That is your version of the story. It is incorrect. Many results have been clear-cut and compelling, but you invent reasons to doubt them, such as your statements about entrainment in the Fleischsmann-Pons boil off experiments. Or your assertion that a 1 L cell will displace ~20 L of water.
Clear-cut results do not attract money in controversial fields. They attract attacks. They attract academic politics and irrational opposition. This can be seen in the history of many scientific and technological breakthroughs such as the laser and the MRI. The better the results, the stronger the opposition was. In cold fusion, for example:
The National Cold Fusion Institute published definitive proof in peer-reviewed journals that cold fusion produces tritium, so it is a nuclear effect. The Institute was quickly attacked and closed down. People such as you, who are determined not to believe any claim about cold fusion, never comment on these results. Or SRI, or Miles, or any other. (For some reason you feel free to invent nonsense about Fleischmann and Pons, but not these others.)
Most research at SRI was closed down as soon as they published positive results. The ANS paid Hoffman to write an absurd little book justifying this. The leader of the anti-cold fusion faction at EPRI wrote the introduction to it. They paid Hoffman hundreds of thousands, which is more than many cold fusion studies. The book was so full of lies it nearly triggered a lawsuit, so the publisher added a slip of paper with an addendum. It is one of the few true statements in the book.
When Miles published his results (http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MilesManomalousea.pdf), the managers at China Lake were furious with him. They cited his report as the reason to reassign him to a menial job as a stock room clerk, despite the fact that he was a Fellow of the Institute. See pp. 152 - 161:
While good studies were attacked and closed down, Kamiokande and other inept studies conducted by people opposed to cold fusion fusion were lavishly funded. See:
“Clear cut results” seems rather subjective.
Results that are replicable by multiple trusted sources using the same BOM, build instructions, testing protocols/procedures and getting the same results will always attract money.
Attacks will certainly come, but will wither and die if he results are replicable.