KIA's sales of FWD vehicles has failed to gain much traction despite offering a better warrantee and a lower price, the reasons why they fail is their bland styling and poor reliability reputation. This represents the mind set of the American consumer, they see KIA as a inferior product. Time to show you so more evidence. If you theory of lowest price=highest sales was correct, then the Honda Accord and the Toyota Camry would not be the two best selling sedans in the U.S. for the last several years. The problem you just don't seem to understand is people will pay for for a product they think is superior. The price difference between the Accord and Camry in comparison between the Fusion and Malibu is on average around $2,000-5,000 MORE for the Accord and Camry when similarly equipped, but the two outsells both of them. Ford has had some trouble getting the Fusion to sell as well as they hoped. They offered it for a good price, they have pushed it, they have mass produced it, but guess what, it isn't selling. Now why do you think they are not selling. It is simple, Toyota and Honda are considered superior product lines, whereas Ford and Chevrolet are considered to be inferior products. This is proof that people car more about perception more than price.
If Dodge and GM offers their pony car lines, Ford will probably run into the same problem they are having with all their other product lines. They will have too much supply without the necessary demand. Dodge and GM intering that market will take sales away from them and Ford doesn't seem to understand that they are producing too much supply of vehicles. This strategy might seem to make sense to you because it is currently working for the Mustang, but when there is competition, it won't work out as well. The domestic manufactures keep trying to fight each other and the Japanese manufactures by discounting, and it keeps failing. Dodge has finally understood this, they are developing more the strategy the Japanese have of offering a product that is nicer to own, but costs a little more, and it is succeeding.
Simple fact, if you priced the Mustang GT at the current price of the GTO and gave the GTO the Mustang's price, the Mustang would go down some but its sales would still beat the GTO by a huge margin. People flocked over to the Ford dealerships because they loved the styling and the historic name "Ford Mustang" has an identity that Americans identify themselves with. The GTO would still not sell, because it does not stand out like the Mustang did. If you don't believe me look at Grand Prix coupe sales in comparison with Mustang sales.
The Viper is still in production and is about to be refreshed again; therefore, it did not fail. The Viper would have failed against the Corvette, if they would have decided to compete against it. Chevrolet would always be able to undersell them no matter what Dodge would do. The Corvette's name would beat them in sales even if Dodge somehow managed to under sell the Corvette because people are loyal to the Corvette just as they are with the Mustang, even more so since it is older. Dodge did the only thing they really could do during the 90s when they introduced the Viper. It is better to make a newer, smaller segment than to try and compete in a segment that has a limited market with extreme brand loyalty. If there would have been large enough market, they would have launched a Corvette competitor.
you are trying to JUSTIFY Dodge charging $3000-$5000 more per car than a comparable Mustang model??
That is precisely your problem with understanding the situation. They are not completely comparable like you think they are. Look at what the Mustang really is. It is a car with a nice looking shell with a bunch of left over parts, just like the Taurus and Crown Vic. Just take a look at the past. The '96 Cobra model that they made such a big deal about had the 4.6L 32valve engine