I'm not going to defend the way some RDP act, but in my area this is the norm. In our case, we need to compete with the professionals who will be cheap just to get a job, or those who offshore their work to some drafting farm out of south-east Asia for cheap.
I like to think our firm does a pretty good job with the projects we work on, but we lose a ton of projects because our fees are realistic. There have been more than a few times the firm I'm currently at has almost gone out of business due to lack of work, losing relatively huge projects due to some other architect spitting out a much lower number than what's even feasible. Our costs, btw, are often less then what the client ends up spending on an architect that low-balls the client and then blames the city for everything. A few years ago we lost a medium-size TI project because the tenant thought our fees were "laughable". About a year later, we heard that the tenant abandoned the project after spending considerably more than what our proposal was because the architect "didn't know the city's requirements" (the city has no special requirements - typical TI plans would have been sufficient).
At some point, to survive, you need to lower yourself to their level, at least a little bit. Quality will only get you so far when money is involved, especially when a client doesn't know much about the field. Again, not defending how some RDPs act. Just explaining my perspective on the matter.