I agree with what you're saying, and while some of the decisions they've made are beyond me, I know those decisions are made by people much more knowledgeable on the subject than me. What I don't understand is when you have an Evo on hand, and someone walks in and says can I see it, why not show it to them? Seems to me that would be free advertising. The customer somehow found out about the phone, and showing it to him isn't going to cost anything. If you have accessories in store & someone wants to buy some, why not sell it to them? Worst case scenario, they return it; best case, they keep it.
Now I could understand Sprint saying we want to have accessories available for purchase when we release the phone, but in either case, you're selling accessories.
i don't have any idea why they won't show you the phone. it isn't a traditional "advertising" decision. maybe it is because they want to chain the phones down before letting customers handle them, so they don't get stolen. maybe it is because the corporate insurance that sprint has does not allow it for some good reason that we don't know. maybe it is because those phones are intended to train employees only and they don't want customers fooling with those stock devices. maybe HTC prohibits it. my guess is it is actually an insurance issue.
i used to work in retail years ago. there would be times that i had products in the back that i couldn't sell because they weren't in the computer system. there was no SKU for them. therefore, there was no way to track their sales, which meant we had no way to track "shrinkage" (retail lingo for "theft" bascially). so, because i couldn't sell them, i didn't let customers see them. i, of course, didn't even tell them i had the product.
again, i don't know. but i feel like people love the conspiracy theory angle or the "sprint is soooooo stoopid" angle. there could be a great reason that we don't know.

