It matters to tourists - and may bring in more - because of word of mouth. If everything is lettered in a historical manner, rather than the actual brand name, it might cause some confusion.
Well worn response: Historical accuracy will bring in more riders than word of mouth.
Well worn response: Only railfans - a small minority - even know what they are seeing is accurate, brand name is more important.
Well worn response: It's a museum, visitors expect historical accuracy.
Well worn response: It's also a buisness. Pepsi doesn't sell it's products in red cans, and UP is so worried about someone mis-using their logos the are actively persuing anyone who uses them at all.
Well worn response: But most tourists don't give a rat's south end what's painted on the equipment etc. they're there for the steam. So "if it does not matter to the tourists, then why not do it historically correct"?
Please go back to the beginning of this post and start over.
It's a circular debate, and we don't have the answers. There are good points on both sides, but in the end, we just don't know whether accuracy will trump word of mouth - or if they're approximately equal in importance.
My personal opinion - for the time being - the C&TS needs to take the safest course, and anything that even hints at greater fiscal return for the C&TS is the way to go. That means approaching operations from the point of view of a businessman, not a curator. That also means a greater emphasis on branding and marketing.
In a few years when ridership is in the 60,000 - 100,000 range then we can go for museum grade accuracy since the business aspect will be in good shape.
Don