2026-01-07 02:21:23

Regarding the funding background of Telegram, founder Pavel Durov recently provided a fairly comprehensive explanation. He candidly pointed out that the online claims about Telegram relying on Russian capital are completely unfounded.

Specifically, in the recent $1.7 billion bond issuance, there is no sign of Russian investors. The old bonds issued in early 2021 have also been nearly paid off, which poses no hidden risks.

More importantly, Durov emphasized that bondholders and shareholders are two different entities. Bondholders are simply creditors and have no say in the company's operations—the real decision-making power lies with him as the sole shareholder.

This clarification comes in response to media reports that approximately $500 million of Russian bonds held by Telegram were frozen due to Western sanctions. From Durov's response, he aims to illustrate the independence of the financing structure and the clarity of the company's decision-making authority. Regardless of external changes, Telegram's control and sources of funding remain very clear.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

17 Likes

Reward
17
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

LayerZeroEnjoyer

· 01-10 01:54

Durov's move here is a bit hasty, the more he explains, the more it sounds like he's passing the buck... Bondholders have no say? So if 500 million USD is frozen, it's really no big deal?

View OriginalReply0

MEVictim

· 01-07 02:51

Talking about bonds and equity separately with this logic just feels like shifting blame—do creditors have no say? Why weren't they so firm when freezing $500 million?

View OriginalReply0

AirdropHunterWang

· 01-07 02:49

Basically, Durov is passing the buck. Bonds and equity are discussed separately, sounds pretty good.

View OriginalReply0

SquidTeacher

· 01-07 02:44

Basically, it's about clarifying that I haven't been kidnapped and that I still have control.

View OriginalReply0

RugPullAlarm

· 01-07 02:44

It's that "clarification" again... You can't see Uncle Putin in the $1.7 billion bond, but how do you explain the $500 million frozen Russian debt? The numbers don't add up, bro.

View OriginalReply0

MEVVictimAlliance

· 01-07 02:40

They're starting to make excuses again. I've heard Durov's explanation before. Separating bondholders and shareholders sounds clear, but the question is, where did the $1.7 billion come from? Is it really that clean...

View OriginalReply0