> it just doesn't make sense to me that anyone else would _want_ to be doing TDD or other similar methodologies. It's _so_ much more effort to do tests before code.

This statement only makes sense if you can provide figures comparing the costs of defects with the overhead of (A)TDD/BDD.

I'm not disagreeing, I'd just be genuinely interested in the true cost of forgoing TDD/BDD versus TDD/BDD. Unfortunately this would require rigorous documentation of the product lifecycle including number of defects, time to fix, losses due to defects, etc. I'm not sure there's a lot of reliable data available, though.