If EUjet's load factor for DUB
was 35% on the 100 (which, let's say, has 100 seats), then it'd surely be 70% on a AT4 (which, let's say, has 50 seats). If, then, you had only one daily flight, there would be a shortage of supply.
When you consider that the AT4 is far more efficient and probably far more cheaper to acquire, the route doesn't look bad at all.
And if the route was operated using the AT7 (which, say, has 70 seats), which is only 15% more expensive to run than the AT4 which has far fewer seats while cruising at a faster speed, then it looks very good indeed.
If a DUB-based low-cost airline operated either the AT4 or AT7, it could fly DUB-MSE-AMS-MSN-DUB (not offering DUB-AMS), as the AMS route also looks good.
[Edited 2004-12-07 18:59:59]
"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."