Perhaps in hindsight they would have been better off just moving the complete LGW operation over to STN and not bother with expensive forays into LCY.
The only competition they would have had would have been the low frequency GR flights to JER/GCI which I'm sure could easily have been seen off.
Maybe this approach would have worked, maybe it wouldn't. Perhaps it would have worked in part. But I can't see it being any worse than their current haphazard approach across multiple airports following a break in service.
It was that break that allowed EZY to have an early departure from INV which probably undermined BE's comeback into LCY, and resulted in BACF staying on IOM.
They might even have made a decent fist of STN-EDI had they wanted to against an EZY that isn't too bothered about STN. This being before FR entered the arena of course.
I also think they have neglected an opportunity at SEN. The NQY route last summer showed that good loads (and as far as I could tell decent yields) could be achieved where EZY failed through overcapacity. I don't blame them for moving it to STN this year where clearly they've been given a better deal, but I believe they could have successfully had a stab at EDI, maybe another couple of domestics. Despite the woeful frequencies of DUB, loads according to CAA stats really weren't that bad.