[Attachment(s) from Hol Wagner included below]
Attached is a document from my collection that was prepared by the C&S at the beginning of 1937 and shows the rate the C&S was receiving from the Q for the C&S locomotives then leased by the Q, and the rate the C&S was paying its parent for leased Q locomotives. The rates had been adjusted downward somewhat in 1933 during the Depression but were still a considerable expense. It's no wonder the C&S was willing to turn over otherwise unneeded locomotives to the Q! At the rates shown, the C&S was receiving $153 per day from the Q while paying $245 per day in rental. Had the rental locomotives remained constant for a year on both roads, the total received by the C&S would have been $55,845, while the amount paid to the Q would have totaled $89,498, leaving the subsidiary owing the parent company $33,653.
It cost the C&S $5,840 a year to rent one of the M-3s, so over the 26 years they were leased by the C&S, each one of the 10 6300s cost a total of$151,840 in rent. New in 1919 the M-3s had cost about $85,00 apiece. So was their long-term rental to the C&S a good deal for the Q or the C&S? On the surface it looks as though the parent company made out quite well by not selling the 10 M-3s to the C&S but instead renting them to the subsidiary for 26 years.
Hol
__._,_.___
Attachment(s) from Hol Wagner | View attachments on the web
1 of 1 Photo(s)
Posted by: Hol Wagner <holpennywagner@msn.com>
![]()
__,_._,___
|