So here let me try to clarify what I meant when I said, "It may measure well, but who cares if it breaks within a two year or less time period." A more informative way to stay this would be, "Reliability of a product is an important criterion for me when purchasing a product, so I genuinely don't understand the appeal of a product that measures well but has poor reliability."
For example, I recently bought a nice shirt from a new-to-me clothing site. It was very comfortable, great looking, and the fit was spot on. However, after two washes it literally started falling apart. Similarly some shorts I bought from the same company in that same order had threads coming out after two times being worn. Kudos to the company for being easy with the return, but I won't buy their clothes again. I have a shirt that I bought 15 years ago that's still very comfortable, great looking, and the fit is spot on. Since I can get the same aspects I value from other clothing products with much better reliability, why would I buy from the one that makes clothes that fall apart right away?
Same thing with audio products for me. I don't want to have to buy multiple products, especially because of reliability issues. I did my best to research diligently and hopefully purchase products that will last 30+ years. Reliability really matters to me, so that's the viewpoint I'm coming from when I made my original statement.
I'm not trying to be contentious here. I'm genuinely curious. Since Topping has had these reliability issues, what then is the appeal for their products? Is it the fun of owning a SOTA product that is pushing boundaries, and as such it's acceptable to have a product possibly fail quickly? Is it the idea that one is supporting this burgeoning business and as such is helping support a new and interesting trend in technology? If so, I could see those as being reasons why some people would want a product even if they don't align with my own.