You're contracting yourself. Either they'll spam people or they'll spend good chunk of million dollars in proper marketing team (who ARE professionals and not spammers). Both can't be done at the same time.
You sure do make a meal out of a simple point while at the same time not addressing it.
I don't think it's unreasonable to pursue clarification about what this "Alibaba" stuff is about. Everybody's in now so you can't argue that a speculative valuation is needed to capitalise the project any longer. The million dollars has been paid.
The Bitpay team are at liberty to give out as much or as little information as they want. It wasn't a condition of investing that material details of their business plan or commercial roadmap be divulged. This has deliberately been left to speculation.
But at the same time many people value their investments to the extent that they want to do as much due diligence as possible. There is a lot to find out about this project because it's not just a technical venture but a commercial one as well. The fortunes of one are bound up in the other. Another complexity arises from the nature of cryptocurrency - you're not actually investing in shares of a company, just a currency which you "hope" will get used in the markets that arise from success of the project. So there's no corporate accountability there which makes such due diligence all the more useful in making your own valuation.
I'd like to know how many of these ventures you've invested in that makes you comfortable about challenging due diligence themes so dismissively in the thread. I'm not demanding this information - I'm suggesting it's important. The response can be "shut up, it's a lottery" and that will be fine - I'll make an appropriate valuation and might still stay invested to some extent. On the other hand it might awaken a more instructive discussion amongst both investors and project stakeholders that actually leads to some useful dialog rather than "it's a pump" or "it's a dump"type dialog.