The bottom line is that Blinks strategy from the outset was based on bucking the market by cutting out brokers. They made claims of being Europes first A to B air taxi company and complete b&llocks like that and thought they would take over the world. By doing that, they set themselves up for a very hard fall as and when it doesn't quite got to plan.
Brokers don't feel inclined to support them in their hour of need (why should they?), nor do other operators (why should they?). They seem to have alienated themselves from the rest of the market and this, coupled with the luke warm response to the Mustang as a product will probably sound the death knell ultimately.
Those who seem to support their cause based on the jobs they create should perhaps think about the effect, both long and short term, and what the impact on the market has actual been. By funding their low rates with start up capital (and rather a lot of it), they have effectively lowered the bar. If everyone else has to lower rates to compete, then ultimately this drives down salaries and reduces investment in infrastructure improvements in more established operators.
The same punters will be there, and will still book charters, but at realisitc rates. That might just mean that operator paying decent salaries, aiding pilots for type ratings and generally raising the bar for both employee and client alike.
I'm sure that the whole blink story will make a great dissertation for future business studies graduates at Harvard one day. Apply the swiss cheese model to Blink and you'll see plenty of holes lining up.
FNPL