An interesting thread and some issues already raised:
Has GA training out priced itself? Yes and no. Traditional GA manufacturers are not really interested in this sector. The bucks are in larger ACFT where the margin is significantly greater. Cessna is not even really interested in anything other than business jets these days. They do not invest at all in the SE piston market, just build the same old aircraft almost because they have to. Sales are down and margins mean significantly smaller return per unit. Economy of scale suffers and makes the merry go round bring even slower.
Most entrants into this field have no real idea of costs, just expectations based on the 40 year ( or older ) aircraft in the existing fleet. They would not expect to ride in a 40 year old taxi, say a HQ Holden, from the days even before commodores, or expect TNT to be driving 1418 Benz trucks. Expectations are different and we respect, and expect late model vehicles. In aviation we want to have the cake and eat it too.
Local manufacturers have attempted to meet the perceived demand for an economical ab initio trainers such as the Goair and boomerang, but when schools just ship in containers of cheap old US cast offs there is no means to compete with that. Maybe we could ship in some loads of 1970's le sabres or ex CHP Crown Victorias to provide cheap cars for those of us who don't like the idea of a local car industry.
LSA s are the immediate solution as they provide a lower cost acquisition due to the significantly lower design safety standards they are designed and manufactured to. Again you get what you pay for. Or not even in some cases.
The costs of design and development and manufacture of a GA two seat trainer that meets FAR 23 is the same essentially as that for a 4 or 6 seat aircraft where the margins are better and the demand is proven. The cost of regulatory compliance is the same! So the LSA market will benefit and grow as it is much less regulated and controlled.
HD