Which is worse?
There are reasonably large (unwanted) things in orbit and yes, something to get rid of them is worth having. However, the large bits have known orbits and they're not really a surprise to anyone paying attention.
The much bigger risk is all the small stuff (nuts & bolts etc) in orbits that aren't clearly known or plotted into the future which makes them a much greater danger. While this first step into debris-cleanup is welcome, it should only be considered a first step.
There's also the question of economics. That 10 million dollar figure? That's just for the deorbiter satellite, right? What's the development cost for SOAR (and projected mass figures, please)?
If I pull out some figures (out of thin air, yes) that look & 'feel' right to me, it looks like they're developing a system that can put... up to 1,500kg into LEO? Probably a bit less. Fine, no problem there but the cost of modifying the A300? Probably not that much. Developing/building/testing the mini-shuttle? That's where most (60%) of your development money will go and it'll probably be expensive. Developing/building/testing the (probably not-reusable) 3rd stage will also be expensive.
It's noble to want to clean up LEO but if it's too expensive, it won't get done...