Anupam Mittal, one of the esteemed investors on Shark Tank India, has responded to the recent allegations made against the popular reality show. Dismissing the claims as baseless and lacking evidence, Mittal emphasized the importance of data and facts in evaluating the show’s integrity.
The allegations in question include accusations such as “Sharks do not invest their own money,” “the show is scripted,” and “Sharks only fund profitable companies.” Mittal highlighted that these claims were nothing more than predetermined narratives, lacking any substantiating data or credible sources. He expressed his disappointment with the flimsy controversy and the absence of concrete information.
In response to the alleged accusations, Anupam Mittal shared his views, clarifying his stance. He began by stating that without specific instances or names provided, commenting on the allegations directly would be challenging. Nevertheless, he offered insights based on his experience and observations within the show.
Mittal stressed the significance of the Completion Ratio (CR) as a crucial indicator of the show’s integrity. He explained that globally, approximately 60% of the deals on Shark Tank are successfully completed. In the case of Shark Tank India Season 1, an impressive two-thirds of the deals were finalized, setting a record of sorts. He expressed confidence that Season 2’s CR, set to be available in August, would also be healthy based on the deal momentum.
Addressing questions regarding the factors affecting completion rates and timelines, Mittal presented several key points. Firstly, he highlighted that many of the businesses appearing on Shark Tank are in their early stages, often operating as proprietorships. The founders may lack experience in areas such as company registration and shareholder agreements. The show’s teams provide guidance and support to assist with these issues, which can contribute to the length of time required for deal completion—ranging from 3 to 9 months.
Mittal also acknowledged that not all deals come to fruition due to various factors. Sometimes founders change their minds, fail to meet legal, financial, or tax requirements, or do not fulfill obligations agreed upon when accepting a conditional deal. He emphasized that these occurrences are inherent to the nature of deal-making and can affect completion rates.
Furthermore, Mittal mentioned that some founders may engage in renegotiation or deal-shopping, which can cause delays in the completion process. Although he personally does not encourage such behavior, he remains open to finding win-win structures that benefit both parties involved.
Taking a broader perspective, Mittal highlighted the positive impact of Shark Tank India on democratizing Indian entrepreneurship. With a staggering number of over 200,000 entries, 388 pitches, nearly 50% of which were presented by women, and approximately 200 offers amounting to around 150 crores, the show has emerged as a powerful catalyst for fostering entrepreneurial talent in India.
In conclusion, Anupam Mittal urged critics to back their critiques with data and specificity rather than relying on incomplete anecdotes and expert opinions that generate clickbait-y headlines but fail to capture the full truth. He extended an open invitation to any founders who may have made such claims, urging them to come forward. If any genuine grievances exist, Mittal expressed a willingness to address and rectify them. However, he cautioned against unfounded complaints stemming from frustrations over not receiving investment without fulfilling their obligations, regarding such incidents as valuable lessons.
The controversy surrounding Shark Tank India is yet another example of how baseless allegations and sensationalism can easily overshadow the positive impact of such shows. As Anupam Mittal rightly points out, it is essential to rely on data and specific information to form accurate assessments, rather than succumbing to narratives that lack substantial evidence.
