That's true, Brickeye but "mediocre" accuracy would actually cover most needs of most shooters.
I have yet to find a single load in my 204 that shoots over 1/2-3/4 MOA. That guns primary purpose is woodchucks. Let's say a 5" kill zone. 3/4 MOA is 5" at 667 yards. That is not only 50% farther than I can see in my hunting area, but also likely to be well beyond MY capabilities, meaning the gun/load is no longer relevant.
My 7mm-08 Encore has never found a load that won't shoot under 1" at 100 yards. It's purpose is deer. I have ONE spot, in THOUSANDS of acres that I can hunt, where shots can exceed approximately 400 yards. Given that the gun is a 15" handgun and I don't have a shooting bench in the field, I am realistically limited to far less than 400 yards. Even if it were a rifle, with a solid rest, I'd be shooting into 4" or less at 400 yards at an animal with a kill zone of 6-8 inches.
Benchrest shooters, in competition, are one thing. The "real world" is quite another. It's not unusual for trajectory (range estimation) and wind deflection, both of which are SPEED dependent, to be FAR more important than "pure accuracy" in terms of a guns MOA capability.
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.