Hello All,

If one wants to claim that people are looking for alternatives to driving AZ 64 to the south rim the Grand Canyon National Park and GCR fills that void and this is the reason for their ridership numbers, I wonder how you explain the Polar Express numbers? The Polar Express at GCR runs to MP 18 and then returns to Williams never reaching the National Park MP 64. Yet in conversations with Mr. Harper he stated that of the 40 some properties doing the Polar Express GCR portion of the Polar Express was over 10 % of the total polar business in the nation. The Grand Canyon as the destination does not explain this part of their business.
Conversely the when the C&TS brought the third locomotive under the current FRA code in 2005 a commissioner announced that they would see a dramatic increase in ridership. Yet the C&TS has still not gotten back to the 50,000+ they carried in 2000 and 2001. The damage created by man made events that became publicly apparent in 2002 including the lack of response to FRA concerns on track and then the fire closures from that year. The ignoring of the new part 230 which by quark only allowed 487 to operate in 2003 and the lack of an investment in a constant long term business (where ALL PARTICIPANTS are working for the same goals) and marketing plan has continually hurt the property. If people do not know that one, you are open, and, two what you have to offer, why would anyone bother to come to your property. When the reason a family of 4 knows about your property is because Dad came across the railroad in riding a bike from El Paso to Denver and not your advertising campaign then you may need to expand your marketing audience. The other mistake is setting up an experience from a Railfan perspective and not how to entertain the entire family. When everyone is enjoying or has part of the experience addressing their interest during part of the trip then they all are more likely to return.
It is critically important to realize that Railfans and model railroaders do not buy enough tickets to create mass crowds for any operation, yet many places only see these people as their perspective audience. The true answer as to why one group is more successful in attracting people and other are not can be found in the marketing abilities and successes of each group. If you have a limited group that you focus your business plan on then you create a limited number of potential visitors. GCR is a classic example of how the RR struggled at many levels until the explosion that happened due to a marketing push that included a new air lines out of LA to the Phoenix and the canyon (this did not take hold as envisioned) and the AAA campaign that has proven very successful for GCR. As ownership has changed the marketing push slowed and business growth has reflected this.
When people are planning trips and determining what they are going to do they can not consider you if they do not know if you exist and what you offer. If you are going to attract their consideration of going to your property the potential visitor first has to have the ability to find out you even exists. They then need to know what you have to offer. You can not put together an event two months before it is suppose to happen and expect it to be a success from the start. Grand Canyon Railways Polar Experience started as a way to sell a few more motel rooms in a slow part of the business season. As things evolved it has taken its own importance where smart people found what the potential visitor was looking for and they have worked hard to deliver it.
Motive power can make a difference but it depends upon how you market or do not market your event or experience that truly sells tickets.

Respectively,
Robby Peartree

The question is: If you have two tourist railways "across the street" from each other (or, say, both in Lancaster County.) One of them has the grand majesty of a steam engine and bears the grand expense.
The other makes do with a GE 65-ton or SW800 with accordingly lower mechanical and fuel expense.

Both with equally competent executive directors, reasonably equivalent public awareness etc.

Will the steam museum make enough extra money to justify the cost of steam? Or does it need to "subsidize" steam "as a program service" because it is correct for their strategic vision (nonprofits get to place mission before profit.)

And if the second one is correct, why don't more museums rebuild and steam that loco they have sitting in the back of the shop?

What kind of market is NS going after with it's super long death march steam trips in sealed window coaches? Some of the trips were over 250 miles round trip. Like Knoxville-Asheville, Cincinnati-Danville, Lexington-Oneida, Detroit-Fort Wayne, and Fort Wayne-Lafayette. A family with young kids might not have the patience for one of those trips but an older retired couple might. Do people even care if the power is steam or not on the NS trips? Some tourist operations like Steamtown and Reading and Northern/Lehigh Gorge in PA offer shorter or longer trips.

[quote="Robby Peartree"]Hello All,

If one wants to claim that people are looking for alternatives to driving AZ 64 to the south rim the Grand Canyon National Park and GCR fills that void and this is the reason for their ridership numbers, I wonder how you explain the Polar Express numbers? The Grand Canyon as the destination does not explain this part of their business.

Polar Express is not the same train run for the same reason as the 'normal" train. there's no comparison between the two.

Conversely the when the C&TS brought the third locomotive under the current FRA code in 2005 a commissioner announced that they would see a dramatic increase in ridership. Yet the C&TS has still not gotten back to the 50,000+ they carried in 2000 and 2001.

What happened in the world shortly after 2005 that affected not only CATS but all of us? Was the current depression caused by the lack of steam there? Do you believe it isn't an even more meaningful critical event?

It is critically important to realize that Railfans and model railroaders do not buy enough tickets to create mass crowds for any operation, yet many places only see these people as their perspective audience.

Damn straight, Skippy........

GCR is a classic example of how the RR struggled at many levels until the explosion that happened due to a marketing push that included a new air lines out of LA to the Phoenix and the canyon (this did not take hold as envisioned) and the AAA campaign that has proven very successful for GCR. As ownership has changed the marketing push slowed and business growth has reflected this.

This is called symbiotic strategic partnerships. Everybody helps each other prosper by contributing to the creation of a critical mass of services that together provide more appeal than any would alone.

Motive power can make a difference but it depends upon how you market or do not market your event or experience that truly sells tickets.

That's only one criteria, but a critical one. I wish we had fewer railfans and more businessmen in charge, but our BODs seem to gravitate to railfans.

dave

This removes the "branding" priority from the equasion, but makes mission identification more critical. The reason most museums don't rebuild the steam locomotive is lack of vision and strategy and business acumen to develop the context in which it is necessary to be done and, based on that, acquire the resources to get the job done.

dave

The market of the people who will gravitate to the lineside to watch it come through brings NS a lot of intangible benefit. They can get by on a limited passenger market which is partially a result of the logistical situation of fitting a special train into their already busy freight schedule.

dave

Amen to this! As a rule museums should diversify their boards of directors. I think museums often find this difficult because they are so bust looking inwardly, that they forget about the outside world. A BOD with a broader perspective can help with this!



I agree that mission is most important here, but I feel as though branding is also critical. if one were to set up a certain visitor experience as a result of their mission, but their branding did not reflect that experience, we have a problem. Simply rebuilding a steam locomotive is not a strategy, and the same for rebuilding any piece of equipment. From a collections standpoint, it might be wonderful, but otherwise it is relatively meaningless. Understanding how a piece of equipment fits into an overall experience is significant though. In other words, a marketing statement like "bringing the 1920s back to life" is more likely to reach a broader audience than "ride behind a steam locomotive, but then again this depends upon your market. A recent visit to a museum left me cold because staring at row upon row of equipment with little in the way of interpretation or creating and experience was boring- and I like this stuff!
In any case, it is important for the experience provided to be a consistent one. In the article "The Experience Economy" Joseph Pine and James Gilmore define experiences as memorable events, revealed over time, that engage individuals in an inherently personal way. The article then explains the rise of such experiences in the economy and outlines the five principles for creating such an experience:
1. Theme the experience- develop a well defined theme, preferably one which guests "participate in a narrative that would seem incomplete if they were not there". The theme should "alter a visitor's sense of reality" simultaneously changing their "experience of time, space, and matter". The theme should "integrate these elements into a new cohesive reality." Themes are also strengthened by "creating multiple places within one place." Lastly, the theme should fit the character of organization staging it.
2. Harmonize impressions with Positive cues- Introduce cues that affirm the desired guest experience.
3. Eliminate Negative Cues- Get rid of inconsistent visual and aural cues- they confuse customers and ruin the experience.
4. Mix in memorabilia- sell tied in memorabilia provides one way of extending, and reminding visitors of their experience.
5. Engage all 5 senses- the more effectively an experience engages the senses the more memorable it will be.

While we might not employ all of these techniques at all times this can certainly be a helpful guide in creating an memorable experience for our visitors. I guess it goes without saying that if your going to do steam- do it well, but the same can be said for any type of railroad experience. Whatever you do, do it well. Also, if you don't do it well, don't market it until you improve. Getting more people to a bad experience just means more people are not enjoying themselves. Find out why people aren't coming and fix it.

The full text of "The Experience Economy" is available in "Reinventing the Museum, The Evolving Conversation on the Paradigm Shift" edited by Gail Anderson. It is found on page 163.

Take care,
Steve

I worked for four summers on the Conway (NH) Scenic Railroad in the 1970's. My observation, regarding whether people cared and/or knew what was pulling the train (usually steam, either 0-6-0 47 (now 7470) or 2-6-0 108) was this: They might not know what it was that pulled the train, diesel or steam, but they liked the steam better. So if you do a marketing survey, don't assume that just because they can't tell the difference between diesel and steam, doesn't mean that they don't prefer steam.

A sign of maturity in any such non-profit organization--be it a farm museum,. an art museum, a philanthropic organization, a comic-book/anime/pop-culture convention, or a rail museum--is the recognition that when the mission and project expands past the core group of volunteers and enthusiasts that got together like the teen in an Andy Hardy movie, full-time administration is necessary. If you think you can just appoint a retiree to do the job, you'll probably get what you pay for, unless he retired from business administration and doesn't care about internal group politics or ticking off certain folks.

I'm watching one non-profit, still an all-volunteer group save for the lawyer, teeter dangerously close to implosion because in spite of a multi-million-dollar annual budget, they still think they can elect a new president every year and have him or her put in what amounts to a full-time job without pay, because the mantra "all-volunteer, by fans for fans" is more important to them than ensuring proper administration. Rumor is that they're retaining certain experienced board members with "perks" like junkets to events in foreign countries at corporation expense (very, very much business-related and networking, but still...)

Dear Dave,

The key issue to me in this discussion is with the polar business at GCR is they have developed a successful experience without the destination of the Grand Canyon that creates visitation numbers consistently above 85 to 90,000 passengers. While it is true the polar experience started with the preexisting infrastructure for canyon trips, many organizations would be thrilled with the ridership numbers as a yearly totals. What started as a six car train has grown to a 15 car train. In the first year they planned about a dozen trips trains and hoped 4 would go but a television spot in Phoenix and due to the coverage business was stronger than expected.

If memory serves me for that year, GCR was doing two trips on Friday and Saturday and one on Sunday. A miss communication with a customer resulted in us having a family with a Down syndrome child without a ride. After fruitless negotiations of alterative possibilities Mr. White made the decision to run a special Polar for the family if he could scrounge up enough employees to do it. The employees jumped in and a special polar was ran. It made a families Christmas. Unknown to the employees at the time but more importantly for GCR in the long run we made a Phoenix travel agents families Christmas and a new promoter of the polar train. In the end it took a lot of people, working together, to make the event happen and a success and not just the locomotive on the front.

The locomotive situation from 2000 to 2005 on the C&TS is a particularly touchy subject for those who signed contracts with the C&TS commission after George Barfamule’s (spelling?) time operating the C&TS. One of the contracts signed during that time dealt with bringing the locomotives into the new 230. At the time this happened it was reported by one of the co authors of the Historic Preservation Study of the C&TS that there was an eerie silence when then commissioner Swartz (the former president of the Santa Fe Railway) in April 2002 asked about the locomotive status during a commission meeting. One can only guess what would have happen if the issues facing the efforts to put the locomotives in the new code had been discussed. While things may not have been different, by not discussing issues, including the track and locomotive issues, with the commission, some of us feel the railroad had no choice than to travel down the road it did.

I believe the belief expressed in 2005 that locomotives equaled to riders was said in part to help sooth relations with merchants who business had suffered due to the ridership numbers in 2002, 2003 and 2004. Since 2005, the C&TS has additionally suffered from the Wolf Creek (Lobato) Trestle fire and the subsequent rebuild. Given the low profit margins (if any profit in some cases) it is important we eliminate as many issues under our control (such as locomotive certification or miss information by employees or volunteers) as issues beyond our control such as Wolf Creek Trestle fire that effect our operations. What follows are the ridership numbers for the C&TS.

2000 50,216
2001 56,044
2002 22,558 FRA track restrictions; USDA Forest Serivce mandated closure.
2003 16,829 One locomotive in service.
2004 30,045 Two locomotives in service.
2005 Original estimate was approx 45,000 with the addition of the third locomotive
On September 19,2005 ridership = 29,211. Estimate for season on Sept 19th was 32,000.. .

2005 33,023 passengers

2006 38,460 riders regular trains + 1,156 on specials


The C&TS has faced a lot of struggles but it is a truly historic railroad still maintaining equipment that was purchased for its original use. The history, scenery and other aspects have a lot to offer. The trick is to see the RR potential and promote it in an effective way. Unfortunately the RR has had along period of upheavals. I believe this constant upheaval has limited the vision of those in leadership positions due to the constant change and the result is a lack of long term planning and damage from a lack of vision. It should also be noted that the current commission seems to be more politically stable at the moment which in the longer term may mean a brighter future.

Robby Peartree

This is always a 'hot button' issue on nearly everybody we work with, both existing and proposed lines.

I'm a big fan of ridership/marketing intercept surveys. They help settle battles, internally, where board and consultants can't resolve issues. Usually we can get everybody agree to at least let your own customers help settle it.

One of my favorite questions - in various wordings - amounts to 'would you be more interested in a steam-powered excursion for $____ more per ticket? (that varies based on territory and length)

That's the real meat of it. Nobody argues that (most) people like steam more, nobody argues that it costs a LOT more to maintain. The question becomes if the additional direct cost is justified in your market and will be supported. That varies a lot more than I imagined. I have had surprises, but in one a few years back it did enable a museum board to make the decision to commit to a steam restoration because the survey (taken on board their existing diesel operation) came back solidly that riders would pay significantly more. They didn't think they would. That resolved it.

Some locations and existing operations create an expectation of steam even when it isn't there, and that will also show up if surveyed. Most times that expectation is an absolute blind spot to the organization, and has never been explored.

The other thing that I've observed is that steam makes a significant impact on the sustainability of volunteers. It's a rallying point, and never underestimate the ability of a volunteer group to achieve what would appear impossible. That's harder to quantify, but even setting the goal - over time - makes a big difference in how the group identifies themselves, and the number of volunteers it motivates. It's why steam restoration attempts (without a viable railroad to run on or a market for it!) still survive.

Mind you, I love steam, always have. But I truly hate watching things fail even more, and I greatly fear unskilled and unfunded steam operations even more, purely for the safety issues, as I have seen some very bad situations. I've probably talked more groups and operations out of steam than ever went into it, particularly on startups. The portable steam operations like the Gramblings and others are also a great way to have visiting steam without necessarily bankrupting the organization to do it.

Did you notice how visitorship at the CT&S fell sharply after 9-11, in 2002? Did 9-11 affect people's travel habits, less people flying or traveling, etc. for a year or so afterwards? Because why would less people visit the RR in 2002 than 2001?

How about the new Colebrookdale RR in Boyertown, PA? Would they benefit with a steam locomotive or not? Right now they are using a high hood vintage GP diesel. They are getting ridership without steam as evidenced by their facebook photos. Maybe have one of the traveling 0-4-0's visit from time to time and pull the train.

9-11 had nothing to do with the down turn. There is correspondence going back to 2000 between the FRA and the operator about two track issues. One area was west of Oiser where the stability of the subgrade was in question and an area east of Oiser then known as the roller coaster. The C&TS initially ran service from Chama to Los Pinos and back. There was no service out of Antonito. Tinderbox fire conditions in the west resulted in the Governor of Colorado announcing that his state was on fire. Durango was dealing with the Missionary Ridge Fire. By the end of July the RR was operating again. In the spring 2003 commission meeting in Santa Fe the Forest service presented to the commission a bureaucratic apology.
On the locomotive front the C&TS had 4 locomotives in 2001. The 489 was not granted another flue extension due to the number it already had. That left the 463, 487 and 497 operating that year. After the return to operation the C&TS operated a 5 day a week schedule until the fall season where they want to seven days.

Robby Peartree

You need to describe benefit. There are many kinds of benefits, both tangible and intangible. Also, what are their organizational goals? What do they want to accomplish? What do the people in their market want? If they wish to market an authentic c.1915 railraod experience, then they probably would want steam, but would first need to explore how to do it.
The simple answer is: They might benefit from having steam, but they might also benefit from not having steam. The questions has too many variables to be worded that simply.

No one is going to create any exceptional intended benefit at all from simply operating a steam locomotive, or a diesel, or even a static exhibit. They will benefit however from successfully marketing and providing the experience which their community desires and their mission outlines. I am interested in museums which seek and interact with as many visitors as possible. Whatever helps provide that experience, within reason, sounds like a good thing to me. In other words, we can't run any trains just because we want to, but we can run any kind of train that provides our audiences the best possible experience. In summary, the question of motive power is more one of experience maximization: how can we provide the best possible experience for our visitors. The answer won't be the same for everyone.

Steve