‘Cost per seat’ is not a standard industry metric and is pretty meaningless.
This must be some old school deal. Most of the Arab Gulf airlines use this ratio (among others)
It is a very meaningful measure since it tells you what the exact overhead is for an empty seat. If you so wish you can regard it as fixed cost, or the cost of owning an asset/seat.
Now, it's up to management to make a calculated decision to optimize revenue and cost per seat, which obviously include route optimization (seat mile), choice of a/c, cabin config etc.
Kjos pointed at Cost Per Seat, meaning to break even SAS would in round numbers have to make much larger profit, which based on the Cost per Seat, must be a staggering number, and hence, is very unlikely to happen.
Notwithstanding SAS's reputation etc. it can probably get away with a slight premium for similar services (LCC), but there is a threshold that pax is willing to accept. I did a quick and dirty again and SAS needs to cut costs further by 7.5-8.5% to stay in the game providing management can get their socks up.