Well, I guess you would know better than anybody on here what the challenges are operating in this space.
1. Don't take new funds to keep the boutique approach = risk a sudden redemption run and forced to sell at lows. Answer - take in more cash when it is available and keep some aside for redemptions + attempt to ensure there is a waiting list for units when a current holder wants out.
2. Trade in the small/micro-cap space to get high returns = risk of having to hold large positions with associated liquidity risks and the inevitable difficulty in managing the confounding factors of time, price and market sentiment. Should you manage this for best long-term gain or least short-term volatility? No right answer.
3. Keep investors confidence through disclosure = run the risk of further confounding your own trades or being judged as misleading. Or of competitors using it against you - particular since the larger ones could delight in pushing your NAV around with their pocket money and undermining the very confidence you wish to create. No right answer.
4. Keep the fund small = costs have to be high relative to FUM and therefore the fund is going to look a shocker if the comparison is all about fees. Answer = the proof of the pudding is in the eating - and the long-term return to the investors matters more. (Maybe some investors here should try adding up their time cost and brokerage and trying to calculate the effective "fees" on their own portfolios).
Only the naive would expect Pie to be able to keep churning out the historic returns with an increasing FUM - and most of that increase comes from growth, not new investors - but it doesn't mean they can't still be a good investment for the future or should be considered "dodgy" in the way you seem to imply.
Looking forward to your analysis on MINT, the homzen. :)