Ok, so the way you "justify" the high price is by the fact that you can hear a real improvement which in your opinion could not have been achieved by upgrading some of the other components, e.g. replacing the Andro with the Solaris.
That's fair. But it also makes me wonder. Since the reasoning has nothing to do with the intrinsic value of the cable, but just with the results it produces, how about this scenario. Let's say someone came out with a sticker (I chose this as an example because I think I heard something like this was actually going around at some point) that they claim improves the sound of you IEM. Of course you think this is absurd, but you give it a try, just to have a laugh. But, amazingly, you hear a big improvement in sound. At this point it doesn't even matter if it's placebo (everybody else swears by the sticker, so you may be psychologically influenced a bit by that) or if the difference can be measured by an objective observer, the important thing is that you are convinced you hear the difference. If the price of the sticker (which in the end you know is just a sticker) is $500, would you buy it?
The reasonable answer is probably yes, I would buy it, because the only thing that matters when evaluating the value of something is how much it offers you, not how much it cost someone to make it. But I don't see myself be able to do that. I would probably dedicate my life to understanding the sticker and coming out with my own than paying 1000% premium.
Coming back to the cables, from all the components that are involved in the audio chain, the cable is the only one I'm confident I could make myself, if so inclined. But hey, maybe I'm missing something.
Anyway, "rant" over.