I think the company went wrong in going after a corporate model...

I think the company went wrong in going after a corporate model with an unproven (regulatory) product and thought that expressed concern for mental health by businesses and governments would produce revenue. Low and behold the companies are not that interested in paying out for a product that is not regulated and requires hardware.
The company was still in R and D when Jack came along with multiple studies and IP acquisition (Canada, sleep labs, several clinical studies - adult and paediatrics). All this was ongoing before Jack took over. He pivoted the company away from this basic company building work. Research work was abandoned. I doubt he understood the need but who knows.
At the same time an unbelievable amount of money was wasted, and still is, going after company based stress monitoring. Why did they buy a small Perth based psych. consulting firm? The salaries, corporate spend, etc is just ridiculous($1m a month and not counting share hand outs) and the need now for more money very obvious.
The company simply can not keep going like this even after a raise (which will not be much given the MC about 2 months worth at current spend). They have to stop the current pathway immediately and go back to basic R and D, regulatory studies etc. Then go to the insurers, governments etc and say that this will save lives, money and works better than anything else on the market. Of course if the studies fail then it was all smoke and mirrors anyway.
As for the board resigning if the spill gets up, it seems very reasonable as it would be untenable to work with people you just sacked. Who would do such a thing?