Yes - it's true VSCO developed Kodachrome and I will say this with 100% truth as I'm the one who did the the majority of the developing: It's unbelievably difficult and not worth the effort to develop this stuff on a small scale. The reason it went bust is because it's too expensive to develop and makes zero sense when there are much simpler and more obtainable C-41 and E-6 processes. Digital photography didn't help it's plight either.
Kodachrome is a beautiful film stock, but it's very romanticized, mainly due to the beautiful imagery that was created with it over the decades. I think this is why it's put on such a high pedestal in the film community.
If Kodak (rather Kodak Alaris) decided to bring this back in a way that was scalable and had a good ROI, I would applaud them, but I just don't see it happening. Ektachrome was made to replace Kodachrome with the much simpler E-6 process.
Yes, we were crazy to pursue it, but it was an incredibly fun and challenging project to work on.
Mad scientists at home that decide to pursue this are going to come to the same conclusion I did throughout this process: It's tedious, expensive, time consuming and your results are going to vary wildly depending on how tight your development process is and the quality of your film. If your film was not freezer stored or shows any signs of age fogging (which is hard to determine from buying rolls from folks here or on ebay), throw the roll of KC in the trash.
Mowrey has confirmed this many times on this forum and having pursued and successfully developed it, I can say with 100% confidence it's not worth the trouble on expired Kodachrome and a non-existent K-14 process. May he rest in peace.