Today, you might order food majorly from either Zomato or Swiggy.

But back in 2014 and 2015, when the concept was introduced in India, but the potential of the food-tech space was clear.

TinyOwl was a food delivery app that entered the market in 2014 during this food-tech boom in India.

As part of the hyperlocal delivery industry, TinyOwl's goal was to connect hungry customers with local restaurants in a seamless, efficient way.

At its peak, TinyOwl gained significant traction due to its easy-to-use app, partnerships with local restaurants, and aggressive marketing campaigns.

However, it wasn’t an easy road, as the competition quickly heated up and challenges started to emerge, leading to it eventually getting shut down.

Let’s look at their start-up journey!

About TinyOwl:

TinyOwl was founded by five IIT Bombay graduates: Harshvardhan Mandad, Gaurav Choudhary, Shikhar Paliwal, Saurabh Goyal, and Tanuj Khandelwal.

The online food delivery platforms were on the rise and TinyOwl also saw the opportunity.

Their vision was simple and similar to that of Zomato: build a platform where users could browse menus, place orders, and track deliveries, all with a few taps on their phone.

TinyOwl’s app aimed to make food delivery not just convenient but also enjoyable by offering a wide variety of choices from local eateries.

By creating a platform where multiple restaurants were listed, TinyOwl gave customers the freedom to explore new places and choose from a wide variety of cuisines.

TinyOwl also recognized the growing demand for hyperlocal delivery, which meant delivering food within a specific area or neighborhood quickly.

With people in metropolitan areas wanting food fast, TinyOwl’s platform helped solve this by making sure delivery times were shorter, as the focus was on connecting customers with restaurants near them.

TinyOwl’s business model revolved around a commission-based structure, where it partnered with local restaurants and charged them a percentage for every order placed through the app.

Essentially, the restaurants benefited from TinyOwl’s platform by gaining access to a larger customer base, while TinyOwl earned a commission on each order.

The company strategically focused on high-volume orders in major cities like Mumbai, Bengaluru, and Delhi.

TinyOwl understood that serving a large number of customers in these cities was crucial to scale its operations and bring in consistent revenue.

Funding Rounds:

In December 2014, TinyOwl secured Series A of $2.05 million from some of the most well-known investors in the startup ecosystem, including Sequoia Capital and Nexus Venture Partners.

This not only provided capital but also created excitement around TinyOwl as a rising star in the booming food-tech space.

In February 2015 and October 2015, they raised Series B of $17.8 million and $7.7 million respectively.

The funds from these rounds were primarily used to expand operations into 50 cities and onboard more restaurants onto the platform.

Additionally, the money was funneled into marketing efforts to grow their customer base, with aggressive campaigns and discounts to attract new users.

There was an overall excitement surrounding the food-tech space at the time. Investors saw the potential for huge returns in India’s rapidly urbanizing cities, where consumers were starting to rely heavily on digital services for convenience.

TinyOwl’s ability to secure large investments was a reflection of this enthusiasm.

However, despite the significant funding and promising early growth, scaling too quickly also came with its own set of challenges, leading to the ultimate pivot.

Why TinyOwl Shut Down:

TinyOwl had a promising start, but several factors led to its eventual downfall; by 2016, the company was forced to shut down.

One of the key reasons behind TinyOwl's failure was over-expansion.

After receiving significant funding, TinyOwl quickly spread its operations to over 50 cities across India in 1.5 years. This meant hiring a big team to manage the operations.

While this rapid expansion helped them gain a larger market presence, it also stretched the company’s resources thin.

They were burning through cash at an unsustainable rate to manage operations in multiple cities while trying to maintain the quality of service.

This kind of expansion demanded a significant amount of capital, and TinyOwl simply couldn’t keep up with the cash burn that came with scaling too fast - they were burning Rs 8-10 Cr every month.

Another major issue was management inefficiencies, particularly when it came to handling operations across different cities.

They also didn’t have business leads in every city they were operating in, which lead to inefficiency.

They missed unit economics as well - they had a fleet of 1000 delivery boys in places where the demand did not justify the supply.

The money from funding also needs to be allocated strategically. TinyOwl initially burned a lot on their delivery fleet, but eventually decided not to have one of their own, which helped to save some cash.

At the same time, TinyOwl faced fierce competition from Zomato and Swiggy, both of which had more efficient delivery systems and stronger funding. This left TinyOwl trailing behind in terms of both service and market share.

One of TinyOwl’s biggest challenges was its costly customer acquisition strategies.

In the race to capture market share, they relied heavily on discount-led growth - offering deep discounts and promotions to attract users.

While this worked in the short term to boost the number of orders, it wasn’t a sustainable approach.

By late 2015, the cracks started to show.

To cut costs even further, they decided to keep only Mumbai and Bangalore operational, and laid off employees, which went from 1,100 to below 200.

This was right before Diwali 2015, which led to a widespread outrage.

They also stopped with discounts, and overall, managed to bring the burn down to Rs 4 Cr. But it still had only 7 months of runway.

The company also had a business for chefs called TinyOwl Homemade.

While some employees suggested making this low-competitive arm the core focus, it was instead dissolved completely.

The company faced increasing pressure from investors to improve its financial performance, but with mounting losses and growing competition, TinyOwl couldn’t turn things around. In early 2016, the company eventually shut down operations.

However, TinyOwl didn’t disappear entirely.

It merged with Roadrunnr, a hyperlocal logistics company, to form a new entity called Runnr.

This move was seen as a last-ditch effort to salvage the business by combining TinyOwl’s food delivery platform with Roadrunnr’s logistics expertise.

Later, in 2017, Zomato acquired Runnr for $40 million, integrating its logistics capabilities to strengthen its own food delivery services.

The story of TinyOwl serves as a cautionary tale for aspiring entrepreneurs about the dangers of over-expansion, unsustainable growth strategies, and the importance of operational efficiency.

Thank you for participating in the poll, it helps us create better content for you!