I think Holenneck might be hinting that a $100k Mercedes is more like a $10k speaker, and that a $125+ speaker is more like a $400k+ (or 1mil) car (especially a hand-built, custom model). Maybe I'm way off base on that one.
As for the original topic at hand, I agree the ad copy is targeting naive readers who some of who probably feel Wilson is charging exhorbant prices. "Gee I guess they're a good value after all!" I don't get a sense that it was aimed at enlightened audionuts, like us. Although I am happy that Wilson makes enough money to consistently take out full page ads in Stereophile, thus helping to subsidize the magazine and maintain my $1/copy subscription.
My take on it is this. Wilson is a successful business man. He knows his client base, and has carved out a successful niche (niches?) while resisting market erosion. I applaud him for that. He's obviously doing well. Would I buy his product? Not unless I had a lot more disposable income (or a lot more income period). The value just isn't there for me. Although he does have a good performing product.
Audiophools like me will need to make their own economic decisions. If the wilson product appeals to their tastes, and it economically doable within the household budget, then it's a good value. But that's a value that has nothing to do with Wilson's costs - publicised or not. The value is only compared against the final retail selling price. It doesn't matter to me if there is $27k profit, $1k profit, or a $2k loss with each set of WP8 sold ($28k retail). Well, the loss or the razor profit might worry me if I was concerned about the company's viability for long term warranty repairs or service. But that's Wilson's problem. And I take that into account when I do my own "value" calculation.
Truth be told, if I had more bucks than time, I'd just get a turn-key solution from a dealer (maybe a Wilson dealer), pay the bucks, and enjoy my stereo. Perhaps that is the value that Wilson is generating.