It doesn't materially alter the success rate of the better players, or the inexperienced players. It just makes all game worlds equal in difficulty regardless of the number of players.
OK, let's look at who I was when I began, occupying small european airports with my A148. Most of the lines I made money on were between 60 & 80 demand. Now, if half of the players bankrupt, I'm suddenly at 30/40 demand - which guarantees a structural loss for a A148. Especially if it flies 1800NM.
You see it when it goes up, I see it when it goes down. If, at each players that gives up, the demand goes down, then it's an infernal spiral downwards. Currently, there are 580 players in GW2. It's not sustainable, many will leave. If you end up, let's say, around 400 players, then following your system, demand will be only 70% of what it currently is. I'm mentoring a new player right there, and I can guarantee you that he, but also many competitors of him, would die if it would happen. Leaving even the best players like Schro with only trinkets to play with.
The number of players allowed is a static variable. Adjusting demand against it seems fair to me. If only 500 players are allowed in next GW3, then there will be less demand. Why not. But the real number of players is highly dynamic, can go up to 600 and then down to 150 at the end. Would it be fair to surviving players to divide their pax demand base by 4?