I appreciate the thought out and logical response. But still... They are a business, and as all businesses do, they want to get as much money out of their clients as possible. Towards this end, businesses are not against fabricating statistics and reasons why the most profitable business model is the best for the game. They also like to use subtle tricks like suggestability, such as putting an image of a thumbs up or thumbs down beside what they want to convince you of... "theres a thumbs up next to it, so it must be the preferable option" is how your inclined to respond on a subconsciou level. Ultimately, Ive always seen buy to play games perform better than pay to play business models. Guild wars 2 has always been doing well, and had the praise of the community, Elite Dangerous, same there... Although the Engineers update has outraged the community... But the devs are addressing the communities feedback and concerns in that, so they are going the right direction.
Another thing I'd like to point out about the "PLEX model", is that it reduces your time in-game to that of work. You're spending a huge chunk of your gametime working to be able to do the same thing next month. It puts people off a game.
Buy to play/Free to play models can work for any game... All you have to do is pursue it, work at it until you find a way that works for that game... THe fact these guys arent even attempting it and are just going to go with a sub model, that says it all.
If I was a game developer, every single game I lauched would be lauched with a buy to play business model, and in my forums would be stated that "we are going to try to keep a free buy to play business model for you, but it may not be possible because it may not support the game and(insert other reasons)." And if it was starting to fail, I would update the community stating that we needed to switch.
I understand that you may understand and see the reasoning behind their decision, but make no mistake, they are a business, and businesses employ tactics to secure the best deal for themselves. This includes wording and twisting facts to their advantage.
As I said, if they wanted to attempt a buy to play model, they could. But they are choosing to not even attempt it.
If elder scrolls online can start with a sub model, and then change to f2p because its failing, then this game could start as buy to play and switch if it fails also. And in all honesty, I expect this to go the same way, they will launch as a sub model, see people arent falling for it, and end up having to switch to free/buy to play. I'll wait until then I think.
Again, I appreciate your thought out response, but keep your eyes open to the fact developers are running a business, and will do whatever they can to get more money from players. Even if that means lieing to your face, and trying to come up with reasons to justify why the most expensive method is best.