FunkkOFF! is still in business. Its website is live, its TeethRefreshers are available to buy, and the company is still presenting the product as a Shark Tank success story. But the most commonly repeated part of the story deserves more caution: there is still no clear public evidence that Robert Herjavec’s $250,000 investment actually closed.
That distinction matters because the deal shown on television is often treated as the same thing as a completed investment. In FunkkOFF’s case, the public record is more complicated.
The company appeared on Shark Tank in February 2023, with founders Joelle Flynn and Sonia Hounsell asking for $250,000 in exchange for 5% of the business, a roughly $5 million valuation. Robert Herjavec eventually offered $250,000 for 12%, and the founders accepted. (ocbj.com)
More than three years later, FunkkOFF has not disappeared. Its current website continues to sell the flagship TeethRefreshers, including subscription purchases, and describes the product as a reusable two-in-one toothbrush and toothpaste. (funkkoff.com)
The harder question is what happened to the Shark investment.
FunkkOFF went into Shark Tank with $80,000 in sales and a very different valuation
When Flynn and Hounsell walked into the Tank, FunkkOFF was still a young consumer-product company.
The founders told the Sharks that they had generated $80,000 in sales since launching TeethRefreshers in July 2021. They had also raised $675,000 from outside funding and invested another $325,000 themselves. Despite that capital, they said the business was down $130,000. (ocbj.com)
Their product was unusual enough to attract attention. TeethRefreshers combined a small toothbrush with built-in tooth gel in a lipstick-sized package. The device was designed for situations where someone wanted to freshen their teeth after eating or drinking without carrying a conventional toothbrush and tube of toothpaste.
The pitch valuation was $5 million: $250,000 for 5%.
That number did not impress every Shark.
Kevin O'Leary wanted more sales. Mark Cuban liked the product but ultimately passed. Herjavec initially appeared ready to let the founders leave before calling them back with an offer. The final on-air deal was $250,000 for 12%. (sharktankblog.com)
The deal implied a substantially lower equity valuation than the founders' original ask, assuming the terms were treated as straightforward equity. But what happened after the cameras stopped is where the record becomes murky.
The Shark Tank deal was accepted on television, but its closing was never clearly documented
This is the part that gets flattened in many online FunkkOFF updates.
The on-air deal is real. Herjavec offered it, and Flynn and Hounsell accepted.
But an accepted Shark Tank deal is not automatically a completed investment. Deals can change during due diligence, be renegotiated, or fall apart altogether.
Contemporary reporting from the Orange County Business Journal described FunkkOFF as having secured the $250,000 deal with Herjavec in March 2023. The company itself has also repeatedly described Herjavec as its Shark Tank investor. (ocbj.com)
There is, however, a contrary piece of evidence that cannot simply be ignored.
The Shark Tank Blog reported in October 2023 that it had found no evidence the Herjavec deal had closed. Its later update continued to flag the deal as unconfirmed. (sharktankblog.com)
That does not prove the investment never happened. It does mean that the public record does not justify stating with certainty that Herjavec ultimately wired the $250,000.
As of 2026, FunkkOFF's own website still references the Shark Tank appearance and Herjavec deal, but its public-facing material does not provide a closing announcement or transaction details that independently settle the question. (funkkoff.com)
So the most defensible description is: FunkkOFF accepted a $250,000-for-12% deal from Robert Herjavec on Shark Tank, but the completion of that deal is not clearly established by public evidence.
The company did get a real post-Shark Tank sales boost
Whatever happened with the investment, the television appearance itself appears to have mattered.
FunkkOFF's founders told Harvest Growth in May 2023 that sales during the first part of 2023 were more than three times the comparable period in 2022. The company's own account was even stronger in its Stevie Awards materials: it said sales during the first six months of 2023 were 350% higher than in 2022. (harvestgrowth.com)
Those are company-reported figures, rather than independently audited financial statements, so they should be read that way.
The immediate demand was significant. FunkkOFF said it sold out during the first quarter of 2023, with customers placing preorders and waiting more than three months for inventory. Its Stevie Awards submission also said the company had expanded from direct-to-consumer sales into retail, reaching more than 90 stores across 40 states at that point. (stevieawards.com)
The company also had a QVC purchase order and an announced August 2023 airdate, according to its award submission. (stevieawards.com)
That is a much stronger post-Shark Tank picture than the simplistic "Shark Tank deal, then vanished" narrative found on some update sites.
By late 2024, FunkkOFF said it was in about 130 retail locations
The company's expansion did not stop with the initial Shark Tank spike.
In a November 2024 interview published by Inventors Digest, Joelle Flynn said FunkkOFF was then available in about 130 locations across 45 states. She listed dental offices, spas, pharmacies, grocery stores, airports and boutiques among the channels carrying the product. She also said the company was selling through its own website and Amazon and had added retailers including SHEN Beauty, Uncommon Goods and FabFitFun. (inventorsdigest.com)
That interview is useful because it provides a more recent first-person snapshot than many of the Shark Tank aggregator pages.
The founders were also still publicly operating as FunkkOFF's co-CEOs in 2024. The Association for Corporate Growth listed both Flynn and Hounsell as speakers at its 2024 New York Women's Leadership Summit, and a December 2024 podcast featured the pair discussing the business and their Shark Tank experience. (acg.org)
In other words, there is little evidence for the idea that FunkkOFF simply fizzled out after its television appearance.
FunkkOFF's current website shows an operating company, not a dead Shark Tank brand
The clearest evidence of FunkkOFF's present status is considerably less glamorous than a Shark Tank headline: the company is still selling products.
Its current store lists TeethRefreshers at $14.99 on sale, with a monthly subscription option priced at $11.99 per delivery. Another product page lists a $21.99 version. The site continues to market the device as reusable up to 30 times and sells additional toothpaste products and bundles. (funkkoff.com)
FunkkOFF also maintains a store locator and an active press section. (funkkoff.com)
That establishes something important but limited: FunkkOFF is still operating as a consumer brand and selling its products.
It does not establish current revenue, profitability, valuation or the size of its retail footprint. Those figures are not publicly disclosed in a reliable enough form to present as settled facts.
There is another interesting development in the intellectual-property record. U.S. patent records show that several FunkkOFF-related patents were assigned on August 28, 2025 from Joelle Flynn and FunkkOFF! Inc. to 360 Global Holdings LLC. The patents remain listed as active. (patents.google.com)
The public record does not, by itself, explain the business relationship between 360 Global Holdings and FunkkOFF, so it would be premature to call this an acquisition or sale of the company. It is simply a documented change in ownership of the relevant intellectual property.
So, did Robert Herjavec actually invest in FunkkOFF?
There are two different answers depending on what standard of evidence is being used.
On Shark Tank: yes. Herjavec offered $250,000 for 12%, and the founders accepted.
As a completed investment: unclear from the public record.
FunkkOFF's own materials continue to characterize the Shark Tank appearance as a deal with Herjavec, and contemporary business reporting did the same. But the absence of clear closing documentation, combined with contemporaneous reporting that the deal had not been confirmed as closed, means the stronger claim should remain qualified. (ocbj.com)
What can be established with considerably more confidence is what happened to the business itself.
FunkkOFF survived the post-Shark Tank period, expanded its retail distribution, continued selling directly to consumers, kept its founders at the helm through at least 2025, and still has an operating storefront today. The company has also continued to describe itself as a Shark Tank brand. (boardofadvisors.com)
That makes FunkkOFF a more interesting Shark Tank story than the usual binary of "Shark invested and the company exploded" or "the deal fell through and the company died."
The business is still here. The product is still for sale. The Shark's $250,000 check, however, remains the part of the story that the public record does not let us state as settled fact.
