Logical debate here in relation to the viability of Flybe.
A lot can be learned from the US market and the evolution of the airline industry since it's deregulation in about 1978. Things have followed a very similar pattern in Europe. This is characterised by a large decline in the number of airlines, the rise of low cost carriers, ultra low cost carriers and a consolidation of power among a few large carriers. This is exactly happened in Europe. The distinction is the regional airline business.
The regional carriers in the main fly got the network carriers, feeding passengers to the big 3 carrier's hub airports, franchise and ACMI is where it is at. Any regional airline who is to be sustainable needs a niche that is not easily penetratable by a low cost carrier, is supported by government grants or is a unique specialisation.
The gap in the market is ACMI flying under the guise of any major carrier who needs connectivity and frequency. Even serving thinner markets and allowing the legacy carriers to deploy large aircraft where they need them. Cityjet up to the pandemic had made significant progress.
An airline like Flybe needs scale to manage down is unit costs, but it also needs a sustainable competitive advantage and I'm afraid so far this hasn't become apparent to me.