For a startup or unknown brand, appearing on Shark Tank is a great fit as it provides them with exposure and credibility boost, much-needed brand awareness, access to strategic investors and mentorship that can be game-changing.

All these advantages make it less to lose for a startup that doesn’t have an established reputation to risk. Further, most startups are still testing their models, so sharing financials etc on a public platform such as Shark Tank is less of a concern compared to an established company with proven margins and strategies.

For an established brand, appearing on Shark Tank can be a highly risky move in terms of perception and reputation erosion, competitive exposure and unwarranted business risks.

And in my view, that’s exactly what Woodsmen Himalayan Whiskey risked for their recent appearance on Shark Tank India season 4.

What was perhaps thought by the company to be a clever marketing and PR coup of sorts raised several red flags that suggest the Shark Tank India appearance would do more harm than good for Woodsmen Mountain Whiskey.

As a business and management consultant advising businesses on growth, competitiveness, risk management and driving shareholder returns, there are several reasons which lead me to believe all these aspects were severely compromised therefore it became more of an act of self-sabotage. Let me explain why.

1. Undermining Investor Confidence: Woodsmen already raised ₹12.5 crore in Series A funding (March 2024) from reputable investors. A year later, appearing on Shark Tank India asking for just ₹1.5 crore at a ₹300 crore valuation raises questions:

• • Why does the company still need funding, that too such a small amount, from a TV show?
  • Why did they not reach out to existing investors? Were they refused?
  • Were previous funds mismanaged?
  • Is the business struggling despite high valuation claims?

This could shake investor confidence and impact future fundraising prospects and more.

2. Overexposure Without Any Clear Gains: If the goal was publicity, there are better ways to achieve it without risking your credibility. Appearing on Shark Tank desperately or opportunistically would signal instability, making a host of key stakeholders worry about long-term financial health.

3. Giving Competitors an Unfair Advantage: In the pitch, Woodsmen ended up disclosing financials, market strategies, sales figures, and some expansion plans. This would play positively in the hands of the competitors, and they could potentially  use this information to:

• • Undercut pricing
  • Accelerate their own funding and distribution strategies
  • Target the same customer base more aggressively

Essentially, Woodsmen handed their rivals free intelligence without gaining any financial advantage in return.

4. Weakening Brand Positioning in the Luxury Space: Woodsmen Mountain Whiskey positions itself as a premium/luxury brand. Luxury brands rarely seek investments in mass-market reality TV shows, as it could cheapen their brand image. A premium whiskey brand should focus on exclusive partnerships, high-end events, and private investor circles—not public reality TV negotiations.

5. The Psychological Fallout for Employees and Stakeholders: The appearance also impacts the employees as they could feel insecure seeing their company go on Shark Tank.

• • Why are we asking for money if we’re doing well?
  • Does management lack confidence in our long-term success?

Suppliers, distributors, and retail partners might second-guess future commitments too if they sense instability.

Overall, this was a highly misguided and miscalculated move: Perhaps coming from an entrepreneurial mindset of “free Publicity” or from some comms partners who either had no clue or had not assessed the “business and reputational risk and damage assessment” this would likely cause.

Given the seeming lack of an informed analysis of the outcome of the effort by Woodsmen Distillery, rather than boosting Woodsmen’s trajectory, their Shark Tank appearance would have resulted in self-inflicted harm in terms of :

• • Raised more doubts than trust
  • Weakened their luxury brand positioning
  • Potentially helped competitors more than themselves
  • Confused existing investors, stakeholders, partners and even employees

If this was a strategic move, it wasn’t well thought out. If it was desperation, it exposed weaknesses rather than solving them.

What they should have done instead:

• • Used private investor networks instead of a reality TV platform.
  • Focused on high-end whiskey events, collaborations, and targeted PR to build exclusivity.
  • If cash flow was a problem, better financial planning rather than seeking low-ROI publicity.

If their goal was to strengthen brand positioning, looking at it from an outsider’s perspective, this was more likely an act of self-inflicted damage that may take a while to recover from.

The author is global head - growth and consulting, Acorn Management Consulting.