I have been out of those markets for over a decade but the rules have not changed that much. In my (old) experience the market price of products depends more on the cost to build them based on feature content and technology, than it depends on arbitrary "how much can we skin the suckers for". Reducing a price to meet competition is not proof that the previous price was too high based on their cost, only that the former price was not competitive based on new market conditions. You do what you must do to move boxes, and not eat dead inventory.
Otherwise similar products from small companies cost more because it cost more for small companies to build them, and they have a smaller denominator (gross sales) to spread their fixed overhead costs across. Conversely a large company like Behringer has very low manufacturing cost and a very large denominator to spread it's overhead across.
While I give Behringer credit for pioneering that new lower price point for digital mixers (thanks to tooling their own motor-faders and perhaps other formerly expensive sub-assemblies). My suspicion is they don't actually use any unique technology that other's can't replicate. They are the first to that spot in the marketplace and have delivered in quantity so will harvest a lot of the initial demand. If they had unique technology they could have ramped up more slowly. IMO others can replicate the general approach. I will now pause for a moment of silent reflection at the though of other majors "copying" Behringer.
While I vaguely recall Behringer buying the IP from a failing digital IC company that included some switching technology years ago, my suspicion is that the recent low cost high power amps in the market from a few companies are probably based on 3rd party technology that the 3rd party wants to sell to all comers, so prices will probably follow the typical spreads between different manufacturers that exist for current products with similar features.
Finally I like to talk about professional robustness, and other aspects people like to mislabel as quality as simply features, that more professional customers pay up for. Along similar lines, Behringer's lower market price is "feature-like" but paid for by Behringer out of their profit margin to secure market share and prevent easy competition.
I suspect the ongoing charm offensive from Behringer is an attempt to raise the brand image so they can reduce some of that need to buy market share. They are already spending more on customer service than historically (or so it appears) so they could use the extra margin to stand still.
Of course this will leave room beneath their price points for new competition, but I don't expect that to come from old established players, probably some new big dog from another category that sees "pro" audio (and I use the term "pro" loosely) as easy pickings. Consumer audio is far more competitive.
Caveat Lector, this is 100% speculation on my part and I have no inside information about current products or any of the companies discussed, other that what I see and read on public forums. YMMV