why the first bitcoin exchange in india was worth the risk
the highest-risk move sometimes looks like the lowest-risk move to regulators.
Building the first Bitcoin exchange in India in 2013 was the dumbest thing I could have done according to traditional risk analysis.
A billion-person market with no regulatory framework. A central bank explicitly hostile to crypto. No legal playbook. Billions at stake.
I did it anyway.
Here's what most founders don't realize about regulatory risk: it's most dangerous when you hide from it. The banks that quietly enabled crypto transfers? They faced worse penalties than the exchanges that showed up and said "we're doing this openly."
We grew to 2.5 million users. Then the RBI raided us.
Most teams would have folded. I didn't have the option. The capital was already deployed, the users were already there, the bet was already made.
So we fought. To the Supreme Court.
That sounds insane because it is. But it was also the only move that made sense given the position.
I'm telling you this because the calculus changed my entire thinking about regulatory risk. Most teams try to avoid it. The highest-risk moves are the ones that don't. They walk toward the regulator and say "tell us the rules."
Sometimes the regulator figures it out. Sometimes you win in court. Sometimes you do both.
Did you take the move that would have made sense if you already had $100M, or did you take the move that made sense for where you actually were?