Latest news with #Zepto
Time of India
a day ago
- Automotive
- Time of India
Ola Electric shares freefall; Nykaa Q4 profit doubles
Ola Electric shares freefall; Nykaa Q4 profit doubles Also in the letter: Ola Electric shares plummet 10% after Q4 losses double to Rs 870 crore; revenue slips 62% Financials: Operating revenue: Fell 61.8% year-on-year to Rs 611 crore, down from Rs 1,598 crore in the same quarter last year. Fell 61.8% year-on-year to Rs 611 crore, down from Rs 1,598 crore in the same quarter last year. Net loss: More than doubled to Rs 870 crore, compared to Rs 416 crore in Q4 of the previous fiscal. CEO speak: Market snap: It now trades well below its initial public offering (IPO) price of Rs 76, having lost over 40% of its value since its listing. The slide follows growing concerns over inflated sales claims, quality issues, and missing trade certificates across various retail outlets. Adding to the pressure, ET reported that Ola Electric has slipped to the third place in India's electric-two wheeler market in May, overtaken by legacy companies TVS Motor and Bajaj Auto. Rival watch: In Q4, Ather's revenue rose 29% to Rs 676.1 crore. Its losses narrowed 17% to Rs 234.4 crore amid rising volumes and improved margins. Nykaa Q4 profit doubles to Rs 19 crore; revenue up 24% Financials: Operating revenue (Q4): Rs 2,061.7 crore, up 27% from Rs 1,668 crore a year earlier. Rs 2,061.7 crore, up 27% from Rs 1,668 crore a year earlier. Net profit (Q4): Rs 19 crore, versus Rs 9 crore last year. Rs 19 crore, versus Rs 9 crore last year. Expenses (Q4): Rs 2,031 crore Rs 2,031 crore Revenue (FY25): Rs 7,950 crore, up 24% from FY24. Rs 7,950 crore, up 24% from FY24. Net profit (FY25): Rs 32 crore, up 105% Tell me more: Other highlights: GMV for Nykaa's core beauty vertical touched Rs 11,775 crore, growing 30% YoY. Sales from House of Nykaa nearly doubled over the past two years. Nykaa Fashion rebounded, with GMV up 18% YoY and revenue rising 19%. It launched a record number of global brands on its platforms, including Yves Saint Laurent and Armani Beauty. CEO's take: Sponsor ETtech Top 5 & Morning Dispatch! Why it matters: The opportunity: Reach a highly engaged audience of decision-makers. Boost your brand's visibility among the tech-savvy community. Custom sponsorship options to align with your brand's goals. What's next: Full Stack by Samidha Sharma: Founders are going direct — but startup rivalry is nothing new What happened: Zepto cofounder Aadit Palicha went public this week with serious allegations, accusing the CFO of a rival consumer internet firm of trying to sabotage Zepto's funding round. In a detailed LinkedIn post, Palicha claimed the rival executive triggered investor calls, shared doctored Excel sheets, and fuelled a bot-driven social media backlash to undermine the company. Why it matters: The big picture: Rivalries between startups during fundraises are not new. What's changed is how they're playing out — not in whispers, but on public platforms. Tactics such as investor smear campaigns and selective data leaks have long been employed. The difference now? Samidha's take: Zerodha Capital's FY25 net profit rises 78%, focus on scaling up credit play More details: Financials: Zerodha Capital has a net worth of Rs 175 crore, with an average ticket size of Rs 6 lakh. The company has raised approximately Rs 250 crore from banks and other non-banking financial companies (NBFCs), with a debt-to-equity ratio of 1.4. Also Read: India may float paper on crypto assets norms in June Framing rules: Mandate so far: In FY23, the government imposed a 30% tax on gains from virtual digital assets. It later required crypto exchanges to register with the Financial Intelligence Unit. The RBI has repeatedly urged caution over the potential misuse of cryptocurrencies. Ola Electric shares plummeted on the bourses on Friday after reporting widened losses in the March quarter. This and more in today's ETtech Top 5.■ Full Stack by Samidha Sharma■ Zerodha Capital's FY25 report■ India's crypto planBhavish Aggarwal, CEO, Ola ElectricShares of Ola Electric tumbled 9.7% to an intraday low of Rs 48.07 on the BSE on Friday, after the company reported its weak Q4 results for FY25 — its worst quarterly performance since it began delivering electric scooters in the earnings call, Ola Electric founder Bhavish Aggarwal called the March quarter a period of 'important learning and introspection.' He said the company is now more cautious in how it allocates capital for new products, with a renewed focus on strengthening internal processes, particularly in customer service, regulatory compliance, and risk the stock recovered slightly by market close, ending Friday at Rs 50.97, it was still down 4.26% for the Ola, its listed rival Ather Energy saw an improvement over its financials this Nayar, CEO, NykaaFSN Ecommerce Ventures, the parent company of beauty etailer Nykaa, posted a sharp rise in profit for the March quarter, driven by stronger sales and improving company's gross merchandise value (GMV) rose 27% year-on-year (YoY) in the March quarter. Profitability continued to improve, with earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortisation (Ebitda) margin expanding to 6.5%.'On a net revenue basis, the beauty business has grown at 25% YoY. This reflects a strong performance across all of the beauty verticals, which include ecommerce, physical retail, our house of brands, as well as E-B2B business, which provides further distribution to retailers,' CEO Falguni Nayar said in a post-earnings call on Top 5 and Morning Dispatch are must-reads for India's tech and business leaders, including startup founders, investors, policy makers, industry insiders and Reach out to us at spotlightpartner@ to explore sponsorship post shows how narrative control is becoming part of the modern founder's playbook, especially in high-stakes sectors like quick are naming names in real time, shaping the narrative before the stories are even battle for capital among high-growth startups is as personal as it is financial. Palicha's move wasn't just a callout — it was a strategic attempt to control the narrative before it turned on him. However, Indian founders would do better to focus on building durable businesses, rather than engaging in personal communication Capital, the non-banking finance arm of stockbroking firm Zerodha, reported a net profit of Rs 12.5 crore and revenue of Rs 36 crore for the financial year ended March more than doubled from Rs 17 crore in FY2024, while net profit rose 78% from Rs 7.2 crore. The company primarily offers credit products such as loans against securities, with stocks, exchange-traded funds (ETFs) and mutual funds accepted as collateral.'We have a bouquet of around 1,300 securities, and we offer loans to investors who have those securities,' said Abhilash SR, head, Zerodha government may release a discussion paper in June outlining policy framework options for crypto assets, amid growing mainstream acceptance of virtual paper will draw on the synthesis document prepared by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the Financial Stability Board (FSB), sources told us, adding that it is currently under assets have gained popularity in part due to US President Donald Trump's strong support for digital position on cryptocurrencies remains ambiguous.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
Founders are going direct — but startup rivalry is nothing new
Founders are going direct — but startup rivalry is nothing new Sabotage is an age-old tactic Rivalry, rebranded Preempting, not just reacting Welcome to a new edition of Full Stack. This is the place where you'll find unfiltered commentary on all things keep the bouquets, brickbats and suggestions coming. You can reach me at and follow me on Elon Musk's X @samidhas Few days ago, Zepto cofounder Aadit Palicha took to LinkedIn to publicly accuse the CFO of a rival consumer internet firm of trying to sabotage Zepto's was detailed and direct— complete with claims of investor calls, doctored Excel sheets, and even bot-backed social media chatter to discredit the company which is in the middle of a fundraise and potential post was discussed across WhatsApp groups, founder and investor forums, and of course, in media saw it as a meltdown, others called it me, it underscored something deeper: the battle for capital among high-growth startups is as personal as it is financial — and increasingly, it's playing out in public. But let's be clear — founders trying to undercut rivals during a fundraise isn't new. It's just more visible investor whisper campaigns to selectively leaked numbers, this sort of interference has long been part of high-stakes corporate rivarly. What's changed is the simply chose to call it out — and to do so in real time, on a platform like LinkedIn, rather than waiting for backchannel damage to this week, The Wall Street Journal reported that Elon Musk had privately tried to influence the multibillion-dollar AI supercomputing project Stargate, spearheaded by Sam tweets. No memes. Just classic playbook tactics — this time at trillion-dollar you've been in this business long enough, you'll remember how Travis Kalanick's Uber practically wrote the ops manual for startup India, Flipkart vs Amazon vs Snapdeal, Ola vs Uber, Swiggy vs Zomato — every funding milestone came with a shadow narrative of investor blocks and strategic different in 2025 is the speed — and source — of counter-narratives. Founders are now their own comms heads. And platforms like LinkedIn and X are where narrative wars play post wasn't just about calling out one executive — it was about taking control of the story before someone else could shape a strategy we've seen in Silicon Valley too. When The New York Times was preparing a critical profile on Bryan Johnson, the biohacker behind Blueprint, he got ahead of it. He framed his anti-ageing regimen as 'scientific progress under scrutiny' rather than a vanity project. By the time the article dropped, his version had already made the this new media ecosystem, investors and journalists are no longer the sole gatekeepers. Founders today are managing perception as much as performance. That means going direct — before rivals or reporters let's not over-inflate every act of rivalry into a scandal though. If a rival startup is trying to talk down your deal or cast doubt on your metrics, it doesn't always require a public maturity of founders should reflect in knowing when to hit back — and when to move Elon Musk has made going direct fashionable but not everything he does needs to founders would do better to focus on building durable businesses — not personal comms wars. A strong narrative helps. But strong numbers close the Sharma is Editor - ETtech. She's been covering the tech and new-age digital economy for over a decade, and has had a ringside view of the industry and its people.
Time of India
3 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
Govt issues notices to 11 firms including Zepto, Uber for using dark patterns to sway consumers, warns action
NEW DELHI: The government has issued notices to 11 companies, including Zepto, Rapido, Uber and Ola for deploying dark patterns to influence consumers' decision making. Consumer affairs ministry on Wednesday also asked all major e-commerce and online platforms to follow govt's guidelines on 'dark patterns', else actions will be taken to protect consumers' interest. Speaking to reporters after a meeting with representatives of major e-commerce companies, industry associations and voluntary consumer organisations on eliminating deceptive online practices, consumer affairs minister Pralhad Joshi said e-commerce players need to carry out internal audits to find out whether any dark pattern is used on their platforms, even by their sellers. They need to submit audit reports to the department. Joshi also announced that a joint working group will be set up for effective implementation of the guidelines and curb this unfair trade practice. In November 2023, the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA), under the Consumer Protection Act, had notified Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns to curb this menace on digital and offline platforms. Joshi said that his department has identified 13 dark patterns — false urgency, basket sneaking, confirm shaming, forced action, subscription trap, interface interference, bait and switch, drip pricing, disguised advertisement, Nagging, Trick question, Saas billing, and rogue malwares — and asked the companies to act against any such practice. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Zagraj w grę przygodową (Spróbuj teraz) Gra Przygodowa Zagraj teraz Undo Consumer affairs secretary Nidhi Khare said that dark patterns are designed, algorithm based and revenue driven. She said the onus is on companies to eliminate this from their system. She added that the CCPA acts and will take action against any unfair trade practice. As per the guidelines, dark patterns have been defined as any practice or deceptive design pattern using user interface or user experience interactions on any platform that is designed to mislead or trick users to do something they originally did not intend or want to do, by subverting or impairing the consumer autonomy, decision making or choice. Stay informed with the latest business news, updates on bank holidays and public holidays . AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Indian Express
4 days ago
- Business
- Indian Express
Zepto workers' strike: In India's gig economy, the continuing struggle for dignity
In the past week, hundreds of Zepto delivery workers in Hyderabad have gone on an indefinite strike. Their demands are basic: Fair pay, decent working hours, social security, and dignity. These are not new demands, nor are they unreasonable. Coordinated by the Telangana Gig and Platform Workers' Union (TGPWU), the strike follows a growing pattern of worker unrest across India's platform economy — from Blinkit to Swiggy — where the promise of entrepreneurial freedom has worn thin under the weight of wage theft, surveillance, and hyper-precarity. In Delhi, 50 Zepto workers recently filed a complaint alleging they were lured from rural areas with promises of ₹30,000 per month, free food, and accommodation. Upon arrival, they faced substandard living conditions, pay cuts, and withheld wages. Zepto has since responded with a familiar script: Distancing itself from the workers through legalistic disavowals. 'We are a technology platform,' the company claims. 'Vendors are responsible for hiring and payment.' This arm's-length logic is by design. It allows platforms to maintain granular algorithmic control — via GPS tracking, performance ratings, and app-based scheduling — while denying any legal responsibility as employers, as has been documented by People's Union for Democratic Rights' Report 2021. Meanwhile, Zepto Cafe pausing services in some locations, thereby affecting 44 stores and 700 gig workers, shows platform capital treats labour as disposable — plugged into the supply chain when needed, discarded when not. It's not just a pause; it's the logic of exploitation in motion. These are not isolated incidents of corporate malfeasance. They reveal something far more structural: The hollowness of India's legal and policy framework for gig and platform workers. Despite repeated gestures toward recognition — most recently in the Union Budget 2025 and the Code on Social Security, 2020 — India's gig and platform workers remain in a zone of legal abandonment. The Zepto strike shatters the illusion that formal recognition in law translates into material rights. State as database manager, not protector The contradictions in India's approach to platform labour are stark. In 2008, the Unorganised Workers' Social Security Act was passed to provide a basic welfare framework for workers outside the formal economy. It defined 'unorganised workers' broadly enough to arguably include gig workers. Yet, when Senior Advocate S Muralidhar recently appeared before the Supreme Court on behalf of the Indian Federation of App-Based Transport Workers (IFAT), the petition did not even seek relief — it sought a mere clarification. Do gig workers fall under the Act's scope? The fact that this question still lacks a definitive legal answer reveals the abyss in which workers are suspended. The 2020 Code on Social Security was hailed as a breakthrough: It was the first time 'gig and platform workers' were defined in Indian law [Section 2(35) and 2(61), respectively]. Yet this recognition remains inert. The Code has never been notified, which means it has no legal force. Meanwhile, the government insists that schemes under the Code are 'being formulated.' This formulation has now been 'ongoing' for over four years. Under the Code on Social Security, 2020, two key schemes were envisioned for gig and platform workers: National Social Security Board for Gig and Platform Workers: A body meant to recommend and oversee social security schemes for gig workers without ensuring universal social security for platform workers. Voluntary Registration and Contribution-Based Welfare: The Code allows for workers to self-register on a central portal. Aggregators (platform companies like Zepto, Swiggy, Ola, etc.) are expected to register their workers on the e-Shram portal. Upon registration, platform workers will receive a Universal Account Number (UAN), which will allow them access to key social security benefits. The e-Shram portal, introduced in 2021, was supposed to be a central database for unorganised workers, including gig workers. But data without rights is surveillance, not welfare. Registration has not translated into healthcare, accident insurance, or pension. The machinery of welfare exists on paper but is void of substance. The contradiction is clear: Gig workers are visible enough to be surveyed, counted, and claimed as beneficiaries in policy announcements. But they remain invisible in enforcement, excluded from labour protections, and denied bargaining rights. Beyond welfare: The struggle for power Despite the Centre's inaction, certain states have begun experimenting with more robust protections for gig and platform workers — signaling that labour governance may be forced from the margins inward. In 2023, Rajasthan enacted the Platform-Based Gig Workers (Registration and Welfare) Act, mandating the creation of a welfare board and compelling platforms to contribute to a dedicated welfare fund. Karnataka followed in 2024 with the Karnataka Platform-Based Gig Workers (Social Security and Welfare) Bill, proposing a welfare cess ranging from 1 per cent to 5 per cent on each transaction or payout made by platforms to gig workers. The state government aims to operationalise the gig workers' welfare fund by August 2025. These subnational laws reflect growing political recognition of gig workers as a distinct labour constituency — one increasingly vocal, organised, and electorally visible. Yet their success depends on implementation, especially amid pushback from industry lobbies and jurisdictional ambiguities over labour regulation in a federal setup. Nonetheless, these initiatives challenge the Centre's narrative of policy sufficiency and demonstrate that meaningful recognition can — and must — begin with redistributing control, not merely registering the governed. Proposals like the 2 per cent deduction from workers' earnings for social security raise further concerns. Without enforceable benefits, such deductions are not contributions — they are taxes on the poor. Moreover, corporate executives are candid in acknowledging that any costs related to worker welfare are ultimately passed on to consumers, revealing the inherent limits of voluntary corporate social responsibility. In this way, the state's role has shifted from genuinely transforming the gig economy to managing its precarious consequences: Offering health insurance or social security schemes funded through deductions may provide temporary relief, but these measures merely patch the symptoms of a deeper problem — platform business models that systematically externalise labour costs and evade employer responsibilities. Recognition becomes a technique of pacification, not empowerment. This is the new face of labour governance under platform capitalism: Symbolic inclusion in exchange for structural abandonment. The ongoing protests go beyond demands for welfare — they call for dignity, accountability, and control over working conditions. Gig workers are not seeking handouts but power: The right to unionise, bargain collectively, and reject exploitation. The Zepto strike, like recent actions at Swiggy and Blinkit, exposes the hollowness of legal recognition without enforceable rights. Unless the labour codes are implemented and platforms held accountable, India's digital economy will remain a site of extraction. Real recognition must begin by acknowledging gig workers not as data points or beneficiaries, but as rights-bearing workers demanding justice and dignity. The writer is Visiting Fellow at the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) and editor of the book Feminist Perspectives on Social Media
Mint
4 days ago
- Business
- Mint
Boss's ultimatum to work on day off or lose bonus sparks anger online
A manager is facing widespread backlash on social media after pressuring an employee to work on a pre-approved day off, even threatening to dock her bonus if she failed to comply. The incident came to light after UK workplace expert Ben Askins shared screenshots of their text exchange on Instagram. While the identities of both the manager and employee have been kept anonymous, the story has struck a chord online. Askins also posted a video about the situation on TikTok, which has since garnered over 27 million views, with thousands condemning the manager's behaviour as 'insane'. Also read | Contractual employee calls Zepto's work culture 'toxic,' 'straight-up abusive' The issue began when the manager messaged a team member, asking her to step in for a colleague who wouldn't be coming to work that day. 'Hey, Jasper won't be coming in today so you'll need to handle the presentation,' the message read. Read | Strategies to survive a toxic workplace The woman responded, reminding her manager that she had the day off. 'Sorry, I can't. I've got today booked off for plans with the kids. I'll be back on Monday,' she replied. The boss's reply stunned many: 'It wasn't really a request TBH. I need you in by 11am.' The employee pushed back, explaining she had been working overtime for weeks and deserved her approved leave — especially to spend time with her children. But the manager remained unyielding. Read | 'Complete task by 4 pm, or else...': Techie quits 'toxic' job in 45 days; gets flooded with support on Reddit 'One day isn't too much to ask. I can revoke your day off and expect you in at 11am,' he wrote. 'That doesn't feel very fair,' she countered, pointing out that another colleague was simply out for brunch, while her family time was being disregarded. The boss then sent a final, eyebrow-raising message: 'Not going to lie. I decide what is fair. We will have a conversation about our commitment when you're in today. If you're not here, it is coming out of your bonus.' The exchange quickly drew outrage online, with many expressing disbelief at the manager's domineering tone. A large number of commenters urged the employee to escalate the matter to Human Resources, calling the boss's behaviour unacceptable and toxic. 'The first text message should not have been responded to. It is that simple,' an Instagram commenter wrote. 'I'm confused why people are even responding on days off, any work devices get turned off and any sent to private gets ignored,' another said. 'Hope this was reported to HR,' a user added. 'That's so rude,' another wrote.
