OSOM, the company formed from Essential’s ashes, is apparently in shambles

Back in 2017, a startup named Essential released the Essential Phone, a device that was celebrated for its design and long-term software support but otherwise received mixed reviews and sold poorly. When Essential shut down in early 2020, many of its former employees came together to form a new venture named OSOM Products. After two product launches, it now appears that the company is in shambles, with a former executive alleging that the founder has been misusing company funds to pay for two Lamborghinis and his lavish lifestyle.

OSOM Products rose from the ashes of Essential in late 2020. Its founder and “Chief Hooligan,” Jason Keats, wanted to build something new without the involvement (and associated baggage) of Essential’s previous founder, Andy Rubin. The company hired several people who previously worked at Essential, including camera engineer Nick Franco, programmers Gary Anderson and Jean-Baptiste Théou, and marketing officer Wolfgang Muller.

OSOM, which the company says stands for “Out of Sight, Out of Mind,” stated that one of its goals was to create privacy-focused products. To lead those efforts, the company hired Mary Stone Ross in early 2021 to be their “Chief Privacy Officer.”

In 2022, the company launched its first product: the Saga, an Android smartphone backed by the large cryptocurrency and blockchain platform company named Solana. It released its second product, the OSOM Privacy Cable, in 2023 and seemingly held talks with Solana Mobile later that year to create a successor to the Saga. However, it seems that not only has the Solana Saga Two been canceled, but its entire smartphone venture might be over.

In a lawsuit docketed on Friday, August 30, 2024, in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (C.A. No. 2024-0894-BWD), Mary Ross, who left the company in May 2024 according to her LinkedIn, asked the court to compel OSOM Products, Inc. to grant her access to the company’s books and records. She filed this lawsuit in an attempt to prove her many allegations of financial mismanagement by Jason Keats.

The allegations she highlights in the lawsuit, detailed in court records seen by Android Authority, are incredibly damning if true. Shockingly, the lawsuit alleges, citing several meetings with the company’s Board and internal documents provided by former CMO Muller, that Keats misused company funds to purchase two Lamborghinis, pay for his racing hobby, pay for his racing partner’s salary, expense multiple first-class travel tickets, pay his mortgage, and more. The suit suggests that the company’s previous Head of Finance may have resigned due to these practices and that the company’s replacement was brought on board to process payments for Keats’ personal expenses.

Allegedly, Keats tried to pivot the company towards making an “AI-powered camera” as its next product after the collapse of its smartphone plans. Before this pivot, though, Keats allegedly attempted to engineer a sale of OSOM Products, Inc. to HP; the lawsuit claims that Keats said HP would buy OSOM for a certain sum, but the price kept dropping, and the deal never materialized. According to the suit, OSOM’s resources are allegedly depleted, and Keats has claimed the company now needs to raise additional capital to continue.

We reached out to Jason Keats for comment but did not hear back prior to the publication of this article. We also reached out to OSOM and received the following statement:

“We are aware of the outlandish allegations by a former employee, and look forward to disproving them in court.” – OSOM spokesperson.

If the allegations brought up in the lawsuit are true, then it would suggest that OSOM as a company is in major trouble. Not only do the allegations suggest that its smartphone venture is over, but they also suggest the company is plagued by financial troubles that are the direct result of actions allegedly taken by its own founder. Though OSOM says these allegations are “outlandish,” we’ll have to wait for the company’s official rebuttal in court to see its counter-evidence.