Troubling indicator
When pressed, they dismiss the risk of a Kessler syndrome. That's a red flag, hyping the potential while dismissing risks. There are a few examples of planning to account for or reduce the impact of an exponential debris problem, such as SpaceX and at least one other designing their LEO satellites so they'll experience re entry within five years or less, as well as operating in a low enough orbit the debris will also de orbit due to friction, or claiming they'll simply launch replacements as fast as they degrade since their satellites are so cheap. But this feels very much like head in the sand wishful thinking/ intentionally ignoring consequences we can't model very well. When the number of launched satellites is going up exponentially, some by companies that have risk of going under, some by companies or groups that are taking a move fast break things mentality, I can't imagine we're not going to collectively need to clean up the mess within a decade. It could close out certain orbital planes entirely for decades, even the lower ones they claim could clean themselves up. It all depends on the details of the debris field/cascade, which we won't know until we experience it. It would be nice to not have to experience it...