I don't completely agree with WW, I think the stobart routes are not right, but on the other hand I see some very sound logic to them.
The ATR is a very efficient aircraft with very low operating costs, and with some support from either end and low airport charges then the costs of the route are probably quite favourable and not requiring a huge load factor to break even.
Munster, is probably underwritten by the automotive industry. If they have some fully flex sales from the auto / high value manufacturing companies then it makes sense to keep it. After all there is a reason this route survived the cull and MST and ANR didn't despite having similar loads.
GRQ is working I would say, loads in the winter especially the first winter of the service will be poor but they are showing a slightly positive trend and this is good.
The French routes have a logic. A LOT of second property owners in the region with places in France, and little direct connectivity. Double daily on RNS with the aircraft in RNS looked like an unexpected but logical decision, but now that they have a season and know more clearly the demographic, then maybe single daily will boost it a lot. Caen had added capacity part way through last summer so maybe that will work.
I think the single aircraft operating this mix is likely to do well, capture and hold the market they have whilst reducing the overhead.
It's easy to sit at home with none of the information available to you and decide they are idiots who don't know what they're doing, but they have access to information that we don't, they know things that we don't and so they are making decision.
I dare say they are constrained by the agreement with Flybe, and I think the MAG deal forcing flybe into STN probably upset everyone, but at the end of the day, why don't we applaud them for trying to make it work, and accept the possibility that maybe, just maybe, there is a logic to what they are doing, even it is not immediately obvious to us wannabe route planners at home