I think a key point has been missing from this discussion. Any money you apply toward the game is funding the development of the game. If you don't want to continue to fund the development of the game, you don't have to. Any perks that you may receive (ships to test, etc.) as a result are subject to change while the game is in development.
The ships are expensive, yes. It is easy to see that when people spend that much money on something, they expect something tangible in return….simply dumping money into a nebulous development schedule is a hard sell. I personally think CIG has been upfront about this distinction, but maybe they could do a better job of it since these angry posts keep popping up on here, Spectrum, and Reddit about "I purchased x and I'm now getting y or z". Bottom line: Cash goes to fund the game development. To expect anything more is folly at this point.
CIG has world-class developers but has always been lacking in effective communication and managing expectations. I honestly think they were caught off guard by the amount of funds they received and spent several years coming to grips with what they wanted to deliver and how to get there…the very definition of Development Hell and that phase sowed a lot of seeds of doubt. At some point, Star Citizen vastly outgrew its initial concept. It is now, in my opinion, one of the most complex software development projects on the planet. It really is a moonshot for gaming and could very well be the last killer app designed solely for the traditional PC. I get a lot of enjoyment out of watching them push the limits of what a game engine can do (finally putting to good use all the $$$$ I've dumped into my PCs over the years) and look forward to seeing this unfold over the next several years. Even considering their massive technical and scope challenges, I think marketing/communication and managing backer's expectations along the way could be their biggest challenge yet.