Georgia Mayors want rail transit connections to Atlanta (Columbus, Savannah: lenders, home)

[Columbus1984]

Originally Posted by DirkMcGirt

Link where it says it will be profitable. There... is... no... way.

Here is all of the information that you need. Columbus seems to be ahead of other Georgia cities. With Columbus being the largest business center outside of metro Atlanta and Fort Benning located nearby, ridership seems feasible.

High Speed Rail | Planning Department :: Columbus, Georgia Consolidated Government

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by DirkMcGirt

Of course the mayor would think it is bearable... because their budget wouldn't have to subsidize the difference. Make the cities wanting to join subsidize the rail operating costs and see how economically viable they think it is.

Well, that's exactly what Robert Reichert, the Mayor of Macon, was discussing in his suggestion for rail between ATL and Macon. It would be a group of cities banning together for the project.

[bu2]

Interesting numbers (that doesn't mean I believe the study-I'd have to look in more detail to be convinced). "Emerging" means 90-110 mph, Regional 110-150 mph and Express 150-220 mph. Costs are $1.3 billion, $2.0 billion and $3.9 billion.

The Study results show that both the Express and the Regional high-speed rail alternatives are operationally feasible, with both producing operating ratios greater than 1.0 for years 2030, 2040 and 2050. For the year 2030, the Express rail system would generate an estimated $28.5 million in revenues against $23.5 million in expenses to produce an operating ratio of 1.21 (amounts are 2030$). Ridership (one-way trips) is projected to be 1.1 million by 2030.

The Regional system would generate $24.6 million in revenues to offset $21.5 million in operating expenses to produce an Operating Ratio of 1.15. By comparison, the Emerging rail alternative is projected in 2030 to generate $16.7 million in revenues against $19.9 million in operating expenses for an operating ratio of 0.83 with an estimated annual ridership of 775,000. Thus, the Emerging alternative is not projected to be operationally feasible.

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by bu2

Interesting numbers (that doesn't mean I believe the study-I'd have to look in more detail to be convinced). "Emerging" means 90-110 mph, Regional 110-150 mph and Express 150-220 mph. Costs are $1.3 billion, $2.0 billion and $3.9 billion.

The Study results show that both the Express and the Regional high-speed rail alternatives are operationally feasible, with both producing operating ratios greater than 1.0 for years 2030, 2040 and 2050. For the year 2030, the Express rail system would generate an estimated $28.5 million in revenues against $23.5 million in expenses to produce an operating ratio of 1.21 (amounts are 2030$). Ridership (one-way trips) is projected to be 1.1 million by 2030.

The Regional system would generate $24.6 million in revenues to offset $21.5 million in operating expenses to produce an Operating Ratio of 1.15. By comparison, the Emerging rail alternative is projected in 2030 to generate $16.7 million in revenues against $19.9 million in operating expenses for an operating ratio of 0.83 with an estimated annual ridership of 775,000. Thus, the Emerging alternative is not projected to be operationally feasible.

Well, i'll be. Maybe we could get some P3 in here if it'll turn a profit?

[jsvh]

Here is hoping we can get the state government to stop fighting rail transit at all costs.

If we could get something like the private Texas high-speed rail company to come in and build one of these lines and operate it for a profit that would be great. Just like rail did years ago (and still does elsewhere).

[DirkMcGirt]

Originally Posted by fourthwarden

Well, i'll be. Maybe we could get some P3 in here if it'll turn a profit?

Lets think about this logically...

The system is expected to cost over $2 billion. Assuming a low cost of capital at 5%, you need to generate $100 million to break even. Add on top of it the $25 million per year in maintenance and you need $125 million in revenue (on the low side). They are projecting the system to bring in $25 million per year. This leaves $100 million per year in shortfall for any investor to even consider getting involved.

Only in a perfect world where ridership meets expectations, maintenance and operating costs meet expectations, and the system is provided for free and all construction costs are ignored does this system even come close to breaking even.

Of course if you spin the numbers you can easily fool the uneducated masses who love a shiny idea more than they like logic and math.

I've simplified this about as much as I could to make the point. It isn't perfect, but if anything it underestimates the costs and deficit this thing would generate.

[MattCW]

A profitable rail system can't necessarily put the profits in its own budget. The very vast majority of rail systems even in just this country are quite profitable.

[DirkMcGirt]

Originally Posted by MattCW

A profitable rail system can't necessarily put the profits in its own budget. The very vast majority of rail systems even in just this country are quite profitable.

I have no idea what you are trying to communicate. You might want to proofread before hitting post in the future.

Your friend,
DMG

[tikigod311]

Love this recent interest. It seems like there is more potential than ever to come together to make rail happen in Georgia. Really, I don't think anything south of Macon is a good idea, but if it helps bring the infrastructure for commuter rail to the A, I'm all for it!

The state is the biggest factor in making this a reality, unfortunately....

[MattCW]

Originally Posted by DirkMcGirt

I have no idea what you are trying to communicate. You might want to proofread before hitting post in the future.

Your friend,
DMG

And you might want to try actually reading next time. I'll be nice and break it down for you this time. A profitable system doesn't mean the system itself sees the profits. MARTA is profitable, NYC Subway is profitable, Amtrak is profitable, CTA is profitable.