After Falsifying Revenue, Why Did This CEO Choose a 'No Pants' Response?

比推Published on 2026-03-11Last updated on 2026-03-11

Abstract

CEO Roy Lee, founder of AI startup Cluely, responded to accusations of inflating revenue figures not with a traditional apology, but with a deliberately absurd video performance. After being accused of falsely claiming $7M in annual recurring revenue in a TechCrunch interview, Lee first admitted to casually providing the number, then released a video where he appeared professionally dressed from the waist up—only to stand up and reveal he was not wearing pants. The company, which began by creating an AI-powered interview cheating tool and was co-founded after Lee was expelled from Columbia University, has consistently leveraged controversy as a core growth strategy. Rather than mitigating the scandal, Lee turned it into a viral moment, echoing a broader trend in tech and crypto where attention itself is monetized. Major investor a16z has backed Cluely, with partners arguing that in an era of commoditized AI models, viral storytelling and public attention are the new moats. Lee’s response exemplifies how some founders now treat controversy not as risk, but as fuel for growth.

Author: DingDang

Original Title: CEO Uses Humor to Respond to Crisis, AI Entrepreneurs Steal Crypto's Marketing Playbook


In most startups, if exposed for 'falsifying revenue,' it would likely lead to a PR crisis—issuing a statement, explaining the misunderstanding, correcting data metrics, apologizing, and then steering the conversation back to product or business growth.

But Cluely's CEO Roy Lee clearly had no intention of doing that.

A Company That Started with a 'Cheating Tool'

Cluely was founded in 2025, and its initial product came from a project called Interview Coder, developed by Roy Lee and his college roommate Neel. This was a tool that used AI to help users cheat in LeetCode interviews. Due to this project, both were eventually expelled from Columbia University.

For most people, being expelled from school would be a black mark to cover up. But Roy Lee turned this incident into a marketing opportunity, even a 'turning point in life.'

Cluely's initial product slogan was: 'Cheat on Everything.' It wasn't until November 2025 that Cluely began shifting its product narrative from a 'cheating tool' to an AI note-taking assistant, such as using AI to automatically organize meeting content, optimize collaboration efficiency, and even modify attendees' expressions to hide distractions. But no matter how the product evolved, the company, or rather, its CEO, never shook off a very distinct vibe: it almost grew through controversy.

And the ensuing storm, in a way, continued down this path.

A Farce Triggered by 'Falsified Revenue'

The incident began when someone dug up a July 2025 report by TechCrunch. The article mentioned that Cluely's Annual Recurring Revenue (ARR) had doubled in a week, reaching $7 million. This data was questioned as fraudulent.

Facing the质疑, Cluely CEO Roy Lee was quite candid. He quickly posted to admit that he had casually mentioned the number when a reporter called him, not expecting it to be included in a formal article. Seemingly to prove it wasn't an intentional exaggeration, he also posted Cluely's actual data from June 2025: consumer business annual revenue of $2.7 million and enterprise business annual revenue of $2.5 million, totaling $5.2 million.

Up to this point, there was nothing sensational, and the explanation was plausible.

But on the same day, TechCrunch reporter Julie Bort published a rebuttal to Roy's claim. She stated that the interview was arranged proactively by Cluely's PR team, was documented, and was not a casual chat.

Roy Lee didn't continue with a written explanation but chose a more dramatic way to respond. He released a video with the caption, 'Breaking News: Cluely CEO Officially Responds to TechCrunch.'

In the video, he sat in front of the camera wearing sunglasses and a suit, with a microphone on the desk, looking as if he was about to make a serious statement. But the setting wasn't an office; it looked more like a living room, with an old desktop computer next to him playing Subway Surfers—a classic time-wasting game. Roy's response was also completely informal, more like a self-deprecating performance, mixed with self-mockery and bragging, his tone reminiscent of a rapper freestyling.

Even more absurdly, at the end of the video, he stood up from behind the desk, revealing that this CEO, formal from the waist up, was wearing no pants......

Thus, a crisis PR situation originally about 'falsified revenue' was handled as a traffic-grabbing, self-mocking performance.

What a16z Is Betting On Is Actually the Attention Economy

The capital market doesn't seem to mind this kind of performative founder personality either. In June 2025, Cluely announced the completion of a $15 million Series A funding round, with participating institutions including the renowned venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz (a16z). Its partner Bryan Kim once mentioned on a podcast: In the AI era, the traditional 'artisan product + slow growth' model is no longer sufficient; viral spread itself is part of the product.

What he considers the 'new AI startup template' is that in an era where model capabilities are increasingly commoditized, attention itself is becoming a key resource. Whoever can capture user attention first may build a new moat.

From the 'cheating controversy' of Interview Coder, to the entrepreneurial story of being expelled from Columbia, to this absurd 'response video,' Roy Lee's entire personal brand has been built along this path: controversy itself is the content for propagation. This might also explain why a16z chose to invest in Cluely, to invest in Roy Lee.

When Controversy Becomes a Growth Strategy

In past entrepreneurial narratives, growth typically came from product capability, technological barriers, and business models. But in today's internet environment, another resource is becoming increasingly important—attention.

This logic has actually been proven in the crypto industry long ago. Many crypto projects capture user attention by creating topics, controversies, or even dramatic events, and then convert this traffic into product growth or commercial value, especially with the rise of Memes—pure propagation, no (traditional) product.

In a way, Roy Lee's response video is a classic case of this logic: when negative news emerges, rather than trying to suppress the controversy, repackage the controversy itself as传播 content.

Evidently, in the current internet environment, attention is often more valuable than explaining the truth.


Twitter:https://twitter.com/BitpushNewsCN

Bitpush TG Discussion Group:https://t.me/BitPushCommunity

Bitpush TG Subscription: https://t.me/bitpush

Original link:https://www.bitpush.news/articles/7618818

Related Questions

QWhat was the initial product developed by Cluely's CEO and co-founder, and what was the consequence of its creation?

AThe initial product was Interview Coder, an AI tool designed to help users cheat on LeetCode coding interviews. As a result, both Roy Lee and his roommate were expelled from Columbia University.

QHow did Cluely's CEO, Roy Lee, respond to the allegations of falsifying revenue reported by TechCrunch?

ARoy Lee first admitted in a post that he had casually provided the number during a call with a journalist without expecting it to be published. He then released a satirical video response where he appeared professionally dressed from the waist up but was not wearing pants, turning the crisis into a performance to attract attention.

QWhich prominent venture capital firm invested in Cluely's Series A funding round, and what was their stated reasoning for such investments in the AI era?

AAndreessen Horowitz (a16z) participated in Cluely's $15 million Series A funding round. Their partner, Bryan Kim, stated that in the AI era, viral marketing itself is part of the product, and capturing user attention is a critical resource for building a moat.

QAccording to the article, what is the 'new AI startup template' that Cluely's strategy exemplifies?

AThe 'new AI startup template' is one where, in an era of increasingly commoditized model capabilities, attention itself becomes a key resource. The strategy involves generating controversy and using viral, dramatic events to capture user attention and drive growth, rather than relying solely on traditional product capability or technological barriers.

QHow did the company's product narrative evolve from its origins to late 2025?

AOriginally promoted with the slogan 'Cheat on Everything' as a tool for cheating, the company began shifting its product narrative in November 2025 towards an AI note-taking assistant. This new focus included features like automatically organizing meeting content, improving collaboration efficiency, and even modifying attendees' expressions to hide distraction.

Related Reads

Investors Are Now Hunting for AI Projects on Bilibili and Xiaohongshu

Investors Turn to Bilibili and Xiaohongshu to Source AI Projects The AI hardware boom is in full swing in 2025, with a surge in smart wearables like AI glasses, rings, toys, and companion robots. This frenzy has investors scrambling, not just sifting through business plans, but actively hunting for promising "under-the-radar" projects on youth and tech-enthusiast content platforms like Bilibili and Xiaohongshu. The logic is straightforward: for consumer-facing AI hardware, genuine user demand and potential pitfalls are often revealed earlier in public discussions, comments, and critiques on these communities than in formal pitches. As one industry insider notes, these products must ultimately be tested and understood by real people. This shift highlights a crucial challenge in the sector: user education. The success of AI hardware depends on moving beyond mere efficiency gains to fulfilling higher-order needs like "unleashing personal creativity." Products must convince users they are natural, unobtrusive additions to daily life. Early hype, as seen with devices like the Rabbit R1, often fades if the product fails to clearly solve real-world problems, leading to high return rates and market rejection. The market is now entering a shakeout phase. 2026 is seen as a year of commercial validation. Some projects have already stalled or been canceled due to market resistance, lack of differentiation, or financial woes. However, the long-term opportunity remains vast, with forecasts predicting a multi-trillion dollar global AI hardware market by 2030. The competition is intensifying. With giants like OpenAI and Meta preparing their own hardware, and Chinese companies launching diverse AI-powered products, the battle for user attention, product excellence, and market understanding is just beginning. The core principle endures: in the AI era, it remains a user-sovereign market.

marsbit12m ago

Investors Are Now Hunting for AI Projects on Bilibili and Xiaohongshu

marsbit12m ago

"Agents' Last Exam", Claude Fable 5 Actually Loses to GPT 5.5

Surprisingly, in the newly released "Agents' Last Exam" (ALE) benchmark from UC Berkeley, GPT-5.5 has outperformed the recently launched and highly-regarded Claude Fable 5. ALE tests AI agents on their ability to perform real-world tasks across 55 professional domains—such as 3D modeling in Siemens NX, creating game scenes in Unreal Engine, and visual effects work in Adobe After Effects—by granting them full GUI and command-line access. In the core task completion rate ranking, GPT-5.5 configurations secured the top two spots (24.0% and 23.0%), while Claude Fable 5 with Claude Code came in third (22.0%). Notably, the highest pass rate was only 24%, and the most difficult "Last-Exam" tier saw most top models, including GPT-5.5 and Fable 5, scoring zero. The benchmark also revealed significant cost and efficiency gaps: Fable 5 spent over four times more money than GPT-5.5's most expensive configuration for a slightly lower score, and was much slower. ALE differs from previous knowledge-based benchmarks by evaluating practical "ability to do" rather than static knowledge retrieval. Its tasks are derived from real expert projects, automatically scored, and designed to prevent cheating through a rotating pool of private challenges. The results suggest that high performance on traditional benchmarks does not necessarily translate to proficiency in complex, open-ended real-world work. The study also notes that agents often fail by prematurely declaring tasks complete without proper verification, and that no single model excels uniformly across all diverse domains.

marsbit18m ago

"Agents' Last Exam", Claude Fable 5 Actually Loses to GPT 5.5

marsbit18m ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片