People have every right to be angry but when this sort of thing happens the fault can only be put at the door of the Accountable Manager.
Any operator that has a proper Quality Auditing system and hold both Management Evaluation and Flight Safety Meetings on a regular basis (Neither involing any expense to the operator providing they employ both Flight Safety Officer and a Quality Manager) should be able to spot flaws in training or engineering resulting in non conformaties being dealt with before the Authority ever need to be involved, in fact if you follow this process you stand in better shape with the authority because they see that you are self regulating yourself.
In my experience of the Authority and FOI's I have always found them to be helpful and responsive if you follow the basic principles that you yourself set out in your Part A and Quality Manual, after all these are a statement of intent from the operator (not the authority) and if you do not follow your own manuals you really cannot blame the Authority for any action they may take.
At every stage of a Quality process and any audit carried out by the authority direct feedback to the Accountable Manager is undertaken so there is no excuse for action that has not been taken, if those under the AM cannot complete the tasks then others must be brought in to do it and if not that again is the responsibility of the AM.
No one is gloating over this whole issue, but Emerald employees should be asking serious questions of why the Accountable Manager of an organisation of this size has allowed his AOC to be revoked, it is fairly unpresidented in recent times and can only be as a result of the basic principles of holding an AOC being seriously neglected.