The tech community has been buzzing recently about a controversy surrounding Tech Burner’s latest smartwatch launch. Shlok Srivastava, popularly known as Tech Burner, released his first-ever smartwatch, which has since become the center of praise, criticism, and accusations. Here’s a detailed look into what unfolded, the allegations made, and the responses from all involved parties.
The Journey of the Smartwatch
In his recent video, Shlok shared the challenges he faced during the development of the smartwatch. He recounted the ups and downs of launching the product, showcasing the journey that took months to come to fruition. He revealed that several tech reviewers praised the product, which initially seemed like a positive sign. However, soon after, the product faced scrutiny, and some videos discussing its negatives gained more traction.
Tech Burner admitted that some people had understood the “formula” behind generating views—negative videos garnered significantly more attention than positive ones.
The Allegations: Chinese Manufacturing and Material Misrepresentation
One of the most serious allegations came from tech YouTuber Rohit Raj Gupta, who claimed that the smartwatch was a Chinese white-labeled product. Gupta also raised concerns about inaccuracies in the continuous monitoring feature of the watch.
Another claim highlighted inconsistencies regarding the materials used. While Shlok claimed the smartwatch body was made of stainless steel, a co-founder of Layers (Tech Burner’s brand) showed proof indicating it was anodized aluminum. This discrepancy raised eyebrows in the community.
Addressing the Allegations
In his response video, Shlok acknowledged the feedback and stated that his team was working on addressing the issues. However, he denied hiring an agency to manipulate emotions or create artificial hype around the product, contrary to Gupta’s statements. Screenshots and threads from Rohit Gupta’s analysis suggested that Tech Burner collaborated with a marketing team to build hype around the product, but Shlok refuted these claims, emphasizing transparency in his operations.
Manufacturing in China: A Necessary Step?
Shlok openly stated that the smartwatch was manufactured in China due to a lack of sufficient funds. However, he assured that the company planned to shift production to India within six months. This revelation was an attempt to address concerns regarding the product’s origin, which many critics used to challenge its authenticity and pricing.
Tech Burner’s Marketing Strategy: Ethical or Manipulative?
The smartwatch’s marketing strategy also came under fire. Critics claimed that emotional marketing tactics were employed to connect with audiences and boost sales. Shlok defended this by stating that emotional marketing is a legitimate part of business strategies and that there was nothing unethical about it.
What Went Wrong?
While Tech Burner’s smartwatch had its merits, inconsistencies in communication, unclear responses to allegations, and aggressive criticism from some tech creators overshadowed its success. Many felt that Shlok’s attempts to address these concerns came off as defensive rather than clarifying the situation.
Conclusion
The controversy surrounding Tech Burner’s smartwatch highlights the challenges faced by creators venturing into product launches. Miscommunication and public scrutiny can easily derail even the most well-intentioned projects.
Moving forward, transparency, consistency, and constructive engagement with the audience will be key for Tech Burner and other creators aiming to establish themselves in the tech product market. While the smartwatch launch was a learning experience for Shlok and his team, it also serves as a case study for how creators can better navigate the complex world of tech entrepreneurship.
