The viral headline that $533 million was transferred round-trip to Byju Raveendran was generating headlines, but the truth is more technical. The $533 million did flow through several entities, but this flow was not a suspicious activity in itself. It was based on the Term Loan B (TLB) finance model. This money was initially deposited in Alpha SPV of Byju, then to OCI Limited, then to Revere Master SPV, and lastly to Byju Global Pte Ltd. This was a written and anticipated route, not an undercover route.
According to Byju Raveendran, the money was spent on valid business activities, such as tablets for students, advertising, and operations. Co-founder and equal signatory Divya Gokulnath was engaged throughout the course of action. Both founders have made it evident that money was never used to benefit themselves or enrich themselves. One question is enough, What is the point of proceeding with the company, remaining in India, and meeting the lenders and regulators when they were planning to do wrong?
Round-trip is a criminal-sounding word in global finance, which may refer to cross-border fund movement. The thing that is lacking in most of the media coverage is what the money actually funded: actual devices, actual marketing and actual operational activity.
How Trade Finance and Compliance are Structured by Byju’s Alpha Transactions
There are layers at all times in trade finance. International business necessitates the transfer of money through various middlemen, and this case was no exception. The Alpha SPV was the creation of the arranger of the TLB, JP Morgan, to meet the RBI currency limitations. In accordance with the RBI, Indian companies are not allowed to take foreign debt directly. They need to channel it via formal organisations.
That is why OCI Limited, a UK-based procurement firm, was included in the chain. It was in charge of sourcing and the supply chain of tablets. Multiple entity usage is also useful in tax optimisation, risk management, and payments to the vendors.
The use of standard instruments, including letters of credit and documentary credit, was done due to the safety needs of global banks in huge transactions. GLAS Trust, the agent of TLB, approved and followed up on the whole structure. These transactions were audited by external auditors, as it was compulsory in the TLB covenants.
The financial outlay was clear, including costs for tablets, advertising, and operations. The TLB agreement by itself contained the conditions for how money could be utilised, and Alpha did that.
Lenders or Litigation: Why the “Missing” Story is Misleading About Byju Raveendran
The account of the missing money is primarily held by GLAS Trust and the Restructuring Professionals (RP) that served Redwood and Silver Point, which are familiar vulture funds. participants. They aim to maximize returns, and effective language is useful for building pressure.
Notions such as missing help them defend violent litigation and attract the media attention. However, they hardly show the full financial records, which indicate the whereabouts of the funds. If someone siphoned money personally, lenders could issue bank statements showing the money entering personal accounts. They have not done this.
Rather, the story deals with the sequencing of transactions. Simultaneously, Think and Learn has bank statements, invoices, and procurement documents, as well as other records that indicate actual money implementation.
The lender narrative has its effects: it leads to the risk of job loss, disturbance of students, and fear of aggressive foreign lending in the Indian startup ecosystem. The media often repeats lender language without considering its intended consequences.
From Filing to Headline: How Allegations Become “Facts”
In cross-border disputes, one party makes the allegations, and this is swiftly picked up by the media. Defensive filings are submitted later and receive significantly less scrutiny. This bias in time makes the premature accusation appear as a fact.
The US filings in courts are usually strong, such as heist, siphoned and round-tripped. Such expressions shape public perceptions before an investigation or response occurs. Journalists quote these filings before they have context or counter-evidence.
This procedure is typical of international cases. Preliminarily, accusations are featured in the press; additional information is given on the matter in the next issue. The American legal language is normally aggressive compared to that of Asian courts, which employs less aggressive language.
The fact that GLAS and the RPs were first in this instance meant that they dictated the initial story. Their accusations were much publicised. Byju Raveendran reacted subsequently, and his reactions were more in the nature of denials rather than evidence, as detailed in
The Evidence for Byju Raveendran’s Good Faith
Numerous facts challenge the theory of wrongdoing. Byju Raveendran put his money into Think & Learn, investing over 1 billion dollars. He was able to withdraw hundreds of millions personally, which he did during the highest valuation of $22 billion. ID during the highest valuation of $22 billion. He instead contributed additional amounts of his own money.
He even sold family properties as a way of paying 158 crore to BCCI, which is one of the operational creditors. A person who tries to commit fraud would not sell personal wealth to settle debts.
He never ran away to India or hid; he still managed the company. Divya Gokulnath remained active as a COO, even though she also underwent the same scrutiny. Think & Learn kept on having audited financial records, investing in product development, employing the teachers, and serving the students.
Most unicorn founders sold their companies for as much as 300 to 500 million dollars. Byju Raveendran did not. In case of personal enrichment, lenders would have recorded personal accounts with a receipt of misplaced funds. They have not. that the missing funds were used for personal gain and maintains that the money was used for the benefit of the company.
Why the Finance Trail Tells a Different Story
The larger context presents that the story about the 533 million dollars turned out to be more vocal than reality. The flow of funds was transferred according to conventional trade finance regulations, tracked through international bodies, and financed actual business requirements, such as tablets, marketing, and operations. Personal benefit and distraction have not been demonstrated.
The founder’s activities do not indicate malpractices but dedication. Byju Raveendran also used personal wealth, paid up operational costs, and remained in control of the company rather than leaving it. A preconception of the allegation was created early, but the recorded facts paint another picture. Time and place are important in international financing, and not all headlines are facts.
