~
While Shark Tank has made starting a business sound exciting, there are many people entering the market unprepared for the operations side of running a business. This is rarely shown.
I never watched any episode of the copied version in India. I have come across some YT videos wherein these Sharks have declined many entrepreneurs who have grown their business tenfold. Most Sharks are not in profit now, but it is a given fact that a 10 years time frame is always used to evaluate investment growth or decline. I assume this show is still young maybe in the future their investment will gain profits.
I too have watched a few clips from the Indian version, but I used to watch the original Shark Tank. I used to listen to podcasts from Mark Cuban and Kevin O’Leary, and what they tell you is that the majority of the deals confirmed on television do not go through because of different reasons. Only half of the television deals actually go through, and only about twenty percent or less of those investments make them a good profit.
When it comes to rejection from the show, the most famous was DoorBot, which later became Ring—a smart video doorbell created by Jamie Siminoff. All of the Shark Tank investors rejected it, except Kevin O’Leary, who wanted the business but with a royalty structure. Hence, the deal was rejected, and the company was later sold to Amazon for a billion dollars.
Jamie actually shared his experience—he went to the show expecting an investment, and when he got rejected, he was really struggling. However, that massive media exposure helped him take the company to a billion-dollar valuation, making it a highly successful business. I really like the concept of the show, and that exposure for young talent is a great alternative path to getting on the map. There are so many examples where ideas were rejected from Shark Tank but still went on to become massive empires.
Why does it feel like this could be an insider job? The wallet was compromised in 2025 and the funds were still present in the same wallet ?
Their sweeping service failed ? Isn't it too many coincidences to label it as a breach. I think these companies deliberately do it to evade taxes.
So I strongly think it as an insider job.
There are too many coincidences to actually believe their story. Their backend team is not that great, and they have proved that yet again. Initially, they rejected the hack claim, and they were forced to accept the fact only after a blockchain investigator provided the details.
