I doubt it. RF cameras are inherently expensive to make (the rangefinder mechanism requires a high degree of precision and a certain amount of hand calibration) and appeal to only a small part of the user spectrum, meaning that economies of scale aren't possible the way they are with mass-market SLRs.
I suspect that the Cosina Bessas represent the least expensive film RFs that can meet the expectations of current RF users; getting any more cost out of them would involve cheapening the product in ways that buyers would find unacceptable.
The Epson R-D 1 was a digital RF using a rather conservative design and Bessa RF technology, making it probably the least expensive way to generate a digital RF camera. It was a good camera, but certainly not a runaway success that would have spurred imitators to join the marketplace and drive down prices through competition.
Also, many observers still complained that it was too expensive, while others criticized it for lacking assembly quality or more advanced features (which would have pushed up its cost further.) This shows that Epson's chosen market position put it between a rock and a hard place: Anything it could have done to enhance perceived quality or features would have driven up the price further, increasing price-driven sales resistance; anything it could have done to lower the price would have required "de-contenting" the camera, increasing quality-and-feature-driven sales resistance.
Basically, they had chosen to target their camera in a part of the market where there isn't a lot of "white space" (room for new product introductions) and the amount of white space that WAS available wasn't big enough to allow the kind of high volume that would have made economy of scale possible. So while I don't consider the R-D 1 a failure, I also think any sensible camera manufacter would see that it also didn't point the way toward a growth opportunity.
I suspect Leica is going to be more successful with the M8 precisely because they recognize that the RF camera market is a niche market, not a potential high-volume market, and their manufacturing process is set up to work for niche-market products.
It's a bit like building cars. If you're going to build a high-volume sedan or SUV, it's prohibitively expensive to assemble it by hand and much more practical and profitable to invest in an automated assembly line. On the other hand, if you're trying to build a low-volume exotic sports car, you'll never sell enough of them to pay off assembly tooling; it's actually more cost-efficient to have it put together by craftsmen in a relatively simple plant. You have to pick the business model that suits the market potential of your product.
