It's 5 hours later, no more adjustments shown on MazdaUSA.
I really can't figure out what their market is.
-If they wanted to play against the X5, the "I really want a high HP, I6" crowd, they really should have bumped the engine specs (like BMW did), and the BMW X5 sales volume is < 60K units/year in NA. (trying to scavenge some sales from a fairly small niche).
-If they wanted to compete against a Lexus RX (twice the BMW X5 sales volume, a much larger group to cross-shop), they needed to be smaller/lighter (X5 length IMO would have worked great), or boosted HP/torque for both base and S engines, or had a multi-K lower price to get a Turbo S Premium or Premium+ a couple K below the equivalent RX trims. Otherwise it's a "why bother", particularly as the RX, as a Gen 5 vehicle, simply does what it does well.
Frankly, having a 7K price differential to get to the S is a whoops to me. If they really wanted good sales they should have had the Turbo S versions priced much closer to the Turbo numbers, maybe a 2 - 3 K upgrade option vs. 7K (or else just drop the lower HP engine offering entirely).
Doing a third-row delete may have been a cheap thing on their end, but I wouldn't be surprised if the cheap way out ends up matched by bad sales volume (and/or scavenging sales from their own CX-90, hardly a win-win - they should be trying to grow market share, not cannibalize themselves).
I wish Mazda all the best, but like the X5 comment above, I'm pretty much getting pushed back to the RX. I do like the cargo capacity, but that by itself is likely a relatively small group of buyers.