No, I haven't missed the point. But I think perhaps you've missed the point that Canon has focused their sensor R&D in areas that they think customers will impact customer buying decisions, and low ISO DR isn't one of those.
Lower noise and higher DR are what I look for in successive cameras and that improvements should be visible right through the range of ISO values, not just in one particular area. It just so happens that one of Canon's competitors has produced a camera that quite clearly trounces Canon at ISO below 800, giving us a better feel for what's possible with existing technology.
I think Canon marketing department is doing a great job (certainly better than Sony/Olympus/Panasonic in this regard) and clearly know how to expand their products in different regions in the world at the appropriate time. That is why their market shares for interchangeable lens cameras has not changed significantly over the years.
However, in maturing markets such as the USA, their inability to match the sensor performance of their competitors is hurting them. A couple of years ago, 8 out of 10 DSLRs sold in the USA carry the Canon logo... now, they are down to 6 out of 10. This is because most folks can no longer strongly recommend Canon to their friends and family. I am sure most folks do not need wide dynamic range at low ISO 90% of the time, but if the competition (i.e., Nikon) can offer this capability at the same price, what's stopping them from buying Nikon? IMO, the SL1/100D is a SUPERB entry level DSLR, but it is clearly not dominating the sales charts like the DRebel or DRebel XT. I believe poor word of mouth has something to do with it.
Personally, I am quite happy with my Canon DSLRs but I won't be upgrading them in the next few years unless Canon is able to make significant progress in their sensor imaging capabilities. Neither will I recommend Canon to friends and family. For compact cameras, I'll go for Sony RX100. For mirrorless, probably Fuji or Olympus. For DSLRs, Nikon. Nothing from Canon is compelling.