A

Project Report
On
A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF POPULARITY OF ONLINE
FOOD DELIVERY SERVICES BETWEEN ZOMATO AND
SWIGGY IN PUNE

By

Deep Santosh Jogi

Under the Guidance of

Prof. Piyush Dixit

In Partial Fulfillment of

Bachelor Degree in Business Administration

Submitted To:
Dr. D. Y. Patil Arts, Commerce & Science College
Affiliated To:

i
Declaration:

I the undersigned solemnly declare that the project report titled a “Comparative study of

popularity of online food delivery services between Zomato and Swiggy in pune” is based
on my own work carried out during the course of our study under the supervision of Prof
Prabha Kumari. I assert the statements made and conclusions drawn are an outcome of my
research work. I further certify that

 The work contained in the report is original and has been done by me under the
general supervision of my supervisor.
 The work has not been submitted to any other Institution for any other
degree/diploma/certificate in this university or any other University of India or
abroad.
 I have followed the guidelines provided by the university in writing the report.

 Whenever I have used materials (data, theoretical analysis, and text) from other
sources, I have given due credit to them in the text of the report and giving their
details in the references.

Deep Santosh Jogi

T..Y.B.B.A
Place – Pimpri
Date – 28 / 05 / 2021

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The completion of this study would have been impossible without the material
and moral support from various people. It is my obligation therefore to extend my
gratitude to them.
I am greatly indebted to Prof. Piyush Dixit who was my supervisor for his
effective supervision, dedication, availability and professional advice. I am also
thankful of Prof. Vishal Gaikwad who guided me through-out the making of this
project report. I extend my gratitude to Head of Department Dr. Prashant
Kalshetti who taught me in the BBA program, therefore enriching my research
with knowledge. The Dr. D. Y. Patil Arts, Commerce & Science college students,
who were my respondents, deserve my appreciation for their support and
willingness for providing the required information during my study. My
appreciation finally goes to my classmates, with whom I weathered through the
storms, giving each other encouragement and for their positive criticism

Deep Jogi
T.Y.B.B.A

iii
 Executive summary
Developments in technology and reliance on internet has pitched a new pathway for
marketing through mobile applications. According to worldwidewebsize.com the internet holds
15- 50 billion active websites. These websites and applications have outdated many traditional
ways of marketing and selling products. A combination of marketing intelligence and
technology has reached to the development of mobile applications which use internet as a
medium to advertise products as well as services. Customers as well as business houses now a
days have a contemporary perception of products and services available in the market.
Marketing strategies are based on online marketing which suits demands of today’s customers.
Keeping in view the online services this paper aims to study the perception of customers
ordering food through online food delivery apps viz. Zomato, Swiggy and Uber eats in Pune.
The research is focused on the people who already use above mentioned food delivery apps. A
survey was conducted for purposeful analysis to study various attributes of all three
applications to conclude that which amongst the three applications is having the best overall
satisfaction with customers of online food ordering customers in Pune. Key words: Online food
delivery, Zomato, Swiggy, Uber eats, Customer satisfaction

iv
 Index
Chapter 01 1-4

1.1 Introduction 2

Chapter 02 5-9

2.1 Industry Profile 6

Chapter 03 10 - 14

3.1 Company Profile

Swiggy 11 – 14
Zomato 15 - 18
Chapter 04 19 - 22

4.1 Literature Review 20

Chapter 05 23 - 25

5.1 Objectives of the study 24

5.2 Scope of the study 24
5.3 Limitations of the study 25
Chapter 06 26 - 33

6.1 Type of Research 27

6.2 Data collection Techniques 28
6.3 Common Methodological Limitations 29

Chapter 07 32 - 46

7.1 Data Analysis and Interpretation 33

7.2 Factor Analysis 44
Chapter 08 47 - 49

v
 8.1 Findings 48

Chapter 09 50 - 51

9.1 Conclusion 51

Chapter 10 52 - 55

10.1 Suggestions and Recommendations 53

10.2 References 54
10.3 Websites visited 55

List of tables and Informative images

Sr. No Particulars Page No

1 Structure of Online Food Delivery Services 4

2 Swiggy’s Journey 13

3 Swiggy’s Company Profile 14

4 Zomato’s Data collection model 17

5 Zomato’s Company Profile 18

6 Demographic Profile Chart 33

vi
List of graphs:

SR.NO Particulars Page no

1.1 Awareness graph 34

1.2 Payment Method 35

1.3 Behavior of Delivery Person 36

1.4 Most Active Service 37

1.5 Service Availing Maximum Offers 38

1.6 Staff Professionalism 39

1.7 Customer Support 40

1.8 Packaging Material 41

1.9 Website and App UI 42

2.0 Overall Satisfaction 43

3.0 Factor Analysis Pie chart 44

vii
CHAPTER
01
1.1. Introduction:

The food delivery industry has emerged as one of the biggest online platforms with
several new companies starting up in a past decade. The shape of the market is changing with a
breakneck speed with players like Swiggy, Zomato, Food panda, Uber Eats, and many others.

Service sector in India is dependent on the Hospitality industry as it has emerged as

one of the main industries in India in 21st century. The needs and desires of the people has
been taken care by hospitality industry over the time (Prajogo & Sohal, 2006). It is very
frequent to find customer loyalty and customer satisfaction as prime aspects in the hospitality
industry which indeed are dependent on the products and services supplied by the company
meeting the expectations of the customers. According to Boston Consulting group in 2015 the
food market in India was around 23 trillion Indian rupees and it is expected to reach 42 lakh
crores by 2020. Technology is playing its key role in revolutionizing the food service delivery
experiences. Dependency of technology has led customers to use online food delivery options
to customize their meals with their preferences and get them reach their doorsteps with few
clicks on mobile devices. Online food delivery services provide aids in terms of convenience,
saving time and effort for the customers which is enough reasons to get used to these services.
An increase in the food delivery services available to the customers and services offered have
resulted in an increase in terms of customer expectations from these service services. The
services are convenient enough to search for restaurants with desired cuisines. Entire menu
remains displayed on the app service and the customer can choose from the menu with a click
of a button. These app services differ in terms of features offered and customer values systems.
This research paper aims to study analyze the views of the customers using Zomato, Swiggy
and uber eats in Pune.

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

2
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.

Uber Eats on the other hand is an American online food delivery service based in
San Francisco, California. Uber has diversified as a food ordering and delivery service under
the name stylized as UberEATS in the year 2014. A study on the relevant literature has been
described below followed by the survey and its results. Finding and conclusions of the
responses from the customers in the specified location are also shown in the paper.

The food delivery industry has emerged as one of the biggest online platforms with
several new companies starting up in a past decade. The shape of the market is changing with a
breakneck speed with players like Swiggy, Zomato, Food panda, Uber Eats, and many others.
With these giant players in the food industry market, the industry is flourishing not just in the
metros but in the tier II and III cities as well. The business of delivering and ordering food
online is changing with rapid growth and these are attracting considerable investment. But the
increased competition and unstable growth policies has caused some causalities along the way
as well. Companies like Eat Fresh and TinyOwl had to shut down due to massive losses. Even
FoodPanda, a giant food delivery marketplace available in 13 countries that went through
multiple acquisitions first by Delivery Hero and then by OLA, is finding it difficult to survive
in online food delivery market.

As the decade draws to a close, we have started to see some signs of consolidation
in a market which has undergone several shifts in terms of strategies and operating procedures.
The decade certainly belonged to the two top startups in the space, Swiggy and Zomato. Even
though Uber Eats, a relatively new player in the Indian market, managed to make a sizeable
dent in the market in terms of daily orders, we must take a look at how the two giants of the
space fared in 2019 in order to get a clearer picture of where the industry is heading.

In this case study, the potential of a growing market in the one of the largest
economies in the world is analyzed. Grocery shopping, meal planning and cooking is now
considered a chore by a good proportion of the growing Indian middle class, causing a surge in
demand for services that free them of such inconveniences. Upwards of 50,000 restaurants in
India provide home delivery, and are often only able to see marginal profits from their take-
away sectors. This indicates a high potential in a relatively untapped market.

Figure 1 shows the relationship between key sectors involved in food-delivery sectors. Fast
Food 1.0, the simple takeaway/delivery sector has seen huge drops in margins. With the growth

3
of IT infrastructure and spread of internet in the Indian subcontinent, recent years have seen the
introduction of two more sectors:

4
 Aggregato
Fast food
r

Cafeterias,
Logistics,
Software

Fig.1 Structure of Online Food

Delivery Services
a. Aggregators: Provide a platform for customers to discover restaurants, with the
ability to navigate through menus of different cuisines. They manage the delivery segment as
well, and charge per order commission (10-15%). They are highly scalable and have all
experienced remarkable growth in the Indian sector (, Zomato and Swiggy). However, they also
take on a significant operational load- couriers’ hiring and training, maintaining equipment, etc.
b. Fast Food: These services opt for a full integration of the process: An in-house app
is developed where consumers can order a limited range of meals. These meals are reheated in
their own fleet of cars as orders come in, and delivered in about 15-20 minutes. Here, choice is
given the backseat in favor of convenience. These services are yet to catch footing in India, but
command a growing market share in North America (Sprig, Maple, Spoon-Rocket etc.). But
recent times allowed 2 of the biggest online food delivery service company to establish and
grow its business simultaneously.

5
Chapter
02
 1.2. Industry Profile:
Online food ordering is the process of ordering food from a website or other
application. The product can be either ready-to-eat food (e.g., direct from a home-kitchen,
restaurant, or a ghost kitchen) or food that has not been specially prepared for direction
consumption (e.g., vegetables direct from a farm/garden, fruits, frozen meats. etc.).

The online food delivery market in India is growing in tandem with evolving
lifestyle patterns and eating habits of Indians. Hectic work schedules and rise in disposable
incomes have popularized food delivery, especially in urban areas.
The online food delivery market in India is expected to expand at compound annual growth
rates of ~30.55% (based on revenue) and ~10.19% (based on the number of users) during the
2020-2024 period, to generate a revenue of INR ~1,334.99 Bn and develop a user base of
~300.57 Mn by 2024. Major players currently operating in the Indian online food delivery
market include platform-to-customer service providers like Swiggy (Bundl Technologies
Private Limited), FreshMenu (FoodVista India Private Limited), Faasos (Rebel Foods Private
Limited) and Zomato (Zomato Media Private Limited). Apart from these, there exist certain
companies that operate with a restaurant-to-customer delivery model like Box8, Domino's
(Domino's Pizza, Inc.), and KFC (Yum! Brands, Inc.).

The India online food delivery market reached a value of US$ 4.35 Billion in 2020.

Online food delivery assists individuals in ordering and receiving the desired food products at
the doorstep. It involves browsing the website or application, selecting from a wide variety of
cuisines available and making the payment through different methods. The website/application
updates the user about the expected duration of food preparation and delivery. These features,
in confluence with attributes such as ease, speed and precision of delivery, are increasing the
demand for these services in India.

The market is currently witnessing growth on account of the increasing access to

high-speed internet facilities and the boosting sales of smartphones. This, in confluence with
the growing working population and inflating income levels, is propelling the online food
delivery market growth in India. Although the players are mainly concentrated in the urban
regions of the country, with Bangalore, Delhi and Mumbai representing the three largest
markets, vendors are now also targeting smaller cities, as they have strong growth potential.
Moreover, the rising trend of the on-the-go food items and quick home delivery models that
offer convenience, ready-to-eat (RTE) and cheaper food delivery options are escalating the
6
demand for online food delivery services in the country. Furthermore, owing to the rising cases
of COVID-19, some of the leading players like Zomato, McDonald's Corporation and
Domino’s Pizza Inc. have introduced contactless delivery services. These services ensure that
the food reaches the customer without being touched by bare hands and is delivered safely with
adequate social distancing measures. Looking forward, IMARC Group expects the India online
food delivery market to exhibit strong growth during the next five years.

Breakup by Platform Type:

 Mobile Applications
 Websites

Breakup by Business Model:

 Order Focused
 Logistics Based
 Full-Service

Breakup by Payment Method:

 Online
 Cash on Delivery (COD)

Regional Insights:

 North India
 West and Central India
 South India
 East India

Competitive Landscape:

The competitive landscape of the market has been analyzed in the report, along
with the detailed profiles of the major players operating in the industry. Some of the leading
players include Zomato, Swiggy, Food panda, Bundl Technologies, Fasso's, Domino's, etc.

Segment-wise market overview

As of 2019, millennials accounted for ~63% of the overall user base of the online
food delivery market. This is owed to increasing disposable income of the millennials,
7
especially in the urban regions in India. Also, millennials prefer ordering food online since it is
easy to handle and saves time and energy of cooking at home.

In 2019, out of the major online food delivery service providers, Zomato held a
share of ~38% in terms of user base. Swiggy held a share of ~27% in the online food delivery
user base of India in 2019. High adoption rates in tier I and tier II cities, as well as swift
delivery services has helped these two companies to gain the high share in the Indian market.

Key growth driver of the market

In the recent years, the number of working women has increased in the Indian
workforce, especially in the city-based organized sectors. As a result, the number of double
income families in also on the rise. With both the partners working and maintaining hectic
working schedules, it become difficult for people to get time and energy to cook at home.
Moreover, the dual income scenario has increased the overall spending capacity of the families.

Also, the key players like Swiggy, and Zomato keep on announcing lucrative offers
for the customers, both existing and new, in order to keep up the stiff competition in the online
food ordering market. This in turn is leading towards people’s preference towards ordering
food online and enjoying their favorite cuisine at home at an affordable price, thereby
increasing the overall value and user base of the online food ordering market in India.

Key deterrent to the growth of the market

Recently, there have been several instances of spurious and closed restaurants; and food shops
taking orders on food platforms, only to be informed later that either the shop cannot be located
or had shut operations. Cases were reported where certain outlets registered on these food
delivery apps have turned out to be makeshift, or operate out of home joints, with hardly any
focus on hygiene and quality. This has caused annoyance among both the customers and the
food delivery executives. Also, consumers are becoming concerned about the quality of food
since such unauthorized food stalls seldom maintain hygiene both while cooking and
packaging. This, in turn, is developing dissatisfaction among the customers of the online food
delivery market in India.

8
Companies covered

 Box8
 Bundl Technologies Private Limited
 Food Vista India Private Limited
 Rebel Foods Private Limited
 Zomato Media Private Limited
 Domino’s Pizza, Inc.
 Yum! Brands, Inc.
 Swiggy

9
Chapter
03
 3.1 Company Profile:

Swiggy is a leading food ordering and delivery startup in India. The company started
operations in 2014 and is headquartered in Bengaluru. Swiggy works by acting as a bridge
between customers and restaurants. It utilizes an innovative technology platform that allows
customers to order food from nearby restaurants and get it delivered at their doorstep. With
Swiggy, customers do not have to keep the contact numbers of various restaurants and eateries
in their locality. 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.

Swiggy Founders:

Swiggy was founded by Nandan Reddy, Sriharsha Majety, and Rahul Jaimini in August 2014.
Nandan Reddy aged 29 and Sriharsha Majety aged 31 both are both alumni of Birla Institute of
Technology and Science (BITS) Pilani while Rahul Jaimini aged 31 is an alumnus of IIT
Kharagpur

Swiggy Business Model:

Swiggy has two major revenue streams.

1. The major part of Swiggy’s revenue from commission it collects from

restaurants for lead generation and for serving as a delivery partner.
2. Swiggy also charges a nominal delivery fee from customers on orders below a
threshold value which 200 rupees for most cities.
11
Swiggy Funding:
Swiggy is backed by one of best investors available in the market. Swiggy has raised a
total of 75.5 million dollars in funding from various investors, including Bessemer Venture
Partners, Norwest Venture, Accel Partners, SAIF Partners, Harmony Venture Partners, RB
Investments and Apoletto

Swiggy Funding:

Swiggy is backed by one of best investors available in the market. Swiggy has raised a
total of 75.5 million dollars in funding from various investors, including Bessemer Venture
Partners, Norwest Venture, Accel Partners, SAIF Partners, Harmony Venture Partners, RB
Investments and Apoletto.

Swiggy Marketing Strategies

Swiggy’s marketing strategy consists of both online and offline marketing campaigns. It
promotes its campaigns via Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Pinterest, and Instagram. Some
of its campaigns include # Secondtomom, #DiwaliGhayAayi, #SingwithSwiggy and Know
your food series of pictures and food walks in a local area. The company has successfully
built its brand awareness and connects with its audience through these channels. Their
Facebook page is quite active with regular updates, averaging to one post a day. Swiggy
uses its Social media not only for campaigning but to engage with its customers from
solving the grievances to taking the feedback.

Swiggy Competitors:

Indian food delivery market is valued at 15 billion dollars and set for an exponential
growth. Food delivery has become a very competitive market in India. Swiggy is in direct
competition with major on-demand food aggregators like Zomato. Whereas there are other
small startups like Food panda and Faasos also in the competition.

12
Swiggy’s Journey

13
 Founded in 2008, Zomato is a leading platform for restaurant search & discovery,
online food ordering, and restaurant table reservations. The company was founded by
Deepinder Goyal and Pankaj Chaddah and is headquartered in Gurgaon (officially
Gurugram). Zomato has been a pioneer in food ordering and restaurant discovery in India,
which has benefitted both restaurants and customers.

Featuring a robust review system, Zomato allows foodies to find the best meals and
restaurants in their neighborhood. A notable aspect about Zomato is that it is among the
few companies that have gone global after starting operations in India. Zomato currently
features more than 1 million restaurants globally on its platform.

Zomato Founder:

Zomato initially named as Foodiebay was started in 2008 by Mr. Deepinder Goyal. It is a
restaurant searching platform providing in-depth details with autonomous reviews and
ratings. Foodiebay, the initial name was changed to Zomato in November 2010 to increase
their reach among people.

Vision:
 To expand to more 50 countries

Milestone:
 Number of
listed
restaurants: in

14
 2008 it was 4000 restaurants which increase to 94000 in 2013 and currently
384,100 in Q1 of 2015.

● Monthly visitors of Zomato increases to 35 million in 2014 which was 11 million in

2013 and 0.015 million in 2008.
● Yearly revenue of Zomato in 2008 was 0.06 crores which increased to 11.3 crores
in 2013.
● Spread in 21 countries worldwide.

Success Factor:
● First mover advantage
● Strong content platform
● Efficient employees
● Good rating mechanism and social platform
● Funding from experienced source

Strategy of Zomato:
● Zomato works with keen interest on various strategies to achieve their goal. It
includes
● Financial strategy: To increase their fund and revenue
● Marketing strategy: To tap their customers from across the globe
● Growth strategy: To grow continuously and increase their customers and page
traffic
● Globalization strategy: To expand themselves across the whole globe as a leading
service provider.
● Deepinder Goyal, Co-founder and CEO, Zomato, earlier told YourStory that issues
like changing rules, number of licenses required, high real-estate costs, and
problems with training and retaining staff are issues that have traditionally plagued
the food industry. They’re something tech can’t really solve.

15
Zomato’s Data collection model

16
17
Chapter
04
4.1 Literature Review:

Sanjay Anandaram Advisor Sattva, Volunteer iSpirt; Advisor Seed Fund,

Ideaspring, Endiya, Ennovent, KARSEM says:

“While online kitchen businesses will raise money and continue to grow, the real battle
and fight will be between players like Zomato and Swiggy,”.

Sathish Meena, Senior Forecast Analyst, Forrester Research, says:

“If you look at it even now, the game is of the big players. The funding is coming only for
the big guys. There is a market for food delivery and foodtech, but now that the money is
being pumped deeply into one segment.”

According to a recent sectoral report published by IBEF (Indian Brand

Equity Foundation)

“food has been one of the largest segments in India’s retail sector, valued at $490 billion in
2013. The Indian food retail market is expected to reach Rs 61 lakh crore ($894.98 billion)
by 2020”.

Hart & Stapleton in the year 1977 says:

" a statement in very general terms of how the marketing objective is to be achieved, e.g.,
acquiring a competitive company, by price reductions, by product improvement, or by
intensive advertising. The strategy becomes the basis of the marketing plan"

20
Nashwan Mohammed Abdullah Saif, Wang Aimin School of Management,
Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan, China

“In terms of the program perspective the marketing strategy standardization/adaptation is

important in the sense it can separate marketing mix elements to be standardized or
adapted in the international market. “

According to Chavan et al., (2015)

digital restaurant uses smart phones to take customer orders. PDA interface was replaced
with smart phones to provide customer user interface to view menu or track their orders.
With secured login system, customers have the facility to view menu, place orders, track
their orders, receive real time updates and make online payment and collect receipts from
smart phone itself increasing customer comfort.

According to Dwyer and Welsh (1985)

Marketing channel strategies refer to the choice of structure in designing the distribution
channel by manufacturers. They also include influence strategies which refer to content,
frequency and intensity of communications intended to achieve demonstration of favorable
behaviors by their channel partners.

Bhavik Rathod, Head of UberEATS India, says:

“It is a huge opportunity. The unorganized food delivery is still $80 billion. And one of the
reasons it is so attractive is a problem - can you bring the cost of delivery down so low that
the economics actually become super viable? Today with better technology it is easier to
bring the cost of delivery lower with a sizeable business.”

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

21
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, behavior 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 favorite food
at any time of the day. Researchers have also revealed that easy access to internet as one of
the supporting factors to the use of such services by the students.

Leong Wai Hong (2016)

in his studies has published the online food ordering and delivery services as an efficient
system to improve productivity and profitability of restaurants through online marketing
and business strategies.

22
Chapter
05
 5.1 Objectives of the project:
Understanding different marketing strategies of two major Indian players in the
aggregator food-tech sector amidst a national lockdown and determine their popularity:

 Using quality tools to isolate reasons for growth and development of these two
particular companies. Understanding how and why did those particular strategies work.
 Developing a line of action in fields where there exists scope of improvement.
 To examines the measures taken by these companies.
 To study the SWOT analysis of both the company.
 Understanding their Marketing Mindset in lockdown phase.
 To study the customer satisfaction amongst the people ordering food from Zomato,
Swiggy and Uber eats in Pune city.

5.2 Scope of the study:

After a deep analysis and research in this study we will be covering the following:
 1. different marketing strategies and statistics of both the company, both before and
during lockdown.
 2. finally draw a comparison in terms of marketing strategies between them.

The study aims to gauze the customer reviews and satisfaction towards the
available online food ordering and delivery services in Pune. The study further compares
various aspects of the three available food delivery services in the area. Based on these
factors the findings of the study can help service providers meet customer expectations in a
better way. On the other hand, new customers of the online food ordering and delivery
services can choose best out of all available options in their residential location. Therefore,
findings from the study can be helpful for residents as well as service providers in Pune.

24
 5.3 Limitations of the study:
 Employees were hesitant for providing the working information about their companies.
 Reviews were very much contradicting.
 Very limited information about the strategies of these companies in different websites.
 The study was based on samples so the result may not be absolute
 There is chance of bias in the information given by the respondents.

A sample size of 162 respondents is enough to gauze the reviews and satisfaction of
customers living in Pune but keeping in view social and cultural variations amongst the
population, the results of the study cannot be generalized to each and every past of Pune or
its adjacent locations.

25
Chapter
06
 6.1 Type of Research:
Comparative research:
 What is Comparative Study?
 Comparative Study analyzes and compares two or more objects or ideas. 
Comparative studies are the studies to demonstrate ability to examine, compare and
contrast subjects or ideas.  Comparative study
shows how two subjects are similar or shows how two subjects are different.
 In Comparative study we compare and contrast two or more things.  Comparative
study is used to determine and quantify relationships between two or more variables by
observing different groups that either by choice or circumstances is exposed to different
treatments.  Comparative study looks at two or more similar
groups, individuals, or conditions by comparing them.  This comparison often focuses
on a few specific characteristics. Comparative study plays a central role
in concept formation by bringing into focus suggestive similarities and contrasts among
cases/subjects.  It sharpens our power of description. Comparative study is also used in
testing hypotheses, and it can contribute to the inductive discovery of new
hypotheses and to theory building.  
 Here we have Comparative study on various factors of customer satisfaction on two of
the biggest online food delivery organizations in India. Here the respondents are coming
across such a questionnaire which determines their preference from one of the two i.e.,
Zomato and Swiggy.

Sampling:
 Sampling is a process used in statistical analysis in which a predetermined number of
observations are taken from a larger population. The methodology used to sample from
a larger population depends on the type of analysis being performed, but it may include
simple random sampling or systematic sampling.
 Sampling is one of the core techniques in primary research. In traditional opinion
research, the sample is the thing. It's not just that it's critical to have a valid sample to
have useful research; it's also that it's surprisingly difficult to get a good sample. But for
Social Media measurement, most people don't think of "sampling" as a part of the
problem. Social Media is generally considered to be more like Web analytics where we

27
 analyze the complete set of ALL behaviors. After all, tools like Radian6 and Buzz
Metrics are designed to capture everything.

Universe:
 The area chosen here is the city of pune and so the universe for the sample will all the
millennials and centennials in Pune region.

TECHNIQUE Of SAMPLING:
 Systematic sampling method: Systematic sampling is defined as a probability sampling
method where the researcher chooses elements from a target population by selecting a
random starting point and selects sample members after a fixed ‘sampling interval.’

6.2 DATA COLLECTION TECHNIQUES:

Primary Data:

Conducted surveys through various platforms but mainly through google forms.
Prepared a questionnaire with detailed questions for the comparative study of various
factors which might determine the popularity of the major organizations in online food
delivery industry.

SECONDARY DATA:

It is the data already collected by someone else. This data is not especially collected
to solve present or specific problem. This information is relevant and can be used for our
purpose. After doing the data collection in primary method the researcher did the collection
through the secondary data. In this there are several types such as:

INTERNET ARTICLES

PERVIOUS RESEARCH PAPER

RELEVANT WEBSITES.

28
Research Tools

The following research tools were used to do analyses and to draw conclusions, we
use Percentage Method, Weightage Method, Google Forms, Excel Spreadsheet, Qualtrics.
The instrument which is used in the research is questionnaire. In this, we are using the
descriptive research to analyses the data. We are using close-ended pattern of
questionnaire. Its method we use to collect the data is Survey. The type of sampling is used
in this survey is probability sampling. The sample unit is consumers / respondents
moreover focused on centennials and Millennials.

6.3 Common Methodological Limitations

Limitations due to methodological problems can be addressed by clearly and
directly identifying the potential problem and suggesting ways in which this could have
been addressed—and SHOULD be addressed in future studies. The following are some
major potential methodological issues that can impact the conclusions researchers can
draw from the research:

Issues with sample and selection

Sampling errors occur when a probability sampling method is used to select a

sample, but that sample does not reflect the general population or appropriate population
concerned. This results in limitations for your study known as “sample bias” or “selection
bias.” For example, if you conducted a survey to obtain your research results, your samples
(participants) were asked to respond to the survey questions. However, you might have had
limited ability to gain access to the appropriate type or geographic scope of participants. In
this case, the people who responded to your survey questions may not truly be a random
sample.

29
Insufficient sample size for statistical measurement

When conducting a study, it is important to have a sufficient sample size in order to

conclude a valid research result. The larger the sample, the more precise your results will
be. If your sample size is too small, it will be difficult to identify significant relationships
from the data.

Normally, statistical tests require a larger sample size to ensure that the sample is
considered representative of a population and that the statistical result can be generalized
to a larger population. It is a good idea to understand how to choose an appropriate sample
size before you conduct your research by using scientific calculation tools.

Lack of previous research studies on the topic

Citing and referencing prior research studies constitutes the basis of the literature
review for your thesis or study, and these prior studies provide the theoretical foundations
for the research question you are investigating. However, depending on the scope of your
research topic, prior research studies that are relevant to your thesis might be limited.

When there is very little or no prior research on a specific topic, you may need to
develop an entirely new research typology. In this case, discovering a limitation can be
considered an important opportunity to identify new gaps in the prior literature and to
present the need for further development in the area of study

Limited access to data

If your research involved surveying certain people or organizations, you might have
faced the problem of having limited access to these respondents. Due to this limited access,
you might need to redesign or restructure your research in a different way. In this case,
explain the reasons for limited access and be sure that your finding is still reliable and
validate despite this limitation.

30
Time constraints

Just as students have deadlines to turn in their class papers, academic researchers
also must meet the deadline for submitting a research manuscript to a journal. Therefore,
the time available to study a research problem and to measure change over time is
constrained by the deadline of your “assignment.” Make sure you choose a research
problem that you will be able to complete well before the assignment’s deadline. If time
constraints negatively impacted your study in any way, acknowledge this impact by
mentioning a need for a future study (e.g., a longitudinal study) to answer this research
problem.

Conflicts arising from cultural bias and other personal issues

Researchers might be biased views due to their cultural backgrounds or

perspectives of certain phenomena, and this can affect a study’s legitimacy. Also, it is
possible that researchers will have biases toward data and results that only support their
hypotheses or arguments. In order to avoid these problems, the author(s) of a study should
examine whether the way the problem was stated and the data-gathering process were
carried out appropriately.

31
Chapter
07
7.1 Data Analysis and Interpretation:

Characteristics Online food ordering Percentage from Total number of

consumers Total respondents respondents

Gender
Male 96 59.3 162
Female 66 40.7 162
Age in Years

15-20 25 15.4 162

20-25 80 49.4 162
25-35 3 1.9 162
30-35 31 19.1 162
35 and above 23 14.2 162
Educational
Qualifications

Post Graduate 47 29 162

Graduate 94 58 162
School Going 15 9.3 162
Others 6 3.7 162
Profession
Students 74 45.7 162
Home makers 43 26.5 162
Government 7 4.3 162
Officials

Working in Private/ 38 23.5 162

Business owners

Marital Status
Married 86 53.7 162
Unmarried 75 45.7 162
Other 15 0.60 162
Demographic Profile Chart

How do you get to know about?

33
 Figure 1.1

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
Zomato Swiggy Others

SMS Television Social Media Friends and Family

SMS Television Social Friends and

Media Family
Marketing
Zomato 11 7 113 31

Swiggy 16 4 98 44

Others 4 3 105 50

34
Which Payment Method is used by?

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Zomato Swiggy

COD ATM / Debit Card UPI Transfer

Figure 1.2

COD ATM/ Debit UPI Transfer

Card

Zomato 76 14 72

Swiggy 75 17 70

35
What was the behavior of the delivery boy who approached at your
doorstep or desired location?

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Zomato Swiggy

Good Neutral Rude

Figure 1.3

Good Neutral Rude

Zomato 40 99 23

Swiggy 43 87 32

36
 Most Active Service
120

100

80

60

40

20

0
Zomato Swiggy Others

Series 1

Figure 1.4

Elucidation 1.4

Figure 1 interprets that the customers of the online food ordering services have
chosen Zomato as most active app in Pune. Out of 162 respondents 29 have voted Swiggy,
18 have chosen Uber eats and 115 have witnessed Zomato as most active online food
delivery service in Pune. By distributing it in percentage we have
Zomato = 71%
Swiggy = 18%
Others = 11%
37
In the comments:

 There was a parcel every day in xyzzy’s neighborhood by Zomato

delivery, sometimes multiple parcels a day.
 A lot of their favorite restaurants only had registration at Zomato so they
had no choice but to order from Zomato.

Service Availing Maximum Offers

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
Zomato Swiggy Other

Series 1

Figure 1.5

Elucidation 1.5

In the opinion of respondents in Pune Zomato offers maximum promotional offers

in the form of discount coupons to its customers as 115 respondents have clicked Zomato,
39 have chosen Swiggy and only 8 respondents have selected Uber eats as maximum
discounts offering food ordering service. By distributing it in percentage we have:
Zomato = 71%
Swiggy = 24%
Others = 5%

In the comments:

 Zomato used to have may early bird offers but not anymore, Swiggy still has some
but not a lot.

38
  Most of the offers provided by these services usually end up limiting the delivery
charge itself.

Staff Professionalism
120

100

80

60

40

20

0
Zomato Swiggy Others

Series 1
Figure 1.6
Elucidation 1.6

Figures 1.3 witnesses the opinion of respondents according to which the employees
including delivery staff as well as customer support agents of Zomato maintain high
standards of professionalism followed by Swiggy and Uber eats. Out of total 162
respondents 106 have put their opinion to Zomato, 38 to Swiggy and 18 to Uber eats in
terms of courtesy and professionalism in different locations of Pune. By distributing it in
percentage we have
Zomato = 65%
Swiggy = 23%
Others = 12%

In the comments;

 They are inclined towards Zomato, as the whole process seem well thought out and
always end up satisfying them.
 Some of them were not able to understand the question.

39
 Customer Support
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Zomato Swiggy Others

Series 1

Figure 1.7

Elucidation 1.7

Figures 1.3 witnesses the opinion of respondents according to which the employees
including delivery staff as well as customer support agents of Zomato maintain high
standards of professionalism followed by Swiggy and Uber eats. Out of total 162
respondents 100 have put their opinion to Zomato, 40 to Swiggy and 22 to Uber eats in
terms of courtesy and professionalism in different locations of Pune. By distributing it in
percentage we have
Zomato = 62%
Swiggy = 24%
Others = 14%

In the comments:

 Most of them raised various ill experience towards Swiggy which led them to
choose Zomato.
 There were not many positive comments on this factor as most of them were
complaints regarding cash back and poor-quality food.

40
 Packaging Material
80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Zomato Swiggy Others

Series 1

Figure 1.8

Elucidation 1.8

The quality of the packaging materials has also been reported best for Zomato as
compared to Swiggy and Uber eats in Pune. A total of 72 respondents have expressed the
quality of packaging materials used by Zomato as better over Swiggy and Uber eats
whereas 62 customers have preferred Swiggy and 28 have chosen Others for the packaging
materials quality. By distributing it in percentage we have
Zomato = 44%
Swiggy = 38%
Others = 18%

In the comments:

 There was a mixture of positive and negative comments on how both the
organizations did their packaging.
 Most of the were unable to find any particular difference between them.

41
 Website and App UI
80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Zomato Swiggy Others

Series 1

Figure 1.9

Elucidation 1.9

The User Interface of Mobile application and Website has also been reported best
for Zomato as compared to Swiggy and Uber eats in Pune. A total of 80 respondents have
expressed the quality of packaging materials used by Zomato as better over Swiggy and
Uber eats whereas 70 customers have preferred Swiggy and 12 have chosen Others for the
packaging materials quality. By distributing it in percentage we have
Zomato = 49%
Swiggy = 43%
Others = 8%

In the comments:

 Review had a mixture of positive and negative comments about the mobile
application, but almost all are satisfied with their websites.
 There were several suggestions to try and implement to make the mobile
application even more satisfactory.

42
 Overall Satisfaction
120

100

80

60

40

20

0
Zomato Swiggu Others

Series 1

Figure 2.0
Elucidation 2.0
While gauzing overall satisfaction in the customers of online food ordering and
delivery services total 113 respondents from Pune have expressed their trust in Zomato, 31
in Swiggy and 18 respondents have picked Uber eats as their preferred food ordering
service. Thus, Zomato has been found as most popular service among the customers in
terms of overall satisfaction among the three surveyed services. By distributing it in
percentage we have
Zomato = 71%
Swiggy = 18%
Others = 11%

In the comments:

 There was clear inclination towards Zomato, as more and more people use its gold
version to unveil more offers in this lockdown phase.
 There were respectable mentions of dominos, pizza hut and others but Zomato was
the clear choice among the youth followed by the Swiggy.

43
7.2 Factor Analysis:

Factors Responsible for Popularity

Awareness
15% 7%
4% Website UI
Mobile UI
5% 15% Packaging Material
Customer support
11%
Offers and Discount
11% Behaviour of Delivery boy
Payment Method Availability
21% 11% Social Media marketing

Figure 2.1

Awareness:

 Most of the respondents were aware of the Zomato services in much larger terms
than Swiggy.
 There were respondents who relied on their friends for online delivery and
preferred the ones their friend would use.

Website UI:

 The respondents mostly never use their website to order, and hence the website UI
has very less weightage.
 The only time they used their websites is to browse for new events and avail time-
limited offers.

Mobile App UI:

 This factor is one of the most important factors which heavily affects the popularity
of the services.
 This is also dependent on the preferences of the individual aesthetics and
interaction with the application.

44
Packaging Material:

 Packaging of the food which is to be delivered is an important factor, as it gives the

customer the first impression to judge whether the food would be good or not.
 Poor packaging might lead to loss of appetite and eventually upset the customer’s
mood. It won’t matter if the food is good if the packaging is unhygienic or
carelessly done.

Customer Support:

 It is quite common on both the food delivery service to have several mishaps in
their delivery and hence they have to maximize their comeback potential
through their customer support.
 As the food generally comes from a local restaurant, it often happens that the
delivery service might be affected due to the low-quality food provided by the
restaurant.

Offers and Discounts:

 Offers and Discounts are one of the most important factors that lead to increase
customer base.
 This affects the early customer whether to stay or switch to other services with
better offers.

Behavior of Delivery boy:

 Delivery persons are the backbone of these organizations, they are the tangible
representative of the company itself.
 The behavior of the delivery boy indirectly is viewed as the behavior of the
company towards its consumers.

45
Payment Method Availability:

 Due to the diverse group to demographic customers, the availability of the payment
options should be vast and has to accommodate each and every mainstream
payment method.
 As such both the organizations already have all the payment option available.

Social media marketing:

 Most of the consumer base are from the demography of youths who spend their free
time at social media.
 As such the organizations who are active at their social media marketing will most
likely be more aware.

46
Chapter
08
 8.1 FINDINGS:

In the competitive environment existing food company Swiggy and Zomato are
rivals to each one of them. So, there is a need to analyze the market efficiency and
promotional strategy that prevailing in the market. Centennials have to like the order food
online in the today’s world. Everyone has no time to cook and serve in a manner to eat
well. That is the reason why Swiggy and Zomato are exists in the market.

It is found from the research paper that most of the centennials are involve with the
digital world. Basically, the objective of the research paper is to identify the company
image or perception in youth / Gen Z mind or to know the consumer preferences on online
food ordering service provider. To identify the factors which influence the consumer to
order food online. Mostly graduate students are using online food and delivery services
having age between 20 to 25. They all prefer Zomato for online food order and delivery as
it gives more discount and offer to them, provides facility like Cash on Delivery, Paytm,
accepting debit cards and many much type of transaction. They prefer Mobile application
more rather than that of website for ordering food online.

Most of the centennials knows about swingy and Zomato from social media
platforms. Swiggy charges more except Zomato. Zomato also provide faster service in
comparison to swingy. Most of the centennials satisfied with the services of Zomato. Their
opinion towards swingy is good and excellent towards Zomato. At last, this research paper
is valid as most of the suggestions is up to our conditions.

 Both Swiggy and Zomato uses Emotional Branding to gather more attention of the
users.
 Swiggy has a pole position on the merchant side. Zomato had neglected the
ordering part for a long time as it didn’t see much value in it.
 Swiggy is leading in some aspect of survey.
 Currently, Swiggy accounts for about 50% of online orders from my kitchen while
Zomato does about 20-25% orders.
 Undoubtedly Swiggy and Zomato made their impact on customers very strongly
and captured loyal customers.
 Both Swiggy and Zomato advertising were very innovative and attractive. Both
companies are expanding so much money on advertising and promotions

48
 Zomato is the most preferred online food ordering & delivery service over Swiggy
and Uber eats in Pune.  Swiggy stands second after Zomato in the opinion of the
online food ordering services in Pune.
 Most of the people prefer the Service with better offers and discounts.
 Other factors such as Mobile App UI and Packaging are prominent for the
popularity for the respective services.

49
Chapter
09
 9.1 CONCLUSION
The consumer’s perception on online food ordering varies from individual to
individual and the perception is limited to a certain extent with the availability of the
proper connectivity and the exposure to the online food services.
 The perception of the consumer varies according to various similarities and
difference based on their personal opinions.
 The research paper reveals that mostly the youngsters / Gen Z are attached to the
online food ordering and hence the elder people / Millennials don’t use these online
services much as compared to the younger ones.
 The study highlights the fact that centennials are mostly poised to use online food
ordering services.
 The research paper also reveals that the price of the products, discounts and
special offers have the most Influencing factor on online food ordering.
On the basis of responses from the customers of online food ordering services in
this particular research, it is concluded that Zomato is the most successful food ordering
online service in Pune. Customers have reported Zomato as most active online food
delivery service availing maximum promotional offers in terms of discounts, with
courteous and professional delivery staff as well as supportive customer care. Respondents
have also chosen Zomato for providing best packaging materials and overall customer
satisfaction over Swiggy and Uber eats in Pune.

51
Chapter
10
10.1 Suggestions and Recommendations:

 On Time or Free Marketing campaign:

Both of these companies should advertise their campaign on “On Time or
Free”. This will surely boost their customer base and be welcoming new users every
day.

 Mother’s Day Advertisement campaign:

This industry is revolving around the demand for meals and is intactly
connected to the ones who take care of their family’s meals day in day out.

Targeting the mothers of this nations and gaining their trust will prove vital in
the business model.

 Special offers for new users:

The business model of online food delivery is to make the user more convenient
to order food while sitting comfortably at home.

It is bound to have drastic increase in customer base if the new users get
accustomed to it and start to rely on the service more and more.

 Independent Franchise:

The business model also considers data collection at a very large scale. This
allows them to have very detailed prospectus of information about a region and its
consumers.

Using all this information Zomato and Swiggy can very well start to open their
own restaurants and posses an advantage than other local competitors because they
already know the eating habits of the people around this region.

53
References

1. Kites, S. E. (2011). Customer perceptions of electronic food ordering

[Electronic article]. Pratibha A. Dabholkar, “Consumer Evaluations of New
Technology-Based Self-Service Options: An Investigation of Alternative
Models of Service Quality,” International Journal of Research in Marketing,
Vol. 13, No. 1 (1996), pp. 29–51
2. Matthew L. Meter, Amy Ostrom, Robert Roundtree, and Mary Jo Bitner, “Self-
Service Technologies: Understanding Customer Satisfaction with Technology-
Based Service Encounters,” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 64 (July 2000), pp. 50–
64. Matthew L.
3. Meter, Mary Jo Bitner, Amy L. Ostrom, and Stephen W. Brown, “Choosing
Among Alternative Service Delivery Modes: An Investigation of Customer
Trial of Self-Service Technologies,” Journal of Marketing, Vol 69 (April 2005),
pp. 61 – 83
4. Joel E. Collier and Daniel L. Sherrell, “Examining the Influence of Control and
Convenience in a Self-Service Setting,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, Vol. 38 (. 2010), pp. 490 – 509
5. M.K. Hui and J.E.G. Bateson, “Perceived Control and the Effects of Crowding
and Consumer Choice on the Service Experience,” Journal of Consumer
Research, Vol. 18, No. 2 (1991), pp. 174-184.
6. Chipotle Investor Relations, “Chipotle Customers Can Get Out of Line by
Going Online, viewed December 26, 2010
7. Michael J. Dixon, Sheryl E. Kimes, and Rohit Verma, “Customer Preferences
and Use of Technology-Based Service Innovations in Restaurants,” Cornell
Hospitality Report, Vol. 9, No. 7 (2009); Cornell University Center for
Hospitality Research
8. Vol. 11, No. 9 2011 Travel Industry Benchmarking: Status of Senior
Destination and Lodging Marketing Executives, by Rohit Verma, Ph.D., and
Ken McGill

54
Websites visited:

www.zomato.com
www.talkwalker.com
https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/report-swiggy-vs-zomato-battle-of-india-s-biggest-
food-aggregator-2820924
https://www.thedrum.com/news/2020/12/03/how-indian-delivery-app-swiggy-combated-
the-lockdown-blues
www.wikipedia.com
www.crunchbase.com
https://www.talkwalker.com/blog/zomato-marketing-strategy

55
Annexures
Questionnaire:
1. Which one the following Online food delivery service have u heard of?
a. Zomato
b. Swiggy
c. Both
d. Others

2. Which one the below has been most active during the lockdown?
a. Zomato
b. Swiggy
c. Both
d. Others

3. Which one of the below do you think has the highest number of offers?
a. Zomato
b. Swiggy
c. Others

4. Would you prefer Zomato or Swiggy for their customer service?

a. Zomato
b. Swiggy
c. Other

5. Which one of the below has the most decent and professional staff?
a. Zomato
b. Swiggy
c. Both
d. Neither

6. Have you reached the customer support of Zomato and Swiggy? Which one would
be considered the best?
a. Zomato
b. Swiggy
c. Both
d. No Experience

7. If ordered online food, how was their packaging and which one would be
considered be the best in terms of packaging?
a. Zomato
b. Swiggy
c. Both

56
 d. Neither
e. Others

8. If you wanted to order something to eat, which app would you use to do so?
a. Zomato
b. Swiggy
c. Others

9. Which one would be the best with overall considerations?

a. Zomato
b. Swiggy
c. Others
10. What payment method do you use for transaction?
a. UPI
b. COD
c. ATM / Debit Card

57