The valuation from the public raise seemed wildly high imo for something pre-revenue, pre-product, pre-user, and without any unique IP. Seems like basically they got caught in being overvalued at their crowd funding seed stage and put themselves in a jam where they either had the equivalent of a down round to bring in the advisors they wanted or to part ways with them in what was ultimately going to be a public situation because they’re overvalued for the stage they’re at and got ahead of themselves with communicating about the advisory relationship.

I don’t see much that’s really damning though. It’s maybe just getting out too far over your skis from lack of experience. Some of the comments are a bit rough in the article, but I wouldn’t write them off from that.