By Somya Panwar
A Coimbatore resident has set off a storm on social media after pointing out that his Swiggy order turned out to be almost 81% costlier than walking down to the same restaurant just a couple of kilometres away.
The customer, Sunder (@SunderjiJB on X), shared screenshots comparing the two bills, highlighting the stark difference. “Hey @Swiggy, please explain. Why does ordering food on the app cost 81% more than buying the same food from the outlet just 2 km away? Is this the real cost of convenience?” he wrote, adding that he ended up paying an extra ₹663 for delivery.
According to his post, the Swiggy order came to ₹1,473, while the same meal directly from the restaurant cost him only ₹810. The post clearly struck a chord amassing over 2.1 million views and igniting debates about delivery charges and platform pricing.
When contacted, Swiggy reiterated its long-standing position: prices on the platform are set by restaurants, not by the delivery company. In earlier statements, Swiggy Cares has clarified, “There may be a difference between in-store and online prices, but the discretion lies with the restaurant.”
The complaint comes at a time when food delivery platforms have been quietly increasing their platform fees. Swiggy has raised its fee three times in three weeks, now charging ₹15 (inclusive of GST) per order. Rival Zomato has hiked its fee by 20%, to ₹12 per order (exclusive of GST).
Given Swiggy handles nearly 20 lakh orders a day, that fee alone earns the company almost ₹3 crore daily. Zomato, with 23–25 lakh daily orders, brings in a similar figure.
Why are fees going up?
Despite robust revenues, both Swiggy and Zomato continue to face financial strain, especially from their quick commerce ventures Instamart and Blinkit which demand high operational costs.
For consumers, this means delivery is no longer just about the cost of food and a small delivery fee. Bills now come padded with platform fees, packaging charges, surges, restaurant charges and GST, all stacked up as part of the “real cost of convenience.”