How about a launch status HEAT team.
It takes about 5 minutes of your time to inform concerned Investors about the situation.
This is 5 minutes out of the 5 months OVERTIME you have had.& 7 days since you gave the definitive launch date.
Even if this is legit, you guys are still a-holes.

They’re operating a registered private business.  

It's not FUD, it's what happened, and ask yourself this, if I was following chris when he was active on blitz, and I owned a +40k bag of blitz out of a total coin cap of 4M (I.e I was a big supporter), how many stratis do you think I got in the ICO? My stratis bags are full, I only finally came to the conclusion about what happened in dec last year, up until then I was concerned but I still held out some hope that Chris would do the right thing by blitz investors, especially the so called executives who had big bags in the hope of running a BDN node. I don't trade, so ups and downs mean nothing to me, and I went all in during the ico, so from a purely self interested stand point I want stratis to succeed, but I don't trust chris anymore, and I think he lied to avoid an ethical but costly blitz swap. To me he's dishonest and ruthless, but so was steve jobs, and I don't doubt he might make stratis a success, but imo he's an unethical scum bag, like steve jobs was. I guess I saw those pics of him today and realised that's what a ruthless asshole in business looks like, same as steve jobs. I never fell for the hero worship of that guy, he was a selfish prick, and treated people like dirt. When I saw Chris' face I saw the same attitude, so yeah, some can kiss his ass and talk 'moon' and cheer for stratis profits, but I see something different.

Github movement detected

5 days past the launch date.

No formal update on the status of Heat launch.

No real apology to nervous investors.

They only really responded due to the C-cex ultimatum which accounts for over 20% of funds.

This just feels so familiar to the countless scams i have seen on bitcointalk.

HEAT client will be open source at launch. HEAT server is MIT licensed and will be open sourced soon after launch if not at launch. It's not decided at this point due to conflicts of interest involved. JV partners and potential investors prefer closed source for some time to get ahead of competitors cloning our proprietary source based on 3 years of work. What we didn't account for when planning the otherwise beneficial closed source period, is that some exchanges understandably request open source. We still have to make sure whether that's publicly, and strictly at launch or if it can be 1-3 months afterwards.

As stated previously, we had to put quite a bit of effort to roll back our FIMK-related processes to base HEAT on the older version of NXT before it was GNU licensed. This has an important reason - Heat Ledger Ltd builds corporate solutions based on the HEAT technology that's MIT licensed (can be closed source). It's natural for corporate customers to request the exact software they use is NOT open source. In fact it's very difficult to obtain customers if the software terms state that the whole piece you provide them has to be published open source.

Our escrow partner C-CEX is being pressured by some ICO participants to cancel the ICO and buy the HEAT tokens back. We've agreed to provide the wallet and HEAT tokens within 4 days from now or the ICO funds on C-CEX would be used to buy back the HEAT pre-sale tokens. They also requested we need to adjust the HEAT API to contain full NXT-compatible RPC for the part that exchangers use. That's no problem and is actually useful to readily offer NXT-compatible procedures for easier barrier of entry for 3rd party integration.

If nothing changes and c-cex pulls up buy support in 4 days, my understanding it's going to be @0.0001, correct?