Ok, so what you are saying is that we shouldn't be able to make our money back when we develop that new 32" wheeled bike next year?
It takes a lot of R&D to develop a new product (and talent in the case of music). In your example, how could GF/Trek ever pay for development by selling the bikes at a real market value instead of the inflated (pay for development) lock in rates?
I don't think that development would be better because there is no incentive to develop high-technology (expensive) stuff.
I know for bikes the current trend is to grab market share early while other manufacturers catch up. Still, there does need to be room to make some $$ so you can develop that next new thingy. (song, drug, bike, whatever)