Geez, I'm on about my 4th revision, trying to address the actual issues instead of getting personal about the ignorance displayed.
Actually you are right in some respects and wrong in others. Yes, you expect the company to make money, and to price the services in such a way as to contribute to the bottom line. But that bottom line does not say where the money comes from. If you can price a move in such a way to cover variable costs - the money you spend on THIS move like crew, fuel, inspection, everything else - and also make a contribution to FIXED costs - which is everything else from the tools to the real estate to the telephone bill etc - THAT is what you are in business for. If you make more money than you spend, you have an obligation to your stockholders to do so. Whether it's a 1-time move or a repetitive move for years, if it makes money, do it!
How in the world do you feel it would cost " hundreds of thousands of dollars to cover the costs of doing such a move safely."? That figure is preposterous and out of touch with reality.
Somehow you seem to feel something catastrophic is apt to happen. What pray tell is going to cause a disaster in moving a loco in special-train service, not to exceed 30 (or whatever ) mph? It's not like you have the possibility of it derailing, blowing up and causing evacuations or death, like moving ethanol or crude. Yet the railroads do THAT every day, with the potential risks evaluated, addressed and accepted.
You also seem to forget that while the loco may indeed have been sitting for the last - what 25 years? -, before that they were whipping occupied passenger trains along the Corridor at high speed. Does it make sense to think that they would rust and decay so much that they are rolling wrecks about to collapse at every turn of the wheels?
You ARE correct that the Class I's today - generally speaking - don't want to be bothered by something like this move. They have in many cases designed their operating plan based on predictable and repetitive moves, and are far less willing to actually provide a service such as this than they did in years past. Yet they DO. Every day somewhere there is a million-dollar transformer, a big heavy generator, and who knows what else, moving on the rails. None of which by the way, can be counted on to generate repeat business.
Please do some logical thinking and re-adjust your view of that equipment as something inherently unsafe. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. But let a qualified inspector look it over and make a determination. If it is structurally sound, if the air brakes work, if other requirements are met, there should be no reason why it cannot move. The fact that something LOOKS rusty, has broken windows, and is generally ugly does not mean it can't move, safely AND profitably.