[PRCo] Re: A 77/54 Bus in 1964? Also - A 10%/year loss?

[Fred Schneider]

By 1963 and maybe even earlier, PRC had shifted most rail car repairs out of
Homewood to the individual car houses.  PAT made a big issue of that in the
condemnation, saying that PRC should not get what they want for the property
because they had not been cycling cars through Homewood for period A, B and C
inspections.  The Railways Company countered that the road failure rate had
dropped as a result of having car house crews (Keating, Tunnel nd Craft)
inspect and repair cars.  You decide who was telling the truth...  If you want
the actual documents, look in the PAT/PRC Condemnation File in the library at
the University of Pittsburgh.

A patronage loss of 5 percent a year could come somewhere close to a 10
percent cash loss if you are living with inflation of 5 percent per year and
the city is preventing you fron fare increases and route abandonments.
Remember that the Pittsbutrgh City Solicitor (Ms. Finkelhor) managed to get
all the PRC abandonment proposals tabled in 1963 claiming that if PRC were to
loose money (or reduce the income), the county's condemnation price would be
lower.

Certainly they were not reinvesting any money.  But that doesn't mean they
made any money.  This was not run on a cash basis.  Just because you cannot
cover accrued depreciation doesn't indicated that you didn't loose money.

You want to add anything EHL?

Jim Holland wrote:

> Good Morning!
>
> > Matt Barry wrote:
>
>  http://www.amcap.org/monthlyfeature/032002/index.html
>
> > Click on above, read article.
>
> > To the best of my knowledge, there never was a bus line numbered 77/54,
-- Trailing quotes stripped by Listar --