Bengaluru entrepreneur bans team from talking to Indian customers: 'Skip India movement'
Vaibhav Domkundwar. a prominent investor and founder of Better Capital, claimed that AI founders are intentionally avoiding Indian customers for exploiting their startups for free trials or discounted work.
"AI founders finally skipping selling to Indian customers after doing PoCs [Proof of Concepts] after PoCs and then being requested for even more 'free' PoCs. There is a limit to this and founders are saying screw it and skipping selling to Indian customers. Enough is enough. Even unicorns are using these startup founders (who are 10x better than their internal teams) for freebies," he wrote.
Domkundwar claimed that his insights were based on 'primary data,' hinting at firsthand accounts from founders in his network.
"I have banned builders at Lossfunk to talking to Indian customers. It's a tiny tech market, but a comfort zone. Many times, founders end up optimising for the Indian market and realise they can't scale further," Chopra said in a reply.
The posts have sparked debate in the startup community, highlighting an uncomfortable pattern where Indian buyers engage in multiple unpaid product trials but rarely convert to paying clients. "Indians are 2x hard to convince and 1/4th willingness to pay. Not worth it at all. I have stopped marketing for the Indian market and will probably deprioritise Indians in the US too," said another founder.
Another user said, "Same for new-tech hardware brands, tiny market, not many early adopters, low paying capacity." Others criticised the founder's move, calling it a mistake while trying to build a global startup.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
21 minutes ago
- Mint
Short-seller Viceroy accuses Vedanta promoters of hidden stake via welfare trust
The entity under scrutiny is PTC Cables Pvt. Ltd (PTCC), which holds a 1.91% stake in Vedanta Ltd, a company with a market capitalization of ₹ 1.75 trillion, according to BSE data. PTCC is owned by Bhadram Janhit Shalika Trust (BJST), which Viceroy alleges is controlled by the Agarwal family, founders of the Vedanta Group. According to Viceroy, PTCC received ₹ 1,500 crore in dividend income from Vedanta over the past five years, and the capital was "upcycled" to promoter-linked entities. 'PTCC exists for one purpose: to quietly recycle Vedanta's cash into promoter-controlled vehicles while maintaining the illusion of independence," the Viceroy report said. Vedanta denied the allegations. 'These assertions are baseless," a spokesperson for the company said, adding that the company was compliant with the disclosure norms as stipulated by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) and the Companies Act, 2013. 'Neither BJST nor PTCC are part of the promoter group as defined under applicable regulations, and their shareholding has been transparently disclosed in public filings," the spokesperson added. A day after Viceroy released its report, JP Morgan had issued a note, telling investors not to get distracted by the allegations on corporate governance and financial management, and that the global brokerage had an Overweight rating on both Vedanta Resources Ltd and Vedanta Ltd. Viceroy's claims are based on publicly available records. In a 2009 income-tax case, BJST's correspondence address was listed as Anil Agarwal's personal residence in Mumbai. In another case, the trust's address was that of Todarwal & Todarwal, a firm linked to Arun Todarwal, who currently serves as a director on the board of Sterlite Power Grid Ventures, a Vedanta subsidiary. Todarwal has also previously served as a director on the boards of Hindustan Zinc Ltd, Sterlite Technologies, MALCO, and BALCO. The report acknowledged that no conclusive documentation of current control was available, noting that Indian trusts are subject to less stringent disclosure obligations compared to companies. Viceroy also cited unnamed former Vedanta employees who claimed that the Agarwal family's control over PTCC was an "open secret" within the company. In addition to alleging hidden promoter ownership, the report flagged governance concerns at PTCC. The company was incorporated in 1993 with the Agarwal family as shareholders and was transferred to BJST in 2017. Its current directors are Todarwal and Kannan Ramamirthan. Ramamirthan is an independent director of Hindustan Zinc, Vedanta's most profitable subsidiary. He has also previously served on the boards of other Vedanta group firms, including Talwandi Sabo Power Plant, BALCO, Sterlite Energy, and Sterlite Interlinks. Vedanta has not disclosed in its filings that PTCC—classified as a public shareholder—has directors with long-standing associations with the group. The company did not respond to a specific query on this issue. Calls and emails to Todarwal for a comment did not elicit a response. Mint could not reach Ramamirthan for a comment. Concerns about the independence of BJST and PTCC are not new. In a 2020 note, proxy advisory firm Stakeholder Empowerment Services (SES) had said that BJST was previously known as the SIL Employee Welfare Trust and was linked to Sterlite Industries Ltd, which was later merged into Vedanta. The trust was subsequently renamed as BJST. 'It is not clear as to who presently controls the BJST," SES had written. However, if the firm was under the control of Vedanta, then PTCC should be classified as a promoter shareholder, it said. Viceroy's first report on the Vedanta Group was published on 10 July, a day before Vedanta Ltd's annual general meeting (AGM). The initial report triggered a drop in the company's stock, though shares later recovered. At the AGM, shareholders reposed their faith in the company. Since the report's release, Vedanta shares have gained 2% to close at ₹ 449.75 on Tuesday. Also Read | Vedanta shareholders back firm after Viceroy report Viceroy has disclosed a short position in the bonds of Vedanta Resources, the unlisted holding company of the group, but said it has no exposure to Vedanta Ltd or any other listed Vedanta entities in India.
Economic Times
25 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Rogue bots? AI firms must pay up
When Elon Musk's xAI was forced to apologise this week after its Grok chatbot spewed antisemitic content and white nationalist talking points, the response felt depressingly familiar: suspend the service, issue an apology and promise to do better. Rinse and isn't the first time we've seen this playbook. Microsoft's Tay chatbot disaster in 2016 followed a similar pattern. The fact that we're here again, nearly a decade later, suggests the AI industry has learnt remarkably little from its mistakes. But the world is no longer willing to accept 'sorry' as sufficient. This is because AI has become a force multiplier for content generation and dissemination, and the time-to-impact has shrunk. Thus, liability and punitive actions are being discussed. The Grok incident revealed a troubling aspect of how AI companies approach accountability. According to xAI, the problematic behaviour emerged after they tweaked their system to allow more 'politically incorrect' responses - a decision that seems reckless. When the inevitable happened, they blamed deprecated code that should have been removed. If you're building systems capable of reaching millions of users, shouldn't you know what code is running in production?The real problem isn't technical - it's philosophical. Too many AI companies treat bias and harmful content as unfortunate side effects to be addressed after deployment, rather than fundamental risks to be prevented beforehand. This reactive approach worked when the stakes were lower, but AI systems now operate at unprecedented scale and influence. When a chatbot generates hate speech, it's not embarrassing - it's dangerous, legitimising and amplifying extremist ideologies to vast legal landscape is shifting rapidly, and AI companies ignoring these changes do so at their peril. The EU's AI Act, which came into force in February, represents a shift from reactive regulation to proactive governance. Companies can no longer apologise their way out of AI failures - they must demonstrate they've implemented robust safeguards before AB 316, introduced last January, takes an even more direct approach by prohibiting the 'the AI did it' defence in civil cases. This legislation recognises what should be obvious: companies that develop and deploy AI systems bear responsibility for their outputs, regardless of whether those outputs were 'intended'.India's approach may prove more punitive than the EU's regulatory framework and more immediate than the US litigation-based system, focusing on swift enforcement of existing criminal laws rather than waiting for new AI-specific legislation. India doesn't yet have AI-specific legislation, but if Grok's antisemitic incident had occurred with Indian users, then steps like immediate blocking of the AI service, a criminal case against xAI under IPC 153A, and a demand for content removal from the X platform would have been Grok incident may mark a turning point. Regulators worldwide are demanding proactive measures rather than reactive damage control, and courts are increasingly willing to hold companies directly liable for their systems' shift is long overdue. AI systems aren't just software - they're powerful tools that shape public discourse, influence decision-making and can cause real-world harm. The companies that build these systems must be held to higher standards than traditional software developers, with corresponding legal and ethical question facing the AI industry isn't whether to embrace this new reality - it's whether to do so voluntarily or have it imposed by regulators and courts. Companies that continue to rely on the old playbook of post-incident apologies will find themselves increasingly isolated in a world demanding AI industry's true maturity will show not in flashy demos or sky-high valuations, but in its commitment to safety over speed, rigour over shortcuts, and real accountability over empty apologies. In this game, 'sorry' won't cut it - only responsibility writer is a commentator ondigital policy issues (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this column are that of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. Rumblings at the top of Ola Electric The hybrid vs. EV rivalry: Why Maruti and Mahindra pull in different directions. What's best? How Safexpress bootstrapped its way to build India's largest PTL Express business Zee promoters have a new challenge to navigate. And it's not about funding or Sebi probe. Newton vs. industry: Inside new norms that want your car to be more fuel-efficient Stock Radar: UltraTech Cements hit a fresh record high in July; what should investors do – book profits or buy the dip? F&O Radar | Deploy Bear Put Spread in Nifty to gain from index correction Weekly Top Picks: These stocks scored 10 on 10 on Stock Reports Plus
Indian Express
33 minutes ago
- Indian Express
New solar cell tech developed at IIT-Bombay a gamechanger: Union minister
Union Minister for New and Renewable Energy Pralhad Joshi on Tuesday said that new solar cell technology developed at Indian Institute of Technology Bombay (IIT-B) is a 'gamechanger' and urged industry players to invest in scaling up the project. In a major boost to works happening in solar energy sector at IIT-B, Joshi announced disbursement of fourth instalment of total funding of Rs 200 crore that was assured more than a decade ago to the National Centre for Photovoltaic Research & Education (NCPRE) — the umbrella body for various research projects in renewable energy sector at the institute. In the current phase of funding, which is expected to bring Rs.83 crore, it will be through Public Private Partnership (PPP) model as government is urging industry players to invest in scaling up the project, particularly the high-efficiency 2-terminal tandem solar cell using a perovskite-silicon combination, achieving about 30 per cent power conversion efficiency, which is significantly higher than the current 20 per cent. Talking about this innovation at the IIT Bombay, the Union minister who visited the NCPRE at IIT-B, said, 'It is a game-changer for India's solar energy future. This makes India a global leader in next-gen photovoltaics and by investing in such innovations, we are driving down the cost of solar energy, making it more accessible for all Indians.' Assuring continuous support from MNRE, Joshi emphasised the need of scaling up of this technology for commercial success. 'Private investment is crucial for large-scale technology development and some of the industry representatives present for the meeting today have shown great interest,' said Joshi. Prof Dinesh Kabra head of the team which has successfully engineered a semi-transparent perovskite solar cell (PSC) said that funding in this phase will be for scaling up of this technology at commercial wafer-size. Further it will be catalysing the support for the future pilot line through which commercialisation will be made possible. 'After having formed the 4-terminal (4T) tandem structure, with this renewed funding the team will now work on developing a 2-terminal tandem structure with support from the manufacturing partner,' he said. The Indian Express had reported about the major breakthrough in the Solar Energy Sector at the IIT Bombay. The semi-transparent perovskite solar cell (PSC) which is layered over a traditional silicon-based solar cell, forming a 4-terminal (4T) tandem structure enables a better energy conversion and durability, especially in India's heat-intensive conditions. Apart from boost in efficiency over conventional solar technology, it has potential to reduce the cost of solar power at around Re 1 per kwh compared with Rs 2.5-4 per unit now.
