I just said there is a regional that somehow manages to make piles of money when others are in the crapper.

But to try to answer your questions -
I doubt it. Slightly below average but hair gel is cheap. Cost Plus.

 

You should look at Ameriflight and the FEDEX and UPS small aircraft subcontractors, it is an issue for freight also. It would appear that freight just doesn't over pay for the feed or accepts the loss on the short segment or turns to ground movement.
The cost of building the distribution network is almost cost prohibitive for new entries.

 

So it would appear that if they didn't have another airlines management making poor business decisions they wouldn't be profitable and make piles of money.
Below average for a regional is pretty sad and one of the points of this discussion is compensation .

 

I have to respectfully disagree with that statement. Airlines can and do exist in the free market economy successfully without government regulation. The free market simply dictates who survives and how many carriers exist.

The industry of the present is just too big for the market it is trying to serve - i.e., overcapacity. The sad but harsh truth is that the industry must shrink in order to be profitable. It's a choice of many carriers operating just barely above cost, or fewer carriers that are strong and profitable.

I don't believe government regulation would make the matter any better. It would exist to subsidize carriers at the expense of the taxpayer. And with government intervention comes the inevitable game of political favorites. If the government is footing the bill, they are going to determine the who, what, where, and how often pieces of the pie. It is entirely plausible that many carriers would cease operating due to the fact the government may choose to subsidize certain carriers only.