Cheaper than that is pretty much guaranteed to be junk.
Ive heard that over and over again, yet never experienced it.
At least with scopes not bargin basement. Ive had a Barska fail, and took a failed one off a friends gun (he got a Trophy in return, from the 90s and is still using it), ive also suspected a couple more Barskas of having failed, but since i wasnt working on the guns cant say for sure.
Ive had a couple BSAs that came with older spring guns shake apart, and one newer one with a canted reticle.
Ive never used any of the more expensive versions of these scopes, and honestly given a chance id try them again.
Ive had to send 6 scopes back to the manufacturer, none failed thru normal use. Either they were bad from the get go, or they received rougher than normal handling.
3 leupolds, 1 Nikon, 1 bushnell, and 1 Bushnell/Weaver,
Ive known of 2 Vortex Vipers that have gone back due to fogging.
Ive had the longest wait with bushnell, second longest with leupold. 1 bushnell, and the Nikon were both replaced and in my hands in a 2 weeks.
1 scope I thought failed during use, but after doing nearly the exact same thing on my other similar scope, im pretty sure it was me. I sent an Athlon Argos back, the horizontal turret quit working....after i loosened the screws that held the cap to set zero. Im now pretty sure i didnt snug them up properly before playing with the scope again. Athlon had its replacement to me in under a week.
I have no issue with folks buying expensive glass, and will often suggest that a person buy the best glass they can. I LIKE looking thru good glass, and ive used (and owned) some, but with 10 rifles at any given time going in and out of my safe, im not willing to spend 5-1k on glass unless I REALLY need it, and so far I havent.
Personally im quite comfortable with the 100-300 dollar scopes
My FF2 i bought used for 80 bucks (they go for 200ish new?), and its been sitting on my .375 ruger for months, and 200 rounds or so.
That gun weights 8.25lbs, and delivers something like 40flbs of recoil energy, and its been perfectly happy, holds zero, and provides as good an image as i can use during legal hunting hours.
Before that I had a Bushnell UltraHD 1.75-6x32 on there and it did fine as well, tho it only had to deal with 40 or 60 rounds (its now back on a muzzle loader where its supposed to be).....just looked funny.
Again, i have NO issues with folks buying the most expensive scope they want. Ill also never say that its a bad decision to get the higher end brand name scopes, and again if its in the budget ill suggest it.
BUT, I also feel that blatantly saying anything under 200 is garbage isnt a fair description of the situation. As with buying anything else on a budget you DO have to know your needs,do your research, and chose your scope more carefully. If your needs (and wants) dictate a higher end scope, dont scrimp, get the higher end scope.