I trhink you are right with the statement about the majority.
The only problem I do see, is: The rebadging you described in your posting is exactly what Minolta did in the past. So if they did not succeed to come over 3% marketshare in DSLR market with this strategy, how Sony thinks they will succedd without anything REALLY special?
I doubt that the body only will help here alone. They can not offer it significant cheaper than Canon. And for teh same price, they can not offer significant better DSLRs than Canon.
So with what can Sony really suprise/differentiate? It has to be something unique.
- Antishake? Is history, nothing new and the market did obviously not see "AS" as the significant difference to be convinced to buy the product.
- Sensor? no, see obove
- Build quality? The majority does not need "Contax quality"
Maybe someone has better ideas, but I can only think of lenses, to really differntiate from others nowadays. At least from a marketing perspective. Not everybody will see the difference between Zeiss glass and other lenses. But nevertheless it sounds good in a sales pitch
I agree that it is difficult to come up with 20 new lenses within a year. But if these are rebadged Contax & ZF lenses, this would be possible IMHO.
9 N-lenses (17-35, 24-85, 28-80, 50, 85, 100 Makro, 70-200, 70-300, 400)
Maybe some 645 lenses? (i.e. 140, 120 Makro)
around 3-5 ZF lenses - fixed focal lenses.
x-amount of RTS-mount lenses
So the design of at least +14 new lenses would be already there, only production and quality control would be the problem. And some of the "old" RTS mount lenses would not be bad either. With new anti-flare know-how, this would be also interesting (21mm, 25mm, 18mm, etc.)
But as you said, how many and which one is now speculation and guessing. But I am pretty sure that some will be Zeiss lenses. Both because of our sources and because everything else does not make sense in my view.