Derek's original hope was since the preparation of the material was relatively simple that replication of the material might be straightforward. This. . .has not been the case. Not anywhere even near the case.

He then describes how bad the replication efforts have been and how poorly the Korean preprints described the process.

Nextbigfuture emphasizes that the disappointment and misjudgement was upon those who thought LK99 would be easy to replicate and that the description provided was sufficient.

The ignored counter evidence to trying to make a good copy of LK99 would be easy:
1. the authors said that of the thousands of samples that they made only 10% worked. The original team who are presumably the best and most experienced at this had a lot of trouble making enough to be measurable and they only had the process good enough to work one in ten times.