Search results

At the turn of the 20th-century railroad regulation was hotly debated in the United States. Railways were accused of abusing of their monopolistic position, in particular by discriminating rates. Public opinion’s pressure for tighter regulation led to the 1906 enactment of the Hepburn Act, which strengthened the powers of the Interstate Commerce Commission. American economists actively participated in the debate. While most of them sided with the pro-regulation camp, the best economic analysis came from those who used the logic of modern law and economics to demonstrate how most railroads’ practices, including rate discrimination, were simply rational, pro-efficiency behavior. However, as relatively unknown Chicago University economist Hugo R. Meyer would discover, proposing that logic in public events could at that time cost you your academic career.

The Case takes place at the headquarters of Genesee & Wyoming, Inc. (GWI), one of the leading short line railroads in the United States. The Case revolves around three executives - Mortimer B. Fuller III, Chairman and CEO, Mark Hastings, CFO and Treasurer, and Alan Harris, Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Office - and the dilemma over whether to pursue international expansion.

GWI has generally pursued a strategy of diversification through acquisition. However, there are other approaches to diversification, including international expansion. With increasing deregulation and privatization of railroads around the world, GWI and its competitors must weigh the risks of internationalization with the rewards. GWI fears that a failure to move quickly might result in missed opportunities as competitors acquire railroads around the world.

An opportunity has recently arisen in Australia, where the government is selling Australian National Railway. GWI believes Australia might be a good initial foray into the international market given the similarities of the country and its railroad industry to the United States and its railroad industry. The Case asks the question, “Should GWI enter the bidding?”

The purpose of this paper is to provide an economic assessment of the productivity growth and technical efficiency of US Class I railroads for the period of 2002‐2007.

The US railroad industry has become increasingly concentrated with seven Class I railroads accounting for over 90 percent of the industry's revenue. Because the small sample size creates a dimensionality problem for data envelopment analysis (DEA) with contemporaneous frontiers, the authors use sequential DEA and calculate the Malmquist productivity indexes using sequential frontiers. Through a decomposition process, changes in productivity are attributed to technical efficiency change, technical change, and scale efficiency change.

Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) led the industry in terms of productivity growth (4.6 percent) and consistently stayed on the production frontier in every period studied; both BNSF and Union Pacific (UP) are top innovators in the industry, but UP trailed BNSF in both productivity growth and technological innovations by wide margins; and Grand Trunk Corporation was very good at “catching up” or leading its peers in efficiency improvements.

Railroads have invested heavily in technology over the years to enhance efficiency and productivity. However, two recent economic studies find that railroad productivity has slowed in recent years. The authors' benchmarking analysis sheds light on how individual railroads performed relative to their peers, and what they could learn from industry best practice.

The benchmarking study enables the authors to report each railroad's performance instead of reporting industry‐wide aggregate indexes or industry averages which tend to mask performance variations. The paper also examines the causal factors of recent productivity growth and provides useful information for the industry and its regulators.

This study utilizes a different approach to examine the effect of transportation on the average height of people in the postbellum period, simply by modeling the change in the marketable surplus of protein. The results show that railroad development had a positive effect on average height from 1867 to 1887, and after this period, its effect was negligible. This study suggests that the factors with negative effects – such as urbanization, industrialization, and infectious diseases – dominated the positive effects of railroad development leading actual average height to decrease from 1867 to 1887.

With increased crude oil prices, railroad is emerging as a cheaper alternative to trucks and other less fuel efficient modes of transportation. As a result, with increase in crude oil price, while other modes of transportation have suffered economic slump, railroad industry is thriving with every company reporting an increase in revenue and profits. In this study, we analyze the performance of seven North American Class I freight railroads. In this chapter, we illustrate the use of data envelopment analysis (DEA), an operations research technique, to analyze the financial performance of the U.S. railroad industry by benchmarking a set of financial ratios of a firm against its peers. DEA clearly brings out the firms that are operating more efficiently in comparison with other firms in the industry and points out the areas in which poorly performing firms need to improve.

The study aims to examine the stock price performance of publicly owned railroad companies following severe railroad accidents that resulted in the loss of human lives and/or hazardous material spills. The focus is on legal liability considerations as one of the primary factors that drives a firm's abnormal performance following a given accident.

This paper employs a sample of 97 railroad accidents that occurred between January 1967 and December 2006 and involved equipment (tracks and/or locomotives) owned by publicly traded US and Canadian railroad companies. The stock price reaction of the affected firms is examined following these disasters and a series of univariate and multivariate tests is used to investigate whether differences in abnormal returns following a given accident can be related to various factors that characterize the affected firm or the accident it was involved in.

The results suggest that legal liability considerations are one of the primary factors that determine a company's stock price reaction following a railroad disaster. Specifically, it is observed that firms that are likely to be sued in connection with an accident tend to incur larger stock price losses. On the other hand, it is found that firms that are protected through indemnification agreements suffer only insignificant price declines, even if initial accident reports hold them responsible for causing the accident.

The paper extends the prior literature on the stock market's reaction to firm‐specific catastrophic events. While there are a number of studies that examine the financial consequences of aviation disasters, there is to the authors' knowledge only one prior study that performs a similar analysis for railroad accidents.

Evidence of audit committee activity in the formative years of the Baltimore & Ohio (B&O) Railroad indicates that control and reporting activity developed long before the existence of regulatory mandate or the external auditing function. This is the earliest example of such an organized and continuing activity in American business history. With no previous business experience to model this enterprise, the organizers of the corporation put in place an audit committee of directors as a control device to safeguard assets and ensure proper handling of cash receipts and disbursements. Research into primary materials establishes that the committee not only performed regular routine audits of the “treasurer’s report,” but also identified and addressed critical problems of control and payment weaknesses. The discovery of the function of value‐for‐money (VFM) auditing by a committee of directors establishes historical context for today’s audit process and audit committee. Because the B&O was such an important entity, it influenced other railroads; and the railroad industry, in turn, greatly influenced the development of modern American businesses during the Industrial Revolution.

Are business outcomes due primarily to entrepreneurial and managerial ability or are they mainly the result of business content? The purpose of this study is to explore this question by comparing the railroads of Victoria and Queensland (Australia) and the South-West and Northern Plains of America between 1881 and 1900. Given the commonalities of the four railway systems in terms of their economic orientation towards rural custom, and their marked difference in terms of ownership, one would expect similarities in their financial circumstances if outcomes were primarily determined by fluctuations in global commodity markets. Conversely, marked differences would be expected if outcomes primarily resulted from managerial initiative.

Conceptually, this study is informed by the idea that social and economic outcomes are shaped by long historical movements, with meaningful structural change occurring rarely but to great effect. In exploring this concept through a comparison of the railways of Australia and the American West, the study draws on two forms of archival evidence. One source of evidence relates to railroad management, operations and finances. Figures cited come primarily from Australian railway commissioners’ reports and Poor’s Manual of the Railroads of the USA. The other source of evidence relates to agricultural statistics. These are drawn from official reports.

This study argues that effective strategic decision-making can only occur if we understand the structural changes that alter our world. In the late nineteenth century, the Australian and American railroads servicing newly settled rural regions were financial failures because management failed to appreciate the structural changes that the revolution in steam-powered transport had initiated; a revolution which resulted in commodity prices – and hence, the railway rates for farm produce – being determined by global demand and supply balances rather than by local factors. As a result, they continued a policy of expansion that was no longer financially justified.

This study seeks to contribute to a fundamental debate in historical studies and management about the drivers of social and economic change. Increasingly, there is acceptance of the view that historical circumstances are inherently unstable and what counts is the particular change cascading through a myriad of “events”. This study points in a contrary direction, suggesting that business outcomes are primarily determined by deep structural shifts that can be understood and steered but seldom opposed.