#Data : Foodpanda India Recorded 37.8 Crores Revenue Against 142.6 Crores Loss

foodpanda earned a revenue of 37.81 crores in FY 15-16 compared to 4.7 crores in FY 14-15 and the company has witnessed approximataely 800% growth in revenues.Foodpanda-in-India

Although, the losses grew from 36 crores to 142.6 crores, the company claims to be running its services at operational profitability since February 2015.

foodpanda : Whose delivery is it anyways?

At present, 40% of the orders are delivered by foodpanda delivery services and the rest 60% orders are delivered by restaurants (during December 2015, only 25% of the orders were delivered by foodpanda delivery services).

Compare this with Swiggy’s revenue which recorded a revenue of Rs. 24 crores (against a loss of Rs. 137 crores)

foodpanda aims to turn profitable by FY 2019 by achieving 100% automation.

foodpanda has raised $310mn so far, with the last round raised $110 million from investors led by hedge fund Goldman Sachs Investment Partners in 2015.

Meanwhile watch this quirky ad from foodpanda

#IndianStartupData : Pepperfry Records 98 Crores in Revenue (155 Crores Loss)

Online furniture startup, Pepperfry which last raised Rs. 210 crores in Sep 2016 recorded a revenue of Rs. 98 crores in FY15-16 and a loss of Rs. 155 crores in FY115-16.

Pepperfry Team
Pepperfry Team


While the revenue has grown nearly 4X, losses have doubled and is largely driven by marketing expense.

Pepperfry has raised $160mn in total and boasts of 5.2 million monthly visits and 2.6 million registered users.

Given that repeat (frequent) purchase isn’t one of the purchasing behavior in this segment, it’d be interesting to see how long investors will hold on to furniture startups before consolidation starts to happen.


[About #IndianStartupData : This is an annual series that breaks down the #PRshit of companies to actual numbers and importantly, more useful contexts.]

#IndianStartupData : Quikr recorded 95 crores of revenue (534 crores loss).

Quikr acquires Grabhouse

Quikr which has been on an acquisition spree and expanding verticals recorded a revenue of Rs. 95 crores against a loss of Rs. 534 crores in FY 15-16.

When it comes to revenue, Quikr has made more money from running Google Adsense (24 crores) and interest income (43 crores) than its core operations.

Quikr : Revenue / Loss
Quikr : Revenue / Loss

To give the company its due, the real monetization of service has started only a few months back – especially after the launch of Quikr services and vertical focus.

Having said that, 75% expense went into advertising and growing traffic – which goes on to demonstrate whether Quikr has a default ‘virality’ or is totally dependent on marketing.

Quikr : Waiting for the right time?

We earlier analysed Quikr’s Commonfloor acquisition and one thing that definitely came out is the fact that both the companies had comparable revenue, but the difference lies in Quikr’s ambition and focus on verticals.

With micro payments / wallets coming to the fore, Quikr is aptly timed for scale – especially from revenue point of view (they have enough eyeballs to take on Olx and others).

Note that the company has been around since 2005 and Pranay has seen a whole lot of survival / growth and it’d be interesting to see if the company has enough horsepower left to run faster and quikrrrr.

Of course, they need a constant supply of funding to keep running the show. Traffic, for now is purely dependent on marketing / promotions.


About #IndianStartupData : This is an annual series that breaks down the #PRshit of companies to actual numbers and importantly, more useful contexts.]

#IndianStartupData : Grabhouse Recorded INR 25 Lakhs Revenue Over 30 Crores Loss

Grabhouse has been acquired by Quikr.

Launched in July 2013, Grabhouse offers a managed rental homes model which comprises of a range of fully furnished, ready-to-move-in apartments across 4 major cities.

grabhouse-data

Grabhouse raised $10mn from Sequoia and Kalari in 2015 and here is a quick look at the company performance.

Grabhouse recorded a revenue of 25.6 lakhs in FY15-16, as opposed to 18.1 lakh in FY14-15.

grabhouse-revenue

As far as losses are concerned, the company recorded INR 30.37 crores loss, a massive 15X increase compared to the last year. The biggest line item that accounted for the expense wasn’t marketing cost, but employee benefit.

The $10mn funding was in tranches, based on performance.

Post acquisition by Quikr, Grabhouse will continue operations as an independent brand for managed rental homes (question : is it really that strong a brand to let it live on its own, post acquisition?).

As part of the overall integration process, Grabhouse founders and entire team will move to the Quikr HQ (FYI: in the past, there were questions raised on Grabhouse’ traffic acquisition strategy).

[About #IndianStartupData : This is an annual series that breaks down the #PRshit of companies to actual numbers and importantly, more useful contexts.]

#IndianStartupData : Revisiting Quikr’s Commonfloor Acquisition [Vertical Vs Long Tail Play]

Quikr's Pranay and Commonfloor's Sumit
Quikr’s Pranay and Commonfloor’s Sumit

Quikr acquired Commonfloor this year in an estimated $200mn deal (mostly stock).

We revisit the deal and numbers – largely, because numbers in this case don’t tell the entire story (and is an important message for founders).

Quikr Vs. Commonfloor : Revenue
Quikr Vs. Commonfloor : Revenue

Both Quikr and Commonfloor had comparable revenue numbers : 53 crores* and 44.4 crores.

Losses anyone?
Well, take a look.

Quikr Vs. Commonfloor : Loss
Quikr Vs. Commonfloor : Loss

Quikr recorded loss of 5X (446 crores) as compared to Commonfloor (86 crores).

Who should have acquired whom?

Clearly, if you look at numbers – Commonfloor fared much better than Quikr and was a better performing company than Quikr. FYI : both the companies started around the same time (Commonfloor in 2007 and Quikr in 2008).

Going by the numbers, Commonfloor should have acquired Quikr and not the other way round?

But the truth is that when you raise funding, as a founder you need to realise that you are entering a treadmill zone – where you need to keep running faster and faster and keep burning / keep raising (you may not have the control on the speed).

Quikr had more money (in the bank/higher valuation) and largely because they had larger ambition than Commonfloor. For Quikr, Commonfloor was an important classified category, even though number wise other categories weren’t performing so well.

Vertical Vs. Long tail

The question here is whether a vertical play (like of Commonfloor, i.e. real estate) makes it a NextBigWhat vis-a-vis a bigger horizontal play which is somewhat lesser impactful, but serves the long-tail?

In the long run, will vertical businesses be forced (by investors) to sell off to (bigger) horizontal plays, which may not be better performer but have better fancy numbers to show off?

What’s your take?

Watch out Sumit’s talk from the last UnPluggd where he talks about the Commonfloor story and the Quikr deal.

Note : These numbers are of FY14-15, which was the prime factor in deciding the merger which happened in Jan 2016.

[About #IndianStartupData : This is an annual series that breaks down the #PRshit of companies to actual numbers and importantly, more useful contexts.]

#IndianStartupData : Swiggy Revenue Grows to INR 23.59 crores, Losses Stand At 137 crores.

Today, we are happy to bring back #IndianStartupData – a series we started last year.

A series that breaks down the #PRshit of companies to actual numbers and importantly, more useful contexts.

INDIAN STARTUP DATA @NextBigWhat
INDIAN STARTUP DATA @NextBigWhat

To start off, we look at Swiggy data.

Swiggy : A Quick Intro

Swiggy raised $50mn in 2016 ($35mn in Series C and $15mn in Series D).  Started in 2013, Swiggy secured its first funding from SAIF Partners in January 2015 followed by a funding round of INR 100 crores in June.

Total funding raised by Swiggy till this date stands at $75.5 mn.

Swiggy Revenue

Swiggy recorded massive jump in the revenue from last year! From 11.6 Lakhs in 2014-15, the company recorded revenue of INR 23.59 crores in FY 15-16.

As far as expenses are concerned, it went up 70% to INR 160 crores.

Swiggy Loss : Swiggy recorded a loss of Rs. 137.18 crores, as opposed to 2.12 crores last year.

Swiggy : Revenue, Expense And Loss
Swiggy : Revenue, Expense And Loss

Swiggy Vs Zomato.

Competitor, Zomato recorded a revenue of Rs. 184.9 crores, against the loss of loss before tax of Rs.492.27 crore in FY15-16.

In order to boost revenues, Swiggy has started charging for deliveries, especially for restaurants who have declined to pay commission to Swiggy.

The biggest threat for Swiggy and the likes is not just Zomato, but the baap of all aggregator – i.e. Google which has started listing restaurant details in search. For Swiggy to continue the run, the company needs to builds ‘predictable experience’ around the service.

After all, pure discovery isn’t enticing enough for restaurants to pay to the aggregators.

How satisfied are you with Swiggy’s services?

Latest news on Swiggy: Myntra Founder Mukesh Bansal Joined Swiggy Board as Strategic Advisor

#IndianStartupData : BigBasket Revenue At INR 178 crores in FY 14-15; Losses at INR 61 crores

Hyperlocal grocery delivery startup BigBasket saw a 2.5 times growth in its revenue in FY 14-15 as its revenue figures reached INR 178 crores.

Introduction

BigBasket, which is owned and operated by Supermarket Grocery Supplies Private Limited, was founded by Hari Menon,V.S. Sudhakar,Vipul Parekh and AbhinayChoudhari in October 2011. It is an online grocery store that operates through the website and mobile app and provides home delivery in on-time and flexible delivery time slots.

BigBasket is currently present across 15 cities in India. The company claims to have more than 18,000 products in numerous categories including grocery & staples, fruits and vegetables, beverages, branded foods, personal care, household among others.

Financial Performance

BigBasket reported revenue of INR 178 crores against loss of INR 61 crores in FY 14-15. The revenue and PAT figures during the last fiscal were INR 71 crores and INR 22 crores, respectively. The revenue from operations stood at INR 170 crores in FY 14-15.

Image1

The breakup of revenue sources is as follows:

Image2

BigBasket operates on an inventory-led model and, hence, the biggest expense for the company was the purchase of stock-in-trade which stood at INR 171 crores.  The company spent INR 22 crores on advertising and promotional expenses in FY 14-15 which was a 420% increase over the previous fiscal. The following is the breakup of the major expenses of the company:

Image3

Funding

As per the documents filed with the Registrar of Companies, the company has raised a total funds of INR 695 crores from various investors including Bessemer Ventures, Helion Partners and Sands Capital. The latest investment of INR 124 crores was done by the US based Sands Capital.

Comparison

BigBasket competes with players like Grofers, Peppertap and ZopNow in the online groceries segment. Here is how it compares with the rest in FY 14-15:

Image4

It is worth noting that most of the other players are in their early stages and have been operational for 4 years or less.

Conclusion

The online grocery store segment has seen a lot of action in the past one year. Grofers recently raised $120 million from Japan’s SoftBank in November 2015. However, it shut down operations in 9 tier-2 cities in January this year as it did not deem the market ready. Another player LocalBanya shut shop in 2015. The space has also attracted E-commerce giants like Flipkart, which has launched Flipkart Nearby; Amazon that launched Amazon KiranaNow; Snapdeal invested in Peppertap in September last year. Godrej also launched Nature’s Basket to compete in the segment. Ola Cabs has also come up with Ola Store for hyperlocal grocery delivery.

The well-funded companies have been on an acquisition spree. Grofers has acquired rival MyGreenBox in April last year along with acqui-hiring Tech companies SpoonJoy and Townrush. BigBasket acquired hyperlocal delivery Delyver in June, 2015. PepperTap  also acquired Bangalore based hyperlocal grocery delivery startup Jiffstore.

Among acquisition, closures and big entrants, it will be interesting to see how the hyperlocal grocery market evolves in the coming year.

[About the author: Vishal and Anchal form the team that runs the Tofler blog. They like to explore and track companies, their performance and senior management. Tofler (tofler.in) is a Business Research Platform.]

#IndianStartupData : Housing Recorded Revenue Of Rs 12 Crores; Loss At 22X, 279 Crores [FY14-15]

[Editor Notes : Nothing is as powerful as data and these articles are part of our coverage of #IndianStartupData – i.e. an overview of financial performance of selected Indian startups with a belief that it gives the audience a good picture of the companies and the ecosystem in general.]

Housing had a terrific 2015 – the company was in news for its founder/CEO, Rahul Yadav and importantly, the Lookup campaign, which was splashed all over the web and offline world.

Housing.com recorded a revenue of INR 12.7 crores in FY14-15, out of which INR 5.5 crores was revenue from operations.

Housing loss went up by 5.7X, thanks to the aggressive Lookup campaign (Housing spent close to 120 crores in advertising and promotions).

Housing Revenue
Housing Revenue

Competitor, Commonfloor in the same FY14-15 recorded a revenue of Rs. 45 crores.

housing-lookup-logo

Housing shareholding structure.

In total, Housing has raised $139.5M in 4 rounds of funding.

Since we are talking about FY14-15, the context has changed a lot after Rahul Yadav was fired. Till the financial year, he owned 5% of the company. Softbank being the majority owner (33%), Nexus @19%, Helion @9%, Qualcomm at 5% and other founders at 7.5%.

These numbers must have changed after Rahul Yadav was fired and new executive team was brought in. But the key thing that startup founders and investors should note is this:

If founding team owns ONLY 12.5% of the company (after Series B), what’s the incentive left for them to make it big/continue?

Plus, how will you make space for more senior hires?

Who calls the shots? The investor who owns ~3X of the company?

Housing’s Focus On Revenue

Housing, till FY14-15 wasn’t really focused on revenue (watch our interview with Rahul Yadav) and the revenue focus has kicked in only 3 months back.

The company has brought in Jason Kothari as the CEO, who is focusing more on revenue side of things and has also culled a few areas which weren’t core to Housing (followed by layoffs).

Competitor Commonfloor has been acquired by Quikr.

Watch our interview with Rahul Yadav when he was the CEO of Housing.

#IndianStartupData : Pepperfry Revenue up 235% To INR 25 crores, Losses Triple To INR 88 crores

The home furnishing industry in India is a great opportunity for companies to capture. Its market in India is pegged to be around USD 20 billion. Moreover, a large number of unorganized players exist who are not able to cater effectively to the demand due to logistics and infrastructure issues. This led to a number of start-ups in this space, backed by big VCs. One of them is the Goldman Sachs backed Pepperfry.indianstartupdata

Pepperfry is a furniture and home décor marketplace, owned and operated by TrendSutra Platform Services Private Limited. This company is a wholly owned subsidiary of Trendsutra Cyprus Ltd., incorporated in Cyprus. It operates on a marketplace model and competes with Urban Ladder and Livspace in the furniture e-retail segment in India. Another key player in the segment is FabFurnish which operates on an inventory-led asset-heavy model.

Pepperfry : Financial performance

The company reported a revenue of INR 25.3 crores in FY 14-15 against a loss of INR 88 crores. This is a revenue growth of more than 200% from INR 7.5 Crore in the previous fiscal. Losses nearly tripled from INR 30 crores in the previous fiscal.

In comparison, it close competitor Urban Ladder had reported a revenue of INR 19 crores and a loss of INR 58 crores in the same period.

Pepperfy Revenue & PAT
Pepperfy Revenue & PAT

In FY 14-15, Pepperfry‘s expense on ‘Advertisement and Business Promotional Expense’  shot up five times of that in FY 13-14. It was the largest head in their total expenses, accounting for about 60% of it. Employee benefit expenses stood at INR 15 crores, 13% of total and 1.5 times of that in the previous fiscal.

Image 2

Pepperfry was founded by Ashish Shah and Ambareesh Murty (both former eBay employees), in July 2011. According to their website, it covers more than 1000 cities in India, has more than 2 million registered users and more than 1000 merchants on its platform.They claim to have fulfilled more than a million orders. Pepperfry currently leads the online furniture market and sources most of its products from Jodhpur.

Pepperfry Funding

All of their funding has been routed through their holding company TrendSutra Cyprus ltd. Total funds of INR 433 crores have been infused into the company with latest being INR 179 crores in October 2015. In comparison, Urban Ladder has raised funds of INR 460 crores so far.

These companies are incurring huge Advertising and Promotion expenses, Pepperfry and Urban Ladder spent INR 68 crores and INR 40 crores, respectively on the same. For the time being it might be justified as the furniture e-tail market is in the early stage of growth and is yet to mature. They also offer heavy discounts to attract customers who have become accustomed to the offline unorganized retail sector. How long will this trend continue and when will these companies become profitable, if they do at all, is something that we will have to wait and watch out for.

[About the author: Vishal and Anchal form the team that runs the Tofler blog. They like to explore and track companies, their performance and senior management. Tofler (tofler.in) is a Business Research Platform.]

#IndianStartupData : Swiggy’s Revenue Stands At INR 11.6 lacs, Losses at INR 2.1 crores

[Editor Notes : Nothing is as powerful as data and these articles are part of our coverage of #IndianStartupData – i.e. an overview of financial performance of selected Indian startups with a belief that it gives the audience a good picture of the companies and the ecosystem in general.]indianstartupdata

Swiggy, an online food-ordering and delivery start-up, is owned and operated by Bundl Technologies Private Limited. They have reported their results for the FY 14-15 and they are not much different from other online food ordering startups.

Swiggy’s Financial Performance

The company reported revenue of INR 11.6 lacs against a loss of INR 2.1 crores. The revenue comprises the delivery fees charged to restaurants and ‘e-commerce revenue’. The biggest expense for the company was the employee expense at INR 1.3 crores.

Swiggy Revenue & PAT
Swiggy Revenue & PAT

Swiggy mainly competes with Foodpanda, TinyOwl, Faaso’s and now Zomato, when it entered the food delivery segment last year. Following is a comparison of FY 14-15 revenue and PAT of ley players in food-tech. Zomato has not been included since it has primarily been a restaurant search and discovery platform and thus is not exactly comparable with the others.

Revenue & PAT of key players in foodtech by Tofler
Revenue & PAT of key players in foodtech by Tofler

Swiggy: The Story so far

Swiggy was founded by Sriharsha Majety, Rahul Jaimini and Nandan Reddy in December, 2013 in Bengaluru and became operational in FY 14-15. It enlists restaurants from nearby location to the customers who can then select and place order through its app or the website. It has dedicated delivery personnel to pick up orders from restaurants and deliver them to the customers. Swiggy now has its operations in 8 cities across India.

Swiggy secured its first funding from SAIF Partners in January 2015 followed by a funding round of INR 100 crores in June. The company has raised a total funding of INR 113.6 crores so far, from SAIF Partners, Accel, Norwest Venture and Apoletto Asia. Here is a snapshot of total funding raised by Swiggy and its competitors in foodtech.

Foodtech Key players funding by Tofler

With most of the players at almost similar stages, there is no clear leader so far in the online food ordering space. Although Zomato is way ahead of anyone in the restaurant search and discovery space, they have only just begun their food ordering operations. A few of the players such as Dazo, Spponjoy, etc. have already shut shop and there could be more such cases or industry consolidation. With heavy funding, this sector has already garnered everybody’s attention and it would be interesting to see how the space emerges.

[About the author: Vishal and Anchal form the team that runs the Tofler blog. They like to explore and track companies, their performance and senior management. Tofler (tofler.in) is a Business Research Platform.]

#IndianStartupData : Nuvo Logistics (PepperTap) Made A Profit Of INR 87 lac With A Revenue of INR 19.6cr in FY 14-15

[Editor Notes : Nothing is as powerful as data and these articles are part of our coverage of #IndianStartupData – i.e. an overview of financial performance of selected Indian startups with a belief that it gives the audience a good picture of the companies and the ecosystem in general.]indianstartupdata

Pepper Tap is an on-demand grocery delivery service based in Gurgaon, India. It is owned and operated by Nuvo Logistics Private Limited and was incorporated in August 2013. Nuvo Logistics also owns and operates Nuvo Ex which provides reverse logistics services to e-commerce players.

Note that the below numbers are not of PepperTap alone, but of Nuvo logistics (i.e. the combined entity).

The company reported a total revenue of INR 19.5 crores in FY 14-15 with a net profit of INR 87 lacs. This was only their second year of operation. In FY 13-14, the company had registered a total revenue of INR 61 lacs with net loss of 41 lacs.

All of their revenue from operations is recognized from sale of services. Almost all of it is reported as ‘Courier Service fees’ with a miniscule amount reported as ‘Platform and logistic services’. A major proportion of this revenue must be attributable to Nuvo Ex since PepperTap had not started its operations before November 2014.

Nuvo Logistics Revenue PAT Chart 2

There is no clarity on the revenue split between the two companies.
FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE

In comparison, Grofers (one of its biggest competitor) had reported a revenue of INR 86 lacs with a loss of INR 4 crores in the same period. Another competitor Zop Now, which operates on an inventory based model, reported a revenue (all of it from sale of goods) of INR 8.8 crores with a net loss of INR 3.7 crores in the same period. Big Basket is another major competitor of PepperTap in this space and are yet to release their numbers.

Nuvo Logistics Expenses Breakup Chart 2

Out of a total expenses of INR 18.4 Cr in FY 14-15, almost half of it was incurred on Employee benefit. Transportation and handling charges accounted for 21% of their total expense. Surprisingly, marketing and business promotion expense remained low at less than 4% of total expenses.PepperTap logo

FOUNDERS

Nuvo Logistics started as a logistics e-commerce company. It was founded by Navneet Singh and Milind Sharma, both of them working with Delhivery prior to founding Nuvo. They started operations with Nuvo Ex, which provides reverse logistics services to e-com players and later conceptualized PepperTap and launched its operations in November 2014. Nuvo Ex is still operational (http://www.nuvoex.com/).

FUNDING

First institutional investment in the company came from Sequoia Capital in December 2014 (nearly 1.5 years after company formation), followed shortly by SAIF Partners. Snapdeal (an e-commerce company) is also heavily invested into the company.

Following is a summary of their major funding rounds so far:

Date Investor Investment Amount (INR crores)
December 2014 Sequoia Capital

5

April 2015 SAIF Partners

31

Sequoia Capital

31

September 2015 Sequoia Capital

53

Jasper Infotech (Snapdeal)

93

October 2015 SAIF Partners

33

BeeNext

13

JATF

13

Ru-Net South Asia

4.5

Kesriwood South Asia

18

Total

294.5

While the industry is trying to figure out the better model out of inventory based model and the marketplace hyperlocal model, giants like Ola, Flipkart, Amazon and Paytm are also beginning to delve into the space.Although it belongs to the newer crop of players, PepperTap has emerged as one of the front-runners in the space of online groceries delivery. They had added features like number disguising and order modification on their app few months back and acquired Jiffstore, a Bangalore based grocery hyperlocal delivery startup last month.

In a very recent development, Grofers recently shut their operations in 9 Tier-2 cities saying that smaller cities are not ready for hyperlocal business yet.

[About the author: Vishal and Anchal form the team that runs the Tofler blog. They like to explore and track companies, their performance and senior management. Tofler (tofler.in) is a Business Research Platform.]

#IndianStartupData : Knowlarity Revenues Up By 78% In FY14-15; Losses : 52%

[Editor Notes : Nothing is as powerful as data and these articles are part of our coverage of #IndianStartupData – i.e. an overview of financial performance of selected Indian startups with a belief that it gives the audience a good picture of the companies and the ecosystem in general.]

Cloud telephony startup, Knowlarity recorded revenue of 36.1 crores*, as opposed to 20.5 crores last year. As far as revenue from operations goes, it stood at Rs. 22.6 crores (as opposed to 12.4 crores last financial year).

Having said that, the company incurred an expense of 53.5 crores, which has increased by almost 52% as compared to the last year.

* Important to note that Knowlarity is into several other telecom businesses especially providing VAS services for SMS/messaging and local, international calls.

As far as revenue split goes, revenue from products stands at INR 22.6 crores. The other big source of revenue is corporate cost allocation – which stands at INR 13 crores (no further details on this is known, but maybe intra group transfers?).

knowlarity-revenue

Knowlarity Shareholding Pattern

The two cofounders own majority of shares.

  • Ambarish Gupta  : 36.05%
  • Pallav Pandey : 34.58%
  • Progressvist Investment Capital Ltd : 8.35%
  • Mansi Singhal and Gaurav Chakravorty (qplum founder) : 7.41%
  • Ravi Prakash Shrivastava : 5.98%

As far as convertible preference share goes, the breakup is as follows:

  • Sequoia : (compulsory convertible shares) : 38.97%
  • SCI Growth Investments II : 61.03%

For an enterprise SAAS play, the numbers surely look very promising (esp the revenue/expense growth).

Knowlarity had raised $16mn in 2014 and has been following an aggressive sales strategy (sometimes, they went overboard which has pissed off its competitors).

All said and done,the numbers surely look very promising for an enterprise SAAS play – though there is an interesting story inside the numbers!

– Know the Knowlarity Startup Story.

What next? A comparative study.

#IndianStartupData : Urban Ladder FY 14-15 Revenue Grew Marginally, Losses Surge 7.5 X

Urban Ladder Home Décor Solutions Pvt. Ltd., which owns and operates Urban Ladder, has reported its latest revenue figures. Urban Ladder’s operating revenue grew from INR 11 crores in FY 13-14 to INR 13 crores in FY 14-15, while the losses surged from INR 7.6 crores to INR 58.5 crores in the same period.indianstartupdata

Financial Performance

Urban Ladder’s total revenue stood at INR 19.2 crores – INR 12.98 Cr from operations and INR 6.23 other income – in FY 14-15 compared to INR 11.9 crores (INR 11 Cr from operations) in the previous fiscal.

Looking at their P&L, it appears that they have shifted from an inventory led model to a marketplace model during FY 13-14 to 14-15.

Revenue from ‘Sale of furniture’, which contributed 74% of their revenue from operations in previous fiscal, was nil in this one.

In INR Crores FY 14-15 FY 13-14
Sale of furniture        —- 8.10
Service Income – Commission 12.98 2.87
Total Revenue from Operations 12.98 10.98

Total revenue from operations grew by only 18% this fiscal. A total ‘Other Income’ of INR 6.2 crores, was mainly comprised of the ‘interest income and income from sale of current investments’. The book value of the current investments stood at INR 300 crores as on 31st March, 2015. Following chart depicts their year on year revenue and PAT.

Urban Ladder Chart 1The loss for the company grew to INR 58.5 crores in FY 14-15 as against INR 7.6 crores in FY13-14. While the revenue grew only marginally this fiscal, certain expenses saw a tremendous increase:

  • Advertising and Marketing expenses (grew by a whopping ten times) and
  • Employee expenses (almost quadrupled) – thus increasing Urban Ladder’s losses many folds.

There was also a spurt in the Courier and Delivery Charges (from INR 81 lacs to INR 4.9 crores) and Labour Charges (from INR 58 lacs to INR 3.9 crores). The company provides free home delivery of furniture and free installation.

Urban Ladder Chart 2

About Urban Ladder

Urban Ladder was co-founded by Ashish Goel and Rajiv Srivatsa in 2012. It provides an online marketplace for furniture and home décor and operates across 30 cities in India. It provides the service through the website as well as 3 different mobile apps. Its major competitors include Goldman Sachs backed Pepperfry and Rocket Internet backed FabFurnish. As per the documents available with the Registrar of Companies, so far it has raised around INR 460 crores from multiple investors including Kalaari Capital, Sequoia Capital, SAIF Partners, Steadview Capital, Anand and Venky LLC, Ratan Tata and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) among others.

Urban Ladder was one of the early entrants in the online furniture retail space, which used to be a niche till a few years back. With a strong focus on quality, they are trying to build their USP on high end designs and great customer experience. With several established players and many more new ones coming in this space, battle is only going to get more intense.

[About the author: Vishal and Anchal form the team that runs the Tofler blog. They like to explore and track companies, their performance and senior management. Tofler (tofler.in) is a Business Research Platform.]

#IndianStartupData : ZO Rooms Reports Revenue of INR 2.6 crores in FY14-15 [Neck to neck with OYO]

[Editor Notes : Nothing is as powerful as data and these articles are part of our coverage of #IndianStartupData – i.e. an overview of financial performance of selected Indian startups with a hope that it gives you a good picture of the companies and the ecosystem in general.
Our Mission : A PR-less startup ecosystem which thrives on great products and services!]

Zostel Hospitality, which owns and operates ZO Rooms, has reported its revenue in FY14-15 at INR 2.6 crores.indianstartupdata

Its competitor OYO Rooms had reported a turnover of INR 2.4 crores in the same period. Going by these numbers, the two companies appeared to be neck-to-neck at the close of previous financial year.

However, it is in this financial year that both of them and the sector itself, have seen tremendous amount of funds pouring in and expansion as a result. Both companies are in the hospitality industry and are disrupting the budget hotel accommodation space in the country.

The ZO-OYO Rivalry

The ZO and OYO rivalry goes back to April, 2015 when OYO managed to get a stay order against ZO Rooms claiming it stole OYO’s copyright material. This was followed by ambush marketing campaign by ZO on the launch of OYO’s mobile app in May, 2015.

About ZO RoomsZo rooms

Zostel, which started as a chain of backpackers’ hostels, launched ZO Rooms in December, 2014 to provide affordable budget hotel to travellers. The company was founded by a group of IIT and IIM alumni and incorporated in 2013.

It is an online aggregator of budget hotels and claims to have around 800 hotels across 54 cities in India, on its platform. Apart from OYO Rooms, Stayzilla and other Online Travel Agencies (OTA) like MakeMyTrip, Cleartrip, Yatra, etc. are its major competitors in this space.

Financial Performance of ZO Rooms

ZO Rooms reported revenue of INR 2.6 crores in FY 2014-15 as against INR 27 lacs in FY 2013-14. The company made a loss of INR 1.99 crores as against a profit of INR 2 lacs the previous fiscal. However, these figures may also include the results from Zostel’s another business of backpackers’ hostels chain.

Zo-rooms

Funding Received and shareholding pattern

As per the documents available with the Registrar of Companies (RoC), the company has raised total funds of INR 37 crores so far. In July 2015, they had filed a funding of INR 30 crores (roughly $5 million) from Tiger Global and Orios Ventures. However, as per media reports, the company has raised a total of $35 million – $5 million in July 2015 and $30 million in August 2015. So far, no documents have been filed with the RoC to reflect the second round.

After the latest round of funding, the shareholding pattern looks like this:

Promoters 21.32%
Internet Fund (Tiger Global) 40.47%
Orios Venture 6.90%
Others 31.31%

However, rival OYO seems to be taking a lead in terms of funding. It has raised INR 748 crores (as per RoC filings) from its investors in FY 2015-16 alone, to carry out its massive expansion plan.

Other Players in the Budget Accommodation Space

The budget accommodation industry has attracted multiple players in the past 2 years. Apart from ZO and OYO Rooms, these include Stayzilla, Zip Rooms and Wudstay. While ZO Rooms has expanded its network of hotels to 54 cities in India, its major competitors Stayzilla and OYO Rooms claim to be present across 4500 towns and 152 cities, respectively. Recently Wudstay acquired Awesome Stays to expand its reach to over 35 cities across India. Zip Rooms claims its presence in 36 cities.

In October this year, OTAs like MakeMyTrip, Goibibo, etc., in a move to protect their market share, blocked ZO Rooms and OYO from listing hotels on their sites. With a number of players entering the hospitality sector in India, each offering a technology-driven, asset light model with a promise of quality, the struggle to “stay” in competition will be one to watch out for. 

[About the author: Vishal and Anchal form the team that runs the Tofler blog. They like to explore and track companies, their performance and senior management. Tofler (tofler.in) is a Business Research Platform.]

#IndianStartupData : OYO Rooms Had A Turnover Of INR 2.4 crores in FY 2014-15

[Editor Notes : Nothing is as powerful as data and these articles are part of our coverage of #IndianStartupData – i.e. an overview of financial performance of selected Indian startups with a hope that it gives you a good picture of the companies and the ecosystem in general.
Our Mission : A PR-less startup ecosystem which thrives on great products and services!]

If you have been around in your city any time recently, more likely than not, you would have spotted an OYO Rooms board. OYO is a branded network of hotels and is one of the fastest growing startups in India.ritesh-agarwal-oyorooms

Founded by Ritesh Agarwal (aged 19 years then) in 2012, OYO claims to be India’s largest branded network of hotels spread across 152 cities with more than 3000 hotels. Oravel Stays Private Limited, which owns and operates OYO Rooms, reported a turnover of INR 2.4 Crores in FY 2014-15, growing from a turnover of INR 51 lacs in the previous fiscal.

However, at the time, OYO appeared to have been present only in 10 cities with 200 hotels. They have seen a phase of exponential expansion in FY15-16 with two major funding rounds this year (OYO raised $100mn led by Softbank). More details are awaited on OYO’s financials and will be updated soon.

OYORooms Turnover
OYORooms Turnover

OYO’s Shareholding Structure

With the latest funding round from Softbank Group in August 2015, OYO’s current shareholding looks like this:

Founders 18%
Lightspeed Venture Partners 19%
Sequoia Capital 18%
Softbank Group 15%
Greenoaks Capital 10%
DSG Consumer Partners 4%
Others 16%

With one of the youngest CEOs at its helm, OYO surely has managed to disrupt the hospitality sector in India so far. Going ahead, it’s going to be a tough battle with competitors like Zo Rooms and a number of others fighting it out.

[About the author: Vishal and Anchal form the team that runs the Tofler blog. They like to explore and track companies, their performance and senior management. Tofler (tofler.in) is a Business Research Platform.]

#IndianStartupData : Faasos Generates Rs 38 Crores In FY 2014-15 [Rs 24 Crore Loss]

Editor Notes : Nothing is as powerful as data and these articles are part of our coverage of #IndianStartupData – i.e. an overview of financial performance of selected Indian startups with a hope that it gives you a good picture of the companies and the ecosystem in general.
Our Mission : A PR-less startup ecosystem which thrives on great products and services!]

Today, we focus on Faasos, the on-demand food delivery service which recently completed their 5 years of operations.

The company was co-founded in 2010 by Jaydeep Barman who was previously an associate principal at McKinsey & Company in London; and Kallol Banerjee who previously worked for Bosch in Singapore.

Faasos

Faasos Revenue

Fassos generated a notable revenue of Rs 38 Crore in FY 2014-15, as compared to INR 27 Crore in the previous year; the revenue figure grew by almost 41% during this period.

The company’s losses were up to the tune of INR 24 Crore as compared to INR 18 Crores in the previous financial year. The major expenses of the company are Cost of Material and Employee Benefit expenses at INR 17.8 Crore each.

Faasos-revenue-FY14-151

The company has incurred losses of INR 24 crores for FY 2014-15 as compared to INR 18 crores in the FY 2013-14.  Fasoo’s incurs heavy expenses on its cost of material (raw-food material, packaging etc) and employee expenses (~INR 18 crores each). On the brighter side, it expects to achieve a turnover of INR 120 crores in FY 2015-16.

Faasos Funding Data

Faasos has raised nearly INR 146 crores since its incorporation operations, from mainly two VCs. They are:

  • Sequoia Capital India: INR 76 crores. They have been regularly funding Faaso’s since its first round.
  • Lightbox Ventures: INR 60 crores. They have entered Faaso’s recently (Year 2015).

(Source : Documents available with Ministry of Corporate Affairs)

[About the author: Vishal and Anchal form the team that runs the Tofler blog. They like to explore and track companies, their performance and senior management. Tofler (tofler.in) is a Business Research Platform.]