"... Personally my base case isn't fraud- it's that they have a...

"... Personally my base case isn't fraud- it's that they have a nice idea in theory but the reality is they've developed a mediocre product that won't ever be commercially viable. All evidence I've seen so far points to this. ..."

There is, if I may say so, rather a lot of supposition in your statement. You are free to think that of course, and free not to invest in the company, but what can you put forward to show others that your 'base case' is correct. Show us all your evidence that you have seen that you base this on and I would be pretty sure it is highly contestable evidence based solely upon opinion.

The thing is that the only evidence that anybody has available to them is that the company has made many, very strong claims that they have an excellent product ready for, or even in the process of, mass production. That would be a ludicrous progression if your opinion was correct. Videos that some people have seen indicate that the product is brilliant, but because of the nature of the demo that is shown, with the presence of some small level of background noise, some people are of the opinion that this noise is coming from the chip, not the demo environment. As 'evidence' that is very tenuous, to say the least, and it is completely at odds with everything that both the demonstrator and the company is saying. Who are people supposed to believe in this case? Those who have some doubts but cannot make them stick - and who as non-holders have nothing to lose if they are wrong, or the company that says very different and has a whole lot more at stake if they try to make and sell a product that won't work?

I know whose opinion would make me feel safer placing my bet.