$27,500 for whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat???

WILSON makes some very expensive speakers, they advertise them as a cost-no-object product, and one of the best manufacturers in the world.
I'm sure the paint job involves many hours of prep work and their employees (in Utah) make a very good wage. For me, the contradiction comes from their stating how well the present line performs, while they are already working on re-designing them at the factory for the next upgrade. The availability of "newer technology", or some new cabinet material is already in the works, and so you're "obligated" to come by after 3-4 years and audition the V-2, then the 3, and so on. This all happens way too quickly while other companies stick by their designs for much longer intervals. You may want to know what was so wrong with the original SOTA speaker you paid so much for. As for the Chronosonic, I would have put the bass-speakers in a separate inclosure and re-work the Tower-of-Pizza design so it looks like it "might" look half-as-good as the original WAMM did.

Let me reiterate that it's not the cost of the paint and the labor involved that seems excessive. The Large unwieldy Chronosonic would have to be completely dis-assembled in order to get the paint applied properly, so I'm very sure they could justify the costs involved if they wanted to.  But for me, I would mention that it's rather the fact that their premier product- the Watt-Puppy- made them what they are today. Only now it's called the Sasha. After endless years of using an inverted metal tweeter they switched over to a smoother-sounding silk dome. But they won't convert the Ver.1 to the 2, or the Ver.2 to the newest Ver.3.  This is mainly  over a tweeter and a modification of the crossover. The dealer ought to be able to buy the upgrade in kit and install the new parts in a few hours.  The cabinet material was superb and virtually inert back when it was called the W/P 3/2 and cost $12K. I respect their dedication to cost-no-object, but the real night-and-day improvement comes from a great recording VS a poor one. Imaging and sound staging is a further step forward, and a valid one. But engineering a pleasant "listenable" speaker was attained many years ago by ADS, Acoustic Research, Advent, Dynaco, and so on. Flat Panels were also making tremendous headway in making the music sound "real". David Wilson is originally known for making a speaker that took up very little space and had impeccable build quality. But his greatest legacy in the long run may end up being the excellent recordings he made. I have THOSE since I could afford them. They should all be re-issued, because I could never justify buying one of their speaker systems, even if I had the money. Since they're never satisfied, the consumer in turn must also never be satisfied.