KentuckyHouse: na, it's a statement of objective, verifiable fact. I understand your confusion because usually attractiveness is opinion. But this is 100% fact, scientifically verifiable. Nobody finds Otterbox cases attractive (don't lie and say "I do" just to be contrary), but people buy them (for $40 or more... jeez) thinking they offer the best protection for the iphone - after all if it's so ugly it MUST do a good job of protecting the phone.
I don't think people would buy a good looking case if they want top of the line protection. It's like how nobody would buy a hybrid or electric car if it looked like a gas guzzling SUV or sports car. The ugliness implies a certain functionality.
But Otterbox cases are SO ugly and respulsive that I'd rather have a cracked screen and pay $50 to get it fixed. In other words I'd pay $50 to NOT have an Otterbox case b/c they're so revolting. Whether you would is a matter of opinion - but simply whether or not they are revoltingly ugly is not a matter of opinioin. It's a fact. I suppose the degree of ugliness, from moderately ugly to horrendously ugly is a matter of opinion. You may think they're ugly but tolerable, whereas I think they're so ugly as to be intolerable. But nobody can say they're beautiful, aesthetically pleasing cases with a straight face.
It is a matter of opinion that they feel/look like cheap junky crap. I'll concede that.