I think you're looking at this just flat out wrong.
Theoretically you're right about different tooling and slower production increasing costs, and if the titanium was the only mount offered, they could sell it for maybe $2475 instead of $2500.
But according to this thread it seems that titanium is better in 0.01% of circumstances (EXTREME temperatures and possibly also EXTREMELY heavy lenses) and offers no benefit in 99.99% of circumstances.
Saving 0.01% of your customers $25 is not worth forcing the other 99.9% to waste $1975. Red absolutely made the right call offering it as an option for those few that need it.
Edit : Ooops, by the time I'd typed this a couple people had already covered all the same ground. Oh well...




...too much RED on the brain.