Tony,
My point is, along with Mulit's other committments low production is almost assured. By design. This project is quite similar to the original '60's GT40. Homologate what you must and focus on the racing program. The GT is not a direct revenue generator, it is the Matriarch of Ford Performance. Therefore justified to spread and amoritize the project cost throughout present and future performance and race vehicles.
To validate, a win will be necessary.
I asserted early on and reiterated on the very first day that the methodology is a reversion to the homologation cars of the 60's - Cobras and GT40s. They were FIRST a race car, with some concessions to the street for homologation. Noone ever gave a street Cobra or GT40 rave reviews as a grocery getter. The same will hold here. The new GT will be uncomfortable for the passenger and driver unless both are very small (look at the space between seats).
Thus I assert homologation vehicles will be produced AFTER the first round of race vehicles. They have to get the cars in the hands of the race teams soon. Le Mans 2016 isn't that far away and they won't show up with a car the Friday before the race...
I also mentioned a checklist in another topic, but to finish I expect they will do the homologation units they need to meet the FIA/ACO rules, continue to produce them to meet the rules for multiple years, and then exit just as quickly as they entered (just like the GT40 program of the 60's) leaving the ongoing to the privateers.
Edit: Others snuck in while I was typing, but to your last statement: To validate, a win will be necessary.
That is n interesting point: What happens to additional years if they aren't able to pull off a 2016 (50th anniversary of the 3 way win) or 2017 (50th anniversary of the All American) victory? The new GT is a "celebration" of those events. Will the shininess wear off in subsequent years?
