I agree that 180 000 € seems steep for "one single delayed plane", but let's not forget that delays are not a law of nature. It is not 180 000€ for every unforseen tech issue. In a worst case scenario an airline would have to pay such a sum, but there are a number of ways to avoid it. If you have a plane going tech, proactively rebooking passengers on other connections could save you a tonne. Keeping a better set of spare parts at a larger number of locations could too, as making special arrangements with your service partners and/or airlines partners could.
Actually, it is because delays used to hold a zero penalty, delays are the favourite choice of action. Because delays virtually costs nothing, Finnair chooses to delay AY69 8-9 hours on a regular basis and has done so for a number of years.
Infact, the 8 hour delay of AY69 is usually not entirely due to technical reasons. Usually, the tech issue is (or could be) solved much quicker and AY69 probably could take off with maybe only 2-3 hour delay in most cases. But Finnair chooses to delay it 8-9 hours, because that is the cheapest option. Passenger delay costs nothing while rush tech service, crew and staff outside their normal schedule cost a lot.
So, there really is a need for a steep penalty for delays, and there is a need for the penalty getting steeper and steeper the longer the delay is. It is not to be bad or unfair to the airlines. It is because the only language a company talks is money. If an item holds a pricetag, the use of it is properly evaluated. If an item is free, it will be used indefinitely.