To get back to the OP, I'm not a Savvy client, but I have taken the seminar (which I thought was well worth the time and cost), and I've watched most of the (free) webinars. It's certainly true that flying safely costs money, but spending more money doesn't equate to flying more safely. The traditional view of maintenance is that mx is good, so more mx is better. The airlines and military, some time ago, shifted to the view that mx is a necessary evil to be tolerated, but minimized. In doing so, they reduced costs, and increased safety and dispatch reliability. GA, for the most part, hasn't made that shift.
Mike strongly favors condition-directed mx over time-directed mx. IOW, repair/replace/overhaul parts based on their condition, not based on the passing of some period of calendar or operating time. In some cases, condition monitoring isn't practical (as with magnetos, for example), so inspection or repair needs to be done on a time-directed basis; in other cases, time-directed mx is mandated by regulation (like an AD requiring a recurring inspection). In most other cases, repair or replace on condition. Before you commit maintenance (i.e., attack an airplane with tools), you should have a good idea of what exactly you're doing and why you're doing it.
BTW, Mike is now saying his engines are at 200% of TBO, and TBO is 1400 hours on his T310R.