LoCo Longhaul
I would respectfully suggest that while low cost longhaul may be a viable concept it is a far more difficult business model than the short haul case.
Accepting the well placed arguments that the tenets of low cost, such as cramped seat pitch, lack of food, no IFE, do not translate to longer flights, I feel that the main stumbling area is with the positioning of aircraft. The loco shorthaulers bring their hardware back to base at the end of the working day which is good for both rostering/crewing and maintenance. If an aeroplane is found to be badly tech in these circumstances, it is relatively easy to plan around it to keep the programme going. Having an aircraft and crew stuck on the ground on the other side of the planet is an altogether different situation and a logistic nightmare, if you're not a major flag carrier with company support on the spot everywhere. I rather suspect that this was one of the problems that EAAC found with their 747 operation.
I don't pretend to have answers - I'm a lifelong shorthaul man anyway - but I suspect that a previous post is close to the truth in that the charter airlines do cheap longhaul already.
Perhaps the scheduled airlines could look at the loco booking model, allowing folk who book early to get cheaper seats? If this is already happening, someone will no doubt tell me!
confundemus