Yes I realize price isn't indicative of quality. High dollar road and mountain bikes are another example. Virtually every one from 89$ Walmart specials to 1400$ bike shop deals are built in the same factory. I've seen the pictures and videos of this happening.
No what I was saying is relative to its competition I think the a99 is too expensive. Not relative to what I can afford. And I can afford anything I want. My wife and I are very fortunate, my ability to pay for something doesn't dictate my sense of its worth. Things are only worth what people are willing to pay for them. And I'd be very surprised if Sony is selling a fraction of a99 vs other brands new ff models. Even if you corrected it for each brands user base.
You can buy a brand new d600 right now for $1600 bucks. Best I've seen the a99 is $2400. The 99 may have some features that the other camera doesn't but my point is they ARE comparable cameras, that shouldn't be $800 apart. I'm not speaking anything to the cameras value to a particular photographer or a hack like me. I'm strictly speaking economics. Widget A vs Widget B if you will.
I know the logic is faulty to break down such a personal choice as a camera in these terms but this is what should be going on at Sony. They aren't competing. That's the real issue I see, at least with the a mount stuff.
Anyway, I owe you an apology for losing my temper, I could have made my same point with more civilized language