&gt;You under-estimate your audience.
No I don't. Have talked to lots of people who bought, got Kindles at Xmas. The issue never came up and why would it? They can read their books when they like on what they like, and still keep them even if they lose the device. One of the joys of the Kindle is you never need to mess around transferring files from computer to device as you do with some other systems. Most people wouldn't want to do that. 

As to business models.... I'm afraid I never cease to be amazed how many people outside publishing think they know how it ought to be run as a business. I don't know what your business is John but I don't think I'd be well placed to tell you how to run it. 

The book world isn't as simple and straightforward as it may appear. There are issues such as territorial rights to be taken into consideration for one thing and the sustenance of the important existing print business, which no 'make ebooks dead cheap everywhere' fan seems to think about, though it's a substantial business and will remain so for years. You seem to want to pay the less than paperback price for a hardback book instead of the less than hardback price. I can't see why any publisher would wish to cannibalise their own sales this way for the brief period in which hardback prices are in force. Nor does it 'punish' the reader. They're still getting the book for less than the print price if they want it early. 

What you're really arguing against is the hardback-paperback process. Maybe we will all move to one paperback edition one day, and some books, like my recent reissues come out as trade paperbacks from the start. I don't think it would make much difference to sales overall. People who don't want to pay hardback prices wait for the paperback and will do the same in ebook. 

If books were $40 a time maybe they would be a 'ripoff' argument. But they're not and I suspect they'll get cheaper still.