I don't think price is that big an obsatcle to the so-called "non-gamer" crowd to be honest, considering Wii Fit cost me something like $120 AUD back in the day and how freely people buy overpriced phones and tablets.
What I mean by non-gamer is people who are not typical game players, and play non-game type of software, like Art Academy, Wii Fit or Brain Training. These experiences can't easily be classified as games, but closer to educational software.
In general, I would see a light version of the console cater more to people who are looking for something more casual and so don't require the full set of hardware capabilities other more graphic-intensive games might require.
I'm not saying I agree with you or with JWeinCom, but I very well see his point. Even if MisterManGuy doesn't agree, I think it's important that he understands JWeinCom's point first and foremost.
Because after all, how can you agree or disagree with an idea you don't fully grasp. I was trying to help him understand the idea.
People pay for things, but I think that one aspect that attracted casual gaming on the Gameboy, DS and Wii was the low entry-point of these systems. More examples are Tetris on the Gameboy, which came bundled with the system. Brain age was sometimes sold at counter-tops at discounted prices, the DS itself was not an expensive console, just like the Wii.
Sure some peripherals were bought, but they promised to deliver the experience with specialized software, so people paid. But when the specialised software can't be matched to the experience (like the balance board was clearly a peripheral used for Fitness games), it's hard for the buyers to justify the purchase to themselves.
So, I would tend to agree that a switch lite might appeal more to people not interested in leveraging the gaming portion of the console which comes at a premium. But the irony is that, in this case, it's the casual aspects of the switch which are more expensive, but it's not obvious to the buyer.