I would not see the load factor issue very dramatically, albeit the trend is indisputable. For that the route policy should be blamed among other things; some opportunities could have been exploited better, no doubts about it.
Anyway, I think there are several ways to fill the planes better. More thorough analysis and research – it's the cheapest way to carry it through. Also, less hasty decisions and more logical thinking would bring some ”miraculous” profits (and fuller planes) too. As one of our members has pointed it out: why start HHN-BLL when Legoland was just closing (while in Summer could have worked), why to link frosty with windy and so on. An other example: SNN-LCJ did not have bad load factors at all (growing), but the route were terminated just as the construction of a big Dell factory in Lodz started (Dell have their main European manufacturing facility in Limerick). Too hasty conclusions, too little knowledge of facts. The User pee can already observe high LF's and unusually high prices on the BGY-TMP route and surely is impatient why after this success nothing more is coming ”from North to South” (PSA-TMP, CIA-TMP, MRS-TMP or alike). Isn't he right? So the route decisions cannot be hasty, but some quick reactions should be taken where appropriate.
I will carry on. The seasonal variations. While e.g. Malta could be flown to year-round, for a low-cost carrier it's better to intensify flights there in the periods other than Summer season. In Summer you can make money flying on short routes as well, while in Autumn an Winter you have some ”spare capacity” and you can fly from even more destinations to Malta in spite of the long distances.
An other ”forbidden” issue is the justification of connecting flights. While all true LCC's provide just the ”point-to-point” tickets and the connecting flights ”from anywhere to anywhere” would bring a total chaos to the system, FR has enough potential to make some innovations in that question as well. It makes sense to designate just one centrally-located airport (like Frankfurt Hahn for example) and to carefully select some routes that could be interconnected. Why bother? Because it is very unlikely that some minor airports would ever be able to provide enough passengers to fill the 189 seats on the daily base to a single selected destination. For example Växjö will probably lose its NRN link, there is not enough passengers to keep it alive, I guess. However, 1 daily flight to HHN around midday and cautiously selected connecting flights [with long connection times] WOULD bring pax. I'll simulate it, let me take just the mentioned VXO as an example (randomly, I have probably never been in Växjö, believe me):
With just one daily flight HHN-VXO-HHN, say: HHN 12:30 – VXO 14:15/ 14:40 – HHN 16:25 you can SAFELY create several connecting flights, e.g.
- GRO-VXO-GRO (GRO 08:30 HHN 10:25 >< 12:30 VXO 14:15; VXO 14:40 HHN 16:25 >< 19:30 GRO 21:20)
- or BGY-VXO-BGY (BGY 08:15 HHN 9:35 >< 12:30 VXO 14:15; VXO 14:40 HHN 16:25 >< 21:05 BGY 22:15)
- or CIA-VXO-CIA (CIA 08:20 HHN 10:15>< 12:30 VXO 14:15; VXO 14:40 HHN 16:25 >< 20:00 CIA 21:45)
- or STN-VXO-STN (STN 07:15 HHN 09:30 >< 12:30 VXO 14:15; VXO 14:40 HHN 16:25 >< 18:10 STN 18:30)
There are few issues more. One of them being the potential related to flight pattern changes. Let me drink a cup of tea now, I'll return with my ”flight pattern revolution” later today or tomorrow.