‘We do not bleed purple…’: Anupam Mittal responds to Harsh Goenka’s jab on companies run by Shark Tank judges

RPG Group Chairman and billionaire Harsh Goenka had the Web speaking after he shared a candid publish on the monetary losses reported by firms owned by the judges of Shark Tank India. 

Posting on X, Goenka praised the present as a platform for budding entrepreneurs however laced his admiration with a pointy quip referencing the long-lasting film Jaws.

“I take pleasure in #SharkTankIndia as a program, and I feel it’s a nice platform for our budding entrepreneurs,” Goenka wrote. He added with a contact of humor, “However at any time when I consider sharks, I consider the film Jaws and bleeding!”

Goenka’s publish included a desk outlining monetary losses from companies related to the Sharks—outstanding entrepreneurs like Aman Gupta (Boat), Peyush Bansal (Lenskart), Anupam Mittal (Shaadi.com), Kunal Bahl (Snapdeal), Namita Thapar (Emcure Prescription drugs), Vineeta Singh (SUGAR Cosmetics), and Amit Jain (CarDekho). The info, which painted an unflattering image, shortly ignited on-line chatter.

Anupam Mittal, founding father of Shaadi.com and one of many Sharks, wasn’t one to let the publish move with no response. Acknowledging Goenka’s jest however questioning the accuracy of the info, Mittal replied on X, stating, “I do know you meant it in jest so with all due respect sir, I feel u reacted to what seems to be superficial, biased & incomplete knowledge.”

Mittal added a witty twist to his protection: “Glad to be taught from stalwarts, however simply to make clear, like u, the sharks don’t bleed purple, we bleed blue & that’s why we do what we do.”

The alternate struck a chord with netizens, sparking debates throughout social media. Opinions ranged from appreciation for the Sharks’ efforts in fostering entrepreneurship to sharp critiques of their monetary outcomes.

Some customers lauded the Sharks, highlighting the dangers of investing in startups. “Losses are a part of the sport. They’re taking dangers to again progressive concepts,” wrote one person. One other added, “Why don’t you be a part of Shark Tank? It is going to be wonderful along with your tremendous wit.”

Nevertheless, not everybody agreed. Critiques ranged from questioning the judges’ {qualifications} to cynicism in regards to the present’s authenticity. “It’s now like some other TV program—performing, emotional tales, laughs, fights, and total funding lower than promoting income,” one person remarked.

Strategies for Goenka to sit on the Shark Tank panel flooded the feedback. “Launch new packages ‘Harsh Tank’—India wants your knowledge,” one person quipped, whereas one other commented, “Shark Tank India exhibits the idea is superb… however the number of judges is questionable.”