CN wants decision Dec. 1 on railway sale

Let's get down to the real questions of this deal:
- Why is this deal in the interest of the American taxpayer? In fact, CN, a Canadian rail line, is looking to bypass American ports in favor of their own in Canada where American rail lines are not welcome, bring the cheap Chinese products to market in the US a couple days sooner saving China fuel costs on delivery, and greatly expanding the pockets of CN rail. For those of you who may question this view..I ask you to visit CN's own website at http://www.cn.ca/specialized/ports_docks/prin... , or the Price Rupert Port Authorities at http://www.rupertport.com/development.htm
- Where are jobs going to be created out of this deal in America? Who really benefits from this deal?
- Do you really think the rail lines that are currently congested in/around Chicago will truly be freed up by this deal? You don't really believe no other rail lines are going to fill the vacancies?
Look, I am all for business, but GOOD BUSINESS. This deal, as currently proposed, does not make good sense for the American Taxpayer. Why should the American taxpayer foot the bill for infrastructure improvements that benefit only CN, its' shareholders, and Chinese manufacturers and shipping companies?

JBChitown wrote:

Let's get down to the real questions of this deal:
- Why is this deal in the interest of the American taxpayer? In fact, CN, a Canadian rail line, is looking to bypass American ports in favor of their own in Canada where American rail lines are not welcome, bring the cheap Chinese products to market in the US a couple days sooner saving China fuel costs on delivery, and greatly expanding the pockets of CN rail. For those of you who may question this view..I ask you to visit CN's own website at http://www.cn.ca/specialized/ports_docks/prin... , or the Price Rupert Port Authorities at http://www.rupertport.com/development.htm
- Where are jobs going to be created out of this deal in America? Who really benefits from this deal?
- Do you really think the rail lines that are currently congested in/around Chicago will truly be freed up by this deal? You don't really believe no other rail lines are going to fill the vacancies?
Look, I am all for business, but GOOD BUSINESS. This deal, as currently proposed, does not make good sense for the American Taxpayer. Why should the American taxpayer foot the bill for infrastructure improvements that benefit only CN, its' shareholders, and Chinese manufacturers and shipping companies?

Keep holding out for that STAR line - i wish you a lot of luck. As to the rest of the red herring arguments you make, try telling it to the STB - they will have as good a laugh as i did.

JBChitown wrote:

Let's get down to the real questions of this deal:
- Why is this deal in the interest of the American taxpayer? In fact, CN, a Canadian rail line, is looking to bypass American ports in favor of their own in Canada where American rail lines are not welcome, bring the cheap Chinese products to market in the US a couple days sooner saving China fuel costs on delivery, and greatly expanding the pockets of CN rail. For those of you who may question this view..I ask you to visit CN's own website at http://www.cn.ca/specialized/ports_docks/prin... , or the Price Rupert Port Authorities at http://www.rupertport.com/development.htm
- Where are jobs going to be created out of this deal in America? Who really benefits from this deal?
- Do you really think the rail lines that are currently congested in/around Chicago will truly be freed up by this deal? You don't really believe no other rail lines are going to fill the vacancies?
Look, I am all for business, but GOOD BUSINESS. This deal, as currently proposed, does not make good sense for the American Taxpayer. Why should the American taxpayer foot the bill for infrastructure improvements that benefit only CN, its' shareholders, and Chinese manufacturers and shipping companies?

What you folks that oppose this deal fail to realize is that the CN can negotiate trackage rights without direct ownership of the EJ&E and reroute their traffic...regardless of whether or not an outright sale takes place. If this happens, you will have no redress and infrastructure improvements will be totally left up to taxpayers, subject to EJ&E approval.
Obstructionism just will not work in the end. Do you really think that CN has no alternative than outright ownership? Geesh.

Up Engr..Red Herring arguments? Have you done any research into this, or are you just trying to ignore the facts?

UP Engr wrote:

<quoted text>
Keep holding out for that STAR line - i wish you a lot of luck. As to the rest of the red herring arguments you make, try telling it to the STB - they will have as good a laugh as i did.

Red Herring Arguments? Perhaps you would be interested in this very recent article quoting Hunter Harrison. This is of course, if you haven't already taken the time to read anything on CN own website or that of Port Prince Rupert's:http://news.medill.no rthwestern.edu/chicago/news.as px?id=88983

railham wrote:

<quoted text>
What you folks that oppose this deal fail to realize is that the CN can negotiate trackage rights without direct ownership of the EJ&E and reroute their traffic...regardless of whether or not an outright sale takes place. If this happens, you will have no redress and infrastructure improvements will be totally left up to taxpayers, subject to EJ&E approval.
Obstructionism just will not work in the end. Do you really think that CN has no alternative than outright ownership? Geesh.

Ummm... why is someone who lives in Michigan weighing in on the deal? Those trains aren't crawling through your backyard, so what could you possibly know about the impact of the deal, other than the earnings per share on your CN stock?

Dear Nanny...the last time I heard this particular borad was open to all who wished to comment.
The relief of congestion on Chicago area rail lines ahould be of everyone's concern in the region. This move by CN is a good one, not only for the CN itself but for the other companies who will benefit from the release of capacity on overcrowded Chicago area belt lines.
What the NIMBYS fail to understand is that if for some reason this deal doesn't happen, the EJ&E will still be free (with no regulation) to make a deal for trackage rights with any of the Chicago area Class one roads. If this happens, the 40 million CN has promised will be out the window and the taxpayer will pay the entire tab for what ever improvements that happen, at the Jay's descretion. Better to make a honest attempt to come away with something than to be left holding the entire bag.

railham wrote:

Dear Nanny...the last time I heard this particular borad was open to all who wished to comment.
The relief of congestion on Chicago area rail lines ahould be of everyone's concern in the region. This move by CN is a good one, not only for the CN itself but for the other companies who will benefit from the release of capacity on overcrowded Chicago area belt lines.
What the NIMBYS fail to understand is that if for some reason this deal doesn't happen, the EJ&E will still be free (with no regulation) to make a deal for trackage rights with any of the Chicago area Class one roads. If this happens, the 40 million CN has promised will be out the window and the taxpayer will pay the entire tab for what ever improvements that happen, at the Jay's descretion. Better to make a honest attempt to come away with something than to be left holding the entire bag.

I truly hope you don't think people are naive enough to actually believe no one will fill the gaps left by CN on the existing lines? The main issue here is that this deal benefits ONLY CN rail and its' Asian customers who are asking to use AMERICAN TAXPAYER DOLLARS for infrastructure improvements that benefit, again, only them. CN needs to step up to the plate and stop masking itself behind the thought that it is 'doing Chicago a favor'.$40 million is a pittance, and is actually rather insulting. The additional comments of getting trackage rights without the deal...stop with the threats and the new direction of 'let's now try to scare them into acceptance'. To top this off, this deal, if approved, will actually take business away from American ports and Rail companies. CN is the only rail line that has access to Port Prince Rupert in Canada...no American lines welcome.

JBChitown wrote:

<quoted text>
I truly hope you don't think people are naive enough to actually believe no one will fill the gaps left by CN on the existing lines? The main issue here is that this deal benefits ONLY CN rail and its' Asian customers who are asking to use AMERICAN TAXPAYER DOLLARS for infrastructure improvements that benefit, again, only them. CN needs to step up to the plate and stop masking itself behind the thought that it is 'doing Chicago a favor'.$40 million is a pittance, and is actually rather insulting. The additional comments of getting trackage rights without the deal...stop with the threats and the new direction of 'let's now try to scare them into acceptance'. To top this off, this deal, if approved, will actually take business away from American ports and Rail companies. CN is the only rail line that has access to Port Prince Rupert in Canada...no American lines welcome.

JB....CN is a business, just like any other. They have laid out the capital investent in Prince Rupert to shorten transit times provide more efficient operating results. Of course they did it so that they could gain a competitive advantage against other railroads.
By the way, CN is a publicly traded company with the majority of its stockholders from the United States, so the "its Un-American" mantra doesn't fit in this case. It's a red herring argument as UP likes to say. Heavy on emotion, light on the facts.

railham wrote:

<quoted text>
JB....CN is a business, just like any other. They have laid out the capital investent in Prince Rupert to shorten transit times provide more efficient operating results. Of course they did it so that they could gain a competitive advantage against other railroads.
By the way, CN is a publicly traded company with the majority of its stockholders from the United States, so the "its Un-American" mantra doesn't fit in this case. It's a red herring argument as UP likes to say. Heavy on emotion, light on the facts.

Heavy on emotion, light on facts? It IS a Canadian rail line, is it not? it is going to take business out of American ports and from American rail lines, is it not? It is going to be the ONLY company running on the EJ&E should this deal go through, is it not? By the way, you still haven't answered my question. Why don't you try doing that, or is it that you can't?

JBChitown wrote:

<quoted text>
Heavy on emotion, light on facts? It IS a Canadian rail line, is it not? it is going to take business out of American ports and from American rail lines, is it not? It is going to be the ONLY company running on the EJ&E should this deal go through, is it not? By the way, you still haven't answered my question. Why don't you try doing that, or is it that you can't?

Continued from above...by the way. Here's my question phrased nice and neat for you:

- Why should I, an American Taxpayer, foot the major bill of infrastructure improvements of which the beneficiaries are a Canadian Rail company, Asian manufacturers and Asian shipping companies, while at the same time actually takes business away from our American ports and American rail lines? Wouldn't my AMERICAN TAXPAYER DOLLARS be better spent building up our ports and rail lines?

JBChitown wrote:

<quoted text>
Continued from above...by the way. Here's my question phrased nice and neat for you:
- Why should I, an American Taxpayer, foot the major bill of infrastructure improvements of which the beneficiaries are a Canadian Rail company, Asian manufacturers and Asian shipping companies, while at the same time actually takes business away from our American ports and American rail lines? Wouldn't my AMERICAN TAXPAYER DOLLARS be better spent building up our ports and rail lines?

I'll give it a try, but I feel as though I'm not getting through to you. The CN is a publicly held company that employs thousands of Americans and pays millions of dollars per year in taxes to the US government. It is owned primarily by US stockholders.
Since NAFTA has passed, we are bound by law to partner with Canada and Mexico, like it or not this is the trade law we govern ourselves by..therefore lawfully we cannot ask a corporation like CN to pay for something that is not required by any of the other Companies that operate in this country.
If you know anything about the rail network in North America, you must realize that it forms a network that does not stop at the border, but is a fluid network that requires efficiency, which this project will help provide.
Here is one more example for you of corporate multinationalism: Ask yourself this question...Are GM, GE, Ford, Deere, Caterpillar and countless others "American Companies"? Think about it.

Ahh the great spin machine at work. I was unaware that my concerns are with CN and the business done with them today. As a matter of fact, I am not against that at all. What I am against, is a foreign company using the American taxpayer to foot the major portion of expenses for infrastructure improvements to a rail line that is to their, and their foreign business partners, benefit. This same transaction would further damage America's own ability to improve it's own ports and rail lines. CN needs to step up to the plate and pay their fair share. Am I asking for the full bill? No. But, their current $40 million offer is what, maybe one overpass? It's actually insulting.

JB
1. The CN is a public Company and is primarily owned by US citizens.
2. The STB will make the decision on the possible construction of overpasses, which, since they cross railroad property, are publicly funded. There may not even be a need for overpasses, this need will be determined by the STB using established criteria.
3. CN will spend 100 million of its own money to update the EJ&E property, not taxpayer money.
4. The most efficient route will win the lions share of the freight traffic, which is what should happen. This is open competition. If we didn't allow improvements in our transportation infrastructure each time someone decided that they didn't agree with the decision, we would quickly fall behind as a society.

One final note: Because a myth is repeated time and time again does not make it factual. If you carefully read what I am trying to say, you will find that I am not mythmaking, but being factual with you. Only definable, factual information will be used in determining the status of this case....inuendo and emotion has no place here.

Railham...let me pose you a question. As you note that I am somehow mistating the fact that should this deal go through the US will lose vast amounts of business at our ports on the West Coast and US rail lines shipping (which is by the way undeniable) to the Canadian Port Prince Rupert that CN has the only keys to..again, no US rail lines are welcome there. Why do you believe CN falsely claimed earlier this week that the deal with the EJ&E has a firm deadline within it and they need to have the decision by the STB by Dec. 1st? There is no such clause in the proposal on the table. Could it be that CN understands very well that as a new administration enters office, who will in all probability be very different from the one that currently turns a blind eye as America continues to lose share to both Canada and Mexico, their time to get this deal through is numbered?

JBChitown wrote:

Railham...let me pose you a question. As you note that I am somehow mistating the fact that should this deal go through the US will lose vast amounts of business at our ports on the West Coast and US rail lines shipping (which is by the way undeniable) to the Canadian Port Prince Rupert that CN has the only keys to..again, no US rail lines are welcome there. Why do you believe CN falsely claimed earlier this week that the deal with the EJ&E has a firm deadline within it and they need to have the decision by the STB by Dec. 1st? There is no such clause in the proposal on the table. Could it be that CN understands very well that as a new administration enters office, who will in all probability be very different from the one that currently turns a blind eye as America continues to lose share to both Canada and Mexico, their time to get this deal through is numbered?

I don't believe that the CN falsely claimed anything in stating its desire to wrap this thing up by the end of the year. I have no way of knowing what sort of stipulations are involved in the actual purchase agreement with the EJ&E since the text is not available. I do know that very often when you are talking about a deal such as this, time is of the utmost importance for financing and competitive reasons. To address the second portion of your question, I have no way of knowing how another administration in Washington would react to this proposal, but I suspect that since the CN has thousands of miles of track and also thousands of American workers, they would not be biased against this plan which is a good one for majority of the population residing in the Chicago region. JB, you must realize that we are governed by the NAFTA trade agreement between the US, Canada and Mexico whenever a situation arises like this, and that NAFTA was signed into law by a Democratic administration. Since this is an undeniable fact, your argument that this is some sort of attack on the US is at best laughable and at worst an outright falsehood.

Wow...Railham...where have you been the few days? I guess you haven't been able to catch up on the goings on. It's been released that Obama is against this transaction in its current state. And, by the way, there's also been another article written that speaks to the link between Prince Rupert Port expansion and the EJ&E acquisition. You may want to google this. So, I hope your laughing when my so called 'falsehoods' are all right there in the light for all to see. Try again...I'm waiting...

JB...Of course Obama is going to say he is against the transaction, he is a Senator from Illinois merely doing the PC thing. AS far as there being a link between Prince Rupert and the EJ&E buyout, that fact, plus the faster transit times around Chicago are what make this deal so attractive for CN. No argument there. Kansas City Southern is in the midst of a similar expansion plan into Mexico, which will enable goods better transit times into the US market from Mexico. This is all a part of the NAFTA agreement which, like it or not, is what we are bound to as participant.
Let me remind you that if for some reason this deal doesn't go through, the Jay will be free to handle this traffic as an independent carrier, free of any STB involvement...so the traffic is coming like it or not, better to make a deal and have a say in what happens in your back yard than to be shut out completely. If you doubt what I am telling you, check it out with anyone in the rail industry, they will confirm what I have said.

Ha!! I really enjoy the new tactic that CN picked up that is 'let's scare them into acceptance', and 'we're doing them a fovor'. Please...tell Hunter to step up to the plate if he really wants to play...otherwise go home.

JB...CN would obviously prefer to own the Jay which would enable them to control the traffic flow, but I'm sure that they could work with them to handle the traffic on an overhead basis. If this happened, the possibility of UP or one of the other western roads entering into the picture would become more probable.I was actually quite surprized when CN offered to kick in an extra 40M to help sweeten the pot, when in all truth they would not be liable funding for any public improvements made to railroad property.