Yeah, just look how great Virgin Nigeria turned out.... When I was in West Africa for two years I was more than grateful for the Delta routes compared to the very limited local options. Any reputable US carrier will be nothing but benficial for folks living in that part of the world who want to travel by air.

I'm completely aware that Delta is larger than UA in most metrics. But what was being discussed is how Delta, as the first mover into Africa will react/perform now that they have direct competition from the USA. I think its perfectly valid to cite DL's history in markets where they have faced competition.

Delta has been accused of having a somewhat haphazard/dartboard route planning strategy of late and with the amount of drops I think there could be some merit to it. Credit Delta for being the pioneer in the market but the point remains that when other carriers serve this market from better hubs (DC being one of them) Delta's record is iffy. Atlanta, Minneapolis and Detroit are great cities and certainly worthy of int'l service but they are not DC, NYC, Chicago, etc......

When Delta started JFK-Mumbai, it was touted as a great success....then came Air India and CO, and Delta retreated to their bread and butter (ATL)and even that failed. All I was saying is that its possible that the same could happen here in Africa, although DL will never have nonstop competition from ATL.

As a JFK DL flyer I am hoping it works out, but I've seen DL fail at everything JFK-South America where there is strong competition. I guess one could say JFK-GRU is a success but its not even flown daily. JFK-Zurich is *seasonal* AA is making inroads in southern Europe from JFK (Barcelona, Madrid, Milan) All of the Eastern European cities have been made seasonal or cancelled. Perhaps there is a reason why other U.S. carriers are not flying to Kiev, Bucharest,etc.

Actually, their record is pretty darn good. They canceled a few marginal routes where they actually had little or no competition. They have retained a significant presence on most routes where they face competition.

You say haphazard, I say aggressive. The reality is that DL has simply been more aggressive with its international route expansion. I'm not sure why one would be surprised that this would be accompanied by higher failure rates.

Well, DL has a much larger presence in NYC than UA, so I'm not sure why you mention them.

As for ATL vs DC, I think you need to check your numbers again. The ATL metro area is larger than DC (admittedly, not by much) and is growing at a much faster clip. There is also far less international competition ex-ATL than there is ex-IAD. ATL is also in the top 10 highest income metro areas (admittedly, along with IAD, but also both MSP and Rochester, MN; ORD is not in the Top 10, nor is NYC). Perhaps most importantly, ATL is the 'capitol' of its region, one of the fastest growing in the US, while IAD's proximity to NYC and PHL means it suffers more from regional competition.

Oh, and did I mention that ATL is the busiest airport in the world? And that it serves over 3m more international pax than IAD? But go ahead, continue to believe it is some sort of backwater.

I think you are attaching WAAAAY too much importance to the cancellation of one ultra-long-haul route. The economics on these routes are lousy. You have to consistently charge a significant premium to make these routes work. So, yeah, I'm not overly surprised that DL exited this route.

Ask Delta if they care about Nigeria? The European airlines have been earning ungodly sums of money on the route to LOS and ACC. The US airlines have just realized this and I guarantee you Delta would love to increase their frequencies to LOS and ABV if the Niegria govt will allow them.

My Nigerian co-workers pay an avg of $1,575 RT on Y class anytime of the year from the US to LOS connecting via Europe. This also includes low seasons like late Jan through March and early Oct through late Nov. There's no route on the planet that commands that kind of fare YEAR ROUND in Y class!!!

The airlines shaking in their pants are LH, BA, KLM, AF, and Virgin because all those passengers connecting from the US will now have an alternative route from the US DIRECT to LOS or ACC.

Let go of your bias and open your eyes. Thank God the goons at Delta did and from what we know UA is about to follow (something CAL wanted to do two years ago but it couldn't because of the US/Nigerian politics and the Virgin Nigeria debacle)

While I do agree that Delta did fumble the NY route, the reasons and mentality above only tell half the story. The poster speaks about Air India entering the market, when they were in the market for perhaps 40 years. CO entering the market was a factor, however so was JET AIRWAYS and their great product, and the fact that unlike the African routes, almost all the major European carriers remained as competitive if not more competitive with their one stop services to India, for which European-Indain services have increased something like 7 fold in recent years. Afterall if one was flying JFK-Hyderabad, changing planes in FRA is a hell of a lot more convenient than in BOM.


Regarding the rest of Joe's tripe, UA is nothing in Europe, and pissed away most of what it had once upon a time, as it did in Latin America. They are not competition and quite frankly the thought of another route to LOS, a market of over 120 million people from the US in the grand scheme of things means little to Delta.

The OP started a thread on an excellent topic - the relativey high cost of travel to Africa and somehow you guys found a way to make this all about Nigeria!
Africa has its problems but attitudes and prejudices exhibited here will in no way help that continent emerge from its dark days. Educate yourselves and let’s keep this board civil

I am done now flame me!

Perhaps that is because the flight is to Nigeria? Were the flight to Kenya, then perhaps this would be about Kenya?

For your education "Accra, Ghana" is not in Nigeria

And you believe that this flight is really about serving Accra, Ghana?

Given UA announced service to Accra, Ghana, why exclude it?

For the same reason nobody here gets too excited about service to Dakar. It is a tack-on destination and nothing more. Accra doesn't pay for this service, Lagos does.

I was assuming that Ghana was essentially a fuel stop for the westbound flight - is that about it?

Not just about a fuel stop.

As you know, fuel stops don't pay for themselves but actual paying customers do.

So just because your "nobody get too excited about service to Dakar", it's meant to be ignored?

Perhaps it's time to realize that -- like with Dakar -- Accra was selected because the airline management involved in new route decisions anticipated the selected service to/from/via the selected city would get enough customers excited enough to pay for the service in a way that would not happen if avoiding those cities about which "nobody here gets too excited".

For US-Africa service, Accra actually makes more sense than Dakar -- although Dakar made sense enough to DL management at the time -- but that would involve having an understanding of Africa that is sorely lacking in some quarters.

A little attention to demographics (including international migration flows) and to business demand would go a long way.

Nah. It is less than 300 miles from LOS. It is tacked on simply because it can be, so why not? Same reason that UA is tacking on BAH to their KWI service.

Ummm... For the most part, yea. I appreciate your attempts to make this into some sort of referendum on DL management's knowledge of Africa or my knowledge of Africa, but I could care less. The reality is that the residents of Accra have the purchasing power of some place like Burlington, VT. I know that makes me a bad person, but what can I do?