I'd rather have a pure handheld switch that is more portable than a Switch TV. A Switch TV with better hardware that can pull off consistent 1080p in most games for $300 might be interesting though.

So you would want a more expensive handheld that would last for even less time than the switch undocked?

No.  If I can't take it out of the house with me, I lose probably 50% (if not more) of the time I've been able to play games on it.  I never would have finished Breath of the Wild in 6 months at the rate that I normally play games only at home.  Portability is the Switch's biggest asset.  Also, the detachable controllers "that you will never use" are the most comfortable way to play video games.  Whether you give them that chance or not is totally up to you.  I'll take arms relaxed at my side instead of pinned together in front of me any day of the week.

Not at all. The whole point of the Switch is it's hybrid console "gimmick", take that away from it and it's just another under-powered Nintendo console compared the the HD twins, again. The ways the Switch allows me to play is phenomenal, why downgrade that? Now if the idea is a Switch Pro/XL, then I'm on board! But hey, everyone has their own opinions.

Who said more expensive? Moore's Law still exists, even if has slowed down a bit. 

I can see Nintendo releasing a more portable Switch revision in 2019 or 2020 for a price of $200 - $250 now that they know what they should expect as a minimum sales-wise. It can release alongside a third version of Pokemon Gen 8. 

I have no interest in handheld aspect of Switch - but as Zelda fan, I have a lot of interest in BotW (though I have a strong feeling I won't like it much)...hence, yeah, I would be interested in Switch TV.

So whatever comes first - Switch getting quite cheap (cause hardware that is inside, that is actually running BotW, is quite cheap) or Switch TV.

No it will ruin market perception. It will be like biting themselves in the ass.

I guess it depends. For Nintendo, they priced the Switch and developed it as it is with the idea that they are not gonna sell the console at a loss. They’ll lower the price in the future but it’ll depend on demand and whether or not they can still gain profit once the price goes down and they got as much out of the $300 price point.
As for the new Switch handhelds or XL, I’m not sure. The point of the “Switch” concept is the ability to “switch” between playing on the TV and on the go. Getting rid of either one of those options will defeat the purpose of naming it the Switch. Casual consumers will probably get confused when they get these types of consoles, asking “why can’t I play it on the TV” or “why can’t I play it on the go?” It would have to take an extreme marketing venture to differentiate these versions to the original Switch.

I don’t know really, the switch serves a purpose, being a hybrid it combines two markets into one,
The home console only version would appeal to me more, since I like to game in front of a television, but also I don’t really game out in public/work or on my travels,the switch now would be nice to play games until o fall asleep on my bed.
Had it released 10-12 years ago, it would appeal to me as I had a PSP when I was young(I believe it was the most expensive thing I’ve bought with my pocket money that time, loved it!), I’d bring it everywhere, on my travels, around the home etc etc.

I’d definitely buy a switch as is if it was cheaper- 100-150AUD or if I got it for free/won it, I wouldn’t mind, but I prefer to game on my PS4/ in front of the tv as the handheld doesn’t appeal to me now.

So... people want a Switch that doesn't Switch. I think I can be pretty confident that it's never going to happen. The entire concept of the Switch is that it's a portable console you can easily dock to your TV - kinda poorly I might add.

If you can't Switch between different operating modes, you don't have a Switch, do you?