DISSERTATION REPORT ON

A Comparative Analysis of Food Delivery Systems

“With special reference to Swiggy and Zomato”

“Submitted in the Partial Fulfillment for the Requirement of Post

Graduate Diploma in Management”
(PGDM)

Submitted to: Submitted by:

MS. BARKHA NARANG Student Name: NAMAN BAJAJ
Roll No. 27/PGDMA/KJ/2018
Batch 2018-2020

Jagannath International Management School

Kalkaji, New Delhi
 DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this project report titled “A Comparative Analysis of Food
Delivery Systems - With special reference to Swiggy and Zomato” is
executed as per the course requirement for the post graduate program in
management and it has not been submitted by me or any other person to any
other university or institution for degree or diploma. It’s my own work.

Name: Naman Bajaj

Enrollment No: 27
Project Title: A Comparative Analysis of Food Delivery Systems -
with special reference to Swiggy and Zomato
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Description Page
No.
Acknowledgement 1
Executive Summary 2
Introduction 3-12
Company Profile 13-21
Research Methodology 22-26
Data Analysis & Interpretation 27-39
Findings 40-43
Recommendations and Conclusion 43-45
Bibiliography 46-47
Appendix 48-51
 Acknowledgement

I would like to thank Dr. J.K. Batra, esteemed director and Dr. Preeti Singh who
gave such an interesting and practical topic to do the research on, which helped
me to increase my knowledge in the working of different food delivery systems in
Delhi NCR Region such as Zomato and Swiggy and how it has affected end
users and restaurants and other stakeholders.
I would like to thank Ms. Barkha Narang who always gave valuable
suggestions, guidance and a plethora of knowledge during the completion
of this project.
He has been an amazing source of inspiration during the completion of this
project. He has helped me to collect, analyze and understand the details of the
project that I would have otherwise lost.
My project report has been a success only because of his guidance.

1
 Executive Summary

This project aims to compare two of the most popular Food Delivery Systems in
India – Swiggy and Zomato. The primary objective of thestudy is to find out which
services is most preferred by consumers and which service delivers better
features for the consumer. The research has been conducted by collecting both
primary data by way of a questionnaire. For the primary data, an anonymous
random sample with sample size of 75 has been selected for analyzing consumer
behavior and preferences amongst the two services.

From the research it has been concluded that Swiggy outperforms Zomato is
almost all criteria except delivery times and Refunds. Zomato is the larger
company of the two and yet is lagging behind Swiggy mostly because of the fact
that Zomato came out of its core competency into the food delivery market, which
was just Menu curation and restaurant listings. It has also been concluded from
the research that consumers eating habits have changes since the rising
popularity of Food Delivery Systems. Earlier they rarely used to order food and
get it delivered. Now however, influenced by various offers, and wide restaurant
coverage across their areas, consumers have started ordering more and more
food from different places. It has been recommended that Swiggy deliver their
service in a much more timely manner and control their social media influence in
a better and more responsible way. It has been recommended that Zomato
increase the user friendliness of their app as most orders are received through
app and use their wide restaurant coverage for negotiating better deals with the
restaurants.

2
Chapter 1: Introduction
The Food Delivery Market in India

Food delivery is a service in which a store or restaurant delivers food to a

customer through the restaurant’s website. Delivered items include drinks, food,
and desserts etc. Payment mode may be online and cash on delivery. Some
features for making successful online food delivery market are generating a code
referral system, easy & user-friendly dashboard, social media integration,
customer integration with push notification and cross-platform compatibility etc.

The market for online food delivery is mainly driven by:

 Rising disposable income.

 Changing demographics,
 Increasing penetration of internet & smart-phones,
 Favorable lifestyle changes,
 Young population,
 Consumption levels,
 A greater share of women in the workforce,
 Aggressive marketing strategies adopted by food startups and
 The convenience of ordering.

Apart from the advantages some of the challenges include:

 Unpredictable demand patterns,

 Inability to influence external circumstances such as traffic,
weather & changing demand on a daily basis
 High delivery cost
 Highly concentrated peaks in ordering during meal-times
 Limited delivery times and kitchen operations etc.
Right now, Indian Food Services (Restaurants and Food Delivery) is a US$50
billion industry as compared to the US Food Services Industry, which is worth
around US$600 billion easily. Macro trends like nuclear families, more women
joining the workforce, and higher disposable incomes are going to make the food
services industry grow at a very high rate in India. Food delivery is going to grow
even more exponentially due to the high road traffic and easy access to hygienic
and affordable food with huge choices.

With Zomato and Swiggy becoming unicorn successes and online food delivery
orders crossing 1 million in daily deliveries, it is undeniable that the Indian food
tech and services industry has been hot lately. Food is a necessity, as well as
passion for many, and choices for both eating out and delivery have exploded in
the last few years.

The role of mobile apps and also the web-based system of ordering food playing
an important role as more and more people use smartphones, followed by
increasing literacy and access to the Internet facilities. Online food delivery is
moving towards self-delivery, causing the fall of delivery time. Players also have
higher control over the delivery process are able to provide much better value to
customers. In upcoming years, product’s 3D images or 360-degree view will be
on websites, which will define more detailed menu information such as
ingredients and portion size etc. In near future, it is expected that products will be
delivered via drones, which will be helpful for delivery within minutes.

By August 01, the amount raised in the food-tech industry (including

delivery, produce and sell, restaurant review and table reservation) reached
$480 million, over three times more than the $135 million the sector
amassed in all of 2017, Tracxn data show.
A significant portion of this went to food-delivery platforms, including Swiggy,
which raised $210 million from Naspers and Meituan-Dianping in June. In this
round, the company was valued at over $1 billion, making it India’s 11th unicorn.

Zomato:- Zomato was started by Deepinder Goyal and Pankaj Chaddah in year
2008 from India. It is a restaurant search and discovery service providing
restaurant locations and menus to the customers along with images of the food
dishes and reviews given by previous customers. Initially the services were
started under the name Foodiebay and in November 2010 the name was
changed to Zomato as the brand name of the company. Zomato has reached
heights of success and is operational in 24 countries around the globe.

Swiggy:- Nandan Reddy, Rahul Jaimini and Sriharsha Majety from Bangalore
have started are the founders of the food delivery company Swiggy. Company
was started in 2014 and is operated by Bundl Technologies Private Limited
having a valuation of $1.3 billion and its total funding around is $465.5 million.

Serhat Murat Alagoz & Haluk Hekimoglu (2012) determined a noticeable

growth in ecommerce with a substantial speed worldwide, similarly food industry
has been noticed to grow by the time. Researchers have used Technology
Acceptance Model (TAM) model to study the online food ordering system. Ease
and usefulness of the online ordering and delivery services has been
emphasized as a major factor towards the acceptance and growth of these
services.

Varsha Chavan et al. (2015) in their studies aimed to gauge the impact smart
device based interface on business management and service delivery have
concluded them as a supporting factor for restaurants in taking orders and
delivering foods with more convenience. Authors have stated online services as
more convenient, user friendly and most effective tools for food businesses.
Ansar Z. & Jain S. (2016) specified the growth in the ecommerce industry as
prime factor for the success of online food ordering and delivery services.
Research has mentioned that more than 400 food delivery apps are nurturing in
India with a funding of about $120 million from venture capital firms and other
such investors. Considering the fact that a minimum 3 meals are consumed by
each individual in a day the food industry is called as a repetitive business
industry which attracts the interest of investors and entrepreneurs towards this
growing business segment.

H.S. Sethu & Bhavya Saini (2016) have wonderfully investigated the perception,
behaviour and satisfaction of students towards online food ordering and delivery
services. The study emphasized the online food ordering and delivery services
helping students in time management and having their favourite food at any time
of the day. Researchers have also revealed that easy access to internet as one
of the supporting factor to the use of such services by the students.

Demand Drivers of Online Food Services

Encouraging Demographics:

With a population of over 1.2billion, India is undeniably one of the biggest

consumer markets in the world today. Moreover, 50% of this population fall under
the age of 25, and the rest before the age of 35 years; making India among the
youngest population in the world too. Most of the fast food demand comes from
age group 18-40 years. What’s more, by the year 2025 the Indian middle-class
demographic is expected to touch 550 million. Young India’s appetite is one of
the key drivers for demand in the food and beverage industry on the whole.

Promising Income and Consumption Levels:

With an increasing number of young Indians being productively employed in
lucrative industries, sectors like IT services have upped the living standards and
made their wallets fatter too. The World Bank reports a staggering 50% increase
in per capita income since 2006 until now. Urban India sees a visible change in
the social setting, which further fuels the advance of fast food restaurants in
India. Higher disposable income is also a key driver for other subcategories of
food products too.

Favourable Lifestyle Changes:

With dual-income families, now urban India sees both parents bring home the
bacon, thus changing the way people live drastically; with changes in routines,
lifestyle and food habits. The demand for quick access to food and one with
affordable rates is on the rise. Time crunches and an increasing need to spend
quality time with 92% nuclear families reaching out for fast food or take outs to
save time and energy that would otherwise go into cooking up a meal at home
every day of the week.

Rising Number of Working Women:

Keeping in line with the above point, there has been an astounding increase in
working women. Working women end up spending most of their productive hours
commuting and at work, therefore there is very less time to cook full blown meals
at home, all by themselves. Working women typically spend a large amount of
their disposable income on buying takeouts or eating out. This is again a key
demand- driver for the food and beverage industry in India.

Supply Drivers of Online Food Services

Expanding Variety of Cuisines:

With more and more restaurants offering global cuisines, this has had a
significant impact on the overall food industry. Chicken biryani, burgers, butter
chicken, pizza and Hakka noodles are customers' most preferred orders. North
Indian fare tops, but Chinese, Italian, south Indian and 'healthy food' are also
popular. The more Indians living in urban areas are willing to experiment with
new cuisines, the more will frequency of dining out increase.

Upgrading of Retail Formats:

With a slew of international food brands and restaurants making themselves

available at popular malls, these seem to be the ideal space to get more
customers who go to malls to shop. And inversely, more customers going to food
courts and restaurants at malls, shop! It is a win-win situation for all parties,
indeed.

Rising of Contract Cultivation:

Contract cultivation is essentially a binding agreement that guarantees farmers’

purchases from giant global companies, provided they agree and supply the
preferred crops to the companies. For example, McDonald's currently has over
400 farmers cultivating potatoes for them in over 2000 acres of farmland in the
state of Gujarat.

Emerging of Logistics Providers:

It’s not just true for the emerging e-commerce industry where couriers and
delivery- handling companies are on the rise. There are logistic providers for
the food industry too, such as Radhakrishna Foodland who is a local partner,
providing their logistics services to global giants in India such as McDonald's
AND Pizza Hut.

Growing of Delivery - dedicated Formats:

The initial investment needed for a delivery-focused format is much lower
compared to starting up a restaurant or even a fast food joint. Investments
includes rent, designing interiors, furniture and so on. Due to such cost benefits,
more operators are ready to devote their time, energy and investments in the
formats dedicated to delivering food at the doorstep. There is a considerable
decrease in the costs of labour, supplies and the biggest cost saving aspect is
the need for quality real estate. This is the most expensive of all investments in
restaurants, and with a delivery format this cost is saved.

Extension to Delivery Services in Existing Restaurants:

Restaurants are now trying to maximize their business output by offering food
delivery services. This way they all are able to rationalize existing fixed costs and
also keep their business sustainable. Home Delivery is a very vital ingredient in
this mix. It’s no wonder restaurants big and small, all are vying to get a piece of
this pie! Moreover with this format, a higher number of customers can be
serviced, compared to the sit-and-dine format where at peak hours, customers
will be missed. The delivery format keeps customer loyalty going strong too.

New Trends in the Delivery Sector:

The role of mobile apps and also web-based system of ordering food cannot be
undermined at this point. With more people using smart phones, increasing
literacy and access to the Internet, the fortunes waiting to be reaped from the
business of home delivery are just a click away! Domino’s Pizza claims to deliver
over 50,000 pizzas in a day and 15,000 of those orders are made online. Fassos
is another popular food chain that doles out over 60,000 orders in a day and all
from their mobile app too. Now that Dominoes and other players have tied up
with the online food service site FoodPanda, these numbers are expected to
double in the coming years. E-Tailing, which is having a sound presence online,
is very promising for all delivery-based ‘quick service restaurants’ (QSR)
compared to the revenues generated from the typical brick-and-mortar format

Delivery-dedicated Websites:

While global food chains and QSR like McDonald's, and Pizza Hut have their
own websites from where you could order food, other businesses who want in on
the food delivery business opt for websites like FoodPanda and Zomato. There
are many others cropping up who have similar food delivery formats, with their
own coupon and discounts system to get more customers - Just Eat and
TastyKhana for instance, who have just entered the market recently. These
exclusive websites earn commissions on every order and the benefit to
customers is that they are able to access a number of food websites offerings at
just one stop, avail discounts and exclusive offers to get maximum value out of
their online or mobile app orders. Zomato is one of the most popular apps and
websites that not only let customers order food from multiple restaurants, but
have a rating system and an exclusive phone number using which customers
could make reservations at the restaurants. Their advantage is the access to call
records, using which they continually streamline their processes. It’s no wonder
they have now picked up a funding of more than $163 million for business
development. An interesting point to be noted here is that FoodPanda plans to
extend their services and tie up with restaurants that cannot do home-delivery.
There will be logistics-related investments done by FoodPanda to simply expand
their reach and get a larger bite of the home delivery market. Regardless of who
gets the better funding, it is the ‘total recall’ of websites that would ultimately take
the biggest share of the pie. Even before Zomato or FoodPanda had made an
impression on the smart Indians, there was Burrrrp!, which is now non-existent
and so are other similar websites which mushroomed at one point, but could not
stay true to their value proposition. We have addressed various online food
services that deliver ready meals at homes & workplaces. There is another
service based on the food delivery model - the online grocery market. Some of
the leading names in this category include PepperTap, which recently got some
extravagant funding from Snapdeal and BigBasket. Other services like
TapTapMeals exist, which is delivery of “home-cooked” meals other than the
usual global QSR menu.

Impact of Online Food Services on Restaurant Business in India:

The format of home delivery or the takeaways have gained a lot more customers
in locations such as malls, offices and big-party orders for residential complexes.
People missing breakfast on the way to work, order-in. People who desire a
better

choice of corporate lunch or party, order in too. Everyone seems to be in awe of

the online food order and delivery option for the convenience and immediate
source of food at home. Besides, the convenience of ordering groceries from
your mobile app or web browser has certainly taken away some market share
from the trusted ‘kirana’ or the mom-n-pop stores. India is the 6th largest grocery
market in the world, but the organized sector as run by some of the online
businesses mentioned above makes up only for 5-8% market share of the
grocery business. The vast majority is still owned by these local markets and the
mom-n-pop stores. This has some obvious impacts on the brick-and-mortar
formats of in-dining restaurants as more people prefer to have restaurant-style
cuisines right in the privacy of their homes or workplaces, but the impact is not so
much as it may appear to be. The fast food business in India is only about 2
decades old, and remains largely unorganized. Given the rate at which the
organized sector is rapidly growing, it is only a matter of time and a much larger
chunk of global investments before a really big impact is made on ongoing
restaurant businesses that may not have a delivery-focused format of their own.

In this project that has been undertaken, it is aimed to compare two highly
popular food delivery services/systems, Swiggy and Zomato and to analyze
consumer preferences between the both in order to establish the better service
between them and the impact that the rising popularity of Food Delivery
Systems has had on consumption and eating out habits of consumers have
changed.
Chapter 2: Company Profile
Zomato:

Zomato started as an Indian restaurant search and discovery service founded in

2008 by Deepinder Goyal and Pankaj Chadha. It currently operates in 24
countries. It was limited to providing information and reviews on restaurants,
including images of menus where the restaurant did not have its own website.
The restaurant search and discovery platform began its operations under the
name, Foodiebay. In November 2010, the brand was renamed as Zomato.

By 2011, Zomato launched in Bengaluru, Pune, Chennai, Hyderabad and

Ahmedabad. The company launched a print version of the website content
named, "Citibank Zomato Restaurant Guide", in collaboration with Citibank in
May 2012, but it has since been discontinued.

In September 2012, Zomato expanded overseas to the United Arab Emirates, Sri
Lanka, Qatar, the United Kingdom, the Philippines, and South Africa. In 2013, the
company launched in New Zealand, Turkey, Brazil and Indonesia with its website
and apps available in Turkish, Brazilian Portuguese, Indonesian and English.

In April 2014, Zomato launched its services in Portugal, followed by launches in

Canada, Lebanon and Ireland the same year.
The acquisition of Seattle-based food portal Urbanspoon marked the firm's
entry into the United States, Canada and Australia, and brought it into direct
competition with Yelp, Zagat and OpenTable.

In February 2017, Zomato in a company's blog, explained the concept of cloud

kitchen. With its cloud kitchen, the company will help the restaurants to expand
their presence without incurring any fixed costs.

In September 2017, Zomato claimed that the company had "turned profitable" in
the 24 countries it currently operates in. Furthermore, Zomato announced that
the "zero commission model" is to be introduced for partner restaurants.

Zomato narrowed down its losses by 34% to ₹389 Cr for the financial year 2016-
17, from ₹ 590.1 Cr crore in the previous year 2015-16.
Now, looking at the success of companies like Foodpanda, TastyKhana, JustEats
etc., Zomato in late 2017 finally entered the food delivery market as well. While,
so far Zomato allowed consumers to read menus across restaurants in 24 Indian
cities, a consumer still had to make phone calls to the restaurant to place an
order.

It is interesting to note that Deepinder Goyal, Founder of Zomato has always

maintained in the past that the company will never enter into the online food
ordering business. The reasons he gave was lack of customization, technological
issues, and poor logistics. However due to the spectacular success of Swiggy, it
made no sense for a company like Zomato to simply be an aggregator of menus
and review of different restaurants. So it got into the business of delivering food
to its users as well.

So far however, it has been playing catch up with the other giants in this industry;
especially Swiggy.
Funding:

Zomato has received investments worth $443.8 million through 10 rounds of

funding. Top investors include Ant Financial, Sequoia Capital, Temasek
Holdings, Info Edge, and Vy Capital.

Acquisitions:

Zomato has acquired several companies over the years; with the most notable
being the acquisition of US based Urbanspoon in 2015. Other acquisitions made
by Zomato include Obedovat, Menu Mania, Lunchtime, MapleGraph, Sparse
Labs, Gastronauci, NexTable, Cibando, Mekanist, and Runnr.

Competition:

Zomato competes with other restaurant discovery and food delivery platforms
such as Swiggy, Dineout, Grubhub, Yelp, DoorDash, JustDial, etc.

About the Founders:

Zomato was founded by Deepinder Goyal and Pankaj Chaddah, both of whom
are from IIT, Delhi. Deepinder Goyal currently serves as the Chief Executive
Officer (CEO) at Zomato. Prior to launching Zomato, he used to work at Bain &
Company as a Senior Associate Consultant. Pankaj Chaddah is the co-founder
and prior to launching Zomato, he had worked at Bain & Company as a Senior
Analyst and Associate Consultant.
SWOT Analysis:

Zomato:

Strengths:

 High awareness amongst consumers

 Global Presence

 Strong brand recognition

Weaknesses:

 Competition from local search engines

 Slightly disgruntled workforce

Opportunities:

 Increasing smart phone users and internet penetration

 Rapid technology Development

Threats:

 Intense competition from other similar services

 Bad reviews and social media influencers
Swiggy:

The fastest company in the country to reach unicorn status, swiggy was started
by Nandan Reddy, Rahul Jaimini, and Sriharsha Majety in 2014. A unicorn
company is any start-up which has reached $1 Billion in total valuation. While
Flipkart, considered to be the most successful startup in india, took almost 6
years to reach a valuation of $1 Billion, swiggy did it in a mere 4 years. That is
enormous especially considering the market it operates in is in its infancy for
now.

History:

In 2013, Nandan Reddy and Sriharsha Majety, both alumni of Birla Institute of
Technology and Science (BITS) Pilani, started a logistics company called Bundl,
which connected small and medium companies to courier service providers. After
a year, they wanted to build an online hyperlocal logistics company in the
restaurant industry.They approached Rahul Jaimini, an IIT Kharagpur alumnus,
who was working as a software engineer for online fashion retailer Myntra at that
time and together, they rolled out Swiggy.

Swiggy started as a small setup in August 2014, with a team of six delivery
personnel and covering 25 restaurants.

Operations:

Currently, Swiggy operates in 25 cities in India. These include: Ahmedabad,

Bangalore, Chandigarh, Chennai, Coimbatore, Dehradun, Delhi, Gurgaon,
Guwahati, Hyderabad, Indore, Jaipur, Kochi, Kolkata, Lucknow, Ludhiana,
Mumbai, Mysore, Nagpur, Noida, Pondicherry, Pune, Surat, Vadodara, and
Vizag. Swiggy is also currently partnered with 12,000 restaurants and 13,000
delivery executives.
Today, Swiggy is the leading food ordering and delivery platform in India.

Swiggy had acquired gourmet food startup '48East' in December 2017. The
acquisition of 48East has helped Swiggy to strengthen its service offerings and
add additional capabilities as well. The deal was done for an undisclosed
amount.

Swiggy works as a single point of contact for ordering food from all restaurants
that may be there at a particular location. Swiggy has its own team of delivery
professionals who pickup orders from restaurants and deliver it at the customer's
doorstep. This has made the task of ordering food a lot easier for customers.

Restaurants also gain by getting more orders and avoiding costs and efforts
associated with maintaining their own delivery personnel.

Funding:

Swiggy has received investments worth USD 155.5 million via six rounds of
funding. Investors include SAIF Partners, Harmony Partners, Naspers, Norwest
Venture Partners, Bessemer Venture Partners, and Accel Partners.

Acquisitions:

Swiggy had acquired gourmet food startup ’48East’ in December 2017. The
acquisition of 48East has helped Swiggy to strengthen its service offerings and
add additional capabilities as well. The deal was done for an undisclosed
amount.
Competition:

Swiggy competes with other players in the food ordering and delivery space such
as Zomato, Box8, Holachef, Dineout, etc.

About the Founders:

Swiggy was founded by Sriharsha Majety, Nandan Reddy, and Rahul Jaimini.
Sriharsha Majety is an alumnus of Indian Institute of Management, Calcutta and
he currently serves as the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) at Swiggy. Co-founder
Nandan Reddy is an alumnus of Birla Institute of Technology and Science and he
heads operations at Swiggy. He had earlier worked at Galla, Zurna, IDinsight,
and Intellecap. Co-founder Rahul Jaimini is an alumnus of Indian Institute of
Technology, Kharagpur and he is the Chief Technical Officer at Swiggy.  Prior to
Swiggy, he had worked at Myntra and NetApp
SWOT Analysis:

Swiggy:

Strengths:

 Sensible Brand Image

 Trained delivery drivers
 Proper incentives offered to Delivery persons

Weaknesses:

 Maximum focus on zonal restaurants

 Low awareness of brand name

Opportunities:

 Marketplace has huge potential

 Potential for increasing marketplace
 Reduction of delivery times
 Better logistics

Threats:

 Increasing health Consciousness among consumers

 Increasing competitors
Chapter 3: Research Methodology
INTRODUCTION

Research refers to search of knowledge. The pattern in which a research is

carried out to arrive at a conclusion or to final new relationship within a particular
framework is called research methodology. Research methodology also refers to
the various sequences, steps to be adopted by a researcher to study a problem
with certain objectives in view.

Objectives:

 To compare different food delivery systems with particular focus on

Swiggy and Zomato.

 To study particular preference of consumers towards either service.

 To judge different companies towards customer friendliness.

 To know the best preferable company among the different food delivery
partners.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Research design is the framework or plan for a study that guides the collection
and analysis of the data. It is a map or blue print according to which research is
to be conducted. The research design is given below,

NATURE OF RESEARCH:

The research design followed for this study is descriptive research for analyzing
the collected data, an in-depth research analysis was framed and various
statistical tools and techniques were also used for the purpose.
DESCRIPTIVE RESEARCH:
Descriptive research includes surveys and fact- findings enquiries of different
kinds. The Major purpose of descriptive research is description of the state of
affairs as it exists at present. The methods of research utilized in descriptive
research are survey methods of all kinds, including comparative and correlation
methods.

DATA SOURCES:

PRIMARY DATA

Primary data is collected in the form of questionnaire. Through the questionnaire

which consists of a number of questions printed in a definite order on a set of
forms, the respondents were expected to read and understand the questions
itself. The respondents need to answer the questions on their own and according
to their perception. Data has two ways of being created or generated. The first is
what is called 'captured data', and is found through purposeful investigation or
analysis. The second is called 'exhaust data', and is gathered usually by
machines or terminals as a secondary function.

 Primary data has been collected to know the preference of

consumers between Swiggy and Zomato
 Primary data has been conducted to know the consumption habits of
the customers as well with regards to ordering food online
 The tool through which this data has been collected is in the form of a
questionnaire prepared by me.
 The questionnaire was distributed via online medium to a sample of
75 anonymous respondents.
SECONDARY DATA

Secondary data consists of information that already exists, somewhere, having

been collected for specific purpose in the study. The secondary data for this
study

was collected from various research articles found from various websites
listed later in the bibliography.

SAMPLE SIZE AND METHODS OF SAMPLING SAMPLE SIZE:

Size of the sample means the number of sampling units selected from the
population for the investigation.

Here the sample size is fixed at 75 respondents.

SAMPLE METHOD:

There are several different sampling techniques available, and they can be
subdivided into two groups:

 Probability Sampling and

 Non-probability Sampling.

In probability (random) sampling, you start with a complete sampling frame of all
eligible individuals from which you select your sample. In this way, all eligible
individuals have a chance of being chosen for the sample.

Probability sampling methods tend to be more time-consuming and expensive

than non-probability sampling.

In non-probability (non-random) sampling, you do not start with a complete

sampling frame, so some individuals have no chance of being selected.
However, non-probability sampling methods tend to be cheaper and more
convenient, and they are useful for exploratory research and hypothesis
generation.

For this project, simple random sampling has been adopted and no particular
preference has been given to any respondent based on age, gender, location, or
any other criteria that would have influenced this study. Responses have been
kept completely neutral and anonymous in nature.

Limitations:

Some constraints were faced during the research work and preparation of the
report, these could be summarized as:

 Due to shortage of time, more exhaustive research could not be

performed
 The study was limited to the area of Delhi NCR due to which the
results cannot be applied to country as a whole
 Primary data could not be collected on the business end to analyze
any business-related impacts of Food Delivery Systems
 Because of the considerably low number of responses (75), the
results may be prone to slight measurement bias
Chapter 4: Data Analysis and Interpretation
Q.1) Do you order food online?
a. Yes
b. No

Respondents
80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
a.      Yes b.      No

Interpretation: 70 out of the 75 people prefer ordering food online which is

approximately 93% respondents from the sample survey..
Q.2) If yes, from which company do you prefer?
a. Swiggy
b. Zomato
c. Others

Respondents
45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
a.      Swiggy b.      Zomato c.      Others

Interpretation: From the analysis it can be seen that 40 people prefer Swiggy,
25 prefer Zomato and rest (10) prefer Others while ordering food.
Q.3) How often you order food online?
a. Daily
b. Weekly
c. Fortnight
d. Monthly

Respondents
35

30

25

20

15

10

0
a.      Daily b.      Weekly c.      Fortnight d.      Monthly

Interpretation: The number of people ordering food online daily are 10 as

compared to 18 ordering it weekly.
 While 30 people order their food online every after 15 days.
 17 people out of the 75 respondents order food once a month.
Q.4) Which meal you typically order food online?
a. Breakfast
b. Lunch
c. Snacks
d. Dinner

Respondents
30

25

20

15

10

0
a.   Breakfast b.   Lunch c.   Snacks d.   Dinner

Interpretation: Out of the 75 respondents, the following is the interpretation of

people buying food for respective meals:
 8 for breakfast
 22 for lunch
 20 for snacks; and
  25 for dinner.
Q.5) In general, how do you prefer to order food?
a. Over the mobile app
b. Over the web browser
c. Others

Respondents
50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
a.      Over the mobile app b.      Over the web browser c. Others

Interpretation: About 60% of the respondents (45 out of 75) order food over
mobile app.
 15 out of 75 (20%) respondents order food over the web browser
 Rest 20% respondents prefer other modes of ordering food.
Q.6 What is the approximate money you spend on ordering food per time?
a. Less than Rs.150
b. Rs. 150 to Rs. 250
c. Rs. 250 to Rs. 500
d. More Than Rs. 500

Respondents
40

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
a.      Less than Rs.150 b.      Rs. 150 to Rs. 250 c.      Rs. 250 to Rs. 500 d.      More Than Rs.
500

Interpretation: As per the findings these are the following spending of

respondents while ordering food per time:
 12% spend less than Rs.150
 28% spend from Rs.150 to Rs. 250
 About 47% spend ranging from Rs. 250 to Rs. 500
 Approximately 13% spend more than Rs.500.
Q.7) Why do you prefer online food delivery?
a. Faster delivery
b. Convenient
c. Time saving
d. Money saving

Respondents
30

25

20

15

10

0
a.      Faster delivery b.      Convenient c.      Time saving d. Money saving

Interpretation:
 People prefer buying online due to the money saving factor contributing the
most for about 33%.
 Followed by Convenience contributing for about 27%.
 Time saving and Fast delivery contribute the equal 20% as factors
 influencing while ordering food online

Q.8) Which company services are good in packing?

a. Swiggy
b. Zomato
c. Others

Respondents
50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
a.      Swiggy b.      Zomato c.      Others

Interpretation: As per the survey conducted, Swiggy has topped in packaging

with 57%.
 Zomato has come second with 24%.
 Followed by others securing approximately 19%.
Q.9) Which company services are good in quality of service?
a. Swiggy
b. Zomato
c. Others

Respondents
60

50

40

30

20

10

0
a.      Swiggy b.      Zomato c. Others

Interpretations:

 Swiggy has topped in giving services to its customers with about

73% respondents polling in its favor.

 Zomato secured second position with 20% respondents polling

 for it.

 About 7% respondents voted for others in giving them quality

services.

Q.10) Which company services are good on time delivery?

a. Swiggy
b. Zomato
c. Others

Respondents
45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
a.      Swiggy b.      Zomato c.      Others

Interpretation: Looking at the graph, we can understand that:

 Swiggy has delivered the food with lightning speed securing about
53% respondents voting in its favor as compared to Zomato with
 about 33% and other with about 13%.

Q.11) Which companies customer grievance service is good?

a. Swiggy
b. Zomato
c. Others

Respondents
60

50

40

30

20

10

0
a. Swiggy b.  Zomato c. Others

Interpretation: Swiggy has topped with 64% (48 out of 75) respondents voting in
its favor for good customer grievance service.
  About 27% respondents have voted for Zomato in its favor.
 About 9% have opted for others.

Q.12) According to you which company below has more tie ups with most
restaurants?
a. Swiggy
b. Zomato
c. Others

Respondents
45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
a.      Swiggy b.      Zomato c.      Others

Interpretation: According to the study:

 56% respondents have said that Zomato has the most tie ups
 with restaurants.

 About 37% say that Swiggy has the most tie ups.

 While, about 7% have voted that others have the most tie ups
with restaurants.

Chapter 5: Findings
Findings:

 70 out of the 75 people prefer ordering food online which is approximately

93% respondents from the sample survey.
 From the analysis it can be seen that 40 people prefer Swiggy, 25 prefer
Zomato and rest (10) prefer Others while ordering food.
 The number of people ordering food online daily are 10 as compared to 18
ordering it weekly, while 30 people order their food online every after 15
days, 17 people out of the 75 respondents order food once a month.
 Out of the 75 respondents, the following is the interpretation of people buying
food for respective meals:8 for breakfast, 22 for lunch, 20 for snacks; and,25
for dinner.
 About 60% of the respondents (45 out of 75) order food over mobile app, 15
out of 75 (20%) respondents order food over the web browser, rest 20%
respondents prefer other modes of ordering food.
 As per the findings these are the following spending of respondents while
ordering food per time:12% spend less than Rs.150, 28% spend from Rs.150
to Rs. 250, about 47% spend ranging from Rs. 250 to Rs. 500, approximately
13% spend more than Rs.500.
 People prefer buying online due to the money saving factor contributing the
most for about 33%, followed by Convenience contributing for about 27%,
time saving and Fast delivery contribute the equal 20% as factors influencing
while ordering food online.
 As per the survey conducted, Swiggy has topped in packaging with 57%,
Zomato has come second with 24%. followed by others securing
 approximately 19%.
 Swiggy has topped in giving services to its customers with about 73%
respondents polling in its favor, Zomato secured second position with 20%
respondents polling for it, about 7% respondents voted for others in giving
them quality services.
 Swiggy has delivered the food with lightning speed securing about 53%
respondents voting in its favor as compared to Zomato with about 33% and
other with about 13%.
 Swiggy has topped with 64% (48 out of 75) respondents voting in its favor for
good customer grievance service, about 27% respondents have voted for
Zomato in its favor, about 9% have opted for others.
 56% respondents have said that Zomato has the most tie ups with
restaurants.
 About 37% say that Swiggy has the most tie ups.
 While, about 7% have voted that others have the most tie ups with
restaurants.
Chapter 6: Recommendation & Conclusion
Recommendations:

For Swiggy:
 Swiggy should also look towards increasing better Restaurant
Coverage
 Swiggy is offering better incentives to its delivery drivers,
however it should be offering better incentives to the restaurants
like Zomato as well
 Though Swiggy providing the best customer service, it should
continue giving the same standard of customer service in order
to keep the hold in the market amongst its competitors.

For Zomato:

 Zomato is lagging far behind Swiggy in a lot of services that the

delivery system offers such as Delivery charges, specialized
offers, etc. Therefore, it needs to provide overall services to the
consumers on these fronts.
 Zomato, however, due to its history has better restaurant
coverage so it is in a much stronger position as compared to
Swiggy in negotiating a better and mutually profitable deal with
the restaurants.
 Zomato should also increase the user friendliness of its app as the
maximum number of orders are received from the mobile app of these
systems. Too many hurdles in ordering food will deter the users from
ordering food from a particular service in the future.
Conclusion:
The food delivery market is still in its infancy, however with the swiftly
increasing popularity of Swiggy, Zomato and other such online food
delivery systems such as UberEats, Foodpanda etc., it is a highly
lucrative market.

Through primary data that has been collected, it can be concluded that
the number of food deliveries have increased due to the rising
popularity of food delivery systems. Most people order food from
restaurants at least a few times a month on a fairly regular basis.
Even though Zomato covers more restaurants, Swiggy has emerged
as the most preferred and most popular food delivery system. In terms
of features and offers, Swiggy far outperforms Zomato in almost all
fields except for better delivery times and refund policies. People have
started ordering more and more food from Food Delivery Systems
rather than visiting restaurants.

Through secondary data that has been collected it can be concluded that
while a majority of respondents think that Swiggy covers more
restaurants, secondary data is in contrast; It is Zomato that has better
restaurant coverage. Swiggy however has become the better known
household name both for the consumers and for the Venture
Capitalists as a safe investment and it has raised a huge sum of
money in a short amount of time. This has enabled Swiggy to become
the fastest company to reach Unicorn Status.
Bibliography:

 DailyHunt. (2019, January 28). Swiggy - Company Profile. Retrieved from

Daily Hunt: https://m.dailyhunt.in/news/india/english/news+patrolling-
epaper- newspatr/swiggy+company+profile-newsid-80728099

 DWAPP. (2018, July 19). SWIGGY: SWOT Analysis with detailed

company snapshot.
 Retrieved from DigitalWalle: https://digitalwale.com/swiggy-swot-analysis/

 Jindal, V. (2018, September 4). Why India’s next unicorn could come from
the food tech services industry. Retrieved from Your Story:
https://yourstory.com/2018/09/india-food-tech-services-industry-prospects/

 KenResearch. (2018, November 29). Rise in Income and Internet

Facilities to Drive Online Food Delivery Market in India. Retrieved from
Ken Research: https://www.kenresearch.com/blog/2018/11/rise-in-income-
and-internet-facilities- to-drive-online-food-delivery-market-in-india-ken-
research/

 Kishore, S. (2018, March 16). Swiggy: The Story of A Company That

Changed The Way A Country Eats. Retrieved from Startup Stories:
https://www.startupstories.in/stories/inspirational-stories/swiggy-story-
company- changed-way-country-eats

 Pani, P. (2017, December 12). Zomato to enter delivery business soon.

Retrieved from The Hindu Business Line:
 https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/info- tech/Zomato-to-enter-delivery-
business-soon/article20849546.ece

 Sharma, S. (2015, February 12). 'This will be Zomato's fastest ramp up for
any geography ever': Deepinder Goyal. Retrieved from Your Story:
https://yourstory.com/2015/02/zomato-announces-online-food-ordering-
india/

 Shrinivasan, S. (2018, November 16). Zomato’s full-course strategy: From

supply to delivery and more . Retrieved from Economic Times:
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/small-
biz/startups/newsbuzz/zomatos-full- course-strategy-from-supply-to-
delivery-and-more/articleshow/66645881.cms

 Wikimedia, F. (n.d.). About Swiggy. Retrieved from Everybody Wiki:

https://en.everybodywiki.com/Swiggy

 Zomato SWOT Analysis, Competitors & USP. (n.d.). Retrieved from

MBASkool: https://www.mbaskool.com/brandguide/it-technology/13626-
zomato.html
Chapter 7: Appendix
Questionnaire

Q.1) Do you order food online?

a. Yes
b. No

Q.2) If yes, from which company do you prefer?

a. Swiggy
b. Zomato
c. Others

Q.3) How often you order food online?

a. Daily
b. Weekly
c. Fortnight
d. Monthly

Q.4) Which meal you typically order food online?

a. Breakfast
b. Lunch
c. Snacks
d. Dinner

Q.5) In general, how do you prefer to order food?

a. Over the mobile app
b. Over the web browser
c. Others
Q.6) What is the approximate money you spend on ordering food per time?
a. Less than Rs.150
b. Rs. 150 to Rs. 250
c. Rs. 250 to Rs. 500
d. More Than Rs. 500

Q.7) Why do you prefer online food delivery?

a. Faster delivery
b. Convenient
c. Time saving
d. Money saving

Q.8) Which company services are good in packing?

a.Swiggy
b.Zomato
c.Others

Q.9) Which company services are good in quality of service?

a. Swiggy
b. Zomato
c. Others

Q.10) Which company services are good on time delivery?

a. Swiggy
b. Zomato
c. Others
Q.11) Which companies customer grievance service is good?
a. Swiggy
b. Zomato
c. Others

Q.12) According to you which company below has more tie ups with most
restaurants?
a. Swiggy
b. Zomato
c. Others