The financial condition of the company wasn't used in the analysis other than to mention briefly what they were at a time when they posted them which they no longer do. #1 and Mach have never produced a valuation to my knowledge. Furthermore, the company is no longer a developmental company. They have products that have been approved for sale and a VP of sales. They've also stated that they've entered into sales contracts with multiple parties. Once that happened, they ceased to become a developmental stage company. Just because you're unsuccessful in selling the products you have does not deem you a developmental stage company. Proctor & Gamble develop new products all the time. That doesn't mean they are a developmental stage company.

What was conducted was a comparison of several similar companies; an industry wide analysis based around the law of averages. It was more than reasonable and is a technique often employed by most stock valuation professionals.