LoneWolf:
What information is missing from that 75 cycles data point?
The claim quoted in the article is that parts "need replacement after operating 75 take-offs
at the 72,000lb maximum thrust level", so I understand that the engine can sustain more take-offs at lower thrust settings.
Lets make the simplified assumption that maximum thrust is always needed when flying from LAX back to Australia, but for all other sectors the thrust can be reduced so far that they don't count for the engine life (reality will be in between). Then it might be possible to fly a single aircraft to LAX and back up to 75 times (150 flights) before its engines have to be changed. If you use the aircraft on multiple routes - most of which don't need maximum thrust - you will get even more flights between replacements.
Probably still not good enough, but less dramatic than replacing engines every 75 flights.