There's a reason I don't like "entitled" or "entitlement" because of its current connotation (especially in the States, where any kind of social insurance scheme, healthcare, pension, unemployment, housing subsidy, nutrition assistance, is labeled as "mooching," when those things are paid for by taxes and belong in some part to those who paid into the system, especially medicare/medicaid and social security).
And I don't think your total amount of Apple devices matters as much as loyalty over time, so no, CosmicHobo, I don't think you are less due Apple loyalty in return for your loyalty. Having other options, you still returned to Apple and did purchase some products new, correct? That's loyalty. It doesn't have to be directly quantified. I'm not arguing that there's a proportional relationship. As in I bought more products, I get better service, because I get more loyalty. There are businesses which do that, and I think that's fine, but I think we have to consider what the "Apple Product" actually is. And ultimately, it ain't computers.
I think when you buy an Apple product, you're buying more than a thing. Steve Jobs really understood this, and it's one of the reasons I haven't been as trusting of Apple in the Tim Cook era. Steve knew we were buying and indeed was intentionally marketing experiences. Part of the reason I purchase Apple rather than building my own PC, be it Windows, or Ubuntu, or Android, or Chrome, or a hackintosh (which I successfully built in about 2009), and specifically pay for AppleCare, is because I'm buying something that "just works" and "just gets fixed." That's part of my social contract with Apple, and my customer loyalty is part of my duty under that contract. Now this is different from legal contract. I understand that. However, from a strict economics standpoint, it is far more profitable for Apple to abide by this social contract because it means I'm a lifetime source of cashflow above and beyond whatever overhead I may cost due to my expectations of experience, including service of the products.
Whether something is covered by my legal contract or not, and most of the time, I only even ask when something seems on the line to me (such as this battery issue, which seemed defective by Apple's own standards to me, same with OldMacs's), but because I have paid both in money and in customer loyalty, I will ask. And as stated, I've never been given no twice. And Apple has certainly never said, "we're tired of your social contract obligation, please don't buy our products anymore." I can report back if I ever get a hard no that doesn't change, but it hasn't happened yet. And that, I feel, is because Apple does abide by the social contract.
And frankly, OldMacs having to go back to a store 6 times is appalling, and a violation of this social contract, let alone that I agree that battery seems, by Apple's own legal agreement standards to be defective.