PepperTap failure

PepperTap

Large and fast grocery delivery service

Description

PepperTap provided online shopping platform that addressed customers' need to buy groceries from local markets by delivering the goods to their doorsteps. It targets buyers from different groups of cities, divided into three tiers. The service helps in solving the problems of long queues in the market, limited parking spaces and manipulative intermediaries. Grofers, their main competitor, focused only on big cities to reduce management costs. Another strong competitor of theirs is BigBasket which manages its own inventory and operates as a mega wholesaler, while PepperTap obtains their inventory from local suppliers.

Stats

Category
Food and Beverage
Country
India
Started
In 2014
Closed
By 2016
Number of Founders
Two
Name of Founders
Milind Sharma, Navneet Singh
Number of Employees
Between 1001 And 5000
Number of Funding Rounds
4
Total Funding Amount
$51.2M
Number of Investors
7
Precise Cause of Failure
Poor Product
Business Outcome
Shut Down

Cause of Failure

Among the reasons why the company shut down even after receiving big investment money from investors, was the deep-seated perception in customers' minds that online platforms should provide cheaper solutions to their needs. To accommodate such expectations, PepperTap offered discounts and sales which were disproportionate to their account strength. PT also failed to weigh the scalability of their project before its full-blast expansion, which caused problems related to technology. For example, certain segments of their products malfunctioned and could not be accessed by customers on the platform.

PepperTap entered the online grocery business without sufficient preparation. It failed to acknowledge the need for deep pockets, large assortment, competitive prices and inventory management.

While 2015 was a great year for startups, and PepperTap was able to find venture capitalists relatively easily, 2016 brought a different scenario. Startups all over the world faced a slowdown in VC activities, and PepperTap had to bow down to the situation. The costs that the company had to bear were high compared to the profit it made. Since they operated without their own inventory, they needed to pay for outsourcing of inventory management plus technology, operation, etc.

PT founders also pointed out that the fact the Indian market was still unprepared for this type of service factored in as a reason that caused them to suspend their operations. The delivery fee for home delivery was seen as too high, particularly in second and third tiers cities or areas where the presence of delivery boys (kirana), was common and proved to be a tough competition to the online platform strategy.

Grocery shopping is also a favorite leisure activity after work among Indians and is often seen as an activity that brings the family together, making it an additional cultural challenge to Internet grocery businesses in India.

Go on Reading

Other Startups

PepperTap

Large and fast grocery delivery service

General Information
Category
Food and Beverage
Country
India
Started
In 2014
Business Failure
Business Outcome
Shut Down
Closed
By 2016
Cause of Failure
Poor Product
Founders & Employees
Number of Founders
Two
Name of Founders
Milind Sharma, Navneet Singh
Number of Employees
Between 1001 And 5000
Funding
Number of Funding Rounds
4
Total Funding Amount
$51.2M
Number of Investors
7
Description

PepperTap provided online shopping platform that addressed customers' need to buy groceries from local markets by delivering the goods to their doorsteps. It targets buyers from different groups of cities, divided into three tiers. The service helps in solving the problems of long queues in the market, limited parking spaces and manipulative intermediaries. Grofers, their main competitor, focused only on big cities to reduce management costs. Another strong competitor of theirs is BigBasket which manages its own inventory and operates as a mega wholesaler, while PepperTap obtains their inventory from local suppliers.

Cause of Failure

Among the reasons why the company shut down even after receiving big investment money from investors, was the deep-seated perception in customers' minds that online platforms should provide cheaper solutions to their needs. To accommodate such expectations, PepperTap offered discounts and sales which were disproportionate to their account strength. PT also failed to weigh the scalability of their project before its full-blast expansion, which caused problems related to technology. For example, certain segments of their products malfunctioned and could not be accessed by customers on the platform.

PepperTap entered the online grocery business without sufficient preparation. It failed to acknowledge the need for deep pockets, large assortment, competitive prices and inventory management.

While 2015 was a great year for startups, and PepperTap was able to find venture capitalists relatively easily, 2016 brought a different scenario. Startups all over the world faced a slowdown in VC activities, and PepperTap had to bow down to the situation. The costs that the company had to bear were high compared to the profit it made. Since they operated without their own inventory, they needed to pay for outsourcing of inventory management plus technology, operation, etc.

PT founders also pointed out that the fact the Indian market was still unprepared for this type of service factored in as a reason that caused them to suspend their operations. The delivery fee for home delivery was seen as too high, particularly in second and third tiers cities or areas where the presence of delivery boys (kirana), was common and proved to be a tough competition to the online platform strategy.

Grocery shopping is also a favorite leisure activity after work among Indians and is often seen as an activity that brings the family together, making it an additional cultural challenge to Internet grocery businesses in India.

Go on Reading

Monitor110

Real-time internet monitoring services

Analytics
Shut Down
$17.3M
Multiple Reasons
Analytics
United States
In 2003
By 2008
One
Between 1 And 10
Between 10M 50M
Multiple Reasons
Shut Down
Dinner Lab

Membership-based social dining experiment

Food and Beverage
Shut Down
$9.1M
Bad Business Model
Food and Beverage
United States
In 2011
By 2016
Three
Between 11 And 50
Between 1M 10M
Bad Business Model
Shut Down
Design Inc.

Marketplace for high-quality design work

Design
Shut Down
$2.3M
Bad Business Model
Design
United States
In 2016
By 2017
Two
Between 1 And 10
Between 1M 10M
Bad Business Model
Shut Down
Flud

Social news reader for different platforms

Productivity
Shut Down
$3.1M
Multiple Reasons
Productivity
United States
In 2010
By 2013
Two
Between 11 And 50
Between 1M 10M
Multiple Reasons
Shut Down
Turntable.fm

Online interactive platform for DJs and listeners

Music
Shut Down
$7M
Bad Business Model
Music
United States
In 2011
By 2013
One
Between 1 And 10
Between 1M 10M
Bad Business Model
Shut Down
Poliana

Web application that simplified the legislative system

Analytics
Shut Down
$15K
Bad Business Model
Analytics
United States
In 2013
By 2015
Four
Between 1 And 10
Less Than 1M
Bad Business Model
Shut Down