Don't get me wrong: I think step 3 has a good chance of working. BUT if you, like your customers, assume that a commitment is equivalent to the actual asset (i.e. the laptop) then you are vulnerable to defaulting on YOUR commitment if and when you cannot deliver the asset.
How might that happen? Imagine you commit to purchasing laptops through a broker, exactly like yourself, who has no laptops to sell. This happens all the time (e.g. "just in time" ordering) and it results in delays, angry customers, and in the case of the US financial system, systemic fraud, corruption and failure.
Naked short selling is surprisingly similar to your strategy: