More than that, there exist certain technology products that cannot be made profitably. Underpaying people to make proof-of-concept quality software instead of paying market rates for suitable quality systems (backed up, versioned, monitored, scalable, secure, etc.) will get you investors and even many customers. But it may not be worth the cost in the long run.
Of course some companies get really far by throwing armies of developers at the proof-of-concept software to keep it running and patched together. But that only works as long as the product is profitable enough to pay for all those developers plus some.
Anyway, point being, companies that "do not want to pay market rates" may have little grasp on the cost side of their profit equation. It's possible that because of that, they do not have a profitable business model, at least for a given product, and should really be rethinking their strategy.
This is one of the problems with keeping your "technology people" out of business planning. It's hard to impossible to avoid chasing organization-wide sunk costs if you don't have someone at the strategic level with a good concept of "technical" things: skill level of the engineering organization, technical debt levels, red flags in system quality, etc.