That's a bit missing the point. The entry level Mac Mini 2014 has the same processor as the MBA 2014 entry model. They merged the volume of both entry models to drive up the economies of scale on that processor. If Apple is release a new Mini at the same time as a new MBA is is more than likely they are going to do the same thing now. At least for the entry models. They shared before, so they are probably sharing again.
The MBA moved up in 2017 to an i5 5350U ( still 2 cores ) .(retails in the $315 range). If map to the 8th generation with the some suffix then there is a i5 8350U ( about $297 ) , but that backslides a bit on GPU and technically Kaby Lake Refresh (although year old refresh might have higher discounts from Intel. ) . There are suppose to be some Whiskey Lake speed bumps in this zone too ( but perhaps still now relief on the GPU backslide. )
That goes to perhaps the top end SKU standard configuration ( Best of 'good, better, best" ) or probably BTO, but that end of the spectrum probably doesn't completely define the Mini.
MBA has same entry issue. Need to hit lower price points. The bottom end of the mini has the exact same issue.
Quads are readily available even on the lower end of the set of processors Apple would likely pick. Intel's dual with revived AMD has made that really a non issue. ( Even more so with the Whiskey Lake refresh coming in Q4 (around same time as Mini and MBA. )
if Apple got on to an approximately 2 year schedule with a regular cadence that would probably be fine. The iMacs and MBP have gone stale in certain years over the last 3-4 also. Intel, is keeping they 'yearly" update with tons of "refried beans" this year. Other than the gross security bug fixes (to some later in the year) and clock tweaks ( somewhat at the expense of power) there isn't really alot going on. Moving 4 cores down the line up is to a large extent a price point move, not a technology improvement move.
AMD has yet to put down a stable yearly track record too. ( this year looks on target, but they are way off the yearly cadence in GPU. )
Every 18-24 months probably won't be complained about too much if it keeps costs under control. ( If the Sun comes up there will complaints about Apple in macrumors forums. Large scale in user community the vast majority aren't going to be buying quickly. )
I don't think it is talking about the lower end at all. Primarily because it isn't interesting to the stock speculators that read Bloomberg. The lower end will help keep Apple's unit numbers from backsliding, but if Apple can drive the average selling price higher, it has similar impact the iPhone X has had. ( less iPhones ... more money. Good, buy the stock. )
How the MBA takes over the Mini's pricing spots when the MBA has a substantially bigger Bill of Materials (BOM) is kind of hand waving. Not sure how Apple would actually do that.
But that is why even if the Mini is a "lower priority" Mac, Apple has to do something now. Demand for the Mini will fall off a cliff if the entry MBA has 4 cores. Mini has no other problem in that Apple has been lazy and has done absolutely nothing. The "no nothing" decision tree option for them has finally disappeared.
I think if Apple sees some activity of "pros" buying up a higher amount of the top end BTO configurations the Mini won't fall all the way back to " lower/lowest priority" Mac status and another 4 year "Rip van Winkle" drought. Apple is trying to look for something to keep them interested. The low end Mini price points are more necessary (reaching minimal volume targets ) than interesting for them.
