Before you all get carried away about thelikely chances of success for long-hail low cost(so-called0 airlines just consider that all of them so far have failed. Britain used tio have several of them. The most successful was the pre-merger Caledonian of the 1960's. But in Britain there was also Donaldson, Transglobe, British Eagle, Lloyd International and then Laker. Canada had an excellent low cost airline called Wardair.
Do you remember People Express, run by Don Burr?
Remember also that Virgin majors on its fare levels.
Laker did not fail because of any conspiracy by other carriers to put him out of businness. That proposition was never tested or proved in court. The court hearings never got beyonrd the evidence gathering stages, the only reason for there to have been any out of court settlement was because BA was about to be privatised and wanted the case to be concluded.
Laker failed because the airline had a gross excess of capacity. The only part of Laker that mad emoney latterly was the European package holiday business.
Talk of using a high density 747 is illusory for such operations. Far too much risk. The plane nedsas a very high degree of support. It would be easy enough to fill on a July Saturday but try other days and other months. Downsizing iof aircraft is the name of the game on ling-haul these days.