I'm sorry I came to this post so late.
Cost is indeed the primary reason that so many quality steels are coated. Kershaw, for example, was very unhappy with the finish on their Bump. They just couldn't spend the time properly finishing the blade at their price point. The Avalanche, on the other hand, has a good steel (S60V, I believe) and with the bead blast/coated blade, they can move them to the shelves at a very atractive price.
Having cast my vote for the practicality of the issue, I prefer uncoated blades. As a soldier, I can safely say I have no need for a black-tical blade. And neither do 99% of my fellow soldiers. When BM went black-combo edge with all their autos, I cried (they supply the huge majority of Army contracts).
I've owned 6 black coated knives. Mostly BT2 coated BMs. They only coating that stood the test of time was the Tungstun DLC coated Kershaw Leek. It has been my EDC for quite a while, and has yet to show any wear. All the BMs showed scratches and gouges almost immediatly. My Camillus Aviator Survival knife is trashed. It looks like it's seen 3-4 combat tours (and it probobly has), but who cares.
It's also important to note that the DLC coated blades have no appreciable increase of corrosion resistance given the molecular nature of the bond with the metal. Only painted/epoxy/powder coated blades have much additional rust protection.