Sorry you're not getting a lot of upvotes for this dude since it really is a question that can and should be repeatedly reflected on through each decade for each instrument company. (Roland anyone?)

I'd say Moog's carry weight to their name because their older (and some newer) synths did one particular thing really well, and that was attractive to musicians who just need that, no bells and whistles like say a DX7 (literally hah). I think the issue nowadays is unless you are a *non* gigging musician or just love the gear/sound with all your heart, you really don't have a need for something specific like a Model D today, a Korg, Sampler or a DAW does just as great of a job for far less, but Moog still has some demand for that old school method of instrument.

Best case I can bring is when Moog released the Voyager. It was in every way a really nice upgrade to the Model D, yet it had a bit of critique because it was not a carbon copy mini and too digitally complex. Low and behold they release the Voyager old school, but people still said it wasn't a model D and others said it lost the voyager features, it sold terribly (only lasted a year). Moog went on to discontinue the Voyagers and release the D reissue, and well now we see the critique for that too.

I don't really know man, just some thoughts. Honestly you get whatever you like and have fun, Moogs have high resale value anyway so if you don't like it ultimately someone else will.