[bpodgursky]

They share essentially zero miles of track or routes. A move only creates a monopoly if it reduces consumer choice.

No freight customer is deciding "Oh I can either ship from LA to Seattle, or Miami to DC." They are shipping from one fixed location to a different fixed location. These railroads merging does not reduce their choices or give the combined entity more leverage.

[throw0101c]

> They are shipping from one fixed location to a different fixed location. These railroads merging does not reduce their choices or give the combined entity more leverage.

If someone on the US west coast wants to ship to the US east (or vice versa) they can pit UP against BNSF, and then NS against CSX. There are a few pairs up because of the two negotiating points:

* UP-NS

* UP-CSX

* BNSF-NS

* BNSP-CSX

If the merger goes through you're now at:

* merged-UPNS

* BNSF-CSX

Do you think UPNS will give a cheaper price for a 'half-trip' and you go to their competitor the other half?

You don't think BNSF/CN/CP aren't looking at CSX right now?

[liveoneggs]

That is a big assumption on your part that east coast ports don't compete with west coast ports

[lokar]

How about monopsony?