BNSF Slams Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern Merger, Warns of Lost Competition and Higher Rates

Core Viewpoint - BNSF Railway opposes the proposed $85 billion merger between Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern, urging customers to voice their concerns to the Surface Transportation Board (STB) [1][2]. Group 1: Merger Opposition - BNSF asserts that no customers are requesting the merger, which it claims is driven by Wall Street for shareholder payouts [2]. - The company believes that the merger is unnecessary and that it can provide immediate benefits to customers while maintaining competition [2]. Group 2: Market Impact - A merger would result in Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern controlling 45% of existing freight, moving 46% of containers, and holding a 43% market share of total carload volumes [2]. - The combined companies would dominate over 50% market share in categories such as chemicals, metals, and lumber [2]. Group 3: Customer Effects - Carload and agricultural product customers would be significantly affected, facing reduced shipping options to the eastern U.S. and potentially higher rates for traffic currently interchanged with Norfolk Southern [3]. - Post-merger, some customers may still have two rail options, but many will be left with no alternative routes, creating a new generation of captive shippers [4]. Group 4: Competitive Landscape - Union Pacific's CEO defends the merger, citing previous tie-ups by companies like CSX and Canadian National Railway to enhance efficiency [4]. - Despite pressure from an activist investor, BNSF has no interest in merging with CSX as a counter to the Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern deal [5].