As has happened before during discussions of Mark's crimes, we seem to have two wholly separate issues under discussion going on in bcjbcj's posts. One is international manufacturing. The other is fraud and theft.
Manufacturing overseas can be done well, and for things like speakers and consumer electronics it can typically be done for cheaper than US/Canadian manufacturing. I doubt that any of us would disagree with that. At the same time, no matter where you build your product (China, California, Massachusetts, Germany, etc.), you need to pay attention to your product's quality. That is always something that takes some effort and some investment, whether it is happening in China or the US.
We all have personal budgets to contend with, and most of us are therefore forced to take some care in picking what to purchase. We do our research - that's a big part of the reason sites like AVS exist, in fact. We read reviews. We talk to other owners. We try to demo products before we buy. Often, we find that an internet-direct company can provide us with a better deal than some more traditional retail channels. That better deal could be solely a lower price, or it could be better performance at a comparable price. The pursuit of these "better deal" products pushes some of these internet-direct companies to get creative in their product designs, development, manufacturing, and marketing. We can and should still hold them to some legal and ethical standards along the way, though, and frankly most ID companies work hard to earn our trust. In my opinion, what AV123 has offered has never been so completely beyond the norm to suggest that they were going to have to lie, cheat, steal, or break laws to fulfill their promises (although some of the sales in the last several months have edged toward a sort of "fire sale" level that could generate some suspicions). They have worked to build consumer trust using a combination of reasonable quality (as long as it doesn't require 120V power), an attractive appearance, a good price, and a vocal salesman who adores superlatives. It was a formula that, while somewhat sketchy at times, didn't inherently equal "disaster." That's why I don't see a reason to suggest that consumers are somehow complicit in Mark's actions simply by buying his products.
That's the business side of the discussion. While an interesting discussion that can open the door to more extensive discussions of ethics, corporate policy, and world economics and politics, I don't see how it has any bearing on Mark's indictment. I dispute the idea of the economy pushing him to criminal acts based on the timeline involved. The raffles started too long ago. I also dispute the idea of economic pressure as a rationalization just as I dispute Dr. Johnson's theory that stress caused some mental illness that altered his personality and caused this behavior. He broke the law, and he broke the trust placed in him (trust that was cultivated through his calculated actions). The decision to start these raffles and pocket the money (whether it went to his personal pocket or the AV123 corporate pocket) is simply unacceptable no matter what the circumstances. It is a decision for which blame can only be placed with one person. It doesn't belong on consumers who were deceived. I admit that I find the idea of replacing my X-LS's more appealing since I learned of the raffle thefts, and I suspect that they will be around only so long as budget prevents me from shopping around for a replacement, but the hardware itself isn't to blame and neither was the act of purchasing that hardware.