Of course the only reason space elevators are even considered, is because rockets are energy inefficient.

In order for a rocket engine to be efficient one needs much higher exhaust speed. There are a number of technical problems with attempting to make higher exhaust speeds, and related to this is one needs an energy source [e.g chemical fuel or nuclear fuel]

A space elevator will use electricity [generated from powerplants] and therefore will not require the vehicle to carry it's source of energy.

Conventional chemical rockets resolve the inefficiency of their relatively low exhaust speed by simply using more energy and by carrying more fuel. So chemical rockets end up expending a large amount of energy lifting the fuel needed to get to higher velocities.

Though not a good idea, a space elevator could use chemical fuel instead of electrical energy and still be more efficent than chemical rockets. And rockets are most inefficient going from sea level to say 50,000'. So one could even use the first 50,000' of a space elevator as an "assist stage" for a chemical rocket.

Or said differently one could use a "space elevator" which was 5 miles tall instead of it being 30,000 miles tall. In other word if you get a chemical rocket to 50,000' elevation and going saying 500 to 1000 mph you would cut in half the needed mass of the rocket.

Now, getting anything moving along a rail at speeds over 500 mph is not easy, going vertical instead horizontal doesn't make it particularly easier. But let's say with space elevator you can achieve a speed of 1000 mph. So that means to go 30,000 miles it takes at least 30 hours.

So, let's say everything goes as planned in regards to a space elevator. It costs 5 billion to build [LOL- excuse me].
And it costs a customer $100 per lb to deliver something to GEO.

So, a rocket launch company ask, I want 100,000 lb of payload delivered 5 miles up at 1000 mph and could have a discount from the 100 per lb since you delivering it less than 1/1000th of the distance? So instead say 50 per lb?

So this is costing 5 million dollars, but currently just for a static launch pad you could pay this much.
Maybe you say a space elevator can't lift such heavy payloads. How about 50,000 lbs [2 1/2 million dollars]. Or say 20,000 lb for some suborbital vehicle.
In other words an improvement for space elevator could be to only use part of it and use chemical rockets to get to other destinations or simply get to GEO and beyond faster?

So, if a +30,000 mile track can cost 5 billion dollars how much less would it be it you instead made it only 5 miles high? Or why start with 2 miles high with plan to extend it 5 miles or more?
2 billion dollars?