Byju’s founder says his edtech startup, once worth $22B, is now ‘worth zero’
New Delhi: Byju Raveendran, the founder of troubled edtech firm Byju's, on Thursday said that he is willing to pay back all the money owed to lenders if they are willing to work with him.
During a two-and-a-half-hour call with the media, Mr Raveendran said lenders will not get any money if the process of insolvency against the company continues.
"If they are willing to work with me, I am willing to give them money back before I take a single rupee out. We paid $140 million but they wanted the entire $1.2 billion which we had already committed or invested by then. There is no way we could have given them back for a long time. Most lenders wanted to settle but one or two wanted to make a killing out of it," Mr Raveendran said.
At present, Byju's is undergoing insolvency proceedings, triggered after the BCCI approached the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal to recover its ₹ 158.9-crore dues. The company settled the dispute with BCCI after paying the entire dues following which NCLAT revoked the insolvency proceedings.
However, US lenders through their agent Glas Trust challenged the NCLAT order in the Supreme Court which restored the insolvency proceedings against the edtech firm.
Byju's has raised a $1.2 billion Term Loan B (TLB)-- a loan which is issued by institutional investors --through its holding company Byju's Alpha, from US-based lenders.
The trouble for Think and Learn, which owns the Byju's brand, began after the lenders through Glas Trust approached Delaware Court of Chancery alleging default in the payments under the loan agreement and sought early payment of the $1.2-billion TLB.
The US-based lenders through Glas have filed claims of $1.35 billion dues in Indian courts during ongoing insolvency proceedings against the edtech firm.
In the latest statement, the lenders have raised their total claim to $1.5 billion.
Mr Raveendran said that no money raised from US lenders has come to India as it also needs permission from the Reserve Bank of India.
He said that there are some aggressive lenders who initiated a case against the company and they don't care about stakeholders in the business as it is their business model to make money out of distress.
Mr Raveendran said that all the deals and acquisitions were approved by the Byju's board, which included leading investors.
"Most of the acquisitions were brought in by the investors and we got carried away. Investors wanted us to launch in 40 countries together. Investors celebrated when we raised a $1.2-billion loan," Mr Raveendran said.
Byju's board member representing Peak XV Partners, earlier known as Sequoia Capital India, Prosus and Chan Zuckerberg Initiative resigned from the company in June 2023.
Mr Raveendran said that investors resigned from the board after Glas Trust filed a case in the Delaware court assuming that the liability to pay back the loan would fall on them.
He said that, over the years, only managers have left the company and five out of six owners of Byju's are still with the firm.
Mr Raveendran said that he is hopeful of making a big comeback after the insolvency issue is resolved.
"Our subsidiary has not taken any hits. At a consolidated level, we will have more than ₹ 5,000 crore in revenue. We are struggling in the core business which has become zero. Still, there are 200 million kids who come to our platform every month. We have to revamp and revive," he said.
Mr Raveendran said that whatever may be the result of litigation, he will continue to teach and nobody could stop him from teaching students.
"Investors will come back when they see value," he said.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Supreme Court declares child marriages violate basic rights, urges Parliament to act
New Delhi, October 18, 2024: The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that child betrothals—a tactic often used to evade the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act (PCMA)—violate fundamental rights, including freedom of choice, autonomy, and the right to childhood.
A three-judge Bench led by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, along with Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, emphasized that the anti-child marriage law was unclear on child betrothals. The Court urged Parliament to outlaw the practice and categorize children whose marriages are arranged as “minors in need of care and protection” under the Juvenile Justice Act.
The judgment noted that despite international frameworks like the 1977 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), India has not fully addressed the issue of child betrothals. Under the PCMA, girls under 18 and boys below 21 are considered children, and child marriage is both a crime and a social evil.
Chief Justice Chandrachud pointed out that confusion persists regarding the intersection of personal laws and the PCMA. The Court acknowledged that the government had submitted a “note” suggesting that the PCMA should take precedence over personal laws, citing conflicting High Court judgments. However, the note was not backed by formal documentation, and the matter remains unresolved, with an Amendment Bill introduced in December 2021 still pending in Parliament.
The Court also broke new ground by addressing the impact of child marriage on boys. The judgment highlighted how patriarchal expectations, misinformation, and peer pressure push boys into committing violence against their child brides. “While girls are disproportionately affected, the right to childhood belongs to all genders,” Chief Justice Chandrachud observed.
“The intent of POCSO is to protect children from sexual harm, while child marriage institutionalizes sexual abuse by subjecting minor girls to exploitation,” the CJI stated. He further noted that child marriage reduces children to objects, imposing burdens such as compulsory heterosexuality and reproductive expectations, which deny them the freedom to explore their sexuality and personal choices.
The Court issued several guidelines, including:
• Introducing culturally appropriate sexuality education in schools.
• Launching a ‘Child Marriage Free Village’ campaign, similar to the ‘Open Defecation Free Village’ initiative, with the involvement of community leaders.
• Establishing an online portal under the Home Ministry for reporting child marriages.
• Creating a compensation scheme under the Ministry of Women and Child Development for girls who opt out of child marriages.
• Allocating an annual budget to prevent child marriages and support those affected by the practice.
The verdict was delivered in response to petitions by NGOs, including the Society for Enlightenment and Voluntary Action, which raised concerns about the persistence of child marriages despite nearly two decades of the PCMA. The Court warned that child marriage poses a direct threat to laws like the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
