My experience is essentially identical with DavyDD's. Moreover, in my experience over a large number of vehicles and a long period of time, if the geometry is set up correctly and nothing is broken, then the tires will wear symmetrically, or close enough to not make rotation cost-effective. It is true that you will see front/back differences in the total amount of wear, but so what? Simply replace the tires in pairs. Total cost over time will not differ appreciably from tires that are regularly rotated.
The above is an anecdotal report of my personal experience, not scientific evidence. BUT, I challenge you to find any published empirical evidence that passes scientific muster to support tire rotation (I have tried). All the pro-rotation advice comes from "common sense" or from sources within the industry that have self-serving reasons to keep owners coming in the door.
This is one of those things (like 3,000 mile oil changes) that are so ingrained into car culture that it is almost impossible to have a rational discussion. I myself never go out of my way to rotate my tires. I believe that this has cost me neither money nor safety over the years. Can I prove it? no.
In closing, two of the most venerable sources in the history of the automobile agree with me:
1) John Muir (the hippie VW mechanic, not the nature photographer) said in "How To Keep Your Volkswagen Alive"
2) Tom and Ray (the NPR car guys) say that BMW (who apparently does not recommend tire rotation) is mostly right:
Blog Post | BMW says to not rotate my tires, but the tire manufacturere says different. Who should I believe? | Car Talk
Can't argue with sources like that.