One thing is for certain, if Bruno is targeting the R22, he doesn't really "get" basic economics!
What is "basic econimics" for you? Who else should he target?
Economics happen to be not very scientific and a lot of guesswork. It worked out for Robinson, but not as he expected. It did not work out for a lot of other start-ups and sometimes people just have a very vague idea about the market and still make it.
Actually, thinking about it, today Guimbal might not look only at the R22 market anymore, but at the Cadet market. The R22s production will stop sometime and I suppose Robinson does not want give away the market share, but the Cadet does not seem to be the solution the market wants. Downgrading something to make it cheaper seldom works (ask Apple). I don't think Robinson has an option other than building a completely new training helicopter to replace the R22, if it wants to stay in this market. Who knows, they probably are happy with just the R44 and the R66, leaving the training market to Guimbal, whos G2 could with higher production rates, which will lower the effective price, become the winner.
If you don't factor in somehow the rebuild cost to your hourly rate, your going broke. There is no way, you don't pay for the rebuild in some way. Offer and demand in the used market will only offset so much of the rebuild cost. There are some operators who see themselves as very clever by trading Robinsons around (some are, some are not). It does make sense, if you don't want your maintenance department rebuilding the ships, because it is either too small or has better things to do. On the other hand, some companies make money by doing only rebuilds, because they don't make money flying the things. And if you streamline your processes the rebuild will be less expensive for the operators. The factory rebuild business of Robinson is not what it once was. Most Robinsons are now rebuild by others. Buy a kit and you are good to go.
When the R22 was designed, the fixed cost of the factory rebuild and the 2000 hour limit, where applauded in the market, because it made calculating the hourly cost so much easier, than with the old designs, where things had to be replaced in much less orderly fashion. Old ships like the 47 where always a nightmare in this respect, because you never knew, when to replace something for too much wear and tear and Bell did not make it any easier by rising prices constantly. That today we would rather want "on condition" parts, is obvious, but this can have its own stumbling blocks. But almost 50 years ago, "on condition" was rarely seen on helicopters and wasn't an option for Robinson, so he took the next best solution, give everything the same times - same as the engine - and a fixed price (well, more or less) for the rebuild. I think, this was a big part of the success of the R22. Now it was possible to buy a new inexpensive helicopter and run a business without many maintenance nightmares and make it through the first few difficult years. If you don't like Robinsons thinking, good for you, but many helicopter companies just use them and make money doing it. And for the widow-maker argument, AFIAK the accident rate of the R22 isn't the worst in the business even compared with fixed wing (comparing apples with apples) and the R44 had an excellent accident rate from the beginning. The Cabris rate is hard to beat, since there wasn't (again AFIAK) a single fatal accident ... yet.
I never had an examiner, nor instructors doing biannuals nor the instructors at the Robinson Safety Course doing 1 2 3. But one can feel what is coming, when the throttle is turning suddenly or even when the collective gets heavier or the examiners hand is moving stealthily toward the collective.