I see a few problems with the prevailing theory here.

1. If they were just trying to unload high-priced bikes to ignorant (but wealthy) customers, they're going to way too much trouble. Many of these framesets would only be appreciated by an aficionado. The average bike enthusiast or racer might not realize what they were looking at. Pinarello, Bianchi, et al make cheaper bikes, too. If it's the name on the downtube they were looking for, why not sell them a lower-line Pinarello? A lot of these were limited production framesets. These were framesets aimed at the knowledgeable wealthy buyer.

2. If they were going for the "ignorant buyer" market, it seems to me that the words "Dura Ace" "Red" "Super Rec" would attract more wow factor (and dollars) than the framesets that they were pushing. Every cyclist knows Dura Ace from 105 and most know that it represents a serious difference in function and quality (and price). I suspect that less than 10% of BFers can tell you which Pinarello goes where in their hierarchy.

3. These weren't demos -- almost every bike in the shop was built out this way and there wasn't a dirty tire in the place.

Putting all this in the best possible light, here's my theory now: I think they are "place holders".

I'm thinking the cheapo groupsets and wheels are there to occupy space for fit -- and perhaps a test ride for a serious buyer -- but with the assumption that, for a fee, they're going to be changing those components out for the eventual buyer. If they can sell a limited edition $7,000 Bianchi with 105 installed, so be it. But they will also be willing to sell that Bianchi with Super Rec, if you'll pay the upcharge. Given the level of these bikes, it seems like a LOT of wasted low-level groupset stock -- but maybe it's a winning strategy. I would sure like to hear how they work it. (But even if I ask, I don't think they're going to want to talk about that with a guy off the street.)