Divyank Turakhia is back with another "unicorn," and this time he says it's worth $1.5 billion without taking any outside money. That's convenient - no pesky investors asking for audited financials or independent valuations.
Look, Turakhia isn't some nobody. The dude sold Media.net for close to $900 million back in 2016, so he's definitely built valuable stuff before. But declaring your own bootstrapped company worth $1.5 billion based on... what exactly? Revenue multiples? Asset valuations? Wild guesses?
The Turakhia brothers have a track record of building billion-dollar companies without external funding, but self-declared valuations are different from market-tested ones.
The "Startup Studio" Magic Trick
AI.tech calls itself a "startup studio" that builds multiple AI companies simultaneously. That's a fancy way of saying "we do lots of different AI stuff." Their portfolio includes Advertising.tech and apparently still owns part of Media.net.
But here's the thing about holding companies: their value is only as real as the exits they can generate. Saying your collection of AI projects is worth $1.5 billion is meaningless until someone actually pays $1.5 billion for them.
I've seen this playbook before. Build a bunch of related companies, claim massive synergies, throw around big valuation numbers, hope everyone just nods along.
India's Unicorn Inflation Problem
The Indian startup ecosystem is having a moment, but let's be honest about what these "unicorn" numbers actually mean. When every other company claims billion-dollar status, the term loses all meaning.
Glance worth close to $2 billion after one year? PhysicsWallah at nearly $4 billion for teaching physics online? These numbers aren't real market prices - they're founder fantasies with spreadsheet backing. India only minted 5 unicorns so far this year, way down from the boom years.
The difference between real unicorns with actual VC backing and self-declared bootstrapped unicorns is the difference between market-tested value and founder fantasy. India's got over 120 unicorns with transparent valuations from external investors.
The Bootstrap Advantage (If It's Real)
Look, if AI.tech actually generates enough cash flow to justify a $1.5 billion valuation, more power to them. Bootstrapped companies that grow profitably are way more sustainable than VC-funded cash burners. Companies like Zoho and Veeam prove bootstrap unicorns are possible.
But without external investors demanding proof of concept, financial audits, and growth metrics, we're just taking Turakhia's word that his three-year-old AI company is worth more than most public tech companies. Other bootstrap success stories had revenue transparency and independent verification.
Show Me The Money
Here's what I want to see before believing this valuation:
- Annual revenue numbers (not projections)
- Profit margins and cash flow statements
- Customer acquisition costs and retention rates
- What exactly those 1,600+ employees are actually building
- Independent third-party valuation methodology
Until then, this feels like a PR move to position AI.tech for either acquisition talks or eventual IPO hype.
The Real Test
The only valuation that matters is what someone will actually pay. If Turakhia can sell AI.tech for $1.5 billion or take it public at that valuation, then great - he's built another massive company.
But until that happens, this is just another rich founder playing unicorn theater with their own money. And hey, when you've already made $900 million, you can afford to dream big with your own cash.