(erielack) LCL Traffic

["Paul Brezicki" <doctorpb_@_bellsouth.net>]

Quite correct, Randy, my description was sloppy. Of course the forwarder was
the customer. Let's just say that as a whole, LCL was a money-loser for the
RR's, so they encouraged the shift to forwarders; thus they could retain the
business at a profit by letting others do the costly pickup and delivery
etc. For example, Erie and then EL had Lifschultz maintain a freight house
at 28th St in Manhattan. Let me rephrase the question: why did the
forwarders continue to use boxcars on EL when on most other RR's the traffic
apparently moved exclusively by TOFC? This is especially puzzling in the
case of 28th St, where cars had to ride the costly and time-consuming floats
while beginning in 1971, EL had an efficient, mechanized intermodal facility
across the river.

Paul Brezicki

Erie didn't use any forwarders.  The forwarders used Erie; they were the
customer.  The forwarder could use any railroad; he chose the one that gave
him the best combination of rate and service. The railroads had to work to
get and keep the traffic.



	The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
	Sponsored by the ELH&TS
	http://www.elhts.org

------------------------------