'I'm not proud': Soham Parekh breaks silence on defrauding companies, says he was forced to do it
Indian techie Soham Parekh, who has been accused of frauding US companies by working in several companies at the same time, owned up to what he did and said he did that out of dire fiancial circumstances.
In TBPN's show, Parekh, who worked in multiple US companies lying to them about his location, admitted that the allegations against him are true but he is not proud of what he has done.
"I'm not proud of what I've done. That's not something I endorse either. But no one really likes to work 140 hours a week. I had to do it out of necessity. I was in extremely dire financial circumstances," Parekh said in the interview. "I'm not a very people person.
I don't share much about what's going on in my life. So I just thought: if I work multiple places, maybe I can elevate myself out of the situation faster," he said.
'I was decent enough, a good enough engineer'
In his first interview amid the major moonlighting controversy, he said he likes to believe that he was decent enough, a good enough engineer, to essentially be able to work at three places because that's the only thing he did the entire day.
"Some of these companies I worked at were before the Co-Pilot boom.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025
Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List
Undo
There was no AI-assisted programming," he said.
Soham Parekh's scam came into light after Suhail Doshi, co-founder of Mixpanel and Playground AI outed him in an X post, warning everyone that Parekh scams startups by faking his resume and working multiple jobs at the same time. "PSA: there's a guy named Soham Parekh (in India) who works at 3-4 startups at the same time. He's been preying on YC companies and more. Beware," Doshi had said. "He hasn't stopped a year later.
No more excuses."
Several CEOs claimed that they interviewed Parekh and got to learn about his scam the hard way.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
13 minutes ago
- Business Standard
As debate over obligatory cession rages, GIC Re could hold the solution
The ongoing debate over whether obligatory cession should be abolished entirely — as many players in the non-life insurance industry have demanded — or retained in some form, could potentially be resolved by allowing state-owned GIC Re to set commissions for insurance companies independently, instead of the insurance regulator mandating a fixed rate. In this arrangement, the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India's (Irdai's) role would be limited to determining the percentage of obligatory cession, industry experts suggested. Obligatory cession refers to the portion of business that Indian general insurance companies must mandatorily cede to GIC Re, the national reinsurer. Ceding refers to the part of the risk that a primary insurer passes on to another insurer. Irdai has retained the obligatory cession to be placed with GIC Re at 4 per cent for FY26 — the third consecutive financial year at that level. Irdai has also specified that the commission on obligatory cession will be a minimum of 5 per cent for motor third-party and oil & energy insurance, 10 per cent for group health insurance, 7.5 per cent for crop insurance, and a minimum of 15 per cent for all other classes of insurance. Additionally, commission above the specified thresholds may be mutually agreed between the Indian reinsurer and the ceding insurer. The obligatory cession was reduced from 5 per cent to 4 per cent in FY23. Irdai has gradually lowered it over the years — from 20 per cent to 15 per cent, then to 5 per cent, and subsequently to 4 per cent. Meanwhile, there has been a long-standing demand from non-life insurers to bring down obligatory cession to zero, as the commission paid by the reinsurer does not reflect the industry's cost structure, industry players said. According to Ramaswamy Narayanan, chairman and managing director of GIC Re, the demand to reduce obligatory cession to zero comes from specific quarters, while other players are comfortable with the current structure. The difference of opinion, he said, lies in how commissions are disbursed. Private insurers that are profitable often feel they are subsidising others, particularly unprofitable state-owned insurers. 'Today, in obligatory, Irdai decides what is the minimum commission to be paid and it varies. We have suggested to Irdai that we understand how to price a contract, how to provide commissions. So if you only say what is the obligatory, we will handle the rest. On a company basis, depending on their performance, we know how to fix the commissions. Irdai has even allowed that, but I think it has been pending at the DFS level. Once that is given, I think everybody will be on board,' Narayanan said. According to him, if the obligatory cession is brought down to zero, it could lead to a cash flow problem. Industry players noted that standalone health insurers are particularly unhappy with the current arrangement with GIC Re, citing low commissions received. 'Removing obligatory cessions will be beneficial for insurers who don't have a high claims ratio. Whereas, having obligatory cession supports insurers who have a very high claims ratio,' said a private sector insurance executive, on condition of anonymity. 'Obligatory cession is an important risk mitigation strategy that should continue to exist for general insurance companies. With composite licences in play, it might be useful for Irdai to revisit the same, given the diversification benefits that the revised product portfolio structure under a composite licence will offer. In case it is being brought down, it should be done in a staggered manner after a careful understanding of how each organisation is managing their business and portfolio risk,' said Vivek Iyer, partner and financial services risk leader at Grant Thornton Bharat.
NDTV
14 minutes ago
- NDTV
"Rs 8 Crore For A Borivali Apartment?" Viral Tweet Sparks Debate On Dubai Vs Mumbai
A recent social media post comparing the then-and-now prices of real estate in Mumbai's Borivali has sparked a broader discussion on high property costs and global relocation options. A user on X (formerly Twitter) expressed disbelief at 5 BHK flats in Borivali now costing Rs 8 crore or more, reminiscing how a 2 BHK once sold for just Rs 15-20 lakh two decades ago. Twitter user Mehul R Thakkar wrote in his post, "Borivali sells 5 BHK apartments for Rs 8 crore++. Can't believe... 20+ years ago, during my childhood: 2 BHK was available for Rs 15-20 lakh in Borivali, and 5 BHK didn't exist, certainly." Borivali sells 5 BHK apartments for ₹8 crore++ can't believe.. 20+ years ago, during my childhood: 2 BHK was available for ₹15-20 lakh in Borivali and 5 BHK didn't exist certainly 🥲 #RealEstate #Mumbai #Borivali — Mehul R. Thakkar (@MehulThakkar_) June 29, 2025 The viral post attracted several responses, but one in particular gained attention. A user suggested that with Rs 8 crore, one could consider moving to Dubai instead. The comment detailed how investing Rs 4.5 crore in Dubai real estate could secure a Golden Visa, allowing long-term residency. Additionally, starting a company in a Dubai free zone offers a two-year residency visa and complete income tax exemption. The user also noted that Dubai's loan interest rates are as low as 3.5%, compared to India's higher home loan rates, making property investment in the UAE more attractive for high-net-worth individuals and aspiring entrepreneurs. As real estate prices in Indian metros continue to soar, many Indians - especially millennials and Gen Z - are exploring global alternatives that offer better returns, lifestyles, and tax benefits.
New Indian Express
15 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Indian benchmark indices end slightly higher after a volatile session on Friday
CHENNAI: Indian benchmark indices ended slightly higher on Friday, July 4, following a volatile session marked by caution among investors ahead of the July 9 deadline for the potential reimposition of tariffs by the United States under President Trump. The BSE Sensex closed at 83,432.89, gaining 193.42 points or 0.23 percent, while the Nifty 50 settled at 25,461, up 55.7 points or 0.22 percent. Despite the green close, market sentiment remained subdued, with traders reluctant to take large positions amid geopolitical uncertainties and ongoing global trade tensions. The broader markets reflected a mixed tone. The Nifty Midcap 100 ended flat with a slight negative bias, while the Nifty Smallcap 100 inched up just 0.03 percent. Investor focus remained on two key themes: the looming US-India trade tariff deadline and regulatory developments within India. Of particular note was SEBI's interim action against global trading firm Jane Street, which led to significant selling pressure in broking stocks. Shares of companies like Angel One and BSE fell sharply, by around 6 percent, amid concerns about tighter oversight in the derivatives market. In sectoral performance, large-cap IT and FMCG stocks helped support the indices, with stocks like Infosys, TCS, and HUL posting modest gains. On the other hand, weakness was seen in banking, real estate, and metal counters. Among the top movers, Marico rose around 3.6 percent on the back of strong rural demand commentary, while Bajaj Finance gained over 3 percent after an uptick in its assets under management. Meanwhile, Trent fell sharply by about 7 percent due to signs of slowing revenue growth for the June quarter.
