Cost? That's a good question. We're discussing how 25% of the US military budget is used to counter the US and other NATO countries. The military doesn't focus on cost, but it does assess cost-effectiveness.If you think like this, you won't ever understand military procurement. Militaries cannot and shouldn't cost optimize to those levels. They aren't private companies. The J-35 provides China with means to rapidly close up the VLO jet disparity with the USA. What would be the cost of waiting 5 more years? Furthermore, existence of a newer platform doesn't make older things nonperforming. That is a weird way to think. You could only argue that something became nonperforming once most of the adversary assets start to overperform it. And even in such cases platforms usually find other niches they do adequately. The J-15T for example. It is not a stop gap solution at all. It will be better for stand-off strikes, buddy tanking, and CMD than the J-35 or a notional J-50T.
Your understanding is that China needs to immediately produce new fighter jets to counter the arrival of US forces. This is ridiculous. There was a 13-year gap between the F-31's announcement and the J-35's entry into service. To this day, the Chinese Air Force is still using and gradually replacing the J-7, and has even phased out production of its successor, the J-10. Clearly, the Chinese military prefers a stable and reliable transition to new equipment rather than hastily introducing a large number of new fighter jets.
Performance degradation? I think my choice of words might have triggered your suspicions.
If the J35 enters service, it would be a crime for China to continue producing the J10, even if the J10 shot down a Rafale. However, if the J10 production rate is only 50, then all costs associated with the fighter will be sunk: logistics, production facilities, research funding, and so on.
The J35 has just entered service, Shenyang has expanded its production base, and within five years, the Chinese military has introduced the latest JXX? How many J35s should be produced annually to recoup the losses? In peacetime, no one in the military knew they would receive the latest fighter within five years, and yet they were forced to produce a lower-tier fighter. What a foolish thing to do.
The J15's multi-role capabilities, as you mentioned, do allow the development of two electronic combat aircraft and a two-seat fighter, all equipped with AESA radars, today. However, this remains a stopgap measure. The J35's inability to fully satisfy the Chinese Navy and its continued delay in development have given rise to the J15T. If Shenyang had not modeled the J35 after the F-35, but instead developed a carrier-based fighter based on a larger fighter competing with the J20, there would likely be no J15T today.
It was only until the J35 was nearing completion that the Chinese Navy was forced to accept a medium-sized fighter. Only then did the J15 find sufficient operational scenarios.