Dropping the tactical nuke of ChatGPT was PR brilliance, nearly anyone would kill for shifting the public conversation that dramatically. That kind of marketing first is a synonym for "winner", it almost doesn't matter what the actual product is, or if it works.
But it does, and then look at the impossibility of their position. If the massive cost of research and operations _augments a profitable line of business_, it is perhaps acceptable. Otherwise, you're just setting cash on fire.
Extremely difficult to operate as a non-profit, more realistic as a division than a standalone org, as much as I dislike saying my second pro-MS thing in a week, it makes sense, and I am OK with them operating anywhere except tucked inside an ad business.
Maybe this sort of thing should be operated by the government funding or whatever, but... it isn't.