>>1915953>I hate Amtrak because they give zero shit about aestheticsThe only time Amtrak's aesthetics weren't utter garbage was when they were operating other railroads' inherited equipment (the Rainbow/Phase I era).
Things have been going downhill for them ever since they abandoned streamliners and F/E units.
>and I know they are trains and shit, but god damn.No, you're absolutely right. Aesthetics are unironically an extremely important part of marketing your product. If your product looks like shit, no one is going to buy it. And that's what Amtrak trains look like, uninspired and unappealing metal boxes on wheels, devoid of the sleekness and elegance that once defined train travel. And then they wonder why no one fucking rides their trains.
This is why virtually everyone (me included) is nostalgic for the days of private passenger rail even though Amtrak has basic quality of life features on its trains that you wouldn't have been able to find on even the most expensive Pullman services back in the day like A/C, accessible seating for the physically disabled, outlets for charging your phone, and WiFi.
As far as I'm concerned, poor aesthetics and visual appeal is a HUGE factor why Amtrak has never turned an actual profit for a single year of its existence and it's become something of a self-fulfilling prophecy. The government doesn't want to put any more than the bare minimum into the trains and their onboard service, they get stuck with ugly and unappealing rolling stock with service that is essentially on the same level as cheap airlines, the company continues to be stuck with the reputation for being a service that no one besides rail enthusiasts and the poor find enticing, and ticket sales remain below profitable levels.
