Shark Tank India 5: Wearable Ring Founder Faces Backlash for Taunting Aman Gupta
In a dramatic episode of Shark Tank India Season 5, a wearable ring brand owner faced severe criticism from Shark Vineeta Singh for repeatedly taunting fellow Shark Aman Gupta and labeling boAt products as inferior. The founder walked away without securing any investment deal after the Sharks expressed concerns about valuation, market competition, and product differentiation.
The Controversial Pitch: Aabo Rings Founder Targets boAt
The episode featured founders Nirav and Atul Hemani pitching their brand Aabo Rings, which offers stylish health monitoring rings. Their premium model, Aabo Pro, is marketed as an AI-powered smart ECG ring with over 30 health tracking parameters. The founders sought an investment of Rs 1.5 crores for 1 percent equity, valuing their company at a staggering Rs 150 crores.
During the presentation, the founder categorized the smart rings market into three segments:
- First category: Premium health-focused rings like Oura
- Second category: Wellness and fitness rings such as Ultra Human
- Third category: Style and fashion-oriented rings
When questioned by Anupam Mittal about where boAt fits in this classification, the hesitant founder suggested that boAt's current ring falls into the third category focused on style and fashion rather than pure health. This remark prompted Aman Gupta to respond with slow claps, challenging the founder's claim that Aabo Rings competes with Oura while dismissing other brands.
Sharks Question Valuation and Product Differentiation
The Sharks expressed skepticism about the Rs 150 crore valuation, especially given the competitive wearable technology market. Namita Thapar pointed out that global brands like Oura dominate the space, while numerous other companies offer similar products. She questioned why another ring brand was necessary in an already crowded market.
Kanika Tekriwal criticized the product's packaging and pricing, noting that the Rs 15,000 price point was significantly higher than boAt's offerings at Rs 4,000-5,000. She emphasized that for most Indian consumers, spending Rs 15,000 on a wearable ring represents a substantial investment.
Anupam Mittal challenged the founder's claims of innovation, stating that the ring merely offered "3-4 new features" without disruptive technology. He emphasized that being a late entrant in a competitive market requires exceptional innovation to succeed.
Vineeta Singh's Direct Confrontation
The tension escalated when Vineeta Singh directly questioned the founder about his intentions. After the founder stated that "Aman is not my competition," Vineeta pressed further, asking if he was at Shark Tank primarily to taunt Aman Gupta rather than seek genuine investment.
Vineeta expressed concerns about the company's financial structure, noting that the founders had already given away 33 percent equity for Rs 5 crores in previous funding. She criticized their "atrangi ask" (flamboyant request) for a valuation ten times higher than their projected revenue, stating that this demonstrated problematic thinking.
Aman Gupta's Response and Sharks' Verdict
Aman Gupta opted out of the deal, expressing displeasure at the founder's characterization of boAt products as "third grade." He defended boAt's health parameters and pricing strategy, emphasizing that both brands operate in a small market and should respect each other rather than engage in disparagement.
All Sharks ultimately declined to invest, citing multiple concerns:
- Overvaluation: The Rs 150 crore valuation was deemed unrealistic
- Market saturation: Too many competitors in the wearable ring space
- Product issues: Questionable packaging, pricing, and AI claims
- Financial structure: Previous equity distribution limited fundraising options
- Founder approach: Perceived focus on taunting rather than business
Anupam Mittal delivered the final blow, stating that the founders lacked understanding of what it takes to compete in a global industry dominated by established players. He concluded that their "chances of winning are close to zero" given their current approach.
The episode highlighted the importance of respectful competition and realistic valuation in entrepreneurship, while demonstrating how personal attacks can backfire in high-stakes investment scenarios.
