If that minority isn't big enough to reimburse the investment (plus some revenue), it can be easily ignored.
Businesses are not charities.

Edit: I always find it amusing when people argue about "there are 10% of customers who would be willing to buy this and that, if this and that would be on offer", while completely ignoring the other 90% that buy without the added bells and whistles.

We are not discussing some rocket science here. Creating FLAC files is a trivial thing. Why not go for the maximal possible and reasonable quality? Just because we follow some argumentum ad populum fallacy?

Apple Music isn't following this fallacy. Despite knowing that only 1-2% of their customers might tell the difference they are offering lossless audio for them. Eddy Cue (Apple’s senior vice president of internet software and services (including Apple Music)):

"Because the reality of lossless is: if you take a 100 people and you take a stereo song in lossless and you take a song that’s been in Apple Music that’s compressed, I don’t know if it’s 99 or 98 can’t tell the difference.
[...]
Now, we’re supporting lossless and we think there’s a set of customers. It’s a small set of customers, but they want it and we’ll certainly give it to them, and they’ll have it as part of this. The good news is they’ll have lossless and they’ll have Dolby Atmos and Spatial. It really does work very well for that [set of customers], but it’s not going to be lossless [leading the way]."

Source:
https://www.billboard.com/pro/apple-music-eddy-cue-spatial-audio-lossless-future-of-music/

Even the other big player Amazon is offering lossless formats with their Amazon Music HD.
English:
https://www.amazon.com/music/unlimited/why-hd
German:
https://www.amazon.de/music/unlimited/why-hd

Well, I guess, some devs/publishers simply aren't interested in doing trivial stuff...

Anyway: you can complain as much as you want - won't change their stance.

Well, probably they should be interested in following the industry standards. Lossless audio formats are part of them now.

I am not really complaining. I just pointed out the fallacy in the discussion.

Honestly, I won't claim to know what their reasons for not offering lossless are. I've yet to see any dev/publisher provide a justification for it.

It could be as simple as ignorance of evolving industry trends. If that's the case and nobody says anything, they will keep not knowing any better.

I won't go out of my way to talk incessantly about it (its not a crusade), but if there is an announcement targeting the release of (or highlighting of) soundtracks and its not lossless, I'll certainly point it out.

I want my music to be at least CD quality (usually lossless) and places I've purchased music at in recent years (7digital, Bandcamp, physical music CDs, a lot of the game soundtracks sold separately from the game here at GOG) have complied with that wish. Its a low effort thing to do, it has some traction already and its not unreasonable.