I consider myself pretty up to speed on economic theory (I'm getting my MBA right now), yet still cannot explain, let alone understand one simple concept... It used to be that bolt-on neck basses never exceeded certain price ranges and that neck-through basses rarely cost less than their bolt-on counterparts. Because of the labor intensiveness involved and the amount of wood used in neck-through's, it seems to make sense. But, recently we've seen an insurgence of high-end AND high-costing bolt-ons...Two examples come to mind: Sadowsky and Lakland. I know there are others, so let's just assume that these two speak for all in that category. Why is it, then, that a Sadowsky costs nearly as much as an American Spector? Electronics? I don't buy it. Spector designs his own preamps too. Research and Development? For an all-wood bass? Bull! Fender did it in the '50's! Handmade? My American Spector is ALL handmade! Wood choice? It's not like my Spector is made out of pressboard! All figured maple, and AAAAA, at that! And, IT'S SOLID...NOT A LAMINATED TOP! So, what's the explanation? I'm sure that they're wonderful basses, and they get an elitest profile of players with their price range. But, there's no way that it should cost almost as much for these bolt-ons as a high-quality neck-through!