I was expecting something in the $5-10K range, probably 10K, to be realistic. The Pentax 25mm is $5K and I got one. It's excellent and I don't regret the decision.
Why does such a lens make sense? Without it, IMHO, the system remains incomplete. Currently, I take care of my wide angle needs with a 24mm XL on a Horseman, which I have mounted with a separate back. It's probably better than the 35mm would be, at least in terms of sharpness, but it is simply an ordeal to carry an additional body with an additional back around, where a single lens would be almost as good.
I do have the 40mm, which is a very nice lens, but often a little short. In the wide angle arena, 5mm is a lot. The 40 is also manual focus, which is o.k., but a set with 35, 50, 80, 180mm AFDs would be very nice. I do understand the reluctance to invest in the telephoto range, which is less competitive when compared to full frame 35mm digital. However, in the MFD realm, wide angles are different and somewhat essential for landscapes and products. The rest of the pack also invested heavily in wide angles, Hasselblad, Leica, Phase, Schneider, Pentax. For Pentax it was one of their priorities. In the case of DHW, I am not talking 24mm, 25mm. But I do think a 35mm would at least open some of that range up for Rollei users.