Would be interesting to know where it will end up and how much it will then be sold for in turn.
Uh, actually, I hadn't seriously contemplated this until now. Hmm. Come to think of it, the major hurdle is probably getting this scheme past my SO. :)
OTOH, I could have sold it last month for at least $400, which would be a much better deal but would mean I would have no iPad for one month.
OTOOH, if I keep the iPad 1 another year, it will probably still be sellable for $250, and that is $250 for 2 years of use which is not bad.
This might lower the resale value of the device which could be another reason for the design that Apple has chosen here.
Eponysterical, as they say on MetaFilter.
It's this kind of thinking (on the part of their competition) that lets Apple keep their head start for way, way longer than necessary.
The short answer: Because what you're proposing would be terrible.
Apple's money magnet is creating a sense of delight and surprise. You'd be mimicking the result, a snap on cover, without grasping the intent, which is to make you feel like a kid seeing magic. People don't want a cover. They want to be delighted by a cover.
At least, they do now, since Apple has shown them it is possible to feel this way.
It there _are_ magnets, I can see it getting annoying when the iPad starts collecting magnet-attracted crap.
This is a problem with magnetic tank bags on motorcycles, they pick up presumably iron/steel grit on the magnets, then you clip the magnets+grit onto your nicely glossy painted fuel tank, and scratch the crap out of it...
http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/03/apple-ipad-2-smart-cover-...
Enough to make me wish my wife's birthday wasn't in January, so that I wouldn't have bought her the original iPad before this was available.