Communication skills are rare, especially in writing. Perhaps less than clear communication contributed to the situation, because I sure had difficulty trying to understand the OP's OP and responses. Perhaps UA did also.
As for trade ins- it's common for consumers to think if a business sells a trade-in for twice what they gave for it they doubled their investment. That simply isn't so.
Speaking from vast experience with bicycles and airguns, trade-ins seldom (to never) can be flipped without some time and labor investments; often substantial. Example- a $500 trade-in that requires resealing, tune-up, parts, and/or more, the vast majority of which do, likely actually costs the business $700-750 to offer for resale. If the business (realistically) asks $1000 for a used gun or bike that sells new for $1500, the customer that traded it in thinks the business is a crook, potential buyers offer $750, and the item (eventually) sells for $800. The gross profit (before normal business operating and selling expenses) was $300, and NET 'profit' (after business expenses like payroll, rent, etc.) was $150 on a $700-750 investment. A 20% return on investment is HARDLY A KILLING... by any measure.
Okay, let's say the used item eventually sold for $850. A $200 'profit' on a $500 investment is still hardly a killing. In fact, truth be told, may or may NOT be break-even.
Trade-ins suck for everyone. Good thing no-one is forced to give or take trade-ins, huh?
That being the case, when hearing or reading one side of any story the listener or reader must always consider the source.