Why A99 is better deal than D600

I think it is more than just OVF vs EVF debacle. Many FF Sony users switched because of the lens availability being disappointed with slow development of ZA line. The decision between selecting A99 or D600 is also more dependent on one's photography as that will highlight or negate some of the advantages or disadvantages you listed.

This has to be seen and verified in reviews. It may be a draw. For primarily landscpae photographer or one that uses MF lenses difference may not matter.

SS is a useful feature, not a necessity but undeniable advantage of Sony at least for some photographers. Landscape photographers often use tripods so they often keep SS off. After using A900 for few years I myself wouldn't pay an extra few hundred dollars just to have in body stabilization.

I think it goes both ways. For ones it is superior EVF experience and for others it is superior OVF experience. Tilting screen is useful but how much more useful in dollar terms?

For pro it is important. For amateur those are quite artificial numbers. How many years of shooting those numbers convey - 5, 10 years? Seems like many change gear more often than that.

For serious videographer, yes, for photographer it is really a moot point.

Then we should list D600 features that theoretically give it advantage over A99 which you conveniently bypassed, like no fixed mirror.

Overall if I had to buy new camera for myself I would reverse your statement. However I already have A900 and my opinion is that neither A99 nor D600 overall featureset provide any real advantages that would justify replacing my camera. Others having different needs may choose differently.