As quick commerce gains popularity, offering everything from groceries to niche products in under 30 minutes, a long queue of brands is waiting to get onboard. But the waiting list for some of these brands is becoming unmanageably long, leaving them frustrated and exploring alternative routes.
Experts estimate that the onboarding process for quick commerce platforms like Zepto, Blinkit, BBNow and Swiggy Instamart takes anywhere between two to six months. In extreme cases, the wait can stretch beyond a year.
“Established brands may experience delays due to the larger scale and scrutiny involved in their evaluation process, while newer brands often face even longer wait times as they work to establish credibility in a crowded market,” said Somdutta Singh, founder and CEO of Assiduus and an investor with Karma Holdings.
Quick commerce platforms are under immense pressure to scale quickly while maintaining a curated product mix. This has made their evaluation and onboarding processes more stringent. Founders say these platforms prioritise brands that demonstrate strong sales performance, significant market presence and robust consumer demand, leaving less room for smaller or newer players.
“Newer brands have to navigate a multi-step process starting with evaluation forms, followed by scrutiny from category managers. Even after approval, negotiating commission rates – which range from 30% to 45% – adds another layer of complexity,” said one D2C founder. By comparison, legacy FMCG brands reportedly pay commissions below 20%, giving them an advantage.
Some brands attempt to bypass the long wait with industry references or by spending heavily on platform-specific marketing. “Spending Rs 4–5 lakh on promotional activities, such as free samples or product listing optimisation, can expedite the process,” said a founder. However, he added that this comes with a risk. “Brands on trial are judged based on how well their free samples perform. Failing to meet expectations can result in losing the slot permanently.”
For fledgling brands with limited awareness and resources, this trial system is a gamble. “We were advised to return once we had monthly sales of Rs 50–60 lakh. But how can we achieve that without being on these platforms?” the founder asked.
Besides high commissions, brands incur significant costs for visibility on quick commerce platforms. Marketing spends, including deep discounting, further strain resources. For established brands, direct-to-consumer (D2C) channels or logistics providers like Zippee and Velocity offer a viable alternative. “Direct quick deliveries save 20–30% in commissions and fees, which can be reinvested to enhance customer experience and expand delivery capabilities,” noted a D2C brand Snitch in a previous interaction.
However, for newer brands, quick commerce remains essential. “It’s the fastest way for startups like ours to grow from zero to 10 and then scale to 100,” said another founder, emphasising that quick commerce is their best bet for reaching initial milestones before transitioning to D2C or offline channels.
Deep Bajaj, an angel investor and quick commerce expert, pointed out that the real bottleneck for these platforms lies in space constraints at their dark stores, designed for hyperlocal deliveries. “While larger storage formats may emerge in the future, the current model depends on curated product selections tailored to specific store demand,” he said.
This limited storage makes it critical for platforms to maintain a fine balance between product variety and operational efficiency. “Overstocking items that don’t sell disrupts inventory management and hurts unit economics,” Bajaj added.
Despite the challenges, the attraction of quick commerce continues to grow. The number of users in India, currently around 26.2 million, is projected to reach 60.6 million by 2029.