I don't know how much is presumptions and how much are facts.
As far as I know, Hasselblad may do fine or they may be in problems. They are privately owned, and I don't think they disclose figures. I got the impression that they have a pretty strong market position here in Sweden. It seems that many pros have a Hasselblad, but I never read about any pro having a Phase One, here in Sweden.
Just to put things in perspective, during ten years of travel I have seen a single MF camera "in the wild" and that was a Noblex. So I don't think that MFD has a significant market share.
Personally, I think that Hasselblad has a mature and complete MF system and they still do a decent amount of development on cameras. On the other hand, I guess that it is the backs that are "sexy" and earn money. I guess that Hasselblad may not be a strong competitor in that area.
My guess is that we would be more fortunate if Hasselblad focused on cameras and lenses and worked with any vendor of digital backs. Hasselblad unfortunately decided to close their system to the competition. I am not sure it was a wise choice.
I am not sure the Leica S2 is oriented toward the luxury sector. It seems to be a fine camera.
I would also say that the vendors depending on Kodak (OK, TrueSense) sensors may have a bit of trouble. Phase One opted to cooperate with Dalsa, and they actually seem to have codeveloped some sensors with Dalsa. I don't think that TrueSense is that offensive regarding development.
Now, regarding the "Lunarcy", I would say that the base is a decent camera with mediocre lenses. Hasselblad could have enhanced it a bit with "Zeiss lenses", now that we have some 'Tuit' lenses from Zeiss, but they put their label on junk lenses from Sony and also did a horrible design.
On the other hand,according to Sony Rumors, they could sell the whole production run. Must be a lot of Lunetics around...
When Leica started the S project the target was 10% of the MF market, 10,000 cameras per year at that time.
Now the total worldwide production is more like 6,000-7,000 units per year. Please, correct me if I am wrong.
We have 4 players: Pentax, Phase One, Hasselblad and Leica. Too many for such a small pond.
Phase One is doing well in the professional market. Leica goes for the luxury market from the start, and they are successful. Pextax seems to aim the aficionado market, not wealthy but photographers trained and wishing MF tools. I don't know but it seems that approach does not work outside of Japan (no new lenses from Pentax 645D, etc.). Hasselblad is trapped. The market is collapsing and they don't have a safe refuge. They have tried to be in all those segments, but they have been losing positions in the professional market because of the flexibility and quality of Phase One's offer, and the luxury market was totally captured by Leica. What to do? How to get funds and where to invest them? All points to an exit of the MF market (not abandoning it, just to invest elsewhere) and an incursion in the luxury or professional segments of small format cameras (a far larger pond with marginal space for Hasselblad, a strong brand yet). But if they cannot do better than the Stellar and Lunar, they are damned.
The question is why. Why are they doing that ridiculous rebranding? I cannot give answer but I guess they cannot get the funds for anything else. Are they thinking in sharing the NEX platform with Sony, like Olympus and Panasonic did with micro 4/3? How can Hasselblad develop a competitive and differentiated offer there? Is the NEX system the best choice for the luxury market? They are reacting too late. It seems like a desperate attempt for raising extra funds in the short terms, selling the brand name. But all looks like a big mistake.