I hesitate to ascribe motivation to what "people" are saying on this or other forums, and especially so if I haven't even seen the specific examples you refer to. I have no idea
why they said what they said.
As for the rest, I entirely agree power is in consumers hands
provided they choose to exercise it. But that's really just another way of making my initial point - these prices are set by demand v. supply, which is why companies are entitled to charge what they want, and why we, as consumers, shouldn't pay it if we consider it too high.
That's also precisely the point of disputing "gouging". Nobody is being forced to buy at gunpoint. If a new product comes out that you (general "you", not you, Cat) want, the question really is "how
much do you want it?", with a secondary question of how much instant gratification is worth to 'you'.
One of three general situations will exist :-
a) You want it, want it now, and can afford it. So buy it.
b) You want it but not enough to pay the 'now premium'. So wait a while.
c) You want it, but can't or aren't prepared to pay the price, now or in the future. Well, sorry, but tough.
I rather fancy a certain watch, but at £20k, the only way I'm buying it is if some kind of windfall drops unexpectedly into my lap of sufficient scale that £20k is chump change. That means absolutely securing utter financial security, then satisfying all the other things that I want more than that watch. Then, we'll see. Chances of it happening? Extremely close to zero. Chances of me spending that same £20k (or more) on a new kitchen in the immediate future? Extremely close to 100%.
We all prioritise what to spend disposable income on, and current top of my list is a kitchen, near the bottom of it is a watch but, even lower than that is very High end graphics cards. If that humungous windfall drops into my lap, no doubt the most powerful PC I can specify would get bought.
The point?
My priorities for spending money on a graphics card, at least right now, tail off at about £200 and fall off a cliff at about £300. But other people value a top-end graphics card highly, and
some value it highly enough to be prepared to pay that "now" premium. I have done that, many times in the past, on CPU's, graphics cards (including North of £1200 on 9ne, some years back) and on a host of other computer bits too. And don't even get me started on cameras, lenses, etc.
The "gouging" assertion seems to arrive from those in group b). They want it, want it now, but either can't or won't pay the "now" premium. But that's the way of the world. What it isn't is a Good reason for companies that can maximise revenues by releasing products for which they believe demand will be high, in quantities designed to satisfy category a) demand before dropping it to category b) levels. Those in b) simply have to exercise their consumer power and wait. If those in category a) were prepared to do likewise, there would be no category a). But they aren't. Maybe they just have more money than the b)'s. Like it or not, it's how the world is. In some cases, the b)'s have the money to be an a) but their 'want' is not high enough to pay the premium.
None of this is defending companies "gouging", though that is a loaded term. What it is is simply how things work. It's all very well wishing we all lived in some kind of consumerist paradise where we could all gratify our desires in full, instantly, but it's a recipe for personal frustration because it isn't coming any time soon.
It's also worth bearing in mind that companies "maximising revenue" are obliged to act in the best interests of shareholders, and for almost all companies, that in large part refers to institutional investors like those that hold all our pension fund assets. They aren't charities, selling at the lowest price they could. It's easy to ascribe that as greed to millionaire or billionaire individuals, and yes there are some, but the truth is, without companies maximising their benefits (which can be defined in a multitude of ways, and is certainly broader than immediate profit), we'd all lose out both in funding of future developments, and in our pensions.
That's why I see these "gouging" remarks are mere whining. If people simply can't afford the "now" premium, then wait. It's naive not to accept (not to like it, but to accept) that others either have more money or are prepared to pay more) and moaning about it isn't going to change how the world works, any more than it's going to negate gravity or reverse the tides. It just .... is.
Oh, and while many examples used are 'whole', the same principle has been in use in the technology field at least as far back as consumers starting to buy technology products, and that definitely includes there being a reasonably active build-it-yourself contingent. On occasion, I've even paid a premium to buy things like processors from system integrators, or even on rare occasions from manufacturers, while they're in the channel but before public release. Believe me, it can be an expensive way to stay on the leading edge.