As a journalist once said to me, regarding a different topic (local politics in some city), something like: I wasn't surprised that bribes were happening; I was surprised that the bribes were so small.
Similar applies here: incredulous that, in various aspects of the tech industry, customers/users are often being sold out for such small amounts of money.
(Though manufacturing is easier to understand than a lot of software-only businesses, which aren't about cost engineering.)
It sort of makes sense. Like, I’m very bothered by this spyware-industrial system and put a high value on my privacy. But, objectively, I am extremely boring and seeing what I’m looking at is actually worth much less than $15.
It is actually really weird how popular this business model has become (I guess it is a thing because people don’t read the fine print). Invasion of privacy is, I think, extremely asymmetric, so the business model of spying on people is a huge destroyer of value.
A problem, as I understand it, is that if you let all the customers with high disposable income pay extra to avoid ads, you're left with a group of lower income customers who are less valuable to advertisers.
Manufacturers would rather get $15 for every TV than only $15 for some TVs. If they were to let you pay your way out, you'd have to pay significantly more in order to subsidize the people who won't pay.
I'd be willing to pay a $15 premium for a TV that is built to do what I want, not what an advertiser wants.