Are platform fee hikes forcing brands to rethink pricing and visibility?

Food delivery platforms Swiggy and Zomato have once again nudged up the cost of convenience for Indian consumers. Just days ago, Swiggy followed its rival in increasing its platform fee from ₹14.99 to ₹17.58 per order, inclusive of GST. The move came shortly after Zomato’s effective platform fee also rose to a similar level. Zomato, however, continues to charge a base platform fee of ₹14.9, excluding GST, as observed by e4m on app listings.

What is now drawing attention is not just the hike, but the pattern. Over the past year, platform fees have evolved into a near-silent trend. What began as a nominal charge, initially as low as ₹2–₹3 per order, has steadily climbed through multiple incremental revisions. Yet, the platforms themselves have largely remained silent on the rationale behind these increases. 

Several sources told e4m that such hikes are rarely accompanied by formal communication, as they are seen as part of ongoing business and pricing strategy rather than a consumer-facing decision that requires justification. 

Both Swiggy and Zomato declined to offer any comments for the story.

Read On: Swiggy and Zomato face online backlash over platform fee hikes

e4m delved deeper to understand how these fee hikes are shaping brand strategies, influencing consumer behaviour, and raising a larger question on if Indian consumers are ready to consistently pay a premium for convenience?

As per Murali Krishnan, CMO & Co-Founder, Wow! Momo, “Fee hikes haven’t broken demand yet, because convenience remains non-negotiable. Order growth is still holding, but that doesn’t mean everything is healthy underneath. Consumers are stretching each order instead of ordering more frequently, which means frequency is clearly under pressure. That’s not true expansion—it’s behavioural adjustment. If pricing pressure continues, growth may not disappear overnight, but it will start losing momentum.”

According to Vijay Shenoy, Deputy Vice President at LS Digital Group, the lack of communication from platforms is not accidental but strategic. “I don’t see either platform stepping out to justify the hike, and why would they? Convenience just got a little more expensive, that’s the whole story,” he said, pointing out that Zomato’s platform fee has risen over 645% in the last 31 months through gradual increments. Shenoy highlighted that consumption trends remain strong despite these increases.

Both Swiggy and Zomato have continued to report over 20% growth in gross order value (GOV), collectively processing close to 4.5 million orders daily.

However, the latest round of hikes has sparked visible consumer pushback online, with users questioning the growing cost of ordering in. Beyond consumer sentiment, the move has also put brands listed on these platforms in a delicate position, caught between rising cart values and the risk of impacting order volumes.

Brands walk a tightrope as pricing pressures build

For brands, the platform fee hike may be consumer-facing, but its implications are far from indirect. It quietly reshapes how consumers perceive value, often influencing the final purchase decision.

An anonymous marketer from a leading QSR chain said that while the fee is not directly levied on restaurants, it inflates overall cart value. “It makes carts expensive, which affects the consumer’s overall decision hierarchy,” the marketer said.

Read On: No change in advertiser appetite, despite Swiggy-Zomato platform fee hike?

Adding to this, Arjun Toor, Co-Founder of RollsKing, pointed out that the impact is most visible among price-sensitive consumers. “The ripple effect on the ecosystem is significant. Consumers looking for affordable, everyday meals are the ones most sensitive to these incremental costs,” he said.

For fast-scaling QSR brands, this creates a tricky balancing act. With operational costs already on the rise, ranging from input inflation to higher fuel prices, the added platform fee further restricts pricing flexibility. “It limits our pricing headroom. If we increase prices on top of platform fees, we risk pricing out a large chunk of our audience,” Toor added.

Echoing similar concerns, Mandar Lande, Co-founder & CEO of WAAYU app, a Zero Commission Food Delivery Platform, highlighted the margin pressure on restaurants. He noted that most brands already operate on thin margins, and rising platform-led costs force difficult trade-offs—either increase menu prices and risk lower order volumes, or absorb the costs and hurt profitability.

Another big challenge experts have pointed out is visibility. As platform costs rise, smaller brands often struggle to compete with larger chains that can spend more on commissions, advertising, and discount-led discovery. This, in turn, impacts their visibility on aggregator platforms. As a result, the industry is seeing growing interest in alternative models, ranging from direct ordering platforms and lower-commission marketplaces to franchise-led expansion, allowing brands to retain better margins while maintaining customer reach, added Lande.

Furthermore, this shift is also prompting brands to rethink their channel strategies. While aggregators continue to dominate as a discovery and demand engine, several brands are accelerating diversification efforts. For instance, RollsKing shared it is doubling down on offline expansion to reduce overdependence on platforms.

However, not everyone sees the fee hikes as a direct threat to brands. According to Shenoy, the impact remains largely indirect. He argues that since the fee is consumer-facing, brands are not immediately squeezed on margins. “The deal brands signed up for is clear—reach, visibility, and volume. All of these remain intact and will continue to grow with the platforms’ growth,” he said.

Shenoy further added that both Zomato and Swiggy are actively working to sustain demand. From lowering delivery thresholds to pushing value-driven meal options, platforms are attempting to keep the funnel healthy. 

Convenience vs cost

While social media outrage around rising platform fees is palpable, industry experts suggest that actual consumer behaviour tells a more nuanced story. 

“People aren’t going to get off their couch and drive out for a few extra rupees. Convenience, once adopted, is remarkably sticky,” said Shenoy.

At the same time, this willingness to pay has its limits. Lande pointed out that while Indian consumers, especially in urban markets, are increasingly comfortable paying for convenience, they are also becoming more value-conscious. 

“A large segment will continue ordering despite higher fees, but they will become more selective. This could mean lower ordering frequency, more price comparisons across platforms, or a shift toward direct ordering options where the overall cost is lower,” he explained.

From a brand perspective, this behaviour signals stability, but not unchecked growth. The demand is holding, but the nature of consumption looks to be evolving.

Over the long term, experts believe the market will absorb reasonable convenience fees. However, sustained or aggressive increases could gradually nudge consumers to reassess their choices and explore alternative channels.