The BYJU’S story and the danger of becoming bigger before becoming stronger

For a while, BYJU’S looked like the perfect symbol of India’s startup ambition. Its advertisements appeared on television, social media, cricket broadcasts and school-related platforms. Its lessons reached families across the country. Its founder became a familiar face in India’s entrepreneurial story. Investors backed the company with confidence, parents associated it with quality education, and students became its most visible users.

The company expanded rapidly, entered international markets, acquired several education businesses and raised billions of dollars.

Then came the figure that appeared to confirm its success:
$22 billion.

In 2022, BYJU’S was valued at approximately $22 billion, making it one of the world’s most valuable education-technology companies and India’s most valuable startup at the time.

But a valuation is not the same as money in the bank.
Within a few years, the company’s image changed dramatically. Investors reduced their estimates of its worth. Board members resigned. Deloitte stepped down as auditor. Employees were laid off. Creditors pursued repayment. Legal disputes intensified. Insolvency proceedings began.

By September 2026, the matter remained unresolved. BYJU’S parent company, Think & Learn Private Limited, continued to face corporate insolvency proceedings. At the same time, the National Company Law Tribunal was examining a dispute over assets reportedly valued at around ₹150 crore but auctioned for approximately ₹16 crore. The tribunal directed that the disputed assets be preserved while it considered questions about ownership and valuation.

The striking part is not merely that a large company entered financial trouble. Large companies fail. Small companies fail. Even respected companies fail.

The more difficult question is this:
How can a company once valued at $22 billion become so financially vulnerable that a comparatively small payment dispute contributes to an insolvency battle?

The answer lies in the difference between growth and strength.
A company can become larger without becoming healthier. It can attract more attention without building stronger foundations. It can raise more capital while becoming less able to survive a difficult period.

The BYJU’S story is therefore not only about one company.
It is about what happens when expansion moves faster than discipline.

The dream behind the company

BYJU’S did not begin with failure in mind. It began with a simple and appealing idea: education could become more engaging if technology were used intelligently.

Byju Raveendran, who had built a reputation as a teacher before becoming an entrepreneur, developed a learning model based on visual explanations, animated lessons and digital content. The approach was designed to make difficult subjects easier to understand and more interesting for students.

The idea suited a changing India.
Millions of families were becoming comfortable with smartphones. Internet access was expanding. Parents were searching for additional academic support for their children.

Students were increasingly familiar with digital platforms.
Then the pandemic transformed the market. Schools closed. Coaching centres stopped operating normally. Classrooms moved into homes. Parents who had once viewed online education as optional suddenly depended on it.

For education-technology companies, demand rose sharply.
BYJU’S was in the right place at the right time.

Its user base expanded. Its visibility increased. Investors saw an opportunity to build a global education company from India. The company raised large amounts of capital and began acquiring businesses in different segments of education.

The story looked unstoppable.
But the conditions that created the boom were unusual.
And unusual conditions can create dangerous expectations.

The difference between being valuable and being financially healthy

A valuation is an estimate of what investors believe a company may be worth. It is influenced by expected future growth, market conditions, investor confidence and the price paid for shares in a funding round.

It is not a guarantee.
It is not cash.

It does not automatically pay salaries, settle loans or cover operating expenses. A company can be valued at billions of dollars and still struggle to meet immediate obligations.

BYJU’S illustrated this distinction clearly.
In November 2023, the company reported audited financial results for its core online education business for the financial year ending March 2022. Revenue had reportedly risen to around ₹3,550 crore, but the business also recorded operating losses of approximately ₹2,400 crore. The results were released after a considerable delay and did not cover all of the company’s acquired businesses.

The figures were complicated, but the central concern was straightforward:
The company was growing while continuing to consume large amounts of cash.

Losses are not automatically a sign that a young company is badly managed. Many businesses spend heavily during their early years to develop products, attract customers and build infrastructure.
The real question is whether those losses are part of a controlled plan.

A company may say:
“We are spending today because we are building a stronger business for tomorrow.”
That argument can be reasonable.
But eventually, tomorrow must produce results.
Customers must stay.
Revenue must become dependable.
Costs must become manageable.
Cash flow must improve.

And the systems controlling the business must become stronger as the company expands. Without those changes, growth becomes an explanation for losses rather than a path beyond them.

When growth stops being a strategy and becomes a habit

Growth is one of the most celebrated words in business.
Companies announce it proudly. Investors reward it. The media reports it enthusiastically. Employees often see it as proof that their organisation is succeeding.

No founder wants to stand before investors and say:
“We expanded too slowly.”
But growth can conceal weakness.

Consider a business that earns ₹10 crore and spends ₹8 crore. Before other expenses, it has ₹2 crore remaining. Now imagine that the same business doubles its revenue to ₹20 crore but increases its spending to ₹25 crore.

It has become larger.
It has not necessarily become stronger.
That is the danger of uncontrolled expansion.

Revenue can rise while resilience falls.
BYJU’S pursued an ambitious acquisition strategy. It bought companies operating in areas such as coding education, test preparation, professional learning and international education.

Acquisitions can be useful. They can provide access to new customers, technology, talent and markets. But every acquisition also creates new responsibilities.

The acquired company may have a different culture, pricing model, leadership structure, accounting system and customer base. Integrating those differences requires time and management attention.

A company that buys several businesses must be able to answer difficult questions:

• How will the businesses work together?
• Which products will remain?
• Which costs can be removed?
• How will customers be retained?
• Who will make decisions?
• Are the acquired companies actually profitable?
• Can the parent company monitor their finances accurately?

If those questions are not answered carefully, acquisitions may increase the size of a company without improving its underlying economics. The organisation becomes more complicated, but not necessarily more capable.

The pandemic boom was not permanent.

The pandemic created a powerful illusion.
Because online education became essential during lockdowns, it was easy to assume that the same level of demand would continue after schools reopened.

But emergency behaviour is not always permanent behaviour.
During lockdowns, parents had limited alternatives. Digital learning filled a gap created by closed schools and restricted movement.

Once classrooms reopened, families had more choices.
The question changed.

It was no longer:
“Can online education help when schools are closed?”

It became:
“Will families continue paying for the same digital products when schools are open again?”

That is a much harder question.
The reopening of schools changed the market. Families reassessed subscriptions. Students returned to physical classrooms. Economic uncertainty made parents more cautious about spending. The extraordinary demand of the pandemic period began to weaken.

This does not mean online education had no future.
It means the market had normalised.

A company that had built its expenses, hiring plans and acquisition strategy around pandemic-level demand now had to operate in a different environment.

That is a lesson relevant to every industry:
A temporary surge can be mistaken for a permanent transformation.
When that happens, a company may continue spending as if the boom will last forever, even after customers have changed their behaviour.

The warning signs were already visible.

The crisis did not arrive without notice.
Financial statements were delayed. Deloitte resigned as auditor. Investor representatives left the board. Valuation estimates fell. Employees were laid off. Creditors became more assertive. Legal disputes multiplied.

In 2023, representatives of Prosus, Peak XV Partners and Chan Zuckerberg Initiative resigned from BYJU’S board. Their departures came during a period of growing concern about the company’s finances and governance.

Board resignations are not automatically proof of wrongdoing.
But they are important signals.

A board exists to question management, examine risks and protect the interests of stakeholders. Independent directors and investor representatives are especially important when a company is expanding quickly, borrowing heavily or acquiring multiple businesses.

When independent oversight weakens during a period of financial stress, the company becomes more exposed.

Governance is often treated as an administrative burden when everything is going well. It becomes valuable only when something goes wrong. By then, it may be too late to build the systems that should have existed earlier.

How a $22-billion valuation lost its meaning

The $22-billion valuation did not vanish in one day.
It was reduced gradually as investors reassessed the company’s prospects.

Prosus lowered its valuation estimate in 2023. In January 2024, BlackRock reportedly marked down its implied valuation of BYJU’S to around $1 billion, a dramatic reduction from the earlier $22-billion figure.

The company did not suddenly lose 95 per cent of its employees.
Its technology did not disappear overnight.
Its offices did not vanish.
What changed was investor confidence in the company’s future.
That is the important point.

A valuation reflects expectations. When expectations change, the valuation can fall sharply even if the physical business remains in operation. This is why a high valuation should never be treated as proof that a company is financially secure.

It is better understood as a statement about what investors believe the company may become. If the company fails to meet those expectations, the number can collapse.

The debt crisis

As financial concerns grew, the company’s disputes became increasingly legal.
BYJU’S faced a major disagreement involving a term loan of approximately $1.2 billion. It also faced other obligations and claims from creditors and business partners.

In July 2024, the National Company Law Tribunal admitted insolvency proceedings after the Board of Control for Cricket in India alleged that BYJU’S had defaulted on sponsorship payments of approximately $19 million.

The contrast was striking.
A company once valued at:

$22 billion
was entering insolvency proceedings in connection with a dispute involving approximately:

$19 million.
That comparison should be interpreted carefully.
The $19-million dispute did not, by itself, explain the entire collapse. BYJU’S was already facing broader financial, operational and governance problems.

But the contrast reveals a basic principle of business:
A company can be extremely valuable on paper and still be unable to meet a payment when it falls due.

Liquidity matters.
Debt matters.
Cash flow matters.
Payment schedules matter.

A company may own valuable assets and still face a crisis if it does not have enough available cash at the right time.

This is why accountants and lenders often focus less on impressive valuations and more on cash movement. A business survives through cash, not headlines.

When the dispute moved into the courts

The legal process became increasingly complex.
In August 2024, an insolvency appellate tribunal approved a settlement between BYJU’S and the cricket board. For a short time, the settlement appeared to offer relief to the company and its founder.

However, the matter did not end there.
In October 2024, the Supreme Court overturned the settlement and directed that the insolvency process continue. The decision raised important questions about how settlements should be handled once a company has entered a formal insolvency process.

At that point, the story was no longer only about an education-technology company.

It had become a case involving:

• Corporate governance
• Creditor rights
• Insolvency law
• Board accountability
• Promoter control
• Investor protection
• The limits of private settlements

Once insolvency proceedings begin, the company is no longer dealing with only one creditor or one dispute.

Many interests must be considered.
Creditors want repayment.
Employees want job security and unpaid wages.
Investors want accountability.
Customers want continuity.
Promoters want to protect the business and their reputation.
Resolution professionals must follow the legal process.
Courts must balance competing claims.
The company enters a completely different phase of existence.

The people hidden behind the numbers

Corporate crises are often described using large figures.
$22 billion.
$1.2 billion.
$19 million.
₹150 crore.
₹16 crore.

But companies are not made of numbers alone.
They are made of people.

An employee who joined because they believed in the company’s mission may suddenly be searching for work. A vendor may be waiting for payment. A parent may be uncertain about the future of a course already purchased. An investor may be facing a major loss. A founder may see years of reputation damaged in a short period.

Every acquisition affects employees.
Every restructuring affects families.
Every delayed payment creates pressure somewhere else.
Every unresolved legal dispute creates uncertainty.

This is why governance should not be treated as a subject meant only for lawyers, auditors and boardrooms. Governance affects real lives.

It determines whether decisions are questioned before they become disasters. It determines whether financial information is reliable. It determines whether stakeholders receive honest answers when conditions become difficult.

Good governance is not merely about compliance.
It is about responsibility.

Who was responsible?

When a company collapses, people often search for one person to blame.
The founder.
The investors.
The board.
The auditors.
The lenders.
The market.
The pandemic.
The acquisition strategy.

But large corporate failures rarely have a single cause.
BYJU’S has denied wrongdoing in various disputes, and different parties have offered different explanations for the company’s difficulties. Those claims must be considered carefully.

A responsible account should separate three things:

1. What has been established through records or court proceedings
2. What has been alleged by one party against another
3. What remains an interpretation or opinion

That distinction is especially important when discussing real people and ongoing legal matters.

The available record shows that BYJU’S faced serious financial difficulties, delayed reporting, board resignations, valuation reductions, creditor disputes and insolvency proceedings.

Those facts are significant on their own.
There is no need to turn every allegation into a proven conclusion.
The strongest analysis is not the loudest one. It is the one that remains accurate even when the story is complicated.

The lesson entrepreneurs rarely hear.

Business education often focuses on strategy, fundraising, marketing and expansion. Founders are taught how to attract customers, raise capital and enter new markets.

But one lesson deserves equal attention:
A company must learn how to survive its own success.
Success creates pressure.
More funding creates more expectations.
More expectations encourage faster growth.
Faster growth creates more employees, products, offices, markets and acquisitions.
More complexity requires stronger systems.
If those systems do not develop at the same speed, success begins to create weakness.

The pattern can look like this:
small → successful → ambitious → enormous → complicated → unstable

The most dangerous transition is not always the movement from success to failure. It is the movement from simplicity to complexity without adequate control.

What the BYJU’S story teaches founders

1. Revenue alone does not prove business health.h
   Rising revenue is encouraging, but it is only one part of the picture. A company must also understand its margins, customer retention, collection cycle, debt obligations, and cash position. A business that sells more but loses more may be expanding its problems.
2. Valuation is not money in the bank.
   A $22-billion valuation does not mean the company owns $22 billion in cash or assets. It reflects what investors believed the company could become under particular conditions. When those conditions change, the valuation can fall quickly.
3. Growth needs boundaries
   Expansion can create opportunity, but it also creates risk. Every new employee, product, market and acquisition adds pressure to the organisation. Growth should therefore be measured not only by speed, but by sustainability. A company should ask whether its systems, people and finances can support the next stage before rushing into it.
4. Governance protects ambition
   Some founders see oversight as an obstacle. In reality, strong governance can protect a company from its own momentum. Independent directors, accurate financial reporting, internal controls and transparent decision-making do not prevent innovation. They make it more likely that innovation will survive.
5. A temporary boom should not become a permanent budget.t
   The pandemic created exceptional demand for digital education. But exceptional demand cannot automatically be treated as a permanent business model. Companies must distinguish between structural growth and temporary acceleration. That distinction matters in technology, real estate, finance, healthcare and every other sector affected by sudden changes in behaviour.
6. Acquisitions should create value, not just size.
   Buying another company can increase revenue, reach and market share. But it can also increase costs, confusion and risk. Before completing an acquisition, a company must understand how the new business will be integrated, monitored and made profitable. Otherwise, it may end up collecting companies instead of building one coherent organisation.

The story is not finished.

It would be convenient to write one sentence:
“BYJU’S failed.”

But that conclusion is too simple.
As of September 2026, Think & Learn remained involved in a prolonged insolvency process. The official corporate insolvency resolution records continued to show creditor claims, asset-sale activity and legal developments.

New disputes also continued to emerge.
In early September 2026, the Bengaluru NCLT ordered that certain assets auctioned by the resolution professional be preserved. The order followed objections from another BYJU’S-related entity, K3 Education, which questioned the ownership of the assets and alleged that property worth approximately ₹150 crore had been sold for around ₹16 crore.

The tribunal had not finally decided the ownership issue or ruled conclusively on the validity of the auction. Its direction was intended to preserve the disputed assets while the matter was examined.

A further hearing was scheduled for September 21, 2026.
That means the final chapter has not yet been written.
Perhaps that is the most honest way to end the story.

Corporate failures rarely conclude neatly. They leave behind appeals, claims, negotiations, unpaid bills, disputed assets, employees waiting for clarity and courts working through complicated evidence.

The collapse of a company may happen quickly in the public imagination.
The legal and human consequences can continue for years.

What really failed?

Was online education itself a bad idea?
No.

Was technology the problem?
No.

Was ambition wrong?
No.

Was entrepreneurship responsible?
No.

The deeper problem appears to have been the possibility that growth moved faster than the systems needed to manage it. That is a more uncomfortable explanation because it does not depend on obvious incompetence.

Failure does not always look like a badly designed product or an empty office.
Sometimes it appears inside a celebrated company.
Sometimes it is hidden behind a large valuation.
Sometimes it is surrounded by famous investors and ambitious plans.
Sometimes the warning signs are visible, but optimism makes them easy to ignore.
That is why the BYJU’S story deserves attention.
It is not simply the story of a startup that fell.

It is the story of how difficult it can be to tell the difference between being bigger and being stronger.

Rethinking the meaning of success

Modern business culture is fascinated by impressive numbers.
A billion-dollar company is celebrated.
A ten-billion-dollar company is celebrated even more.
A founder who becomes extremely wealthy is often treated as proof that the business model worked.
But perhaps the more important questions are different.

Instead of asking:
“What is the company worth?”
we should ask:
“How resilient is it?”

Instead of asking:
“How quickly is it growing?”
we should ask:
“Can its systems handle that growth?”

Instead of asking:
“How many companies has it acquired?”
we should ask:
“Has it successfully integrated the businesses it already owns?”

Instead of asking:
“How much money has it raised?”
we should ask:
“What lasting value has that money created?”

And instead of asking:
“How famous is the founder?”
we should ask:
“Would the organisation remain strong if the founder stepped away?”

These questions may not produce exciting headlines.

But they are the questions that reveal whether a company has a future.

The lesson beyond BYJU’S

The BYJU’S story matters even to people who never used its products, invested in the company or worked there.
Every generation creates its own version of the same belief.
One generation assumes property prices will always rise.
Another believes a particular technology can only expand.
Another treats a popular investment as risk-free.
Another assumes that a successful company cannot fail.
Then circumstances change.
The lesson is not that ambition should be avoided.
India needs ambitious founders. It needs technology, investment and companies willing to attempt difficult things.
But ambition without discipline becomes recklessness.
Growth without governance becomes vulnerability.
Capital without accountability becomes dangerous.
And success without resilience becomes temporary.
A company should not be judged only by how quickly it rises.
It should also be judged by how well it prepares for the day when conditions become less favourable.

The question worth carrying forward

BYJU’S may eventually be remembered as one of India’s most dramatic startup failures. It may also be remembered in a more complicated way: as a company that grew at extraordinary speed, encountered extraordinary difficulties and became a lasting lesson in governance, finance and corporate responsibility.

The final judgment will depend on court decisions, creditor recoveries, investor assessments and the historical record that develops over time.

But one lesson is already clear:
Success is not measured only by how high a company rises.
It is also measured by whether the structure beneath it is strong enough to support that height.
BYJU’S reached a valuation of $22 billion.
That was an extraordinary achievement.

But the more important question was never simply how high the company could climb. It was whether the organisation beneath the valuation could survive when the world changed.

The pandemic changed.
Customer behaviour changed.
Investor confidence changed.
Capital became more difficult to obtain.
Legal pressure increased.

And the company’s experience revealed a lesson that every ambitious organisation must eventually confront:
Growth can make a company visible.
Only resilience allows it to last.
That may be the real story of BYJU’S.

And perhaps the most important lesson is not for the next founder who wants to build a billion-dollar company.

It is for the founder who wants to build one that remains standing after the billion-dollar headlines have disappeared.

.    .    .