On the discussion about "made for" vs. "after market" shafts: I have been fit for drivers three times since 2009, and in all cases one of the stock shafts gave me best or "near best" numbers. Granted, I only have 87 MPH driver clubhead speed. But, I'm not going to pay an extra $350 upcharge for a driver shaft that gives me six more yards in distance.
A related issue is swing precision. My swing is not as precise as someone who is a 2 HDCP. Thus, they would likely benefit more from the narrow performance window of a-m than me.
Also, the "made for" shafts, as you correctly remarked, are often last year's after-market shaft. This is like in the early 2000s in personal computers: last year's "screamin' machine" is this year's stock model. The year 2 item, be it a computer or golf shaft, has lower costs in part because of economies of scale and leveraging past R&D.
Related topic: you needed to get a better handle on explaining fixed costs vs. variable costs, and economies of scale. One of the biggest fixed costs is R&D, as you all have noted. If we have the R&D all done for a Speeder X1 after-market, we may tweak it as a shaft profile that fits a lot of people that will play our new driver, and call it the Speeder X2A. But, as a "made for" shaft we will sell 20 million of them rather than 1 million of last year's a-m Speeder X1. The economies of scale for the 20-fold leap in numbers sold makes for a lower per-unit cost.
Finally, will a respected shaft maker risk putting junk materials into a "made for" shaft?
When someone shows me an after-market shaft, once I see them hit the ball, I sense the a-m benefit is often 80% prestige and 20% performance.