Who says that no default trust accounts have never been sold?
I can tell you for sure that
this account was on default trust when it was sold; I got it removed once it tried to participate in a scam. I can also say with a good amount of certainty that it was purchased for roughly 2.5 btc and probably was able to scam for roughly zero.
Apparently I did not think this through in my thought experiment. Maybe because I would consider the sale in that manner a scam already. I dont see it as enabling someone to scam, but a scam in itself. It would be deceiving towards those that put trust into me as the holder of the account. A sale without proper precautions would be to misuse the trust.
I find it fascinating thought that buying an account for the purpose of scamming does not seem to ROI. There's no actual evidence here whether it does or doesn't. This is the usual QS masterbation story, he's linking us to a thread in which he follows up on a Stunna accusation and takes credit for it in order to inflate his ego. It's anecdotal at best, and given that all QS anecdotes are about how great he is in his own eyes, it's certainaly a questionable anecdote w.r.t. facts.