I agree with what your saying, but that’s doesn’t mean the end result is even close to an economically viable fusion reactor. Look back in 1990 people could have spend a lot of money building a truly monumental reactor and hitting Q>100 briefly. Nobody suggested that was a good idea because all the other unsolved problems which is why ITER was being built in the first place. The point wasn’t simply to scale it was to test blanket materials etc in an environment very close to a working reactor.

SPARK is undoubtedly a more efficient design but it’s not a solution for any of the major outstanding problems.

Of course. They are basically a privately funded research group at this point. No one has any idea how to operate a profitable fusion plant.