‘Bigger than nations’: Zoho founder says Big Tech now wields power like East India Company
In an era defined by trillion-dollar valuations and cross-border digital influence, Sridhar Vembu, former CEO of Zoho Corporation, has reignited a provocative comparison: today’s technology giants, he argues, are beginning to resemble the British East India Company in their reach and power.
In a post on X (formally twitter), Vembu said, “Big tech is bigger than most sovereign nations. ‘East India Company’ is the way to think about them,” underscoring concerns about how deeply entrenched global technology firms have become in economic and strategic systems worldwide.
Capital at a scale reserved for nations
The remarks were triggered by discussions around Alphabet raising $32 billion in debt within 24 hours — an amount and speed typically associated with sovereign borrowing rather than private enterprise. Comparisons circulating online contrasted such fundraising with the longer timelines governments, including India, require to mobilise similar capital.
The debate also pointed to Google issuing a 100-year bond, a maturity horizon exceeding that of many sovereign issuances. Observers say these examples highlight how Big Tech companies now operate with financial tools, investor confidence, and long-term planning once exclusive to nation-states.
From market players to infrastructure powers
Vembu’s analogy is not new. He has repeatedly invoked the East India Company — a commercial entity that gradually transformed into a territorial and administrative power in colonial Asia — to illustrate how economic dominance can evolve into structural influence.
His argument centres on the idea that digital platforms are no longer just vendors of software or services; they form the backbone of communications, commerce, and governance itself. Control over such infrastructure, he suggests, can translate into geopolitical leverage.
Europe’s digital sovereignty moment
In January, while commenting on France moving away from foreign video-conferencing tools toward a domestic alternative, Vembu called the shift “ironic,” interpreting it as a delayed recognition of technological dependence.
The transition involved reconsidering reliance on platforms developed by companies such as Zoom Video Communications and Microsoft, and instead prioritising nationally controlled solutions.
For Vembu, such decisions signal the early stages of what he calls “technology sovereignty”—a framework in which nations seek greater ownership of their data ecosystems, digital infrastructure, and innovation pipelines.
Who shapes the rules of the digital age?
The comparison to a colonial trading giant is intentionally provocative, but it reflects a widening policy debate. As technology firms accumulate capital, talent, and cross-border user bases measured in billions, their decisions can influence supply chains, information flows, and even regulatory agendas.
Analysts note that unlike historical monopolies, modern tech companies operate simultaneously as infrastructure providers, marketplaces, financiers, and geopolitical actors—often without the checks traditionally applied to states.
