Under normal circumstances, a merger between railroad giants would be so outlandish that they would never consider publishing an announcement like this. Anything is possible these days, it seems.
Union Pacific to buy Norfolk in $85B mega U.S. railroad deal
11–20 of 100 posts
Re: Union Pacific to buy Norfolk in $85B mega U.S. railroad deal
#12What happened to antitrust? We were making great progress and then a few months ago this admin totally flipped?
Under Biden, FTC commissioner Lina Khan was returning the agency to enforcing anti-trust and anti-monopoly laws.
I think she correctly identified corporate consolidation, collusion and legally entrenched middlemen as a threat to the working class and economic competitiveness.
Her record wasn't 100% wins but I think she was setting the stage for a much more impactful 4 years had Biden or Harris won.
I think she was one of the reasons big tech and oligarchs fell into line for Trump. Now we're stuck with the most openly corrupt and transactional corporate administration in US history.
A good interview on her philosophy: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/19/opinion/lina-khan-monopol...
Re: Union Pacific to buy Norfolk in $85B mega U.S. railroad deal
#13Earlier quoted context omitted.
We were making great progress under the previous administration until six months ago, yes.
Oh, no, you were not! The fact that it's way worse now, doesn't mean you had "great progress" before.
I think it's pretty much indisputable that the FTC was making huge progress in consumer rights and antitrust work. What, specifically, are you talking about in your comment. It's easy to make comments like this based on general 'feelings' without saying anything at all.
Re: Union Pacific to buy Norfolk in $85B mega U.S. railroad deal
#14What happened to antitrust? We were making great progress and then a few months ago this admin totally flipped?
The case for merger is that the the two lines don't really overlap, so it (arguably) won't decrease competition. Meanwhile a larger network would make things more efficient for shippers because goods can travel coast to coast without changing trains. https://archive.is/65ihv
This is absurd and easily and trivially disputed.
Having a nationwide network absolutely lets you compete with networks that are more regional "If you want to use our western routes you have to use us in the east too."
> larger network would make things more efficient for shippers
LOL
> goods can travel coast to coast without changing trains
They already can.
Re: Union Pacific to buy Norfolk in $85B mega U.S. railroad deal
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
We were making great progress under the previous administration until six months ago, yes.
Oh, no, you were not! The fact that it's way worse now, doesn't mean you had "great progress" before.
I think maybe Lina Khan was, but not the whole Biden administration.
Re: Union Pacific to buy Norfolk in $85B mega U.S. railroad deal
#16Shortening “Norfolk Southern” to “Norfolk” makes this confusing to read. Norfolk is a city (and former HQ of Norfolk Southern). “Union” isn’t shortened the same… Also, railroads are already monopoly, it’s not like anyone can lay down new tracks, and operators aren’t required to allow 3rd parties on their networks…
Don't forget the famous Norfolk island, whose TLD is .nf: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norfolk_Island
The fastest Mandelbrot rendering algorithm, using a perturbation method, was developed by a guy from there.
Re: Union Pacific to buy Norfolk in $85B mega U.S. railroad deal
#17Shortening “Norfolk Southern” to “Norfolk” makes this confusing to read. Norfolk is a city (and former HQ of Norfolk Southern). “Union” isn’t shortened the same… Also, railroads are already monopoly, it’s not like anyone can lay down new tracks, and operators aren’t required to allow 3rd parties on their networks…
Believe me, it's a lot more confusing to british people.
Re: Union Pacific to buy Norfolk in $85B mega U.S. railroad deal
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
The case for merger is that the the two lines don't really overlap, so it (arguably) won't decrease competition. Meanwhile a larger network would make things more efficient for shippers because goods can travel coast to coast without changing trains. https://archive.is/65ihv
This is absurd and easily and trivially disputed. Having a nationwide network absolutely lets you compete with networks that are more regional "If you want to use our western routes you have to use us in the east too." > larger network would make things more efficient for shippers LOL > goods can travel coast to coast without changing trains They already can.
>They already can.
I'm not a railroad expert, but here's the exact quote from the article, which cites a consultancy:
>Going from coast to coast is a greater prize. Avoiding interchanges between networks would mean faster trains and fewer delays. According to Oliver Wyman, a consultancy, the share of intermodal goods in America that travel by rail on journeys longer than 1,500 miles increases from 39% to 65% when served by a direct line. Transcontinental railways would mean fewer lengthy stops in Chicago and may make shorter routes near the Mississippi river more profitable.
Maybe Oliver Wyman is on the payroll of UP/Norfolk and this isn't true, but I'd like to see something more reputable than a HN comment of 1-3 word refutations.
Re: Union Pacific to buy Norfolk in $85B mega U.S. railroad deal
#19Under normal circumstances, a merger between railroad giants would be so outlandish that they would never consider publishing an announcement like this. Anything is possible these days, it seems.
No, why? Is it (much) more outlandish than the merger that created BNSF? Is it much more outlandish than CP and KCS? What makes this more outlandish than the previous mega-mergers?
Re: Union Pacific to buy Norfolk in $85B mega U.S. railroad deal
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh, no, you were not! The fact that it's way worse now, doesn't mean you had "great progress" before.
I think it's pretty much indisputable that the FTC was making huge progress in consumer rights and antitrust work. What, specifically, are you talking about in your comment. It's easy to make comments like this based on general 'feelings' without saying anything at all.
What great progress was made under the previous administration?