So you admit the cripple hammer is real and Canon did it to make more money. We're making progress here folks!
Of course. Canon crippled my 1D X by not including in-camera HDR even though the all their other ILCs and even several PowerShots offered that as-close-to-free-as-possible feature. I guess they excluded it to force me to buy the more expensive...oh, wait.
I guess it just might be possible they excluded it because they knew the target market didn’t want it, and as-close-to-free-as-possible still isn’t free (an example is orientation linked AF point and AFMA, both of which were available on prior cameras, but on the 1D X the former ‘broke’ the latter requiring a firmware update to fix).
You’re right that it’s about increasing profit. Since you seem able to understand that corporations like profit, can you also grasp that Canon almost certainly has data and/or modeling to support increased profit based on inclusion or exclusion of select features in certain models? Further, are you able to comprehend that Canon has been making these sorts of decisions for years, and the outcome in aggregate is continued domination of the ILC market? If so, then we actually are making progress, because that brings us to the conclusion that Canon is excluding p24 from current models for a logical, valid reason.
Somehow, I think that train of logical thought will derail itself in your head, because the next stop on those tracks is the realization that your incessant complaining about the omission of p24 amounts merely to the whining of a petulant child.