Unethical Practices in Swiggy and Zomato Business Models: An SEO Analysis

Swiggy and Zomato are two of the most significant player in the Indian online food delivery market. Both platforms have gained immense popularity due to their services, but the business models of both companies have faced scrutiny due to various ethical concerns. In this article, we will delve into the ethical issues surrounding Swiggy and Zomato, with an SEO-optimized approach to provide a comprehensive analysis.

Introduction

Swiggy and Zomato, while offering convenience and a valuable service to both restaurants and customers, have been implicated in several unethical practices. These include taking a cut of the revenue from restaurants, putting pressure on restaurants to offer discounts and promotions, and charging unfairly high fees to both buyers and sellers.

The Debate Surrounding Revenue Sharing

One of the primary ethical concerns raised against Swiggy and Zomato is their revenue-sharing model. These companies take a commission from the restaurants for every order placed through their platform. While this might be seen as a fair service fee by some, others argue that the high commission rate (often ranging from 25% to 30%) is exploitative. This high commission can put significant financial pressure on restaurants, especially small and medium-sized ones.

Pressure on Restaurants

Another critical ethical issue concerns the pressure placed on restaurants to offer discounts and promotions to maintain a competitive edge. Swiggy and Zomato often pressure restaurants to provide attractive offers and deals to incentivize customers to order through their platform. This indirect pressure can lead to price reduction manipulation and loss of revenue for the restaurants.

Ethical Complaints from Customers

The customer experiences on Swiggy and Zomato have garnered significant negative attention. Numerous accounts of poor service and unethical practices have been reported. One such complaint involves a customer who ordered Biryani from a restaurant on Swiggy and found it contaminated with dead mosquitoes. The customer was offered only a partial refund, which they found unethical given the disgusted and unsanitary condition of the food. Furthermore, there are reports of sellers being forced to reduce portion sizes to subsidize the platform's fees, leading to dissatisfaction among buyers.

Fee Structure and Customer Dissatisfaction

The fee structure of these platforms has also come under the spotlight. In a typical delivery order, the cost to the customer includes the restaurant invoice, delivery charges, and service fees. However, the service fees can often be significant, significantly adding to the total cost. For example, in a recent order, a customer paid 380 rupees, with only 280 rupees going to the restaurant, and the remaining being service fees. This opaque fee structure can be viewed as unethical, especially considering the high cut taken by the platforms.

Customer Service and Ethical Standards

The customer support on these platforms has also been criticized. In the case highlighted by Vicky Kumar Roy, customers report being offered only partial refunds, even when the food is in a poor condition. The slow refund process and the promise of immediate processing are further issues that customers face, adding to their frustration and dissatisfaction.

Conclusion

While Swiggy and Zomato provide valuable services to both restaurants and customers, the business models and practices associated with these platforms have significant ethical concerns. Revenue sharing, pressure on restaurants, high fees, and poor customer service are just a few areas that need scrutiny to ensure fairness and transparency. Governments and regulatory bodies must intervene to address these issues and protect the interests of both restaurants and customers.

Search Engine Optimization (SEO) Keywords

Unethical business models, Swiggy, Zomato