It would seem a lot more objective if people would at least admit the abysmal track record of giving guidance that turns out to be false on things like shipping dates, product launches, revenue, margins, etc. As long as shareholders defend them when their guidance is false, they will continue to do it.
Look at your logic. "Guidance that turns out to be false"...."when their guidance is false"...
This implies that they know the guidance will not be accurate at the time they give it. Clearly that's not the case. I'm certain that, each time, they have given shareholders information that they have received from their customers and which they believe to be true. They don't purposely give out "false expectations" IMO. (I can understand you and others may feel that way if you adhere to the tenet that EDIG is a scam of some sort or exists simply to promote its stock. I happen to think that's a crock, but I'll not try to persuade anybody on that issue as the camps are just too far apart.) Should they be issuing information they're given by OEM's? Absolutely! I would MUCH rather be kept informed by a company I am invested in, and kept apprised of the most current expectations than be left wondering what the hell is going on. I also understand that things change and business is dynamic, so if these don't play out, I won't call the lynching mob. As I've said before, I have seen quite a bit of growth, and prefer the current management mindsets over those of the past. I am frustrated by the wait for the FT product, but think EDIG has done its best to keep its shareholders informed. I happpen to appreciate that.
Market Data 
Markets 
