Yeah, I think unless the authors are deliberatly misleading the public (which is of course a possibility, though not very likely I think) it is hard to imagine a scenario where all of this won't turn out to be highly interesting in one way or another (even if it might turn out to not be a superconductor)
I really doubt there’s intentional fraud here, but they were forced to publish (or pre-print to be pedantic) early. [0] This certainly led to less rigor.
