Re: One year contract, bad on engines and cars

Absolutely right Les.
One other thing, the selection of the RGRPC, right or wrong, wise or - um - otherwise, puts a group of people in charge who aren't in it for the money, they are in it to see the trains run. The objections to some of the other potential operators, as well as Mr. Bartholomew was that they seemed to be more interested in the bottom line than in running a railroad. Granted, one point of contention between the RGRPC and the Commission has been money, but it hasn't been a question of the operator making a profit, but rather what constitutes a reasonable loss to the RGRPC.
Whether the specific ideas / priorities of the RGRPC are shared by those of us on the sideline (including those in Chama and Antonito), is somewhat irrelevant. Their primary motive is to see the trains run safely and to that end they will be much less reluctant to spend money on maintenance than would be someone looking at the bottom line. As a result, it seems to me that a one year contract with the RGRPC is likely to be better for the railroad, overall, than a 5 year contract with someone who expects to walk away with money in their pocket.
Don