Firstly, end of the line carriers depend entirely on where it is presumed the start of line is drawn. Emirates could be seen as an end of the line carrier. From space the north pole might actually be underneath; it's all relative.

Hub and spoke operations are generally the purview of the established or legacy carriers. A key tenet for maintaining any sort of unit cost advantage in Low Fare Airlines is point to point flying. Self evidently, the further away from home (longer stage) more resources, like staff and premises, rest facilities and the like are needed. Very important therefore is stage length. Stretch the stage length too far, unit costs rise faster than any any revenue gain at the margin. Fuel included CASK consumes more of any operating margin and the unit costs very quickly morph to resemble any established airline. Add in FX volatility and fuel becomes a much bigger problem.

Perhaps, inadvertently this has revealed the problem with Jetstar International: Yield premium is non existent as demand is elastic and the business has rising unit costs.
Jetstar do have scale, they are, fleet wise, bigger than their parent. Despite this domestic scale they lack the ability to generate anything like the revenue's their parent does. Jetstar has a role, but their foray into long haul operations is not readily replicated world wide. Take away the accounting cloak and it is a very marginal business, at best. Demand elasticity bites hard.

Thus, the Boston Bruce Buchanan play relied on foreign crews, from impoverished countries (after all he was trying to help) paid them a pittance and flew them on as many tag flights, all over Australia, as he could get away with.