I cannot speak for these distributors, but to a lot of them it is a bothersome task sorting out customer's problems. They start out all full of vigour and verve and get things done. Soon there is a problem that becomes too much for them to handle. Shipment comes in late, rate of exchange variances make the LBS's unhappy, a bad batch of product gives rise to warranty claims, and so on and so forth. Now suddenly this disty has to step up to the plate and do something. This is where they fall short. The gross profit that they have been making is not ploughed back into the business in any noticeable percentage. New cars, nicer premises, salary increases (mostly for the upper echelons, not the tea lady) and the like take up the majority of their money made. Now they have to replace faulty kit with new kit "for free" but realise that there is nothing for free. They need to ship the faulty kit they have exchanged out back to the manufacturer at their "cost". The reason why manufacturers chose a distribution model over a direct model is to pass on these mundane tasks to another party. There is money to be made by a distributor, but suddenly there is not enough money being made, so they hike the price up. LBS's do not see the product being sold at the new price and therefore order less of it (or even worse, they get their stock and are stuck with it because we cannot afford the new price). The distributor needs to add some VALUE to the whole chain or they become 10-20% leeches for doing precious little. Their actions can further the brand in a country if driven correctly. Conversely, if the cock it up, they could irreparably damage a brand as well.
