re-constructed in the future. IIRC the track is still in place to TC right? Also another question that was raised when 765 went over the Huron River bridge, can it support a 130 car coal train? How long were the old PC coal drags of the 70's?

I own the book " Rails Around Michigan " and from what I can figure by the book,given that they used 3-4 units on those trains based on HP ratings of locos then,I'd guess 120-130 cars per train.

Thanks Stryker. What my comment really also asks is the added amount of wear and tear on the Huron River bridge, and to my knowledge I have not seen or can find any referance to any upgrades to the bridge except to the north where there was a wash-out a few years ago. On the other hand, if they can handle 90 car grain trains, I don't think there'd be much trouble aside from maybe needing a push like they used to in the PC days.

You're welcome Train Watcher. Most major spans are built usually in hindsight with heavy freight in mind for generations.There was alot more traffic in the old AA days. 3 50 car trains causes as much wear and tear in the end as 1 150 car train without factoring in weight.New track and decking would probably be all that would ever be needed. Helpers may or may not be needed based upon modern locomotive HP and tractive effort ratings.

[TSB]

...on old M of W and Transportation guys. I could have bought a book.

[KC]

...on old M of W and Transportation guys. I could have bought a book.

or pack away the golf clubs and write one!

Kelly

[AARR]

Believe it or not GLC/TSBY has been approached by other railroads to run the coal trains from pit south and also north to pit over the years... CN being one of them now I wouldn't hold my breathe who knows what will happen. Hell GW could also invest at some point you just never know. So sit back watch, wait and go foam the GLC!

I believe you but it is surprising. Are you able to share where these coal trains are coming from and going to?

At one time CN was sending 10-12 trains a day over the Holly Sub and there were rumors about them diverting some of the coal traffic (which at the time averaged about one in each direction per day) over TSBY/AA between Pit Jct. and Toledo. Is that what you're referring too?

[bctrainfan]

While we're in speculation land, how about throwing in the Michigan line rumors? If NS wants out, is Watco looking to connect the GDLK/AA/GLC dots? Wouldn't this give Watco some pretty good flexibility for interchanges that maximize their haul mileage? I have no idea really if there is even traffic that would make sense for this, but maybe Watco sees profit in GR-Toledo or even something like Elkhart-TC? (caveat: all things are possible in speculation land!)

[JStryker722]

While we're in speculation land, how about throwing in the Michigan line rumors? If NS wants out, is Watco looking to connect the GDLK/AA/GLC dots? Wouldn't this give Watco some pretty good flexibility for interchanges that maximize their haul mileage? I have no idea really if there is even traffic that would make sense for this, but maybe Watco sees profit in GR-Toledo or even something like Elkhart-TC? (caveat: all things are possible in speculation land!)

I don't think it be worth it to Watco to connect the dots along the Michigan line. There is NO active interchange point between the AA/GLC mainline and the Michigan Line. The one that did exist is very overgrown and paved over,much less steep as hell. If Watco ever took over Michigan line ops,my guess the GLK/Michigan line would act as one and then you'd see either the current AA/GLC setup or a brand new ( once again ) Ann Arbor Railroad.