But GSW was backed by VC money ... there is nothing to suggest...

But GSW was backed by VC money ... there is nothing to suggest taking on more VC would make this company any better. One only needs to look at VC fund return benchmarks to understand their view about how many of their investments will be profitable.

There are many other reasons that early stage companies want to IPO...the main one is maintaining control (product, vision). If you've ever seen a VC term sheet, you would appreciate how toxic VC money can be with their control provisions, veto rights, anti-dilution.

GSW is well and truly not alone in its life-stage as a listed tech ASX company. there are many others who's business models will ultimately be tested - eventually, you have to deliver an offering to customers that is compelling, and they have to want to pay for it at some stage. For pre-revenue companies, this question mark will always hover until that can demonstrate the runway.

The main issue here for GSW is shareholder/investor view about the integrity of management. The business model hasn't changed. If the share price falls, there will be many who will view it as a huge buying opportunity regardless.

Watching this unfold from afar, without ever owning a share, I find it staggering the vitriol towards GSW - is it because it was founded by an ex-AFL player? Is it good ol' Australian tall poppy syndrome rearing its head again? Is it because people are jealous they missed the 20x earn from IPO to the high? A combination of the above?

Investors have different goals and incentives. For many holders, they have made a life-changing earn out of their GSW holdings, and I tip my hat to them. Wish I had! Others like to back companies that have "impact", or the ability to be generational.

Sort of what make a market!