Doesn't mean that there was no benefit.
There has been a big benefit to Airservices, but benefit/cost and cost/effectiveness are not the same thing.
As I am quite certain you are aware, and something hardly kept secret, was that mandating ADS-B as has been done in Australia forced many aircraft to be re-equipped with C-145/146 receivers, when they had perfectly good, for their purposes, C-129.
But, the big "but" was that the forced upgrade enabled the program to withdraw ground aids.
Remember, in benefit cost, you incur a cost, for a benefit.
In cost/effectiveness, you incur a cost, somebody gets the benefit.
Or put another way, poor old Australian aviation gets slugged, Airservices reaps the benefits.
Tootle pip!!