Those are not the correct odds. 1 in 42,000 have actually been confirmed to have failed... Of all that were originally shipped. Now, let's take into account the fact that most shipments were never delivered to consumers - but, to keep things fair in your favor, let's say 75% made it to customers. So, we'll give you 1 in 32,000. Now, it is a principle of actuarial science that only about 1 in 12 claims are ever actually reported. But this is a high profile event! So let's give you triple that and say that 1 in 4 have actually been reported. Now the odds are 1 in 8,000 devices that are likely to have actually failed so far. But wait, that's over 5 times more likely just by eliminating two bad assumptions! And that's with EXTREMELY generous approximations in favor of your argument. It could easily be as many as 1 in 1800 without granting things unreasonably in your favor.
Using the original million shipments that the 42,000 is based on - and not adjusting it for the incidents reported after that 42,000 started making the rounds on the internet, it's incredibly likely that there are 250-600 more devices that will fail within the first two weeks of use, under similar circumstances as those that have failed so far. The pattern used to predict failure rates on known to be corrupted parts looks very similar to the Fibonacci sequence. That means that given enough time, 4-6 weeks based on the shortness of the time so far, we can have thousands of destroyed units and in double that time it can grow to tens of thousands or even a hundred thousand. THAT is the reason for the recall. It's because so many failed so quickly that the odds are significant, over 20%, that ALL of the devices with this battery issue could catastrophically fail within the first 18 weeks of use.
We can keep doing this, but the long and short of how it works is that when you start factoring in limiting criteria, such as the length of use before charging, the number of days into ownership that they failed, the fact that the numerator includes those shipped to places that do not have the defects, such as China, etc. All of those things will further reduce the number of devices in play to which the known cases will be evaluated against - unless someone can definitively say exactly how and why they're failing, basically all that can be said is that the odds are significantly higher than the relatively close to zero odds of one that is sent without the error - so there is literally no good reason not to do the exchange.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram