The matter of Rail begins with discerning when to look at the forest and when to instead look at the trees.  Initially, A project begins at the forest view and future vision.  So, the burdens fall upon the affirmative actor, i.e. the project proposers.  A future vision does not meet such a burden.  So, the tree view next becomes pertinent, i.e. the detailed elements comprising of a competent financial and business plan.  The analytical shortfall of many is in using the wholistic "forest" perspective when the myopic "tree" perspective should instead be used, and vice-versa.  When that happens, nobody can respond to the circuitous analyses.