I think what you're saying is different than what he meant. No one 'needs' a composite based on your logic, but there's no denying the fact that composites generally outperform and mostly outlast wood sticks. Whether or not a particular person should spend $$ to attempt to achieve this gain, of course, depends on them.
Also, your analogy regarding the cost of those sticks and so called 'profits' made off them are completely incorrect. You'd be surprised to know that there isn't a large margin on hockey gear at all. No one's making a lot of money selling high end sticks...
Carbon fiber and graphite costs 10$ a pound which is about the weight of a stick. I'm sure these companies get discounts as well. A bit of glue and that's it for material. They are made in china so minimal worker cost. Electrical costs are also minimal for the same reasons. Add shipping cost which shouldn't be a lot since they're so light. Of course you add in retailer's cut.
Just look at it this way. 300 dollar sticks go on sale for less than 100 sometimes. The retailer is clearly not going to take a loss on this unless it's been sitting there for many years. And of course their's the fact that they break often.
When is the last time you saw a woody on sale? Probably very rarely since the profit margin is very slim.
So which one is CCM or Bauer going to promote more. The one where they make about 40 bucks on or the one where they make 5 or 6.
As for performance, that's opinion. I'm no worst with my Stinger than my G75, T90 or Nexon except maybe clappers which I rarely do. Durability has to go to the wooden stick unless we're talking about Colt sticks. One little slash in that spot right above the blade of a composite and it's done. Woody's will have the blade disintegrate though.