A retimer is a much simpler device (thus cheaper) and can be tested using linear methods. To test a line with a redriver you really need a full on BERT system + a VNA whereas you can get by with just the VNA for the retimer. To accurately characterize PCIe Gen 4 and 5 you need to go to almost 50 GHz of bandwidth on your test equipment so you are talking big money on hardware for test, design, and validation.
Meanwhile, a redriver doubles your power budget on the driver since it literally is a second set of drivers in the middle of your PCIe line.
This is an ad from a company that sells redrivers. It's an informative ad, but still an add so it should be viewed with a critical eye.
Also, while I agree with big money for hardware, do you see a way around if your design needs a retimer?
You can go a long ways with careful design and quality redrivers, but at some point it will be better to go to a retimer. Which you should use is a matter of use case and engineering decisions. Just please be skeptical of the conclusion that "Usage [of redrivers] is highly discouraged; use at own risk" from a company that specifically designs and sells retimers.
But there are trade-offs that can lower the capital cost, like leasing the equipment, using a third party for aspects of the design/test, carefully evolving known good designs and simply budgeting a lot more for more PCB re-spins.
In the finally analysis those to want to make products in this domain aren't doing it on a shoestring budget, it's going to cost a lot no matter what.
Though apparently retimers are allowed to spend up to 64 nanoseconds? What takes so long? Especially when the PCIe spec casually asserts the existence of <10ns retimers.