CSX Corporation (CSX) 2018 Q1 法說會逐字稿

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the CSX Corporation First Quarter 2018 Earnings Conference Call. As a reminder, today's call is being recorded. (Operator Instructions)

各位女士、各位先生，下午好，歡迎參加 CSX Corporation 2018 年第一季財報電話會議。提醒各位，今天的電話會議將被錄音。(接線員指示)

For opening remarks and introduction, I would now like to turn the call over to Mr. Kevin Boone, Chief Investor Relations Officer for CSX Corporation.

接下來進行開場致詞與介紹，我想把電話交給 CSX Corporation 投資人關係長 Kevin Boone 先生。

Thank you, Michelle, and good afternoon, everyone. Joining me on today's call is Jim Foote, Chief Executive Officer; and Frank Lonegro, Chief Financial Officer.

謝謝你，Michelle，各位下午好。今天與我一同參與電話會議的有：執行長 Jim Foote，以及財務長 Frank Lonegro。

On Slide 2 is our forward-looking disclosure, followed by non-GAAP disclosure on Slide 3.

投影片第 2 頁為我們的前瞻性聲明揭露，接著投影片第 3 頁為非 GAAP 揭露。

With that, it is my pleasure to introduce our President and Chief Executive Officer, Jim Foote.

接下來，我很榮幸介紹我們的總裁兼執行長 Jim Foote。

Thank you very much, Kevin. It's great to be here this afternoon with everybody on the call.

非常感謝你，Kevin。很高興今天下午能與各位一同參與這通電話會議。

Before we start with the slides, I would like to make a few comments. CSX had a very good quarter. We are drastically changing the way we operate the railroad by taking millions of unnecessary steps out of the business process that we use to run the railroad. This is producing record operating performance, improved customer service and, when combined, impressive returns to shareholders. The women and men of CSX have accomplished a lot. Clearly, first quarter results are a reflection of all the hard work that has taken place over the past year. We are proud of these results, and I would like to thank all CSX employees for their contributions towards achieving them.

在開始看投影片之前，我想先說幾點。CSX 本季表現非常出色。我們正大幅改變鐵路的營運方式，從我們用來營運鐵路的業務流程中，移除數百萬個不必要的步驟。這帶來了創紀錄的營運表現、改善的客戶服務，而兩者結合後，也為股東帶來令人印象深刻的報酬。CSX 的女性與男性員工已完成許多成果。顯然，第一季的結果反映了過去一年所投入的所有辛勤努力。我們為這些成果感到自豪，也要感謝所有 CSX 員工為達成這些成果所做的貢獻。

With that said, the plan recently laid out at our investor conference is a 3-year plan. We're only 1 quarter in, 1 out of 12, and we still have a lot of work to do to achieve our goals. The good news is that every day I feel a little more confident in our ability to deliver on these targets.

話雖如此，我們在投資人會議上最近提出的計畫是一個 3 年計畫。我們才剛走過 1 個季度，也就是 12 個季度中的第 1 個，我們仍有許多工作要做，才能達成目標。好消息是，我每天都對我們達成這些目標的能力更有信心。

And I want to take the time to highlight safety. On my watch, safety will always come first. We have some work to do to improve, and the team is committed to do so. To be the best run railroad, you have to be the safest.

我也想花點時間強調安全。在我任內，安全永遠是第一優先。我們在改善方面仍有一些工作要做，而團隊也承諾會做到。要成為營運最出色的鐵路公司，你必須是最安全的。

Now let's get into the deck, and we'll start with the Slide 5 on our highlights. And this should be a pretty simple quarter to walk through. We only had 1 extra day in last year's first quarter and, other than the restructuring charge last year, just a few relatively minor onetime events that Frank and I will point out.

現在我們進入簡報內容，先從投影片第 5 頁的重點開始。本季應該相當容易說明。去年第一季只多了 1 天，而且除了去年的重整費用外，只有少數相對較小的一次性事件，Frank 和我會指出來。

EPS increased 53% to $0.78 versus last year's adjusted EPS of $0.51. The increase was driven by lower costs on flat revenues, which drove a 19% improvement in operating income versus the prior year's adjusted results. The new lower tax rate and share count, down about 4%, also contributed to the significant year-over-year increase. Our operating ratio improved 570 basis points to 63.7% when compared to last year's adjusted OR of 69.4%, a record first quarter. I might be a little biased, but I think it's CSX's best quarter ever. Lower cost in labor and MS&O partially offset by price, driven fuel -- higher fuel costs, drove a significant year-over-year improvement.

每股盈餘（EPS）較去年調整後 EPS 0.51 美元增加 53%，至 0.78 美元。成長主要來自營收持平下的成本下降，使營業利益較前一年調整後結果提升 19%。新的較低稅率以及股數約下降 4% 也對顯著的年增幅有所貢獻。與去年調整後營業比率（OR）69.4% 相比，我們的營業比率改善 570 個基點至 63.7%，創下第一季新高。我可能有點偏心，但我認為這是 CSX 有史以來最好的季度。人力與 MS&O 的較低成本，部分被價格、燃油帶動的較高燃油成本所抵銷，但仍推動了顯著的年對年改善。

Going to the next slide, Slide 6. Total revenue was flat as price, fuel surcharge and supplemental revenues offset a 4% decline in volume and negative mix. We did see a slight sequential improvement in pricing, excluding coal.

看下一頁，投影片第 6 頁。總營收持平，因為價格、燃油附加費與補充性收入抵銷了運量下滑 4% 以及不利的產品組合。我們確實看到定價（不含煤炭）出現些微的季對季改善。

Looking at the business segment. Each was, to some degree, impacted by either outside influences or a prior period demarcating decision. Chemicals was impacted by a few items, including no fly ash movements that occurred last year, lower plastic and pet coke shipments and basically no crude-by-rail. Lower North American vehicle production and challenges with rail car availability, which was an industry issue, reduced auto. Ag and food was mainly impacted by lower ethanol business, which we exited because of its low or no margin. And fertilizer revenues, as I mentioned previously, were down due to the Plant City facility closure. Domestic utility coal declines were somewhat offset by a continuing strong export coal market. And intermodal saw strong international volumes. Other revenues increased year-over-year as liquidated damages contributed $19 million, and the remaining increase was driven by higher demurrage and other supplemental revenue. Obviously, we have changed the business practices in this area and are working with our customers to create a more fluid network.

來看各業務部門。每個部門在某種程度上都受到外部因素或前期分界決策的影響。化學品受到幾項因素影響，包括去年有的粉煤灰（fly ash）運輸今年沒有、塑膠與石油焦（pet coke）出貨下降，以及基本上沒有原油鐵路運輸（crude-by-rail）。北美汽車產量下降以及車輛供應（鐵路車廂）可用性方面的挑戰（這是產業性問題）使汽車業務下滑。農業與食品主要受到乙醇業務下滑影響，我們已退出該業務，因其利潤偏低或沒有利潤。如我先前提到，肥料營收因 Plant City 設施關閉而下降。國內公用事業用煤的下滑，部分被持續強勁的出口煤市場所抵銷。多式聯運方面，國際運量表現強勁。其他收入年增，因違約金（liquidated damages）貢獻 1,900 萬美元，其餘增幅來自更高的滯期費（demurrage）及其他補充性收入。顯然，我們已改變此領域的業務作法，並正與客戶合作，以打造更順暢的網路。

On Slide 7, let's take a quick look at our operating performance. We've highlighted some key metrics that are familiar with you. As we outlined at the Investor Day, we continue to make significant progress year-over-year in both train velocity and car dwell. We also saw improvement in train length and GTMs per available horsepower, which represent improved asset utilization and efficiency. It seems like almost every day, we set a new CSX record in one area of our operations or another. We are making progress, but there is clearly more opportunity ahead.

在投影片第 7 頁，我們快速看一下營運表現。我們標示了一些各位熟悉的關鍵指標。如同我們在投資人日所說明的，我們在列車速度與車輛停留時間（car dwell）兩方面，年對年持續取得顯著進展。我們也看到列車長度與每可用馬力的總噸英里（GTMs）有所改善，這代表資產使用率與效率提升。幾乎每天，我們都在營運的某個領域創下新的 CSX 紀錄。我們正在進步，但顯然前方仍有更多機會。

Since the beginning of the year, we reduced another 142 locomotives and a total of 816 year-over-year. Service design improvements have been -- have seen a reduction in over 40.8 million expected annual car miles and 351 weekly crude starts year-to-date. Brian Barr in our mechanical department has done an exceptional job with line of road failures, improving 35% and doing it with a smaller workforce.

自年初以來，我們又減少了 142 台機車，年對年合計減少 816 台。服務設計改善已使預期年度車輛行駛里程減少超過 4,080 萬英里，且年初至今每週原油列車開行（crude starts）減少 351 班。我們機務部門的 Brian Barr 在路線故障（line of road failures）方面表現卓越，改善 35%，且是在較小的人力規模下達成。

Now let me hand it over to Frank, who will take you through the financials and provide more details on the benefits from the operational improvements.

現在我把時間交給 Frank，他將帶各位看財務表現，並提供更多營運改善所帶來效益的細節。

Thank you, Jim, and good afternoon, everyone.

謝謝你，Jim，各位下午好。

Turning to Slide 9. Let me walk you through the summary income statement. Reported revenue was roughly flat for the first quarter as a 4% decline in volume was offset by the benefits of increased supplemental revenue, higher fuel surcharge recoveries and solid core pricing gains.

請看投影片第 9 頁。我來帶各位看損益表摘要。第一季報告營收大致持平，因運量下滑 4% 被補充性收入增加、更高的燃油附加費回收，以及穩健的核心定價成長所抵銷。

Moving to expenses. The P&L reflects our adoption of the new pension accounting standards where only the service cost component of our pension expense is now included in operating expense, while the remaining aspects of pension accounting now fall below the line in other income. Prior year results, including the geography of last year's restructuring charge, have been restated to reflect this new standard.

接著看費用。損益表反映我們採用新的退休金會計準則：目前只有退休金費用中的服務成本（service cost）部分列入營業費用，其餘退休金會計項目則列在其他收入的營業外項下。前一年度結果（包含去年重整費用的歸屬）已重編，以反映此新準則。

Total operating expenses were 13% lower in the first quarter, 8% lower after normalizing for last year's restructuring charge. Overall, labor and fringe savings of $100 million or 12% year-over-year were driven by an 11% reduction in average headcount.

第一季總營業費用下降 13%；若將去年重整費用正常化後，則下降 8%。整體而言，人力與附帶福利（labor and fringe）節省 1 億美元，年對年下降 12%，主要來自平均人數減少 11%。

Scheduled railroading enabled train crew savings on multiple fronts. A 22% increase in velocity and a 5% increase in train length enable an 8% reduction in road crew starts, while the elimination of 8 hump yards last year and a 20% improvement in cars processed per man hour drove savings in yards staffing levels.

排程式鐵路營運（scheduled railroading）在多個面向帶來列車乘務節省。速度提升 22% 與列車長度提升 5%，使路線乘務開工（road crew starts）減少 8%；同時，去年取消 8 座驼峰調車場（hump yards），以及每人時處理車輛數提升 20%，也帶動調車場人力配置的節省。

Improved network fluidity seen through the velocity and dwell metrics, combined with a 20% improvement in GTMs per available horsepower, has helped eliminate rolling stock assets. Our active locomotive fleet was down 23%, and the number of cars on line came down by 11%, the combination of which enabled resource reductions within our mechanical workforce.

透過速度與停留時間（dwell）指標所反映的網路流動性改善，加上每可用馬力的總噸英里（GTM）提升20%，已協助我們淘汰部分鐵路車輛資產。我們的在役機車車隊減少了23%，線上車輛數量下降了11%；兩者結合使我們得以在機務維修人力方面進行資源縮減。

In addition, the efforts we started in early 2017 with our management restructuring to streamline the management workforce, eliminate bureaucracy and improve the speed of decision-making across the system and here in Jacksonville have resulted in significantly lower labor expense. Fewer management resources also resulted in lower incentive compensation expense versus the prior year quarter.

此外，我們自2017年初開始推動的管理重整，旨在精簡管理人力、消除官僚作風，並提升整個系統以及傑克遜維爾（Jacksonville）這裡的決策速度，已使人力費用顯著降低。管理資源減少也使得相較去年同期的激勵性薪酬費用更低。

MS&O expense was down 16% against the prior year. The asset efficiency of scheduled railroading, combined with improved year-over-year locomotive availability, resulted in lower fleet counts, yielding lower materials expense, lower maintenance and repair costs and lower levels of consumables. Given the sustainable nature of these asset reductions, we have sold or scrapped hundreds of engines and thousands of freight cars in the past 12 months.

MS&O費用較去年同期下降16%。定期化鐵路營運（scheduled railroading）的資產效率提升，加上機車可用率年增改善，使車隊數量降低，進而帶來材料費用下降、維修與修理成本下降，以及耗材用量降低。鑑於這些資產縮減具可持續性，我們在過去12個月已出售或報廢數百台機車與數千輛貨車。

The locomotive fleet reductions have also allowed us to rightsize our contracted maintenance services agreement. Fewer crew starts and the more balanced network operating plan also drove reductions in ancillary costs such as hotels, meals and taxis.

機車車隊縮減也使我們得以將外包維修服務合約調整至適當規模。更少的乘務開工（crew starts）以及更均衡的網路營運計畫，也帶動旅館、餐飲與計程車等附帶成本下降。

Efforts to streamline the workforce and reduce organizational complexity also apply to our contractor and consultant workforce. Working towards our broader total workforce targets for 2018 and beyond, we have made significant progress in reducing our labor footprint with savings from contractor and consultant reductions flowing to the MS&O line.

精簡人力與降低組織複雜度的努力，同樣適用於我們的承包商與顧問人力。為達成我們2018年及之後的整體人力目標，我們在縮減勞動足跡方面已取得顯著進展；由承包商與顧問縮減所帶來的節省，已反映在MS&O項目中。

Finally, continued efforts to monetize our surplus real estate portfolio resulted in $32 million of real estate gains in the quarter versus $2 million in the year-ago period. The gains in this year's first quarter are consistent with the guidance we provided at the investor conference, that we would achieve $300 million of cumulative real estate sales through 2020.

最後，持續將我們的多餘不動產組合變現的努力，使本季錄得3,200萬美元不動產處分利益，而去年同期為200萬美元。今年第一季的處分利益與我們在投資人會議所提供的指引一致：至2020年將累計達成3億美元的不動產銷售。

Looking at the other expense items. Depreciation increased slightly due to changes in the asset base driven by capital investments, offset by asset sales. 24% higher fuel prices year-over-year presented a significant headwind, although our continued focus on fuel efficiency through better matching a horsepower to trailing tonnage and increased use of energy management and distributed power technologies drove year-over-year improvement in fuel efficiency despite harsher winter conditions this year.

再看其他費用項目。折舊因資本投資帶動的資產基礎變動而小幅增加，但部分被資產出售所抵銷。燃料價格年增24%帶來顯著逆風；不過，我們持續聚焦燃油效率，透過更佳地將馬力與牽引噸位匹配，並增加使用能源管理與分散式動力（distributed power）技術，即使今年冬季條件更嚴峻，燃油效率仍較去年同期改善。

The equipment rents are up slightly due to higher incidental rents, though we are continuing to drive days per load improvements to reduce our car hire expense.

設備租金因偶發性租金較高而小幅上升，但我們仍持續推動每載重的天數（days per load）改善，以降低我們的車輛租用費用（car hire expense）。

Equity earnings were favorable primarily due to improved performance at our affiliates and tax reform true-ups.

權益法投資收益表現有利，主要來自我們關聯企業績效改善以及稅改調整（true-ups）。

Lastly, we are cycling 2017's restructuring charges, part of which are now housed below the line due to the new pension accounting standard. Below the line, interest expense increased, primarily due to the additional debt we issued earlier this year. Tax expense was roughly flat on a 57% increase in pretax earnings, illustrating the favorable impacts of tax reform. Our effective tax rate in the quarter was 23.8%, though we continue to expect around 25% for the full year.

最後，我們正進入2017年重整費用的比較基期，其中一部分因新的退休金會計準則而改列至線下項目。在線下方面，利息費用增加，主要因我們今年稍早新增發行的債務。在稅前盈餘增加57%的情況下，所得稅費用大致持平，顯示稅改帶來的有利影響。本季有效稅率為23.8%，但我們仍預期全年約為25%。

All told, these pieces sum to the headline items Jim highlighted in his opening remarks. Importantly, the 63.7% operating ratio we achieved in the first quarter represents a meaningful step toward the 60% operating ratio target we set at last month's investor conference.

總體而言，這些項目加總後，構成了Jim在開場致詞中強調的重點。重要的是，我們第一季達成的63.7%營運比率（operating ratio），代表朝向上月投資人會議所設定的60%營運比率目標邁出重要一步。

Turning to the cash side of the equation on Slide 10. Capital investments in the first quarter reflect our recently announced 3-year capital target of $4.8 billion, driven by the reduced capital intensity of the scheduled railroading model. As we've said many times before and reiterate here, our commitment to investing in safety and reliability remains unwavering, and we have undoubtedly become a less capital-intensive company through improved asset utilization that reduces yard infrastructure and rolling stock needs and better processes that serve as an effective alternative to capital investments.

接著看第10頁投影片的現金面。第一季資本投資反映我們近期公布的三年資本目標48億美元，主要受定期化鐵路營運模式資本密集度降低所驅動。如同我們過去多次提到並在此重申，我們對安全與可靠性的投資承諾始終不變；而透過提升資產利用率以降低調車場基礎設施與鐵路車輛需求，以及以更佳流程作為資本投資的有效替代方案，我們無疑已成為一家資本密集度較低的公司。

Our free cash flow growth of 3% was more muted than our earnings growth would have implied. First and most importantly, estimated federal tax payments for the first quarter are not paid until April. As a result, you see the year-over-year benefits of tax reform in our earnings but not yet in our free cash flow. Second, as with any quarter, there are timing items that can impact free cash flow on a short-term basis. Here, we made back wage payments in the quarter to employees affiliated with unions that have concluded national bargaining. There were also timing differences in state tax payments and prepaid expenses. Bigger picture, the combination of core earnings growth, lower CapEx and lower cash taxes will drive significant free cash flow conversion and $8.5 billion of cumulative free cash flow through 2020.

我們自由現金流成長3%，較盈餘成長所暗示的幅度更為溫和。首先且最重要的是，第一季預估的聯邦稅款要到4月才支付。因此，你會在盈餘中看到稅改帶來的年增效益，但在自由現金流中尚未反映。第二，與任何季度一樣，某些時點因素可能在短期內影響自由現金流。在本季，我們向已完成全國性談判的工會所屬員工支付了追溯薪資。此外，州稅支付與預付費用也存在時點差異。從更宏觀的角度來看，核心盈餘成長、較低的資本支出與較低的現金稅負相結合，將推動顯著的自由現金流轉換，並在2020年前累計達成85億美元自由現金流。

Finally, we were pleased to provide significant returns to our shareholders during the first quarter. On February 12, we announced a 10% increase to our quarterly dividend and meaningfully increased our share buyback program to $5 billion, with expected completion in the first quarter of 2019. As you evaluate our buyback cadence in the quarter, remember that our buybacks in the first half of the quarter were premised on a much smaller $1.5 billion program. Since implementing a larger program mid-quarter, we have capitalized on recent mark-to-market fluctuations and repurchased shares at a faster than pro rata pace.

最後，我們很高興在第一季為股東提供了可觀的回報。2月12日，我們宣布季度股利提高10%，並將股票回購計畫大幅提高至50億美元，預計於2019年第一季完成。在評估本季回購節奏時，請記得本季前半段的回購是以較小的15億美元計畫為基礎。自本季中段實施更大規模的計畫以來，我們把握近期按市價評價（mark-to-market）的波動，以快於按比例（pro rata）的速度回購股票。

With that, let me turn it back to Jim for his closing remarks.

接下來，我把時間交還給Jim做結語。

Great. Thanks a lot, Frank. As I said at the very beginning, it's a very simple and clean quarter for everyone to understand.

很好。非常感謝你，Frank。正如我一開始所說，這是一個非常簡單、清楚，讓大家都容易理解的季度。

And so in conclusion on the last slide here, a little bit about the financial outlook. As I've said before, previously said, we expect the revenue to be up slightly for the year, and I have the increased confidence in this outlook given the start of the year.

因此在最後一頁投影片做個總結，談一下財務展望。如我之前所說、也曾提過，我們預期全年營收將小幅成長；鑑於年初的表現，我對此展望更有信心。

Also, as many of you are aware, as I am happy to say, not only to say it, but I am happy that we are no longer under the requirement to have weekly calls with the STB. We have improved our service, and I expect that to continue.

另外，正如各位許多人所知，我也很高興地表示，我們已不再需要與美國地面運輸委員會（STB）每週通話。我們的服務已經改善，我也預期這種改善將持續。

As we demonstrated in the first quarter, we expect a solid step-down each year in the operating ratio. There remains significant work ahead in order to deliver on our 2020 target of a 60% OR. However, our goal of making CSX the best run railroad is in sight, and we are working hard to achieve that.

如同我們在第一季所展現的，我們預期營運比率將逐年穩健下降。為了達成2020年60%營運比率（OR）的目標，前方仍有大量工作要做。然而，讓CSX成為營運最佳的鐵路公司之目標已在望，我們正努力達成。

So I would like to turn it back to Kevin now. We can start. Frank and I will be glad to answer any of your questions.

所以我現在想把時間交回給Kevin。我們可以開始了。Frank和我很樂意回答各位的任何問題。

Okay. (Operator Instructions) Michelle, I think we're ready to take questions.

好的。（接線員指示）Michelle，我想我們已準備好開始提問。

(Operator Instructions) Our first question comes from Chris Wetherbee from Citigroup.

（接線員指示）我們的第一個問題來自花旗集團（Citigroup）的Chris Wetherbee。

I guess, maybe I want to start on the revenue side. So, Jim, you kind of outlined the outlook for some modest revenue growth over the course of the year. I guess, when you think about sort of volume and price, could give us a little bit of sort of help there? When you looked at yields in 1Q, they certainly were good. Can you give us a sense of maybe where core pricing is and maybe what that assumption is of mix of volume and price as the year progresses?

我想，也許我想先從營收端開始。所以，Jim，你概述了今年營收將溫和成長的展望。我想，當你從運量與價格的角度來看時，能否給我們一些說明？你們在第一季的單位收益（yields）確實不錯。你能否讓我們了解一下核心定價大概在哪個水準，以及隨著今年進行，你們對運量與價格組合的假設是什麼？

Yes, I think what I said was prices sequentially improved slightly. If you exclude coal and if you look at the revenue, clearly, we are going to continue to see a slight tick-up as we go through the year in our supplemental revenues as we've implemented more specific demurrage policies as an example, and you'll see that in other. Fuel surcharge is going to move up and down as the year moves around. So I think there's a reasonable -- a reasonably solid environment out there for pricing. And based upon kind of expectation that we've put out there in terms of a year-over-year kind of slight increase, the run rate you're seeing there today in terms of volume and these other elements that increase or bringing together total revenue should be reasonably consistent with what you saw here as our -- and then as you remember, we've had a lot of onetime items in the prior year that we've demarcated. As an example, the 7% volume of intermodal that was taken off to railroad in late summer of last year as well as some other items. And those items, we begin to cycle. And so that's why we're a little more confident that the volume in the later part of the year begins to see more of an improvement than what we're having right now.

是的，我想我剛才說的是，價格按序較前期略有改善。如果你排除煤炭、並且看營收，顯然，隨著我們在補充性收入上實施了更具針對性的滯期費政策（例如），我們在全年推進的過程中將會持續看到小幅上升，你也會在其他項目中看到。燃油附加費會隨著年度進程而上下波動。所以我認為，外部的定價環境是合理——相當穩健的。而且基於我們對外所提出的預期，也就是年對年小幅增加的預期，你今天看到的量的運行水準，以及這些其他會增加或匯聚成總營收的要素，應該會與你在這裡看到的情況相當一致——並且如你所記得的，我們在前一年有很多一次性項目，我們已經加以劃分說明。例如，去年夏末有 7% 的聯運量被轉移到鐵路上，以及其他一些項目。而這些項目，我們開始進入比較基期的循環。因此，這也是為什麼我們對於今年後段的運量開始出現比目前更明顯的改善，會更有信心。

Okay. So cadence could get a bit better as the year progresses. That's helpful. And then just maybe a follow-up on...

好的。所以隨著年度推進，節奏可能會變得更好一些。這很有幫助。然後再補問一下……

But a much shorter way of saying it, yes.

不過用更簡短的方式說，是的。

Yes. I appreciate it. Now your color was greatly appreciated. And then, I guess, just trying to get a sense of what maybe normal seasonality from an operating ratio perspective might look like. So you guys are doing some dramatic things on the cost side, so it's a little hard to kind of see through that and relate it back to your historical patterns from 1Q and then how the rest of the year typically plays out. Is there anything you can help us with and maybe, Frank, sort of headcount expectations? We saw where you ended the quarter. But anything you do on sort of the cost or cadence of the OR improvement in 2018 would be helpful.

是的。感謝。你提供的補充說明非常受用。接著，我想試著了解一下，從營運比率（OR）的角度來看，正常的季節性大概會是什麼樣子。你們在成本端做了不少大刀闊斧的措施，所以有點難看清並把它對照回你們歷史上第一季的型態，以及接下來一年通常如何演變。你們能否提供一些協助？也許 Frank 也可以談談人力編制的預期？我們看到你們在本季末的水準。但若能分享一些關於成本或 2018 年 OR 改善節奏的資訊，會很有幫助。

Clearly, the first quarter, so I think in everybody's opinion here, the first quarter is the toughest operating environment for CSX. And I'll let Frank jump in if he has anything additional to that.

很明顯地，第一季——我想在座各位都同意——第一季是 CSX 最艱困的營運環境。如果 Frank 還有其他補充，我讓他接著說。

Chris, the only thing I'd add, as you implied seasonality for the rest of the year, remember that we had a couple of fairly significant onetime items in the second quarter, so you probably need to adjust a little bit for that one. On the headcount side, I mean, you see the 3,000 year-over-year in the first quarter, and it really doesn't matter whether you look at average headcount or ending headcount, we're down about 3,000 employees year-over-year. When you add in contractors, it's a little bit more than that on a year-to-date basis, about 1,100 down year-to-date, and that's against the goal that Jim set on the fourth quarter call of around 2,000. So we feel like we're in pretty good shape on that one. So hopefully, that gives you enough color to go on.

Chris，我唯一要補充的是，正如你提到的全年其餘時間的季節性，請記得我們在第二季有幾個相當重大的單次性項目，所以你可能需要對那一點做一些調整。在人力編制方面，你看到第一季年對年減少 3,000 人，不管你看的是平均人數或期末人數，我們年對年大約少了 3,000 名員工。若把承包商也算進來，年初至今的降幅會再多一些，年初至今約減少 1,100 人，這是對照 Jim 在第四季電話會議所設定約 2,000 人的目標。所以我們覺得這方面的進度相當不錯。希望這些補充說明能提供你足夠的參考。

Our next question comes from Ken Hoexter from Bank of America Merrill Lynch.

下一個問題來自美國銀行美林（Bank of America Merrill Lynch）的 Ken Hoexter。

Jim, your thoughts on the service failures of some of your peer railroads. Does that impact your ability to continue this pace of improvement just given the amount of traffic that is interchanged between rails, whether it's your fellow eastern peer or even going west or north? Can you just talk about your -- the constraints that you see from that?

Jim，你對一些同業鐵路的服務失誤有何看法？考量到鐵路之間有大量的交接運輸流量，不論是你們東部的同業，或是往西、往北的路線，這是否會影響你們持續以目前的速度改善的能力？你能談談你從中看到的——有哪些限制嗎？

Well, Ken, clearly, it's a network out there, and so we're impacted, to a degree, by our interchange partners, whether they be in the west at Chicago or Memphis or wherever or the Canadians, again, in Chicago or wherever we interchange traffic. So obviously, we would like to have a more fluid network. It's better for us. But I think if you look at our operating performance in the first quarter and if you look at the way we ran our network during the first quarter, if you wanted any proof that the scheduled railroad model works, you'd want to stress it. So I think we passed the stress test in terms of -- Hunter didn't build a dome over this railroad. We are operating in the same winter conditions as everyone else and in the same soup, so to speak, with everyone else, and we improved dramatically. And so I think that's kind of a -- shows the resiliency and the strength of our organization to perform even better in the future just based upon historical operating performance metrics.

Ken，這顯然是一個網路系統，因此我們在某種程度上會受到交接夥伴的影響，不論是西部在芝加哥或孟菲斯或其他地方，或是加拿大的夥伴，同樣是在芝加哥或其他我們交接貨運的地點。所以很明顯地，我們希望網路能更順暢。這對我們更好。但我想如果你看我們第一季的營運表現，以及我們第一季運行網路的方式，如果你想要任何證據證明「排程式鐵路」模式有效，你就會想要在壓力下測試它。所以我認為我們通過了壓力測試——就……Hunter 並沒有在這條鐵路上蓋一個圓頂。我們和其他人一樣在相同的冬季條件下營運，也同樣在同一鍋「濃湯」裡（打個比方），但我們大幅改善。因此我認為這某種程度上——顯示了我們組織的韌性與實力，即使僅以歷史營運績效指標為基礎，也能在未來表現得更好。

Yes. Truly a great job. Just didn't know if there was a limitation based on what you saw, but great job. The follow-up would just be on the sustainability of your other revenue surcharges. Does business adapt now that they see that you're increasing your rates on demurrage and other items? Or does that come back down as your customers adapt? Or do you expect that to continue to grow as you've changed the business based on what you've seen in the past?

是的。確實做得非常好。我只是想確認是否會因你所看到的情況而存在某些限制，但真的做得很好。追問一下關於你們其他收入附加費的可持續性。當企業看到你們提高滯期費和其他項目的費率後，業務是否會因此調整？或者當客戶調整後，這些費用會回落？還是你預期，基於你們過去看到的情況、以及你們已改變的業務方式，這部分會持續成長？

Ken, it's Frank. So we broke out for you the liquidated damages piece in the prepared remarks. So you've got that as an item, obviously, to look at on a onetime basis in the quarter. We're not trying to make tons of money on supplemental revenue. We're really trying to change the behavior of the customers so that we get into 7-day a week service, we get into balance, we get into the things that scheduled railroading is all about. And in some respects, we need the customers' help in turning cars fasters. So this is really intended to be a behavior change or -- I wouldn't imply the run rate that you saw here in the first quarter for the rest of the year. Think something more like the [1 15] type of a number for Qs 2, 3 and 4. And obviously, we're expecting the customers to change their behavior and not want to pay these charges going forward. But Jim's commentary on the top line should give you a sense of where we think we're going to be on a volume basis. So we feel pretty good about it.

Ken，我是 Frank。我們在事先準備的講稿中，特別為你拆分了違約金（liquidated damages）那一塊。所以你可以把它視為本季的一個一次性項目來看。我們並不是想在補充性收入上賺很多錢。我們真正想做的是改變客戶的行為，讓我們能做到每週 7 天服務、達到平衡，並實現排程式鐵路的核心要素。而且在某些方面，我們需要客戶協助更快地周轉車輛。所以這其實是為了促成行為改變——我不會暗示你在第一季看到的那個運行水準會延續到全年。第二、三、四季請把它想成更接近 [1 15] 這樣的數字類型。而且很明顯地，我們也期待客戶改變行為，未來不想再支付這些費用。但 Jim 對營收端的評論應該能讓你了解，我們認為運量基礎會落在什麼位置。所以我們對此感覺相當不錯。

Our next question comes from Tom Wadewitz from UBS.

下一個問題來自瑞銀（UBS）的 Tom Wadewitz。

Congratulations on the great results, really strong OR and cost side performance. Wanted to, I guess, get your thoughts, kind of a granular one and then maybe a broader question. The comp and benefits per worker we were thinking maybe be up year-over-year was down, and, I guess, incentive comp was down. Can you help us think about, is that against the backdrop where performance is good? Is incentive comp going to be down in coming quarters? Or was that kind of a one-off? And how do we think about comp per worker as we look at second quarter, third quarter? Does that continue to be down? Or how would we think about that relative to first quarter?

恭喜你們取得很好的成果，OR 以及成本端的表現都非常強勁。我想請教你們的看法，先問一個比較細的問題，再問一個可能更宏觀的問題。我們原本以為每位員工的薪酬與福利年對年可能會上升，但實際上卻下降了，而我想激勵性薪酬也下降了。在績效表現良好的背景下，你能否協助我們理解這點？激勵性薪酬在接下來幾季也會下降嗎？還是那算是一個一次性因素？另外，當我們看第二季、第三季時，該如何看待每位員工的薪酬？它會持續下降嗎？或者相對於第一季，我們應該如何思考？

Got you. Tom, Frank. You're right, on a comp per person basis in the quarter, we were better by about 1%. And you're right, the driver is largely the year-over-year favorability on incentive comp, probably a tad of employee mix in there as well. As you think about modeling in the future, if you assume static employee mix, you're really just talking about inflation and then you're spreading your fixed costs. I think what you're going to see on the incident comp piece depends on how we do against our plan as the year goes on. We did have a fairly significant headcount reduction year-over-year that drove it lower in the first quarter. And then as you think about the fourth quarter, remember, we had a fairly significant reversal of incentive comp in the fourth quarter of last year that we'll cycle. That was the reversal of Hunter's options, if you remember, about $30 million number. So just as you think through how to model that, those are probably the big moving parts.

了解。Tom、Frank。你們說得對，以本季每人薪酬（comp per person）來看，我們大約好上了1%。而你們也說得對，主要驅動因素是激勵薪酬（incentive comp）相較去年同期更有利，另外員工組合可能也有一點影響。當你思考未來如何建模時，如果你假設員工組合維持不變，那你談的其實就是通膨，然後把固定成本攤薄。我認為你會在激勵薪酬這一塊看到的情況，取決於我們在今年進行過程中相對於計畫的達成狀況。我們確實在年對年的人頭數上有相當顯著的縮減，這使得第一季的數字更低。然後當你想到第四季時，請記得去年第四季我們有相當顯著的激勵薪酬回轉（reversal），今年會進入比較基期（cycle）。那是 Hunter 的選擇權回轉，如果你還記得的話，大約是3,000萬美元。所以當你思考要怎麼建模時，這些大概就是主要的變動因素。

Okay. So incentive comp might be down, but then you get to fourth quarter, it's tougher comp, it could be up. Is that...

好的。所以激勵薪酬可能會下降，但到了第四季，因為比較基期更難，反而可能會上升。是這樣嗎……

I think that's fair, yes.

我覺得這樣說是合理的，是的。

Okay. So then the broader question I have, I think you were asked this a little bit earlier, but with the 63.7% OR in first quarter, if you just apply kind of normal seasonality, you could be -- you could see 300 and 400 basis points of improvement in second and third quarters versus that. So that puts you at a 60%, 61% potentially second quarter, third quarter. Is that a reasonable framework that, that's possible you deliver that? Or should we kind of step back from that and there are one-offs in first quarter, whatever reason that, that type of pattern wouldn't apply?

好的。那我更廣泛的問題是，我想你稍早也被問到一點：第一季 OR（營運比率）是63.7%，如果套用一般的季節性，你在第二、第三季相較於這個水準，可能會看到改善300到400個基點。那樣第二季、第三季可能就到60%、61%。這樣的框架是否合理，也就是說你們有可能交出那樣的表現？還是我們應該退一步看，第一季有一些一次性因素，或其他原因，使得那種型態不適用？

Tom, as I said, we delivered a very, very solid and impressive performance in our historically most difficult period. But as I said many times in my opening remarks, this is not easy. So we're going to continue to grind and we're going to continue to do everything we can to continue to improve. But 1 quarter out of 12 isn't a game done -- game set match. And so you figure it out. But we got -- this is hard work, and we're going to hopefully -- hopefully, we're going to get better. But I wouldn't draw any kind of drastic conclusions from the enormous step-down we just had in 1 quarter.

Tom，如我所說，我們在歷史上最困難的期間交出非常、非常扎實且令人印象深刻的表現。但如我在開場致詞中多次提到，這並不容易。所以我們會持續努力、持續把能做的都做到，繼續改善。但12季中的1季並不代表大局已定——不是 game done -- game set match。所以你得繼續摸索。但我們——這是辛苦的工作，我們希望——希望我們會變得更好。但我不會因為我們在1季內出現的巨大下滑，就做出任何激烈的結論。

Yes. One other thing, Tom, just as you think about your year-over-year comparisons. Q1 of last year was pre-precision railroading. So you are not necessarily comparing apples-to-apples. Whereas, I think, as you go forward in this year, obviously, we made significant step-downs in Qs 2, 3 and 4 year-over-year against '16. So just sort of put that into the hopper as well.

是的。另外一點，Tom，當你思考年對年的比較時。去年第一季是在精準鐵路（precision railroading）之前。所以你不一定是在做同質比較（apples-to-apples）。而且我想，隨著今年往後走，很明顯地，我們在第2、3、4季相較於2016年，都做出了顯著的年對年下台階式改善（step-downs）。所以也把這點納入考量。

Allison Landry from Crédit Suisse.

接下來是來自瑞士信貸（Crédit Suisse）的 Allison Landry。

Given the tightness in truckload and the service issues at Norfolk, do you think that your intermodal volumes could recover a lot sooner than you originally expected and I think is consistent with your comments at the Analyst Day? But how should we think about perhaps the cadence for the balance of the year and maybe what the potential upside is?

考量到卡車整車（truckload）市場的緊俏，以及 Norfolk 的服務問題，你是否認為你們的聯運（intermodal）量可能會比你原先預期、以及我想也與你在分析師日（Analyst Day）評論一致的情況，更早大幅回升？但我們應該如何看待今年剩餘期間的節奏，以及可能的上行空間有多大？

Yes. Intermodal this year, like I said though, has a big hole to climb out of, to a degree. And -- but as we move forward, I think that -- clearly, there is a lot of opportunity for us on the intermodal side, both internationally and domestically. But we have 2 specific goals in mind as we look forward for intermodal, which I think we outlined at the investor conference, is, one, to make sure we improve the overall efficiency of the network and concentrate in the key corridors that are best for us; and then secondly, focus on the profitability of the business. And so just because there might be a lot of intermodal and truck business that's available in the marketplace right now, I'm not going out and just chasing it to put volume on the railroad. So we're going to logically and methodically move forward with the rollout of our growth plan. And so therefore, I'm not looking for a major, major upside in what we've already told you.

是的。今年的聯運，如我所說，在某種程度上有一個很大的坑要爬出來。不過隨著我們往前推進，我認為——很明顯地，我們在聯運端有很多機會，包含國際與國內。但我們在展望聯運時有兩個具體目標，我想我們在投資人會議上也有說明：第一，確保提升整體網路效率，並把重心放在對我們最有利的關鍵走廊；第二，聚焦業務的獲利能力。因此，即便目前市場上可能有很多聯運與卡車業務可供承接，我也不會只是為了把量放到鐵路上就去追。所以我們會以合乎邏輯且有條不紊的方式，推進我們的成長計畫的落地。因此，我不預期會出現超出我們已經告訴各位的那種重大、重大的上行。

Scott Group from Wolfe Research.

接下來是來自 Wolfe Research 的 Scott Group。

So wanted to start on coal. Maybe if you can share some views there. Met prices kind of dipped a little bit below 200. And how you think about export volumes and maybe coal yields on a sequential basis given some of the step-down in met prices. And then maybe just some views on utility coal volumes that were down a bunch in first and how you're thinking about that rest of the year.

我想先從煤炭談起。也許你可以分享一些看法。冶金煤（met）價格似乎小幅跌到200以下。在冶金煤價格下滑的情況下，你如何看待出口量，以及煤炭單位收益（yields）在環比（sequential）上的變化？另外也想聽聽你對公用事業用煤（utility coal）量的看法，第一季下滑很多，你們如何看待今年剩餘時間？

Yes. Let's take the second part of your question first, utility coal volumes. You know what the challenges are there in terms of the southern utilities here and the other ones that are most -- becoming more vulnerable. Northern utilities were stressed a few years ago, domestic utility coal volumes. And now it's kind of moving into the south. And so as gas prices stay low, we're going to try to do everything we can to keep those utilities up and operating, but it's a challenge for us. And so we're expecting that the domestic utility side of the business is going to remain under pressure, absent some other forces that would change that. On the export side, the -- both the thermal and met coals have remained relatively strong, stronger than we had originally expected. And the outlook for this year is that, that strength should continue. And we're not seeing -- even though some of the metrics that are used to price the business, like the API2, are starting to trend down slightly. The demand is still there. So we'll continue to do everything we can to maintain the domestic utility franchise, and we'll continue to run the wheels off the railcars to move as much of this export coal, whether it be thermal or met, as we possibly can as long as the demand is there.

是的。我們先回答你問題的第二部分：公用事業用煤的運量。你知道那裡的挑戰是什麼，主要是南方的公用事業，以及其他那些最——變得更脆弱的業者。北方公用事業在幾年前就承受壓力了，也就是國內公用事業用煤的運量。而現在壓力有點往南方移動。因此，只要天然氣價格維持低檔，我們會盡一切努力讓那些公用事業維持運轉，但對我們來說是個挑戰。所以我們預期，除非有其他力量改變現況，國內公用事業端的業務仍將持續承壓。在出口端，無論是動力煤（thermal）或冶金煤（met），都維持相對強勁，甚至比我們原先預期更強。而今年的展望是，這股強勢應該會延續。我們沒有看到——即便一些用來為業務定價的指標（metrics），例如 API2，開始略微走低。需求仍然存在。所以我們會持續盡一切努力維持國內公用事業的基本盤（franchise），也會持續把車皮跑到極限（run the wheels off the railcars），在需求存在的前提下，盡可能多運輸這些出口煤，不論是動力煤或冶金煤。

That's helpful. Jim, can you just say, do you have a big length-of-haul difference to southern versus northern utilities?

很有幫助。Jim，你能不能說一下，南方公用事業相較於北方公用事業，你們的運距（length-of-haul）差異很大嗎？

I think we do, yes.

我想是的。

Longer than the south.

比南方更長。

Yes, yes. It's -- that's why it's -- I guess, one's the south and one's the north. And the mines are more located in the north, so we run it further.

是的，是的。這——這就是為什麼——我想，一個在南方、一個在北方。而礦區更多位於北方，所以我們運得更遠。

Okay. And then, Frank, just quickly, can you just clarify what your point was about the buyback? And I know you didn't have the new bigger buyback until sort of the middle of the quarter. What's sort of quarterly run rate should we be thinking about for dollars on the buyback?

好的。然後，Frank，簡單問一下，你能否澄清你剛才關於庫藏股回購的重點是什麼？我也知道你們新的、更大規模的回購計畫大概是在本季中段才開始。那麼，就回購金額而言，我們應該如何看待每季的運行速度（run rate）？

Well, it depends on what the stock price is, to be honest with you. But, no, we're obviously in the market pretty heavily, about $835-or-so million in the first quarter. The point I was trying to make was, if you were looking for a straight pro rata version of the $5 billion over 5 quarters, given the fact that we entered the program mid-quarter, we didn't obviously hit that. But from a run rate perspective, if you had forgiven the first 6 weeks, which were under the earlier program, we were ahead of a pro rata from that level. And obviously, it's going to depend on our prognosis for our performance for the year. It's going to depend on what we think the economy is going to do. And it's going to depend on what the market's reaction to our performance is. We're clearly going to return a significant amount of capital to shareholders over the coming 4 quarters. We've dimensionalized that for you. The exact cadence, I think, is just going to depend on the factors that I mentioned.

坦白說，這取決於股價是多少。不過，我們顯然在市場上相當積極，第一季大約回購了8.35億美元左右。我想表達的重點是：如果你用「50億美元、分5個季度」去做單純按比例（pro rata）的推算，考量到我們是在季度中段才啟動該計畫，我們顯然沒有達到那個水平。但從運行速度的角度來看，如果你把前6週（當時仍在較早的計畫之下）先排除不計，我們的進度是高於按比例推算的水平。而且很明顯，這將取決於我們對今年業績表現的預期。也取決於我們認為經濟會如何發展。也取決於市場對我們業績表現的反應。未來4個季度，我們很明確會向股東返還相當可觀的資本。我們已經把這個規模量化給你們了。至於確切的節奏（cadence），我認為就會取決於我剛才提到的那些因素。

Our next question comes from Fadi Chamoun from BMO Capital Markets.

下一個問題來自BMO Capital Markets的Fadi Chamoun。

I just want to go back to the volume kind of questions. So you've kind of outlined at the Investor Day to us that, ultimately, the improved cost, improved service, your ability to kind of start leveraging that to grow the business faster is more of a 2019, 2020 story. But I'm wondering, given some of the service issues we're seeing elsewhere and the trucking capacity problem, is there kind of an opportunity here to see an acceleration? How's kind of the conversation with customers going? How do you feel about your ability to begin to leverage this service and cost story a little bit earlier?

我想回到關於運量的問題。所以你們在投資人日向我們概述過：最終而言，成本改善、服務改善，以及你們開始運用這些優勢來更快地推動業務成長，會比較像是2019、2020年的故事。但我想問的是，鑑於我們在其他地方看到的一些服務問題，以及卡車運能吃緊的問題，這裡是否存在某種機會，讓成長加速？你們與客戶的溝通進展如何？你們對於能否更早開始運用這個服務與成本的故事，有什麼看法？

It was only like 6 weeks ago, or whatever it was, we were in New York and kind of laid out this plan, and the weather conditions across North America were brutal at that time and the railroads, to a large degree, were having issues at that point in time. And everybody in the world knew about ELDs and all kinds of challenges that were there. So there's not been a lot of major -- there haven't been really any kind of external influences that would make us change our minds right now in terms of what we see for the rest of the year, which is kind of what I said at the -- in summary. What I said 6 weeks ago is kind of where we still are. Obviously -- and we're running our railroad 6 weeks ago really good. So like I said, not only externally, but internally, there's not a lot of change. And so our service is second to none. And our strategy to leverage that service and make sure that we are appropriately compensated for the service that we provide is still our strategy. And so that is not something that you want to turn on a dime and discount in order to put volume on the railroad. So it's going to be a methodical, strategic, rational growth story as we go forward and as we improve the efficiency and as we clearly distinguish our ourselves in the marketplace and show to the customers that we can create value for them. We will begin to have the growth. I believe we'll continue to have the growth or we will achieve the growth that we outlined to you in 2019 and 2020 and I see no reason to try and do something to accelerate that strategy.

大概就在6週前左右，我們在紐約把這個計畫大致說明清楚；當時北美各地的天候狀況非常惡劣，鐵路業者在很大程度上也都面臨一些問題。而且全世界的人都知道ELD（電子行車紀錄器）以及各種相關挑戰。所以，外部並沒有出現什麼重大——其實也沒有任何外部因素，會讓我們在目前這個時間點改變對今年剩餘時間的看法，這也就是我在——總結時所說的。我6週前說的，基本上就是我們現在仍然的立場。當然——而且我們在6週前就已經把鐵路營運得非常好。所以如我所說，不論外部或內部，都沒有太多變化。因此，我們的服務是無可匹敵的。而我們運用這個服務、並確保我們提供的服務能獲得適當報酬的策略，仍然是我們的策略。所以這不是那種你想要臨時急轉彎、為了把運量放到鐵路上就去打折的事情。因此，隨著我們持續提升效率、並在市場上清楚地把自己區隔開來、向客戶展示我們能為他們創造價值，我們將以有方法、具策略、理性地推動成長。我們將開始看到成長。我相信我們會持續成長，或是我們會在2019與2020年達成先前向你們說明的成長目標；我看不出有任何理由要去做什麼來加速這個策略。

Okay. And maybe just one quick follow-up. When we look at the intermodal pricing, like what you're reporting in RPU and intermodal, like how well aligned is this with the current market rates that we're seeing on the truckload side? Or is there an opportunity to kind of move that materially as you kind of begin to touch a little bit more of your contracts?

好的。再追問一個很快的問題。當我們看你們在RPU以及聯運（intermodal）所揭露的聯運定價時，這與我們在整車運輸（truckload）端看到的當前市場運價，匹配程度如何？或者，當你們開始觸及更多合約時，是否有機會讓這個價格出現實質性的上調？

I have the ability -- I do not have the ability to price my portfolio of business to the markets on a daily, weekly or monthly basis. We have kind of long-term contracts with our existing customers. So a large part of that business is locked up. The pieces of the business that aren't, I will take advantage of the market environment to price the business appropriately, but that's kind of methodical. These things roll over a little bit here, a little bit there, a little bit in the summer. So -- but more so than just a tightness in the truck market is the differentiation now in the quality of my service. And the reliability of my service is what's going to be the main factor in driving growth in the future.

我有能力——我沒有能力把我整個業務組合的定價，按市場每天、每週或每月去調整。我們與既有客戶多半是長期合約。所以其中很大一部分業務是被鎖定的。至於那些沒有被鎖定的部分，我會利用市場環境把價格訂得恰當，但這會是比較循序漸進的。這些合約會在這裡一點、那裡一點、夏天再一點地陸續到期更新。所以——不過，比起卡車市場的緊俏，更重要的是我們服務品質的差異化。而我們服務的可靠性，將會是推動未來成長的主要因素。

Our next question comes from Amit Mehrotra from Deutsche Bank.

下一個問題來自德意志銀行（Deutsche Bank）的Amit Mehrotra。

Just first question, Jim. Can you update us on how the apology tour is going and anything tangible you can share following the disruption last summer? And kind of related to that, Canadian Pacific put out a release last week. Seems that there's still significant "gaps" in terms of them reaching an agreement with their unions. If you could just help us think about what the exposure, if any, I'm sure there is some, for CSX, if there's any type of work stoppage at CP, either on the revenue side or the -- related to the cost actions.

第一個問題，Jim。你能否更新一下「道歉巡迴」進展如何？以及在去年夏天的營運中斷之後，有沒有任何具體的內容可以分享？另外也相關地，加拿大太平洋（Canadian Pacific）上週發布了一則新聞稿。看起來他們在與工會達成協議方面仍存在顯著的「落差」。如果可以的話，請協助我們思考：若CP發生任何形式的停工，CSX可能承受的曝險（如果有的話；我相信多少會有一些）是什麼？不論是在營收端，或是——與成本措施相關的部分。

No apology tour anymore. That's canceled. Nothing to apologize for. The railroad is running great. The railroad is running -- again, if you look at the metrics, our railroad is running better than anybody else in North America. And -- so I got a suitcase that it says I apologize on it. So maybe one of the other railroads wants to borrow it, but I'm not using it. In terms of the Canadian Pacific, I don't know if they're going to have a strike or not. I don't think they know if they're going to have a strike or not. And so I can't really speculate and I can't comment on that.

不再有什麼道歉巡迴了。那已經取消了。沒什麼好道歉的。鐵路營運得非常好。而且——再說一次，如果你看各項指標，我們的鐵路營運表現比北美任何其他業者都好。而且——所以我有一個行李箱，上面寫著「我道歉」。也許其他鐵路公司想借去用，但我不會用它。至於加拿大太平洋，我不知道他們會不會罷工。我想他們自己也不知道會不會罷工。所以我無法臆測，也無法對此評論。

Well, I'm not asking if they're going to have a strike. What I'm asking about is if they do, like what's the exposure to CSX?

我不是在問他們會不會罷工。我問的是，如果他們真的罷工，CSX的曝險會是什麼？

I think that's a hypothetical question. So I just said I'm not going to speculate.

我認為那是假設性的問題。所以我剛才已經說了，我不會臆測。

Okay. I'll move on. And then just one quick one for Frank on the buybacks and debt levels. Just from the perspective of the rating agencies, I guess, the rating agencies look at balance sheet capacity and buyback. I guess, they have a couple different metrics and can -- maybe even conflicting with each other in terms of retained cash flow and the way they compute that versus maybe adjusted debt to adjusted EBITDA. And you could be well in the parameters of retained cash flows as a percentage of your total debt but kind of out of the parameters of adjusted debt to adjusted EBITDA. So maybe it's a little bit too technical for sure, but if you could just help us think about how CSX thinks about its balance sheet, pro forma for all the share repurchases. You surely have the capacity, but just philosophically, if you can just help us with that, and we'd appreciate it.

好的。我繼續。接著有一個很快的問題想問 Frank，關於庫藏股回購與負債水準。從信評機構的角度來看，我想信評機構會看資產負債表的承載能力以及回購。我想他們有幾個不同的衡量指標，而且——也許在保留現金流及其計算方式，與可能的「調整後負債／調整後 EBITDA」之間，甚至可能彼此相互矛盾。你可能在「保留現金流占總負債的百分比」這個指標上完全落在參數範圍內，但在「調整後負債／調整後 EBITDA」上卻有點超出參數。所以這可能確實有點太技術性，但如果你能幫我們理解 CSX 如何看待其資產負債表——在所有股票回購的備考（pro forma）基礎上。你們當然有能力，但就理念上，如果你能幫我們說明一下，我們會很感謝。

Sure. We spent a fair amount of time with the rating agencies earlier in the year as we looked at our credit profile, we looked at debt that we wanted to raise this year, we looked at the sizing of the buyback program, et cetera. And I think we have a good understanding of where the breakpoints are. They obviously look at 2 key things at a very high level: one is leverage, and the other is coverage. And I think what tax reform has done is probably allowed a little bit more room on the leverage side because you've got more coverage, because you've got more free cash flow. So I think we've struck a very good balance. I think we have a very good understanding, and I think everything that we are proposing to do on the buybacks as well as on debt issuances later in the year are all right in line with the conversations that we have with them. So we feel like we're in really good shape.

當然。今年稍早我們花了不少時間與信評機構溝通，當時我們檢視了我們的信用概況、我們今年想要發行的債務、回購計畫的規模等等。我想我們對臨界點在哪裡有很好的理解。他們在很高的層次上主要看兩個關鍵：一是槓桿，二是覆蓋倍數。我認為稅改所帶來的影響，可能是在槓桿端提供了多一點空間，因為覆蓋倍數更高了，因為自由現金流更多了。所以我認為我們取得了非常好的平衡。我覺得我們理解得很清楚，而且我們所提議要做的回購，以及今年稍晚的債務發行，都完全符合我們與他們的對話內容。所以我們覺得狀況非常好。

So if we just -- just to press you a little bit more, if I could. As we look out beyond sort of the $5 billion framework that you provided and we kind of flex the beyond 2019, is it now kind of 2.5x net debt-to-EBITDA, which is maybe obviously a little bit higher on a gross debt basis? I mean, is that the right sort of benchmark that we should think about from a modeling standpoint?

那如果我可以——再追問你一下。當我們看向你提供的 50 億美元架構之外，並把 2019 年之後的情境做一些彈性調整時，現在是否大概是 2.5 倍的淨負債／EBITDA（以總負債口徑可能顯然會更高一點）？我的意思是，從建模角度來看，這是不是我們應該採用的正確基準？

We said at the investor conference, and I'll reiterate here, that we're going to look at that on an annual basis.

我們在投資人會議上說過，我也在這裡重申，我們會以年度為基礎來檢視這件事。

Our next question comes from Brandon Oglenski from Barclays.

下一個問題來自 Barclays 的 Brandon Oglenski。

Jim, can you just remind us of the level of business that you've looked at and said we don't really want to have that on the network anymore. Because as we look at your volumes trending early in the second quarter, I think you guys are close to flat on the publicly available reports. So how do we put that in context, the business that you walked away from?

Jim，你能不能提醒我們，你們檢視過並認為「我們不太想再把這類業務留在網路上」的業務規模大概是多少？因為我們看你們第二季初的運量趨勢，我想從公開可得的報告來看，你們幾乎是持平。那我們該如何把你們放棄的那部分業務放到這個脈絡裡理解？

Well, again, on the intermodal side of the business, as I think we've said in the middle of last year, we started to transition away from what we referred to us the hub-and-spoke model in intermodal. And in closing a number of lanes that we served, we took about 7% of the intermodal traffic off the railroad. And we have -- we've -- we're getting close to getting intermodal volumes back to flat with prior years, so we're replacing a large percentage of that business. And if our run rate is getting close to, on a volume basis, flat, that would kind of give me, as I said earlier, a little more confidence that we're going to be able to have a revenue line for the year which is slightly up. So it all kind of fits in with our prior view of the year that the volumes would strengthen across the board with coal as always being somewhat of a question mark for us, but they would strengthen as the year progressed, and we'd see enough in the second half of the year to offset what is a 4% decline in volume in the first quarter.

嗯，再次就聯運（intermodal）業務而言，正如我想我們在去年年中說過的，我們開始從我們所稱的聯運「樞紐—輻射（hub-and-spoke）」模式轉型。在關閉我們服務的若干路線（lanes）時，我們把大約 7% 的聯運貨量從鐵路上移除。而且我們——我們——我們已經快要把聯運運量拉回到與前幾年持平，所以我們正在替代其中很大一部分業務。如果我們的運行率在運量基礎上接近持平，那就會如我先前所說，讓我更有信心我們今年的營收線會小幅成長。所以這一切都與我們先前對今年的看法一致：運量會全面走強；煤炭一如既往對我們而言仍有些不確定性，但隨著年度推進會走強；而我們會在下半年看到足夠的增量，來抵消第一季運量 4% 的下滑。

Okay. Appreciate that. And when you look across the network, you do have headcount down quite a bit. I mean, like everyone talked about, your OR has improved pretty aggressively here. But what is left on the structural side? I mean, if you did have a big influx of demand, do you think the headcount levels can still come down or are you at a point now where you would have to be thinking about hiring more people and bringing on more assets?

了解。謝謝。另外，當你看整個網路，你們的人力編制下降了不少。我的意思是，就像大家談到的，你們的營運比率（OR）在這裡改善得相當積極。但在結構性面向上還剩下什麼？也就是說，如果需求大量湧入，你認為人力水準還能再下降嗎？還是你們現在已經到了必須考慮再招人、增加更多資產的階段？

Clearly, we wouldn't -- clearly, you'd have to have some sort of monumental increase in volumes for us to begin considering hiring employees back and assets. No, we've got 800 locomotives in storage. So we're in great shape to handle any kind of increase in volume. We -- forget about taking assets out. We still have -- we still intend to improve the fluidity of the network. We still intend to improve velocity. We still intend to drive down dwell. We still intend to increase train length. All of those initiatives do 2 things: one, improve our operating leverage, drive -- which by driving down our cost and improving our efficiency, but they allow us, because of that, to add additional volumes with our existing asset base that we have today. We're handling just about the same amount of volume that CSX handed -- handled a year ago with 8 fewer hump yards, 1,000 fewer locomotives, 4,000 fewer employees, 20,000 fewer railcars. So putting more volume into this railroad that is going to continue to improve to be operated more efficiently is not going to be a challenge for us.

很明顯，我們不會——很明顯，除非運量出現某種極其巨大的增加，我們才會開始考慮把員工與資產再加回來。不，我們有 800 台機車在封存（storage）。所以我們有非常好的條件來應對任何形式的運量增加。我們——先別談把資產移出。我們仍然——我們仍然打算提升網路的流動性（fluidity）。我們仍然打算提升速度（velocity）。我們仍然打算降低停留時間（dwell）。我們仍然打算增加列車長度。所有這些措施會帶來兩件事：第一，提升我們的營運槓桿——透過降低成本並提升效率；第二，也因為如此，讓我們能在現有資產基礎上承接更多運量。我們現在處理的運量幾乎與 CSX 一年前處理的差不多，但少了 8 個驼峰調車場（hump yards）、少了 1,000 台機車、少了 4,000 名員工、少了 20,000 輛鐵路貨車。所以把更多運量放進這條鐵路——而且它還會持續改善、以更有效率的方式運作——對我們來說不會是挑戰。

Our next question comes from Brian Ossenbeck from JPMorgan.

下一個問題來自 JPMorgan 的 Brian Ossenbeck。

Jim, just a follow-up on the train length. I've been able to track those improving in the West and up North, but it's more recent phenomenon in the East. So I was wondering in a [detention] network, are there actual physical limitations to building train lengths, grade crossings or something like that? Or was it just more temporary and you just need longer sidings, the right balance to keep that track going?

Jim，關於列車長度我再追問一下。我能追蹤到西部與北部的列車長度在改善，但在東部這是比較近期才出現的現象。所以我想問，在一個[detention]網路中，拉長列車長度是否有實際的物理限制，例如平交道之類的？還是只是比較暫時性的問題，你們只是需要更長的會車線（sidings），以及適當的平衡來讓這個趨勢持續？

No capital necessary in order for us to improve train length. We are not restricted by siding length. We'd have a long, long way to go before we would need to spend capital to be able to get, say, 12,000-foot trains out there. But if we were, that'd be good news probably, which I'm sure we'd consider if necessary. But that's not in our 3-year vision to be -- to have to spend capital to do any of those stuff.

我們要提升列車長度不需要資本支出。我們不受會車線長度限制。在我們需要花資本、才能把例如 12,000 英尺的列車跑出去之前，還有非常非常長的一段路要走。但如果真到了那一步，那大概會是好消息，我相信如有必要我們會考慮。但在我們的三年願景中，並沒有把必須為這些事情投入資本列入規劃。

Brian, 2 other things I'd add to Jim's good comments. One is we invested a fair amount on what we call the Southeast corridor, Chicago into the Southeast in the last decade or so, so we're leveraging that clearly. And then as Hunter, Jim, Ed and others have really looked at the network operating plan, we've done a fair amount to reduce congestion, i.e., to reduce the number of active trains. The number of meets and passes that you have in any given day is a lot less than it used to be.

Brian，我再補充兩點，呼應 Jim 很好的評論。第一，我們在過去十年左右，對我們所稱的東南走廊（Southeast corridor）——從芝加哥到東南部——投入了相當多，因此我們顯然正在善用這些投資。第二，隨著 Hunter、Jim、Ed 以及其他人深入檢視網路營運計畫，我們做了不少工作來降低壅塞，也就是降低在運行中的列車數量。你每天需要進行的會車與超車（meets and passes）次數，比以前少了很多。

Okay. Is there anything specific to the East, physical limitations, tighter, shorter distances between grade crossings that would limit train length growth from here?

好的。東部地區是否有任何特定因素，例如實體限制、平交道之間距離更緊密、更短，會限制從現在起列車長度的成長？

No. No different.

沒有。沒有不同。

Just wanted to clarify that. But if question was, just to go back to intermodal for a second, talking about disciplined growth in that business. Can you give a sense as to how you're handling the demand? But dwell times are up the terminals across the whole industry, so specifically, I wanted to get your comments on some of the terminal performance in the larger hubs like Memphis and Chicago in addition to the trade capacity serving those markets.

只是想釐清一下。不過如果問題是——先回到聯運（intermodal）這塊談一下，關於該業務的紀律性成長。你能否說明你們如何因應需求？但整個產業的各個場站停留時間（dwell times）都在上升，所以我特別想請你評論一下像孟菲斯和芝加哥這些較大型樞紐的部分場站表現，以及服務這些市場的貿易運能（trade capacity）。

Well, we have improved the efficiency of our Chicago terminals, both Bedford Park and 59th Street significantly. Everybody had challenges at Christmastime, especially in Chicago and Memphis when the winter weather came in at Christmas day and just hung around for a month, so it slowed everybody down. Our dwells are -- both originating containers in our intermodal terminals and containers that arrived in our intermodal terminals, our dwells are down because our train service is becoming more reliable and predictable. And therefore, the trade community can rely upon us to be there and handle load for them to haul away. And then at the same time, as we mentioned earlier, with us being more clear in what we expect of our customers in terms of when those containers come into our terminals that we want them out. And if they don't want to get them out, they have to pay to store them. That is increasing the throughput and the fluidity of those 2 main terminals there. Again, Memphis has been a challenge for us, but Memphis is now running smoothly. And again, and I have a big focus on our intermodal terminals for this year. And I'm sure. I'm positive. In fact, I was just in Chicago going through our Bedford Park and 59th Street terminals. I'm sure that we can make improvements there that will improve throughput, which basically adds a significant amount of capacity without spending any money.

嗯，我們已大幅提升芝加哥場站的效率，包括Bedford Park與59th Street兩個場站。每家公司在聖誕節期間都遇到挑戰，尤其是芝加哥與孟菲斯；聖誕節當天冬季天氣來襲，並持續了一個月，讓所有人都慢了下來。我們的停留時間——無論是我們聯運場站內的始發貨櫃，或是抵達我們聯運場站的貨櫃——停留時間都在下降，因為我們的列車服務正變得更可靠、更可預測。因此，貿易社群可以信賴我們會到位並替他們處理裝載，讓他們能把貨拉走。同時，如同我們先前提到的，我們也更清楚地向客戶說明我們的期待：貨櫃進到我們場站後，我們希望他們把貨櫃提走。如果他們不想提走，就必須支付堆存費。這正在提升那兩個主要場站的吞吐量與流動性。再說一次，孟菲斯對我們而言一直是個挑戰，但孟菲斯現在運作順暢。而且，今年我會把重點放在我們的聯運場站。我也確定。我很肯定。事實上，我剛在芝加哥走訪我們的Bedford Park與59th Street場站。我確信我們可以在那裡做出改善以提升吞吐量，基本上不花任何錢就能增加相當可觀的產能。

Matt Reustle from Goldman Sachs, you may go ahead.

下一位是來自高盛（Goldman Sachs）的Matt Reustle，你可以開始提問。

Maybe if you can touch on asset sales for a moment here. Made some progress in the quarter. What do you expect to be the driver -- what determines whether you hit that $300 million base case or that $800 million in upside that you highlighted at the Analyst Day? Is it simply demand in the market? Are there certain assets that are tied to federal grants that make up a big portion of it? And I guess, if you can categorize the market for asset sales now, that will be helpful as well.

也許請你談一下資產出售。本季已有一些進展。你預期主要驅動因素是什麼——是什麼決定你們能達到3億美元的基本情境，或是你們在分析師日提到的8億美元上行情境？只是市場需求的問題嗎？是否有某些與聯邦補助（federal grants）綁定的資產，占了很大一部分？另外，如果你能把目前資產出售市場的狀況做個分類說明，也會很有幫助。

So on the real estate side, we're seeing, obviously, pretty stiff demand for what we put out there for sale. Mark Wallace and his team are working awfully hard to free up assets that maybe haven't been for sale for a while. Obviously, you saw a good down payment on that $300 million in the quarter from a line sale perspective. You've probably seen a little bit of traffic out of the STB on a couple of items that we have out for bid right now. And you'll continue to see us focus on that. It is not a demand-side problem. There's a lot of demand out there for infrastructure-type assets, so we think we're hitting the market at a pretty good time.

就不動產方面而言，我們看到——很明顯——我們拿出來出售的資產需求相當強勁。Mark Wallace和他的團隊非常努力地釋出一些可能已經有一段時間未曾出售的資產。很明顯，你們也看到本季從路線出售（line sale）的角度，對那3億美元目標已先取得一筆不錯的「頭期款」式進展。你們可能也在STB（美國地面運輸委員會）那邊看到一些動態，關於我們目前正在招標的幾個項目。而你們也會持續看到我們把重點放在這上面。這不是需求端的問題。市場對基礎設施類資產的需求很大，所以我們認為現在切入市場的時點相當不錯。

Okay. Got it. And just one more on the higher demurrage charges. Is this a case where you're hiring good rates on customers? Or is it you're becoming more strict on the chargeable days. Maybe you can walk through that. It seems like quite a jump for some of these customers' in just in one quarter.

好的。了解。再問一個關於較高的滯期費（demurrage）收費。這是你們對客戶提高費率的情況嗎？還是你們在可計費天數上變得更嚴格？也許你可以說明一下。看起來對某些客戶而言，單季的跳升幅度相當大。

Well, basically, what you're talking about is here is demurrage or detention, which is a standard operating practice throughout the transportation industry, whether it's the railroads, whether it's the steamship companies, whether it's the terminals. If your asset sits around at somebody else's property and you don't get it out, they charge what for what sits there because they can't use it while your equipment is sitting there. All of these charges, to a large degree, have been on the books of CSX for a long time, but were not necessarily enforced aggressively, or for one reason or another, a customer here or a customer there was given an exception to the policy because it was viewed as an incentive to the customer to come and do business with CSX. Under our current model, under scheduled railroading, we're focused equally on providing our customer with a fair value for what they pay us. But at the same time, having an intense focus on the value of our infrastructure and the value of our asset, and we are not just going to give that away anymore. So as -- again, as Frank made his comments, this is not something necessarily that we want to view as a profit center that we want to, in any way shape or form, gouge our customers. It is a simple fact of life that, again, when the car sits on our network, that -- or it is our car that has been delivered for unloading and it's not unloaded, we expect to be compensated for either the use of our track space where the cars are sitting or the use of our asset while it's -- we can't use it for another piece of business. And again, these are standard industry practices that we just are applying in a more uniform and consistent manner.

嗯，基本上你談的是滯期費（demurrage）或滯留費（detention）。這是整個運輸產業的標準作業做法，不論是鐵路公司、船公司（steamship companies）或場站。如果你的資產停放在別人的場地上，而你沒有把它移走，對方就會就其占用收費，因為在你的設備停在那裡時，他們無法使用該資產。這些費用在很大程度上，CSX的費率表上早就存在很久了，但未必被積極執行；或因某些原因，某個客戶或另一個客戶曾被給予政策例外，因為那被視為吸引客戶來與CSX做生意的一種誘因。在我們目前的模式、也就是定期化鐵路營運（scheduled railroading）之下，我們同樣重視為客戶提供其支付費用所對應的公平價值。但同時，我們也高度聚焦於我們基礎設施的價值與我們資產的價值，我們不會再把這些價值白白送出去。所以——再說一次，正如Frank所評論的，這不一定是我們想視為獲利中心的東西；我們不想以任何形式對客戶漫天要價。但事實就是——再說一次——當車輛停在我們的路網上，或是我們的車輛已交付等待卸貨卻未被卸貨時，我們預期能就兩者之一獲得補償：車輛停放所占用的軌道空間，或是資產被占用、使我們無法用於其他業務的機會成本。而且再說一次，這些都是標準的產業慣例，我們只是以更一致、更統一的方式來執行。

Our next question comes from Justin Long with Stephens.

下一個問題來自Stephens的Justin Long。

So maybe to address service first and take a bigger-picture approach. Clearly, you've shown improvement, but some of the other rails are struggling. Jim and Ed, you've seen a lot of service disruptions in the industry in the past. You know what it takes to fix some of these issues. With that in mind, when you look at the North American rail network as a whole today, do you have any thoughts around the timing of when we can return to an environment of normal fluidity?

那我先從服務面切入，並用更宏觀的角度來看。很明顯你們已展現改善，但其他一些鐵路公司仍在掙扎。Jim和Ed，你們過去在產業中看過很多次服務中斷。你們也知道要修復這些問題需要什麼。基於此，當你們看今天整體北美鐵路路網時，對於我們何時能回到正常流動性的環境，你們是否有任何時間點上的看法？

No. I can comment on how CSX is running. I can't comment that, on when other railroads are going to do that. It'd just be inappropriate for me to comment.

沒有。我可以評論CSX的運行狀況。但我無法評論其他鐵路公司何時能做到那樣。我這樣評論並不適當。

Okay. Fair enough. And maybe to go back to pricing for my second question. Seems like things are moving higher, coal being the exception. Could you talk about your view on coal pricing going forward? I'm just curious if you expect this downward pressure to continue and if you're pursuing any changes as it relates to the percentage of your contracts that have a fixed component.

好的。可以理解。那第二個問題回到定價。看起來各項都在走高，煤炭是例外。你能談談你們對未來煤炭定價的看法嗎？我想了解你是否預期這種下行壓力會持續，以及你是否正推動任何調整，例如在合約中含固定成分（fixed component）的比例方面。

Well, 2 pieces of businesses here: The export business, both of the thermal and met, pricing is kind of driven by other indices -- indexes that we really don't have a lot of control over, and so that piece of business kind of goes up and down with those indexes. On the utility side of the business, clearly, the coal-fired utilities, in competing with other utilities, generating facilities that are using natural gas to generate -- to run their turbines, the coal guys have a disadvantage just on a cost per million BTU basis. So to the extent that we can work with those customers, those coal-fired utilities, to give them a more -- a lower-cost basis on a delivered per million BTU basis, i.e., might involve cost of the coal post our transportation, we're going to try and do that and see what happens. There is a lot of coal to the utilities. The majority of the coal that comes from either the Powder River Basin or the Illinois Basin going to our utility. So there is a longer haul. The transportation component of that is larger than what has historically been the case just because it's moving a farther distance. And so if we can do something in that marketplace that will help our customer, that will allow us to use the fact that we've got coal assets, cars and locomotives to move it and it produces to us a very good return, we're going to try to do that.

嗯，這裡有兩塊業務：出口業務，無論是動力煤還是冶金煤，其定價某種程度上是由其他指數——也就是我們其實沒有太多控制力的指數——所驅動，因此那塊業務會隨著那些指數上下波動。在公用事業這一端，顯然，燃煤電力公用事業在與其他公用事業競爭時——那些使用天然氣發電、驅動渦輪機的發電設施——燃煤方在每百萬英熱單位（BTU）的成本基礎上就處於劣勢。所以，只要我們能與那些客戶、也就是燃煤公用事業合作，讓他們在每百萬BTU的到岸（交付）成本基礎上更——更低成本，也就是可能涉及我們運輸之後的煤炭成本，我們就會嘗試這麼做，看看結果如何。公用事業端有大量煤炭需求。來自粉河盆地（Powder River Basin）或伊利諾伊盆地（Illinois Basin）的大部分煤炭都運往我們的公用事業客戶。因此運距更長。其中的運輸成本占比也比過去歷史情況更高，原因只是運送距離更遠。因此，如果我們能在那個市場做些事情來幫助客戶，同時也能利用我們擁有煤炭資產、車輛與機車來運輸，並為我們帶來非常好的回報，我們就會嘗試去做。

Our next question comes from Ben Hartford from Baird.

下一個問題來自Baird的Ben Hartford。

Jim, any perspective on international intermodal, in particular, your service being a standout relative to the other rails. But any other concerns for the steamship lines with regard to network fluidity broadly in diverting some of the flows away from the East and the Gulf Coast over to the West to improve transit times? Have you seen any or have you heard any talk about that as we enter the spring peak?

Jim，對國際聯運（intermodal）有什麼看法嗎？特別是你們的服務相較其他鐵路公司顯得很突出。但就航運公司而言，是否還有其他顧慮，例如為了提升運輸時間而在整體網路流動性（network fluidity）方面，把部分貨流從東岸與墨西哥灣沿岸轉移到西岸？在進入春季旺季之際，你們是否看到或聽到任何相關討論？

I'm putting up a big for sale sign in, let's see, Jacksonville, Savannah, Virginia, Baltimore, New York, New Jersey. Open for business. Bring it in. We can handle it all. So I'm good to go. I'm ready to handle their freight and not going to -- not a problem.

我正在掛上一個大型「出售」招牌，讓我想想，傑克遜維爾、薩凡納、維吉尼亞、巴爾的摩、紐約、紐澤西。開門做生意。把貨帶來。我們全都能處理。所以我隨時可以上。我準備好承接他們的貨運——不會——不是問題。

Okay. And then more broadly on protectionism. Several weeks now into -- a lot of the rhetoric around tariffs, obviously, on the steel and aluminum side and, on the grain side, down more recently. Any thoughts that you have as it relates to consequences near term that may have arisen given the rhetoric that we've now been absorbing over the past couple months?

好的。然後更廣泛地談保護主義。關於關稅的許多言論已經持續了好幾週，顯然在鋼鐵與鋁那邊，以及更近期在穀物那邊。就我們過去幾個月一直吸收的這些言論而言，你對可能已經出現的短期後果有什麼想法嗎？

No. It's a -- I keep being asked to become an expert on tariffs, and I'm not. And so right now, everybody -- yes, everybody depends on what day it is as to whether or not this is viewed as a good thing or a bad thing. Anecdotally, we're looking at moving some more petcoke, and we're looking at some steel mills on [a rail we're opening up]. So that's just anecdotally. So I'm sure as things play out, if anything does come to be, there will be negatives and positives in it. And it's too early to try and guess what those might be.

沒有。這個——大家一直要我變成關稅專家，但我不是。所以目前，每個人——是的，每個人都取決於今天是哪一天，才會把這件事看成好事或壞事。就傳聞層面來說，我們正在看是否能多運一些石油焦（petcoke），也在看一些鋼廠在[我們正在開通的一條鐵路線上]的機會。所以那只是一些零星觀察。因此我相信，隨著事情發展，如果真的有什麼落地，裡面會同時有負面也有正面。而現在要去猜那些會是什麼，還太早。

Cherilyn Radbourne from TD Securities, you may go ahead.

TD Securities的Cherilyn Radbourne，妳可以開始提問。

Just wanted to ask a question around routings. One of the things I was struck by at the Investor Day was just how, in closing hump yards and in moving away from the hub-and-spoke system in intermodal, you'd eliminated some what would seem like very dysfunctional routings. Could you just speak about what impact all of that has on length of haul in merchandise in intermodal and what, if any, implications that has for RPU in those franchises?

我想問一個關於路由（routings）安排的問題。投資人日讓我印象很深的一點是，透過關閉驼峰編組場（hump yards）以及在聯運業務中逐步遠離樞紐—輻射（hub-and-spoke）系統，你們消除了某些看起來非常低效、失靈的路由。你能談談這些措施對一般貨運（merchandise）與聯運的運距（length of haul）有什麼影響，以及若有的話，對這些業務線的每單位收入（RPU）有何含意嗎？

Well, again, if you take an inefficient -- if you route a car in an inefficient manner, basically, you have artificially increased the length of haul, assuming that you can haul it in a more direct fashion and assuming that you do. And so by improving the efficiency of your network and by taking out all of these millions of out-of-route miles that we move cars on an annual basis, you're going to, theoretically and I would think actually, reduce your length of haul. At the same time, your revenue, if you just look at it on a revenue per unit basis, it's not going to change much. If you can get to a cents per revenue ton mile, you would see an increase because you're going to get the same amount of revenue and having less of the ton mile. So it's kind of a -- there are different metrics, but I think what you're trying to get to is taking something and moving it in a straight line is going -- versus a crooked line is going to be less miles, and you're still going to get paid the same amount of money for doing it.

嗯，再說一次，如果你用低效率的方式去路由一節車，基本上，在假設你其實可以用更直接的方式運送、而且你也確實這麼做的前提下，你就等於人為地拉長了運距。因此，透過提升網路效率、把我們每年讓車輛繞路行駛的數百萬英里移除掉，理論上——而且我認為實際上也是——會縮短你的運距。同時，如果你只用每單位收入來看，你的收入不會有太大變化。如果你看的是每收入噸英里（revenue ton mile）的美分數，你會看到上升，因為你拿到相同的收入，但噸英里變少了。所以這有點——有不同的衡量指標，但我想你要表達的是：把東西用直線運——相對於用彎曲的線運——里程會更少，而你做同樣的事仍然會拿到同樣的報酬。

Great. And then maybe just by way of a quick follow-up, in terms of the equity earnings of affiliates, that's a new income statement line item. Frank, can you just give us some help on how to think about a normal annual run rate for that?

很好。然後也許快速追問一下，關於聯營公司權益法收益（equity earnings of affiliates），那是一個新的損益表科目。Frank，你能否幫我們理解一下，這個科目在正常年度下的常態化年化水準（run rate）該怎麼看？

That's a great question, Cherilyn. So the equity earnings of affiliates, the reason that we had to create that was because the nonconsolidated subsidiaries, so you might know those as Conrail, TTX and the Belt Railway of Chicago, among some others, they had to actually revalue their deferred tax liabilities. And because of the size of those revaluations, we had to carry it as a separate line item. You saw a $25 million benefit in the quarter against a $13 million benefit last year. Obviously, those affiliates, when industry volumes are up, they do better. And when industry volumes are down, they may not do as well if they're not pulling costs out the same time. We did have some tax true-ups in there. We said on the call for the fourth quarter, we said think about a $10 million to $15 million per quarter credit there. We're probably at the top side of that one if you're thinking about it from a run-rate basis.

這是個很好的問題，Cherilyn。所以，聯營公司權益法收益之所以需要單獨列示，是因為未合併子公司——你可能知道的像是Conrail、TTX以及芝加哥環帶鐵路（Belt Railway of Chicago）等，還有其他一些——它們必須重新評價其遞延所得稅負債。而由於這些重估的規模，我們必須把它作為單獨的列項。你看到本季有2,500萬美元的利益，相較去年為1,300萬美元的利益。顯然，當產業運量上升時，這些聯營公司表現會更好。而當產業運量下降時，如果它們沒有同步降本，表現可能就沒那麼好。其中也有一些稅務調整（tax true-ups）。我們在第四季的電話會議上說過，可以把這裡想成每季約1,000萬到1,500萬美元的入帳（credit）。如果你從常態化水準來看，我們大概是在那個區間的上緣。

Our next question comes from David Vernon from Bernstein.

下一個問題來自Bernstein的David Vernon。

I just wanted to clarify, Jim, it sounded like you were talking a little bit before about the coal business trying to maybe get a little bit more aggressive to grow some utility coal business using price. Is that -- did I hear that correctly? Or what are you trying to get at with the utility coal pricing commentary?

我只是想確認一下，Jim，聽起來你剛才稍早在談煤炭業務時提到，可能會用價格更積極一些來成長部分公用事業用煤的業務。那——我聽得對嗎？或者你在公用事業煤炭定價的評論中想表達的是什麼？

Basically, what I said, yes, is on the Southern electric utilities to the extent that we can work with our customers, i.e., if it makes economic sense for us, CSX, to be more aggressive on price to keep those utilities up and running and using coal, we will try to do that.

基本上，我說的是，是的，對於南方的電力公用事業，只要我們能與客戶合作——也就是說，若對我們CSX在經濟上是合理的——在價格上更積極一些，以維持那些公用事業持續運轉並使用煤炭，我們就會嘗試這麼做。

And can you bound that for us as far as kind of any sort of directional indicator of how much room there is to move in that stuff on the rate?

那您能否就利率方面，給我們一個大致的界限，作為某種方向性的指標，說明在那方面還有多少調整空間？

We have room to move.

我們有調整空間。

All right. And then maybe -- I'll follow up with Kevin off-line. But maybe, Frank, question for in the MS&O. How do you reconcile taking a lower accrual on the personal injury when the accident rates are up as significantly as they are in the quarter?

好的。那接著我可能會在會後再跟 Kevin 私下跟進。不過也許，Frank，關於 MS&O 我有個問題。當本季事故率顯著上升時，你們如何能在個人傷害方面採用較低的應計？

So what the actuaries do, this is not something that we do, it's something that we work with actuaries on. They look at probability and severity, so it has to do not just with the number of incidents but also the severity of incidents in its overall longer-term period of time. We give them all the data, they run the numbers, and we adjust the accrual as necessary. In some quarters and years, it might go up. In other quarters, it might go down.

精算師所做的事情——這不是我們做的，而是我們與精算師合作的部分。他們會看發生機率與嚴重程度，所以不僅與事件數量有關，也與事件嚴重性以及更長期整體期間的情況有關。我們把所有資料提供給他們，他們跑模型、算數字，然後我們視需要調整應計。在某些季度或年度，可能會上升。在其他季度，可能會下降。

Our accident rates -- actual accident rates in the first quarter this year, or not?

我們的事故率——今年第一季的實際事故率，是嗎？還是不是？

Yes, but the raw incidents that we had were roughly flat, both on a personal injury and a train accident basis. But obviously, what moves the ratio is the denominator, which is per million train lines on train accidents and 200,000 man-hours on PI.

是的，但我們的原始事件數大致持平，無論是個人傷害或列車事故都是如此。但顯然，影響比率變動的是分母：列車事故是以每百萬列車英里為基準，而個人傷害（PI）是以每 200,000 工時為基準。

Yes. I mean, they're indexed to the volume of activity, right?

是。我的意思是，它們是依活動量來做指數化的，對吧？

Right, which is not -- I'm not suggesting that, that's inappropriate. I'm just saying someone can look at the number and say, "Oh my god! They're having a lot more accidents," when actually, we're either equal to or slightly less than, depending upon what day it is going forward in the year, kind of back where CSX historic -- to historical run rates and moving up vis-à-vis the rest of the industry in terms of these numbers.

對，這並不是——我不是在暗示那樣做不恰當。我只是說，有人看到那個數字會說：「天啊！他們事故多了很多」，但其實我們不是持平就是略少；視今年接下來的某一天而定，我們大致回到 CSX 歷史——歷史常態水準，並且就這些數字而言，相對於產業其他公司也在往上提升。

Yes. And the thing you have to remember, David, is in the frequency index, a sprained ankle counts the same as an amputation. I mean I hate to be that graphic about it, but what we look at and what the actuary looks at it is what is the frequency, so we talked about that, and then what is the severity based on our recent experience. So that's why you see the change.

是。而且你必須記得，David，在頻率指標裡，扭傷腳踝和截肢被算作同樣一件事。我知道這樣講很直白，但我們看、精算師也看的是：頻率是多少——我們剛談過；以及基於我們近期經驗的嚴重程度是什麼。所以你才會看到這個變化。

Our next question will come from Walter Spracklin from RBC.

下一個問題來自 RBC 的 Walter Spracklin。

What I'd like to focus in on is some of your opportunities after the full implementation of your precision railroading is rolled out and your service levels are really salable. Jim, can you focus in on what you've seen as areas or sectors that you really see CSX as being able to grow into a little bit more than either competitors or more than it has in the past? Are there any sectors that really excite you with regards to that of selling your service model once we kind of get through this phase of de-marketing and slower growth -- slower volume growth in 2018?

我想聚焦的是：在你們精準鐵路（precision railroading）全面落地、且服務水準真正具備可銷售性之後，你們有哪些機會。Jim，你能否談談你看到哪些領域或產業板塊，讓你覺得 CSX 有能力比競爭對手、或比過去更進一步成長？在我們度過這個去行銷（de-marketing）與較慢成長——2018 年運量成長較慢——的階段之後，有沒有任何板塊讓你對於銷售你們的服務模式特別感到興奮？

Well, clearly, much as you're familiar with this, much as that way we looked at this at the Canadian National in the early days, the benefits of this are on the merchandise side of the business. And having, on a revenue basis, 2/3 of your business tied to the merchandise segment, that's where you want to focus, and that's really where the value comes. And those are the customers today that are the easiest to convert because in most -- well, in all cases, they're shipping already today by rail, they're comfortable with shipping by rail, they're sophisticated and big customers who are shipping by rail and they're paying a premium price to move a large product -- same product that they're moving by rail in the truck where they want to get reliability. And the big area of opportunity is to convert those customers and other customers like them to your network on the merchandise side of the business. Half of the intermodal business is looking just for price, and the other half of the business is looking for just price, but at the same time, a really high premium service. So the area where you can focus and do the best good for CSX and the customer base is on the merchandise side of the business, and we'll be transitioning a much greater focus on the top line in the out years, than just truing up and improving the basic operation of the railroad.

嗯，很明顯地，就像你很熟悉的那樣，也像我們早年在加拿大國家鐵路（Canadian National）看待這件事的方式一樣，這些效益主要在一般貨運（merchandise）業務端。而且若以營收來看，你們有 2/3 的業務與一般貨運板塊綁在一起，那就是你要聚焦的地方，也是真正價值所在。而且這些客戶是今天最容易轉換的，因為在多數——其實在所有情況下——他們現在就已經用鐵路運輸，他們對鐵路運輸很熟悉；他們是成熟且大型的客戶，使用鐵路運輸，並且願意付出溢價來運送大量產品——同樣的產品，他們也會用卡車運輸，因為他們想要可靠性。最大的機會，就是把這些客戶以及類似的其他客戶，在一般貨運端轉到你們的網路上。聯運（intermodal）業務有一半只看價格，另一半也只看價格，但同時又要非常高端的服務。所以你能聚焦、並且對 CSX 與客戶群帶來最大效益的領域，是一般貨運端；在未來幾年，我們會把更多重點轉向營收成長（top line），而不只是把鐵路的基本營運校準並改善。

Okay. That makes a lot of sense, Jim. And so reliability, how long do you think -- clearly, you're going to be increasingly -- have a reputation for higher reliability. How long do you think before those truck customers buy in and trust that by going over they're are going to get that reliability? Is this something that you got to build out over quarters or over years? How long do you think that'll run?

好的。這很有道理，Jim。那談到可靠性，你認為需要多久——很明顯你們會逐步——建立更高可靠性的聲譽。你覺得要多久卡車客戶才會買單並相信，轉過來之後他們能得到那樣的可靠性？這是需要用幾個季度來建立，還是要用幾年？你覺得這個過程會持續多久？

Days, week, quarters, months, years, it depends upon who the customer is. It depends upon where you're doing it. And most of it as in any business, you got to go in and sell to the customer on the idea of converting. And as I said earlier, these guys are sophisticated purchasers of transportation that know rail and they know truck, and they'll scream at you every day that they have to pay premium prices when your service is not good, i.e., they got to pay more to put it in a truck. And so you just got to go onto them and prove lane by lane by lane by lane that you can handle their product to their valued customer and do it in the same way at the same level efficiency and reliability that they get out of a truck. They don't necessarily need it there at 24, 48 hours. They needed there with a degree of reliability that if you say you're going to do it in 4 days, it's there in 4 days 85%, 90% of the time. And if you can do that and not have the outlier where, "Oh, that load didn't get there for 12 days, and this one didn't get there for 10 days," that's how you win it back.

可能是幾天、幾週、幾季、幾個月、幾年——取決於客戶是誰。也取決於你在哪些路線、哪些地點推進。而且像任何生意一樣，大部分都需要你去向客戶推銷「轉換」這個概念。如我先前所說，這些人是成熟的運輸採購者，懂鐵路也懂卡車；當你們服務不好時，他們每天都會對你大喊，因為他們得付出溢價——也就是得多花錢改用卡車。所以你必須一條路線一條路線地證明，你能把他們的產品運到他們重視的客戶手上，並且以同樣的方式、同等的效率與可靠性，達到他們用卡車所得到的水準。他們不一定需要 24 或 48 小時就到。他們需要的是可靠性：如果你說 4 天到，就要有 85%、90% 的時間能在 4 天到。而且如果你能做到這點，並且不要出現那種離群值——「喔，那一車 12 天才到，這一車 10 天才到」——你就能把生意贏回來。

Makes a lot of sense. Okay. Last question here. Senior management, now when you look across a group -- you got a good set of railroaders here. Any areas where you think you're going to be looking to add or ameliorate over the next -- in 2018 in your senior management ranks at all?

很有道理。好的。最後一個問題。高階管理團隊方面，現在你放眼整個團隊——你們這裡有一批很不錯的鐵路人。在 2018 年，你覺得在高階管理層面，有哪些領域你們會考慮增補人手或加以改善嗎？

I think, clearly -- well, clearly, based upon the results and the performance and everything I've said since I've been here, we got a great team of people that know what the heck they're doing. And as I said, I'll match these guys up with anybody in the industry, and I think we've proven that with our first quarter results that we can perform with anybody. And -- but yes, there are some holes to fill in the organization that everybody is aware of. And Ed and I are working very, very hard to make sure that we find the right people and the right talent who can fill those roles. And we'll probably -- moving some things around by -- during this year more to give people, again, opportunities to show what they can do in certain roles. And we're not sitting still and sitting back on that area either. Everything here is all systems go, improve the place and run it better and better every day and make sure we have the future leaders for CSX ready to go when called on.

我認為，很明顯——嗯，很明顯，根據業績結果、表現，以及我自從來到這裡以來所說的一切，我們擁有一支非常優秀的團隊，知道自己到底在做什麼。而且如我所說，我願意拿這些人去跟業界任何人相比，我認為我們已用第一季的結果證明，我們能和任何人一樣有表現。不過，是的，組織裡確實還有一些缺口需要補上，這點大家都知道。我和 Ed 正非常、非常努力，確保找到合適的人選與正確的人才來補上這些職位。而且我們可能——在今年之內會調整一些安排，讓大家再次有機會在某些角色上展現他們能做什麼。在這方面我們也不會停下來、也不會袖手旁觀。這裡一切都是全速前進：改善這個地方、把它一天比一天經營得更好，並確保 CSX 未來的領導人才在需要時已準備就緒。

Our next question comes from Jason Seidl with Cowen.

下一個問題來自 Cowen 的 Jason Seidl。

Wanted to touch back on price a little bit, excluding the coal franchise. Jim, I think you mentioned there was some sequential improvement there. Can you give us a sense of how much of your book of business for 2018 has already been repriced?

想再稍微談一下定價，但不包含煤炭業務。Jim，我想你提到那裡有一些環比改善。你能否讓我們了解一下，你們 2018 年的業務組合中，有多少已經重新定價了？

In what segment of the company?

你指的是公司哪個業務區塊？

Ex coal.

不含煤炭。

All right. I guess it's safe to say that kind of we have -- best way, say, 1/3 of the business rolls over every year. That's kind of a good metric to use. And we can't -- I'm not going to -- can't give you any much more guidance than that.

好的。我想可以很有把握地說——最好的說法是，我們大概每年有 1/3 的業務會到期續約（roll over）。這算是一個不錯的衡量指標。除此之外我們——我不會——也無法再給你更多指引。

Okay. And piggybacking on some of your comments on the call. You mentioned that you might change some of the pricing dynamic. Should we think about it as maybe you guys setting this up something that links to a natural gas index like a Henry Hub to be more flexible given some of the utility's needs?

好的。再接著你在電話會議中的一些評論。你提到可能會改變一些定價機制。我們是否可以理解為，你們可能會建立某種與天然氣指數（例如 Henry Hub）連動的機制，以因應部分公用事業客戶的需求、提高彈性？

That would be the obvious methodology to use.

那會是最顯而易見的方法。

Our last question comes from Ravi Shanker from Morgan Stanley.

我們最後一個問題來自摩根士丹利（Morgan Stanley）的 Ravi Shanker。

Just wanted to make sure I understand your strategy on intermodal here with what's going on in the truck market. Are you saying that you are focusing more on getting pricing from existing customers versus focusing on truck-to-rail conversion? Or is it -- or are you pursuing the volume opportunity as well?

我想確認我是否理解你們在聯運（intermodal）方面、在卡車市場現況下的策略。你們的意思是，你們更專注於向既有客戶爭取更好的定價，而不是專注於把貨量從公路卡車轉到鐵路？還是——你們也同時在追求量的機會？

Well, clearly, we're focused on 2 things: one, growing the business; two, profitably. So volume with price equals top line growth. And whether that's an existing customer giving more volume or whether it's a new customer that could give me volume I don't have today, that is always the equation. I do not have a scorecard in my office that says R to R, or whatever you call it, road to rail and how many did I get today. That's not a game that's going to make me any money. Just taking a truck off the highway and putting it on the railroad, if it's not priced right and it's not moving in the right and specific corridor, it adds no value to me. And at the end of the day, it adds no value to the customer because we probably don't do a very good job for him. So whether it's an intermodal customer or whether it's a merchandise customer, the whole objective here is to go to the customer and say, "I can provide you with value," whether it's the merchandise customer that we talked about before or whether it's the intermodal customer who wants to take advantage of the railroad in connection which is over-the-whole trucking -- over-the-road trucking operation. I need to provide value to him and make sure that, that value to him, I get paid for. And if the 2 don't align, if the guy wants me to add value and expects me to give him a discount at the same time, then we don't -- the stars don't align, and he probably goes someplace else.

嗯，很明顯，我們專注兩件事：第一，成長業務；第二，以獲利的方式成長。所以，量加上價等於營收成長。不論是既有客戶提供更多量，或是新客戶帶來我今天還沒有的量，這永遠都是那個等式。我辦公室裡沒有一張記分卡寫著 R to R，或你怎麼稱呼它，公路轉鐵路（road to rail），今天我拿到了多少。那不是一個能讓我賺錢的遊戲。只是把一輛卡車從高速公路上移到鐵路上，如果定價不對、而且不是在正確且特定的走廊（corridor）上運行，對我沒有任何價值。而且到最後，對客戶也沒有價值，因為我們很可能也無法把服務做好。所以不論是聯運客戶或是一般貨運（merchandise）客戶，這裡的整體目標就是去找客戶說：「我能為你提供價值」，不論是我們先前談到的一般貨運客戶，或是想要利用鐵路、並與長途公路運輸（over-the-road trucking）作業相衔接的聯運客戶。我需要為他提供價值，並確保我提供給他的價值，我能獲得相應的報酬。如果兩者無法對齊——如果對方希望我增加價值，同時又期待我給折扣——那我們就不合拍，他大概就會去別的地方。

All right. Understood. And just one housekeeping for Frank. On the real estate gains, I think you had indicated at the Analyst Day that you expect that run rate to step down in 2018 versus 2017. But you had $30 million higher this quarter versus last year. I know that's a lumpy line, but what can we expect in terms of the cadence of that in the coming quarters because right now it looks like it's going to be a significant headwind unless you guys kind of step into the extra $500 million bucket?

好的。了解。另外有一個給 Frank 的例行問題。關於不動產處分收益，我記得你在分析師日提到，相較於 2017 年，你預期 2018 年的年化水準（run rate）會下降。但你們本季比去年同期高了 3,000 萬美元。我知道這個科目會有波動，但未來幾季在節奏（cadence）上我們可以期待什麼？因為就目前看起來，除非你們能補進額外的 5 億美元那一桶，否則它看起來會是一個顯著的逆風。

So Ravi, we're not trying to time this at all. When the assets are up for sale and they are ready to close, we close them. Like you said, it's going to be lumpy in terms of the quarters and years. We set that goal of $300 million in real estate sales. It's aggressive but achievable. And you might remember that in Mark's remarks at the investor conference, he actually said he thought there was some upside to that, which isn't in the targets that we set. So we're not trying to time it at all. We're going to go as fast as we can and put the money in the bank as fast as we can.

Ravi，我們完全沒有想要去抓時點。當資產準備出售、也準備好完成交割時，我們就完成交易。如你所說，以季度和年度來看會有波動。我們訂下不動產銷售 3 億美元的目標。這很積極，但可達成。而且你可能記得 Mark 在投資人會議的談話中其實提到，他認為那個數字還有一些上行空間，但那並未納入我們設定的目標之中。所以我們不會去抓時點。我們會盡可能快地推進，並盡可能快地把錢存進銀行。

And so I think we're done with all the questions, so we'll wrap it up here.

我想我們已經回答完所有問題了，所以我們就到這裡做個總結。

And thank you. This concludes today's teleconference. Thank you for your participation in today's call. You may go ahead and disconnect at this time.

謝謝。今天的電話會議到此結束。感謝各位參與今天的電話會議。您現在可以掛線。