Views

Dunzo investment thesis

Why I wouldn’t invest in the online hyperlocal delivery startup

Summary

  • Dunzo is an on-demand parcel delivery startup founded in 2016, clocking $100MN+ GMV
  • It has improved its unit economics & built strong network effects from its logistics network, merchants, & customers
  • Indians are slowly but surely realizing convenience & willing to pay more for deliveries; food, grocery, medicine are large verticals
  • Merchant delivery marketplace is big with high growth but competition is fierce amongst demand aggregators (Zomato, Swiggy, BigBasket, Grofers, Jio, Amazon) 
  • There’s uncertainty around true TAM, GMV post discounts, unit economics of food vs merchant delivery, & post-Covid retention
  • Leadership in delivery costs a moat in the “winner takes most” type of market

Problem

  • Users want to save time & need “runners” who they can rely on for small, daily life tasks 
    • 25MN high-income users culturally habitual to the convenience of “do this task for me”
  • 50MN+ merchants having a limited online presence, limited by ways to do home delivery 
    • Tech barrier hinders unorganized merchants from engaging with users online
    • Owning logistics is expensive & profitable only at a scale 
    • Users find it hard to discover merchants & get stuff delivered 
  • 140MN two-wheelers (120MN owners) are underutilized assets with owners looking for additional income
    • ~1MN partners working with delivery platforms

Solution

  • Dunzo is an on-demand logistics company, acting as an intermediary between local merchants & buyers who want things delivered at home
    • A managed marketplace where Dunzo “owns” discovery, logistics, & payments
    • Users can order chores or purchases from listed merchants using the app

Market

  • Demand
    • $700BN physical retail (90% unorganized)
    • 20MN+ daily retail transactions (90% offline)
    • Delivery: food ($6.5BN), grocery ($3BN), medicines ($1BN)
  • Supply
    • 13MN kiranas ($600BN turnover), 150K+ restaurants, 10MN street vendors ($4BN)
    • Intracity road logistics ($20BN)

Important metrics

  • 8 cities, 11K merchants, 10K delivery partners, 5MN users, 25 mins delivery time
  • Annual GMV grew 5X to $100MN; ~20% returns/cancellations
  • Annual orders grew ~4X to 14.5MN
  • Annual revenue grew ~4X to $15MN
  • Unit economics (per order)
    • AOV = $6.9, merchant take rate = 10% of AOV, delivery fees = 5-10% of AOV
    • Revenue = $1.1, variable cost = $7.4 (delivery = $4.5) -> losing $6.3/order
  • EBITDA negative 11X of the revenue 
  • Cash burn $46MN (FY20); spent $13 to earn $1
  • To become a $10BN business it needs $1BN revenue: 1BN orders (2.8MN/day); assuming 10 deliveries/partner/day -> 280K delivery partners

Positive signals

  • Contribution margin positive in pin codes in Bangalore; Chennai & Mumbai market maturing
    • Easier to operate in dense areas with short distances 
  • Successfully acquires & retains customers
    • Low CAC (acquired 700K users through word of mouth) & high retention (80%) -> high LTV:CAC
    • ~70% orders from repeat users. Monthly ARPU/repeat user up by 3X
    • High order frequency from power users -> top 1% users Dunzo twice/day
  • Growing AOV ($6.9) vs Zomato ($5.5), Swiggy ($5)
  • Powerful flywheel effects

Challenges

  • Hyperlocal startups succumb to death/pivot due to negative unit economics
    • Grofers pivoted from marketplace to inventory-led
  • Blitzscaling approach by competitors, deploying capital without much regard for economics
  • Low margins & high continual cash burn makes profitability a far fetched reality
    • Low AOV, discounts, cancellations/returns, affect the bottomline on the balance sheet
    • Expected contribution margin/order ~5%
  • Aggregating demand across verticals for maximum capacity utilization to lower delivery costs 

The rationale for not investing

  • A strong reason for existence
    • Solving high-frequency problem & saving time for users, executing complex chores & P2P tasks
  • BUT market size for chores unknown & unit economics varies for food vs merchant delivery
    • Negative gross margins with no clear sight of profitability
  • Tough to scale & assume cost leadership in the current market structure
    • Need to aggregate demand in adjacent verticals to minimize delivery costs
    • Large competitors better positioned with consolidated demand in “winner take most” type market
The following two tabs change content below.
Rohit Manchanda

Rohit Manchanda

In pursuit of understanding the new worlds around me. I use writing as a way to deep dive into trends or observations within technology, startups, or markets that I’m learning about.
Rohit Manchanda

Latest posts by Rohit Manchanda (see all)