You didn't provide the quote for the annual inspections in accordance with the proposed AD in comparison with replacement under the current AD.
I realise that money is no object when it comes to the safety of air navigation, but I reckon aircraft owners are entitled to know what option will cost less. Given that CASA "deems" either replacement or the proposed inspection regime to be "sufficient", it seems pretty pointless to waste money on the more expensive option.
You seem to be suggesting that replacement is cheaper. Which kinda makes my point that the fanfare around the proposed AD to supersede the current AD was a little premature.
It was just luck that two aircraft full of passengers didn't die in fog at Mildura. Yet - amazingly - no one's at fault and no rules got changed.