It's real goofy-lookin'.
I can't imagine it's a lift-versus-speed thing. Like how human-powered aircraft have the longest and skinniest wings possible.
Was it shaped that way just to do the quadcopter thing, which they've apparently not used here? I feel like you could just extend the nose so the wings are in the middle, and have a plane that's still plane-shaped.
Reminds me a lot of a Cessna Mixmaster. No front propeller, and the horizontal tail attaches to the engine cowling rather than crossing behind the propeller.
My instinct would be to go full Rutan, build a canard. If we're going with a single engine pusher. No need for the tail booms, everything produces lift, the main problem is flaps really aren't a thing with canards, you land them clean. But, if you're going to bolt VTOL to it somehow, who cares?
There's a thin line between "that looks kind of silly" and "it worked in Kerbal Space Program."
I mean, my vision is basically an electric Velocity.
Well that's one place we can agree anyway, trial and error are very valuable tools, they just need to be weilded carefully and not considered an error too soon. That makes it risky though.
I know i come of as pessimistic, and by a lot of measures i am, but usually only in comparison to the dismissive or condescending attitudes many people seem to have on the subject. Just build trains, duh... They work here, just do it there!
The backlash to poorly thought it arguments are usually people doubling down on their argument in the other direction, so I'd prefer to temper optimism and encourage actual conversation. Even if i may have trouble with that second part :)