Old and silly... your words.
I wouldn't characterize Leica owners as such. I was a Leica owner at about 29 (if that can count as old in silly) but I know the reaction that most people had to seeing a M9.
It usually was "why are you shooting film... I'm not... that's a digital camera? Well once you make the jump to full frame you'll never go back to a crop sensor... that's full frame... how many frames per second, megapixels, and autofocus points aren't in there? So you have to manually do everything? How do I zoom... wait so you have to do everything from focusing, to zooming with your legs, and it costs how much? No thanks I'll stick with my [insert brand here].
The point of the story is that Leica is somewhat of a niche brand but exposure of a product and familiarity goes a long way to ensure future success. Most people don't know about HCB or Magnum to the same extent as a Leicaphile would know. People are used to more automation as well these days be it smartphone or DSLR. People flock to Canon and Nikon, not because they are far and away better than everything else, but rather they are familiar and confident in the brand. It doesn't matter that camera sales are down, that Nikon appears to be struggling financially, or that mirrorless is generally the only thing other than cinema cameras that's making strong profits - people in various cultures attribute quality with certain brands. Leica is seen as quality but younger people aren't really familiar with Leica to the same level as say Canon, Nikon, Sony, or Fuji. It doesn't mean they are better but it's no different than say in cars - far more people are familiar with Porsche, Ferrari, and Lamborghini than say a Pagani or a Kornigsegg which is just as capable performance wise but doesn't have the global saturation of the aforementioned brands. A mass produced "entry level" model would go a long way to increase awareness of the Leica brand for future generations.
That's all I was saying. No need to be defensive as I like the heritage of Leica but it seems they were in a somewhat strained financial position about 10 years ago so maybe it's time to mix some more of the old traditions and the new direction. Seems like not too long ago they abandoned the R for this reason of not being able to compete at the speed that Canon and Nikon was innovating... I doubt they can keep up with the other mirrorless makers at the pace they are moving to mature mirrorless cameras.
In all seriousness I don't know a single M owner that doesn't want a cheaper M-mount alternative that takes the same lenses, has the advantages of mirrorless like Focus peaking, image zoom for critical focus, and costs less as to not attract quite as much attention. It's not about supplanting the M but augmenting it in the key weaker areas. It really can just be a Q without the lens built in and that by itself will sell as fast as they make them. Like all things, if you fail to adapt to changing times then you will be left behind.