Because like myself don't think all people look at cruisers as a "laid back" ride without any consideration to performance. In fact, i doubt anyone would prefer a cruiser that does nothing well but cruise. Cruising may be the 1st consideration for some, but that doesn't mean they don't wish for more. Why wouldn't you? I, like many or all here, ride a Tbird for the very fact that it DOES corner and perform well. Just because i bought a cruiser don't mean i wasn't looking for that. So your next question will probably be, "then why didn't you buy a sportbike?" Simple....i hate them. I love the cruiser ergos and look, but i also like performance both in handling and power. Hate everything about sportbikes except the performance.
What i don't get is why people think that everyone must fit into some sort of mold. Your question is one i see all the time, but i just don't get it. Why must someone want a bike to NOT do certain things well? I can understand if the thing they do well is not your #1 consideration and it happens to hurt whatever IS your #1 consideration. But if it does it all, why would you not be ecstatic about that? The way I see it you're getting a huge bonus. And i believe 99% of those looking at a cruiser would be happier if the bike they want does it all well. And i don't think anyone is surprised at cruisers scraping pegs. It may be mentioned in a shootout but i b=never heard any reviewer sound surprised, only reporting the fact.
Anyways, I think the thunderbird is helping to rewrite the book on what a cruiser can and should be. In the past manufacturers didn't even bother with those things when they built a cruiser, and thats why there are so may mediocre ones that do one thing well and 50 things horribly. Thats changing and it's a good thing. IMHO a cruiser that cruises well and does nothing else well is a very flawed motorcycle.