Your argument is somewhat flawed in a few spots there, AftrmktSales, but I do appreciate the discussion and your view. please allow me to address what I see as the inconsistencies in your viewpoints.
1.) No end user should have to pay for the research and development of extra bells and whistles that does not benefit the end user, and only benefits the dealer with 'lock-in'.
2.) The forklift manufacturer buys from their suppliers and does not do the research and development of the controls systems that are the causes of this "lock-in". However the dealer does respond to government regulations, and this response is where this 'lock-in' is generated, as it is a response to the regulation that says only trained and authorized people may work on and adjust the controls, and that the controls must be 'tamper proof' to prevent those not properly authorized to work on those controls from accessing the controls and adjustments. The law does NOT require the manufacturer to control who the employer is, of the people who will access the controls.
3.) The profit margin that a dealer gets for his goods and services are that dealers choices, based upon market forces and choices made by that dealer, and in no manner are the 'fault' or responsibility of the end user, and the same is true of the expenses the dealers decides is needed to sell their machine.
4.) Customers are not property of the dealer who sold the equipment. Competition is a good thing for the end user/consumer and to work to defeat competition is self defeating in the long run (you may win every race you run if no one else is running, but you will never have a championship). Customers will vote with their wallet and feet in the long term.
5.) While dealers find they have no choice but to train their techs on the particulars of the machines they warranty, in all but very rare cases, the techs have invested thousands of their own money in tools and years of industrial education prior to ever being considered as a possible hire in a forklift dealership. I do not think this web site's technical section forum board would exist if your assumption about tech training was true, that it was the dealers who provided all the training to the techs.
Techs find their training where they can get trained.
6.) While I don't doubt there are people who would like to be able to, as you claim " who has not taken a single risk", this is insulting to those techs who recognize their 10 to 20 thousand dollars* in tools is an investment in the distribution processes of the dealer they work for.
* a techs tool investment often is more than their investment in anything other than their home, should they be so fortunate to be able to own a home after purchasing the tools they need to do their job without having to add a few thousand dollars in computers, cables, and software licenses.
Again, thanks for your input into this discussion.