said by El Quintron:said by Davesnothere:It might be more that he cannot afford NOT to put the site back online, moreso than the exact cost to do so.
Those would be my exact thoughts as well.
There HAS been STRONG circumstantial evidence to support such a hypothesis.
The OTHER arguments to support 'staying the course', at least insofar as the short to medium term would be :
(1) short term - COMPLETING the data recovery, as I'd expect that they are already on the hook for a portion of the recovery costs, REGARDLESS OF RESULT or how far they may choose to go,
(2) medium term - to recoup at least the costs of the complete data recovery.
The long term analysis would of course be the loss of revenue and reputation if they did not make their best effort to recover the DSLR site completely (as per our near above posts) .
There would also be the short term self-satisfaction of 'Slaying the Fierce Monster', and the all-term knowledge gained to assist in better avoidance of a similar future meltdown (PRICELESS).
And THAT's the way it is.... (or at least the way I see it)