Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

If you are living in a metropolitan area in India, chances are you regularly order food from <keyword id="19901323" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="Zomato" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="Zomato" meta.hostid="261" meta.entityid="Zomato">Zomato</keyword>. The company launched in India in 2008 and was earlier just a food delivery service. Overtime, it evolved into a food discovery platform as people can rate restaurants, reserve tables, leave reviews and more. Now, we all know that when we order food via Zomato we end up paying slightly more. There are various charges that the company levies on users including handling charges and delivery fee. In August last year, Zomato started charging a <keyword id="20299300" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="platform-fee" source="keywords">platform fee</keyword> from users. And this has proved to be a successful business move for the platform as during its annual report, the company revealed that it has collected Rs 83 crore till March from levying platform fee. So what exactly is this platform fee that has raked in moolah from the company? Moreover, how does it benefit Zomato and what effect does it have on the end consumer? Read on to find out. <h2>What is Zomato’s platform fee?</h2>Zomato's platform fee is a small additional charge that the company adds to your order. Think of it as a convenience fee for using the app's services, including delivery, customer support, and the seamless experience of browsing through hundreds of restaurant options. Initially, the company used to levy Rs 2 per order as platform fee. But that amount has grown in the last one year and today Zomato charges Rs 6 as platform fee in key areas. It can be located when you load the bill details of your order. <div type="image" title="Zomato levies platform fee" msid="112313825" hostid="261" sizebytes="48995" caption="&amp;lt;p&amp;gt;Zomato levies platform fee&amp;lt;/p&amp;gt;"></div> <h2>How it impacts Zomato</h2>The Platform fee might seem like a minor addition to your bill, but when multiplied by millions of orders, it becomes a significant source of revenue for Zomato. Since every order placed incurs this charge, it increases the company’s "take rates" — the profit made per order. This fee serves as a crucial, controllable revenue stream in the supply chain, providing a steady income source that companies can directly manage. Alongside advertising fees and restaurant commissions, the platform fee has become a significant revenue generator for Zomato. In other words, levying a platform fee is basically a clever way for Zomato to boost its revenue without significantly increasing the prices of individual menu items. During its annual report, Zomato identified the platform fee as one of the three main factors driving Zomato's Adjusted Revenue, which saw a 27 percent year-on-year growth, reaching Rs 7,792 crore in FY24. "Adjusted Revenue as a percentage of GOV (gross order value) continued to rise, primarily due to higher restaurant commission take-rates, improved ad monetization, and the introduction of the platform fee from Q2FY24 onwards," the report highlighted. The report also added that all of the above mentioned factors compensated for the reduction in customer delivery charges per order due to the free delivery benefit available on Gold orders. <h2>How are you affected by Zomato’s platform fee?</h2>Zomato’s report also revealed that most late-night orders in the last fiscal year came from Delhi NCR, while Bengaluru led in the number of breakfast orders. Now the question that arises is, how exactly is the end consumer being affected by the platform fee? One of the obvious answers is that it makes your order a bit more expensive. Especially if you order from the food delivery giant on a daily basis. You might not even notice the addition of Rs 6 in your final bill but if you order food from Zomato everyday and start calculating, it will come up to be a noticeable amount. Say you have ordered food from Zomato everyday since the last three months. In this case, you would have ended up paying around Rs 540 as platform fee. Moreover, platform fee tends to be higher during peak hours or weather conditions. Thus, the order ends up being even costlier. Just last month, CEO of Bengaluru-based company <keyword id="22689022" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="capitalmind-deepak-shenoy" source="keywords">Capitalmind Deepak Shenoy</keyword>, was making headlines for saying that he has reduced ordering food from <keyword id="19896956" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="swiggy" source="keywords">Swiggy</keyword> and Zomato because of higher platform fees. “Massively reduced ordering from Swiggy/Zomato, down to just once maybe on a weekend, like today and noticed their 'platform' charge is now ₹6. Happy that I weaned myself off the daily ordering. They also take 30 percent from restaurants, btw,” he wrote in a post on X (earlier called Twitter).

Zomato earned Rs 83 crore from platform fee: What it is, how it benefits the company and how it affects you

A <keyword id="19895037" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Bengaluru" source="keywords">Bengaluru</keyword> based <keyword id="19910096" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="woman" source="keywords">woman</keyword> has been awarded a <keyword id="19896798" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="compensation" source="keywords">compensation</keyword> of Rs five lakh by a <keyword id="20546234" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="consumer-forum" source="keywords">consumer forum</keyword>, nearly 20 years after a 3.2 centimetre <keyword id="22504968" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="surgical-needle" source="keywords">surgical needle</keyword> was left in her body following her surgery at a private <keyword id="19915254" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="hospital" source="keywords">hospital</keyword> here. The Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has directed the hospital and two <keyword id="20000183" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="doctors" source="keywords">doctors</keyword> to pay Padmavathi, a resident of Jayanagar, Rs 50,000 as litigation expenses. It has also directed <keyword id="22497673" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="New-India-Assurance-Co-Ltd" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="New India Assurance Co Ltd" meta.hostid="261" meta.entityid="New India Assurance Co Ltd">New India Assurance Co Ltd</keyword>, which had issued a policy covering the hospital expenses, to pay her Rs five lakh for "the professional and <keyword id="21130249" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="medical-negligence" source="keywords">medical negligence</keyword> caused." The then 32-year-old woman underwent the surgery on September 29, 2004 at the <keyword id="22497672" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Deepak-Hospital" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="Deepak Hospital" meta.hostid="261" meta.entityid="Deepak Hospital">Deepak Hospital</keyword>, with the two doctors allegedly performing the hernia operation. On completion of the surgery, her appendix was also removed, according to the Commission's order last month. Immediately, on the next day, she complained of severe pain for which she was prescribed some pain killers and assured that it is post surgery discomfort and that it will get cured. She suffered acute stomach and back pain for several years and was also admitted in the same hospital twice later, the order noted. Padmavathi later approached another private hospital here in 2010 and during a scan, it was noticed that some foreign body existed in the abdominal and back portion of her body and it was suggested to her to get it (surgical needle) removed. She then underwent surgery and the 3.2 cm surgical needle was removed following which she approached the consumer forum with a complaint the following year. The forum noted that the complainant was aged about 32 years, when she underwent all these surgeries and removal of the surgical needle. "Definitely she suffered severe pain and inconvenience till removal of the surgical needle," the order stated. Hence, she is entitled to get "global compensation" of Rs five lakh and the insurance company (New India Assurance Company Limited) is directed to pay the amount while the two doctors are liable to pay litigation expenses of Rs 50,000 to the complainant, it further added.

Woman to get Rs 5 lakh compensation, 20 years after needle left in her body after surgery

New Delhi, The Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA) Chairman <keyword id="20085060" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="deepak-mohanty" source="keywords">Deepak Mohanty</keyword> on Friday said the total corpus under the <keyword id="20085061" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="national-pension-system" source="keywords">National Pension System</keyword> and Atal Pension Yojana has crossed Rs 11 lakh crore. The milestone of Rs 11 lakh crore asset under management (AUM) was achieved on January 10, 2024, he told reporters here. The AUM has increased from Rs 10 lakh crore to Rs 11 lakh crore in 4 months 18 days (August 24, 2023 to January 10, 2024), he said, adding the private sector AUM crossed Rs 2 lakh crore. The authority in September revised the AUM target of Rs 12 lakh crore for the current fiscal. The pension authority is working on a minimum assured pension plan, and it could become a reality in the next financial year if the guarantee issued is resolved. "There are a lot of complications in determining the rate of return, what to set as the bar for return. Fund managers are also thinly capitalised. So, you have to keep a check on their liabilities also," <keyword id="19981292" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="mohanty" source="keywords">Mohanty</keyword> said. Asked about the Budget wishlist, he said the move to raise the assured return under the Atal pension plan continues to be on the 'wishlist'. However, he declined to comment if the <keyword id="19906106" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="interim-budget" source="keywords">Interim Budget</keyword> may take up the issue. Finance Minister <keyword id="19916618" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="nirmala-sitharaman" source="keywords">Nirmala Sitharaman</keyword> will present the Interim Budget for 2024-25 on February 1. The pension fund regulatory body was considering raising the current return of Rs 1,000-5,000 to Rs 2,500-7,500. The chairman of the pension authority also said that few states who have issued notification to pull out of the National Pension System continued to contribute to the plan irrespective of the on-paper withdrawal. However, he did not wish to identify the states.

Total corpus under pension funds crosses Rs 11 lakh cr: PFRDA Chairman

The <keyword id="6354977" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="supreme-court" source="Orion">Supreme Court</keyword> on Monday came down heavily on two members of <keyword id="6396355" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="nclat" source="Orion">NCLAT</keyword> who were issued contempt notice for defying an order of the apex court. After going through the relevant CCTV footage of the NCLAT proceedings from October 13, a bench headed by <keyword id="6363345" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="cji" source="Orion">CJI</keyword> D.Y. Chandrachud and comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra said that there exists a "clear intention" to breach the directions passed by the Supreme Court. In view of the unconditional apology tendered by Member (Technical) Dr Alok Srivastava, the bench decided to put an end to contempt proceedings. During the hearing, the top court was apprised by senior advocate P.S. Patwalia that Member (Judicial) Rakesh Kumar -- who was part of the contentious bench of NCLAT -- has tendered his resignation to the Chairman of the appellate tribunal. Senior advocate Patwalia, who represented Member (Judicial) Rakesh Kumar, said that members of the bench had no intention to defy the orders passed by the apex court and there is no affront or ego involved. At this, CJI D.Y. Chandrachud said: "There is no denial of the fact that the lawyers did point out (before NCLAT bench) that an order was passed by the Supreme Court." In its order, the apex court directed <keyword id="227293" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="deepak-chhabria" source="Orion">Deepak Chhabria</keyword> and the scrutiniser to deposit costs of Rs 1 crore and Rs 10 lakh, respectively, in the Prime Minister Relief Fund for misusing the process of law. Earlier on October 18, the Supreme Court had issued contempt notice to two members for "wilfully" defying directions passed by it. The top court had also set aside the judgment passed by the two-member bench of the NCLAT saying that parties cannot take recourse to "devious" means to obviate compliance with the orders passed by the Supreme Court. On October 13, the top court ordered the Chairperson of the NCLAT to conduct an inquiry into the working of a bench of the appellate tribunal which allegedly defied an order of the Supreme Court. It had said that it is passing the order in "extraordinary circumstances" where the two-member bench of the NCLAT proceeded to pronounce the judgment despite the clear mandate of the order passed by the Supreme Court asking the appellate tribunal to declare "its judgment in the pending appeal after it is duly apprised of the fact that the result of the Annual General Meeting has been declared". Senior advocates <keyword id="106922" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="abhishek-manu-singhvi" source="Orion">Abhishek Manu Singhvi</keyword> and N.K. Kaul had apprised the top court that the bench consisting of Rakesh Kumar and Dr Alok Srivastava of the NCLAT proceeded to deliver the order despite request made by the petitioner before the appellate tribunal to not deliver the judgment until the report of the scrutiniser is made available. "If what is stated is correct, this will clearly constitute the defiance of the order of this court by the NCLAT," the Supreme Court had said, noting that its order was uploaded at 1.55 p.m. while the scrutiniser's report was stated to be uploaded at 2.40 p.m.

You Searched For "deepak" and got 4 results

Zomato earned Rs 83 crore from platform fee: What it is, how it benefits the company and how it affects you

Divyanshi Sharma

Woman to get Rs 5 lakh compensation, 20 years after needle left in her body after surgery

PTI

Total corpus under pension funds crosses Rs 11 lakh cr: PFRDA Chairman

PTI

SC closes contempt proceedings against NCLAT bench after one member apologises, other resigns

IANS

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides