Manufacturing conformance quality directly impacts production costs and thus market pricing levels. A manufacturer chooses what level of conformance quality to require from the manufacturing process, and the spectrum of what consumers demand is a factor in that choice.
True but I have a gut feeling Apple didn't expect to sell faulty LCD units as part of keeping prices in line.
Users who demand the highest conformance quality are likely to find themselves disappointed with mass-market devices since manufacturers will cater to the broadest market demands. The reality is that what these "discerning buyers" consider "garbage" is in fact good enough for the majority of consumers who are less demanding.
And hence the garbage. 
Where there is sufficient volume of "discerning buyers" willing to pay the premium, a niche market serving that demand may come into being. At present that doesn't exist in the tablet space.
Again I don't think this light bleed issue was part of the equation that this is good enough but I could be wrong.
Secondarily, conformance quality tends to increase as manufacturing processes mature over the life of the product due to "learning curve" effects. One might argue that "discerning buyers" might be best able to buy devices meeting their high standards by avoiding early adoption of new devices. By waiting for the manufacturer to get further down the "learning curve" the variance in conformance quality will typically lessen and thus increase the probability of receiving a device meeting the buyer's high standards.
Well you won't see me in line for iPad number 3. I'm an early adopter and I expect issues but when you sell me a screen for the most part it better fall within normal standards.
