The American multinational technology giant Microsoft Corp is internationally known for its computer software, personal computers, consumer electronics, and related services. Microsoft was founded by Bill Gates and Paul Allen on April 4, 1975. They rose to popularity during the 1980s by dominating the personal computer operating system market with MS-DOS.
Even today, Microsoft continues to be one of the big five American information technology companies, along with Amazon, Apple, Google, and Meta. While we continue to use a lot of Microsoft’s products and services, little do we know about the failed launches of the firm. This article will focus on the failed products so as to understand the evolution of Microsoft as a company in a more holistic manner, which is not usually done due to the over-emphasis on the products that did well in the market.
Low adoption; lost to Google Assistant, Siri, and Alexa.
1. Zune
Failed Microsoft Products – Microsoft Zune
To compete with the Apple iPod, Microsoft launched a new brand of digital media products called Zune. The Microsoft Zune was launched in November 2006, which included portable media players, media player software that was specifically designed for Windows PCs, and a unique music subscription service, which was named Zune Music Pass.
However, the brand did not fare well in the industry, to the extent that it took two years for them to sell 2 million units. It was shut down due to a lack of profitability in June 2012.
2. Kin
Failed Microsoft Products – Microsoft Kin
While the digital market was going crazy over the release of various kinds of mobile phones, Microsoft, in its attempt to address the contemporary tech trends, launched two mobile phones that were named Kin One and Kin Two.
Despite all the perks that they boasted about the Kin phones, they did not support games and apps that could be downloaded. This was a very bad setback in contrast to the iPhones that were having a breakthrough in the history of mobile phones through the introduction of their App Store in 2008. Unsurprisingly, Microsoft had to stop selling its Kin due to very poor sales, which are rumoured to be less than 10,000 units.
It was released as a special millennium edition operating system after Windows 98 in September 2000. Windows Millennium is deemed to be one of the worst OS that Microsoft ever launched. It had severe crashing issues and faced incompatibility with various popular applications that functioned well on Windows 98. Microsoft had to roll back the OS within one year of its release.
4. Microsoft Bob
Failed Microsoft Products – Microsoft Bob
It was launched in 1995 as a graphical user interface that was meant for Windows 3.1 and Windows 95. The intention was to provide a more nuanced user interface for the users. However, the product did not run well in the market. They were largely criticised for the price, and Microsoft had to roll it back by 1996.
5. Microsoft Portrait
Failed Microsoft Products – Microsoft Portrait
Microsoft Portrait was a video conferencing platform developed by Microsoft during the 1990s. Low internet consumption was the USP of this platform that came way before Skype and FaceTime. However, the product was called back and considered one of the worst Microsoft products. It is an irony to note that the once-flop idea is a billion-dollar industry now.
6. Microsoft Lumia Smartphones
Failed Microsoft Products – Microsoft Lumia
Microsoft acquired Nokia for $7 billion in 2014, which gave them ownership of the Lumia smartphones. It was speculated that the Lumia line of smartphones would be a flagship phone that would run on Windows software. However, they soon became unpopular due to their bad features and lack of competitiveness with respect to the rival phones. By 2017, their quarterly revenue dropped to $5 million.
7. MSN
Failed Microsoft Products – MSN
MSN was launched in 1999 to be a significant competitor in the instant messaging software market. It had more than 330 million active users every month during its zenith. However, Microsoft had to discontinue MSN due to the dispute between the TOM company that maintained MSN from China and Skype. The product was discontinued in 2014.
MSN TV was launched by Microsoft after it bought WebTV Networks in 1995. It used a television for display and was supported by online services. It was a perfect alternative for people who were looking for a computer with internet access. However, they had to discontinue this product over controversies and inconsistencies by 2013.
Microsoft entered into tablet business in the year 2012, and that was when it launched Surface RT and Surface Pro into the market. Although the Surface Pro was a successful product, Surface RT did not fare well. It was basically because of the fact that apps had to be written specifically for Surface RT to be more consumer-friendly. This confused consumers and dismayed app creators. Microsoft bailed on Surface RT in 2013, which led to the biggest sell-off of Microsoft’s shares after 200,9, which wiped out over $34 billion in market value.
10. Windows 8
Microsoft Failed Products – Windows 8
Windows 8, which was released in 2012, was an attempt by Microsoft to gain stronger market dominance in the field of personal computers as they were growing more insignificant with the popularity of tablets and smartphones.
Amongst other features, one of the most highlighted features was its new interface that featured touch-friendly tiles. However, the users and critics did not receive it well. They removed the start menu, which was introduced with Windows 95 and received widespread criticism for it.
Some of the critics even called this operating system a “Colossal blunder”. People found it difficult to work with this OS, especially while not using the touchscreen facilities. Satya Nadella, the CEO of Microsoft at that time, even admitted that there were things that went wrong in the OS. Through the introduction of Windows 10 and the start menu with it, Microsoft tried to mitigate the harm done to its reputation that Windows 8 caused.
11. Windows Vista
Microsoft Failures – Windows Vista
After launching Microsoft’s popular operating system Windows XP, they launched Windows Vista in November 2006. However, it became another flop just like Windows ME. It had lots of glitches and was slow. Apart from that, its hardware and software had incompatibility issues, which were in addition to high prices. The security issues and other incapabilities further eroded its reputation, which made this OS end up like another black spot in the history of Microsoft.
12. Microsoft Office Assistant (Clippy)
Microsoft Failures – Clippy
Long before the launch of the Amazon Assistant named Alexa, Microsoft launched its office assistant named Clippy in the year 1997 as an added service to the updated version of Office 97 till 2003.
Apart from the newly born technology, it failed to gain recognition from users, and in the end, Microsoft had to end it with the launch of Office XP. With the introduction of new technology, we can assume it to be favoured by some; however, it is considered a failed product on a larger scale.
Clippy was developed as an office assistant; however, there was no user data collection done by Clippy. Due to this, Clippy failed to gain the trust of people and their acknowledgment. There was a great gap in user interaction with Clippy due to a lack of knowledge of Artificial Intelligence.
13. Microsoft Internet Explorer 6
Microsoft Failed Products – Internet Explorer 6
Undoubtedly, the term “Internet Explorer 6” is an acknowledged term. However, when the talk is about loyal users, Internet Explorer 6 has earned. The answer can be avoided because of its failure. Internet Explorer 6 was introduced in the year 2001 along with the launch of Windows XP.
It was launched to provide a safe and free experience of web surfing. However, it failed to gain users and was replaced with newly launched services termed Microsoft Internet Explorer 7.
Microsoft failed to follow the guidelines provided by the World Wide Web Consortium, causing different visualizations of web pages on Internet Explorer than in their original form. They also failed to focus and improve the services given by Internet Explorer, hence losing the trust of users. The security provided by Internet Explorer was also not up to mark. and is considered one of Microsoft notable failures.
14. Microsoft Groove Music
Microsoft Failed Products – Groove Music
Just like the popular music platforms available now, such as Spotify and Amazon Music Unlimited, Microsoft had also launched its in-house music platform, Groove Music, launched in 2012 and was discontinued in the year 2017. Grove Music was earlier made as an additional service given to monthly music pass holders of Zune.
After the fall of Zune, Groove was tagged as Xbox Music and given as an additional service to Xbox users. In 2015, Groove Music was renamed to its original tag and was provided as an unlimited music streaming platform at its original price. Groove Music was one of the complete platforms due to its services and compatibility with different devices.
The moves taken by Microsoft were quite lagging as the competition in the same field was too stiff to catch up. Even though Groove was a complete service, there was nothing eye-catching about it to attract users to it.
15. TerraServer
Microsoft Failure List – TerraServer
Google Maps is the source of finding unknown locations easily. Long before Google even gave rise to its idea, Microsoft launched a satellite-provided image of Earth. TerraServer was launched in 1997 and discontinued in 1999.
At that time, TerraServer was the first program capable of showing neighbourhood houses with detailed information. It was the first of the best technologies invented by Microsoft. TerraServer did manage to catch the attention of the audience, but failed to survive the interest.
Most of the feedback received by TerraServer was from local users commenting on the images of their houses and neighbourhood. They failed to provide the aim behind creating such a great innovation, as was later done by Google Maps.
16. Microsoft Band
Microsoft Failures – Microsoft Band
Recently, there has been a growing trend of smartwatches seen by people of all ages. Years back in the trend, Microsoft launched its wearable band consisting of multiple inbuilt Technologies such as fitness tracker features, health-oriented capabilities, compatibility with different devices, etc. The band was launched in 2014 and discontinued in 2016. With the closure of the band, Microsoft gave refunds to its lifelong customers.
Even though the band was launched with the best technology, it was not able to survive in the market. Some reports suggest that the belt attached to the watch was weak and needed to be replaced after some time by Microsoft. The band was almost the best in the technical aspect; however, the band design was not appealing enough to attract users towards it.
17. Cortana
Microsoft Failed Products – Cortana
Cortana was Microsoft’s voice assistant, named after the AI character from the Halo video game. It was first made for Windows Phone and later added to Windows 10, Xbox, Skype, Teams, and even iPhones and Alexa.
Microsoft used the same voice actress from the Halo games to make Cortana sound real. But even with a cool voice, most people didn’t use it. It never made it to smart speakers and wasn’t as helpful as Alexa or Google Assistant.
In 2019, Satya Nadella said Cortana was just a helper for Microsoft, not a competitor. Over time, Microsoft removed Cortana from all devices. By 2024, it was completely gone, replaced by Microsoft Copilot.
All these Microsoft fails can never be considered a setback for Microsoft. It was all a learning experience that has only led the company to design and launch better products. Beginning as a lone company in the personal computer market and continuing to be one of the major players in the market even after competition and options soared tells a lot about the commendable way in which Microsoft learns from its mistakes and evolves.
FAQs
What is Microsoft’s biggest failure?
Microsoft Lumia, Zune, Kin, MSN, Microsoft Band, Groove Music, and Microsoft Bob are some of the biggest failures of Micorosft.
What is Microsoft’s most popular product?
The Windows operating system is the most popular product of Microsoft.
What are Microsoft failed projects?
Microsoft has launched many products over the years, but not all were successful. The Zune failed to beat the iPod, while Kin phones lasted just weeks due to poor features. Windows Phone struggled without enough apps and was shut down in 2017. Operating systems like Windows Vista and Windows 8 were disliked for being buggy or confusing. Projects like Microsoft Bob, Cortana, and Groove Music also failed to win users. Devices like the Microsoft Band and services like MSN TV were either ahead of their time or quickly became outdated.
What is Microsoft overhaul top after series failures?
After many failures, Microsoft changed its focus under CEO Satya Nadella. It moved from failed products to cloud (Azure), AI (Copilot), and useful tools like Teams. This shift helped Microsoft grow strong again and become one of the top tech companies.
In the annals of mobile phone history, Nokia once reigned supreme with its robust devices and iconic brand. However, as the smartphone revolution took hold, Nokia’s fortunes took a sharp turn, leading to a notable decline in its market share and influence. The fall of such a prominent industry leader begs the question: What were the reasons behind Nokia’s failure? What is Nokia’s failure story?
This post focuses on the reasons why Nokia failed after enjoying unrivaled dominance in the mobile segment for several years. The ferocious and mighty telecom giant Nokia was well known for its products’ hardware and battery life. By understanding the lessons from Nokia’s failure story, we can gain valuable insights into the rapidly evolving landscape of the technology industry and the critical importance of adaptation and innovation.
For years, it was the talk of the town. User satisfaction with Nokia’s mobiles was globally recognized. The company launched the first internet-enabled phone in 1996, and by the start of the millennium, Nokia had also released a touch-screen mobile prototype.
This was the start of a revolution in the mobile phone industry. The Finnish giant was the largest cell phone maker in 1998. Nokia overtook Motorola, a move that was hard to predict. So, what led to the downfall of Nokia? It wasn’t a single factor but a myriad of reasons, most of which resulted from Nokia’s resistance to change. We present to you the main reasons behind Nokia’s failure.
In the fast-paced world of technology, companies that fail to adapt to changing trends and consumer demands can quickly find themselves left behind. Nokia, once synonymous with mobile phone supremacy, experienced a significant downfall due to its resistance to smartphone evolution. As competitors embraced the shift towards smartphones, Nokia’s reluctance to fully embrace this revolution became one of the key reasons for its failure.
Nokia failed to take advantage of the Android bandwagon. When mobile phone manufacturers were busy improving and working on their smartphones, Nokia remained stubborn. Samsung soon launched its Android-based range of phones that were cost-effective and user-friendly.
Nokia’s management was under the impression that people wouldn’t accept touchscreen phones and would continue with the QWERTY keypad layout. This misapprehension was the start of its downfall. Nokia never considered Android as an advancement and neither wanted to adopt the Android operating system.
After realizing the market trends, Nokia introduced its Symbian operating system, which was used in its smartphones. It faced usability issues and lacked the app support and developer ecosystem that rival platforms like iOS and Android offered. The clunky user experience and limited app selection hampered Nokia’s ability to compete effectively. Also, it was too late by then, with Apple and Samsung having cemented their positions. It was difficult for the Symbian operating system to make any inroads. This is the biggest reason behind Nokia’s downfall.
Nokia was slow to recognize the potential of smartphones and the shift from feature phones to touchscreen devices. They failed to anticipate the demand for devices with advanced capabilities, such as app ecosystems and touch interfaces. This led to a loss of market share to competitors like Apple’s iPhone and Android-based smartphones.
The Deal With Microsoft
Another reason for Nokia’s failure was the ill-timed deal with the tech giant Microsoft. The company sold itself to Microsoft at a time when the software behemoth was fraught with losses.
Nokia’s sales screamed the mobile phone maker’s inability to survive on its own. At the same time, Apple and Samsung were making significant strides in innovation and technological developments.
It was too late for Nokia to adapt to the dynamic and rigorous changes in the market. Microsoft’s acquisition of Nokia is considered to be one of the biggest blunders and wasn’t fruitful for either side.
The partnership limited Nokia’s ability to differentiate itself and left it dependent on Microsoft’s success in the mobile industry. The Windows Phone platform struggled to gain traction, further impacting Nokia’s market position. This case study provides valuable lessons for businesses considering similar alliances and emphasizes the importance of aligning visions, complementary strengths, and adaptable strategies.
Nokia’s Failed Marketing Strategies
Nokia Net Sales Worldwide, 2011-2024
Marketing plays a crucial role in shaping a brand’s success and perception. In the case of Nokia, its decline can be attributed, in part, to failed marketing strategies that hindered its ability to compete effectively in the mobile phone market.
One notable misstep in Nokia’s marketing approach was its unsuccessful implementation of umbrella branding. Companies like Apple and Samsung successfully adopted the umbrella branding model, with flagship products like the iPhone and Samsung Galaxy series acting as the focal point for expanding their product lines. However, Nokia failed to follow suit and capitalize on the umbrella branding strategy, missing out on the opportunity to create a cohesive and recognizable brand identity.
Additionally, Nokia’s marketing efforts struggled to maintain the user trust that the company had built over the years. Inefficient selling and distribution methods further eroded consumer confidence and made it difficult for Nokia to reach its target audience effectively.
While Nokia attempted to regain momentum by introducing hardware and software innovations, these offerings were often late to the market and lacked the uniqueness that would have set them apart from competitors. Rivals had already released similar features and devices, diminishing Nokia’s ability to capture consumers’ attention and regain market share.
The failure of Nokia’s marketing and distribution strategies played a significant role in its ultimate decline and exit from the mobile industry market. Without a strong brand identity, effective distribution channels, and timely innovations, Nokia struggled to compete with rivals who had successfully aligned their marketing strategies with evolving consumer preferences and market dynamics.
Nokia’s failure to keep pace with changing technology and trends played a significant role in its decline. While the company had earned a reputation for its hardware, it didn’t prioritize its software lineup, which proved to be a crucial oversight.
Initially, Nokia was cautious about embracing technical advancements to mitigate the risks associated with introducing innovative features to its phones. However, this approach hindered the company’s ability to adapt to the rapidly evolving market.
The business needed diversification, but it was too late by the time Nokia realized this. Instead of being amongst the early initiators, Nokia transitioned when almost every major brand had already started producing awesome phones.
This case study shows Nokia’s failure to keep up with changing technology and its delayed response to industry trends significantly contributed to its downfall.
Internal Issues in the Company
Internal issues played a significant role in Nokia’s downfall. Frequent disagreements within management on strategy and execution led to uncoordinated efforts and reduced the effectiveness of decision-making.
The company’s once-innovative business culture grew more rigid hampering creativity and slowing its ability to respond to market changes. Continuous leadership changes only deepened internal conflicts.
With shifting strategies and no clear direction, Nokia lost its unified vision, leading to confusion and inefficiency. These internal struggles were a key factor in the company’s decline.
Overestimation Of Strength
Nokia overestimated its brand value. The company believed that even after the late launch of its smartphones, people would still flock to stores and purchase Nokia-manufactured phones. This turned out to be a misconception, as consumer preferences had shifted towards other brands.
People still make predictions that Nokia will retain the market leadership if it uses better software at its core. However, this is far from the truth, as seen today.
The company got stuck with its software system, which is known to have several bugs and clunks. Nokia felt its previous glory would help alleviate any sort of trouble. Unfortunately, things didn’t play out that way.
Unfortunately, the market dynamics had changed, and consumers were no longer willing to overlook the shortcomings of Nokia’s software. Competitors had surpassed Nokia in terms of user experience and software innovation, leaving Nokia struggling to regain its position.
Nokia’s lack of innovation in its products significantly contributed to its failure case study. While brands like Samsung and Apple came up with advanced phones every year, Nokia simply launched the Windows phone with basic features, failing to keep up with the industry’s rapid progress..
The Nokia Lumia series was a jump-start measure, but even that collapsed due to a lack of innovation. The unattractive and dull features didn’t help. In the era of 4G, Nokia didn’t even have 3G-enabled phones. Nokia also came up with the Asha series, but it was game over by then.
Wrong decisions and risk aversion brought about the decline of the mobile giant. Nokia refrained from adopting the latest tech. Nokia’s failure became a powerful case study that made organizations realize the importance of continuous evolution and enhancements. The journey of what was once the world’s best mobile phone company to losing it all by 2013 is quite tragic. Nokia’s failure was not solely due to its lack of innovation but also its shortcomings in leadership and guidance. These factors, combined with its inability to adapt to market demands and technological advancements, sealed the company’s fate.
Organizational Restructuring at Nokia
Nokia underwent a sudden and significant organizational shift by adopting a matrix structure driven by enhancing agility within the company. However, this abrupt change resulted in dissatisfaction among stakeholders, particularly as key individuals in top management departed from the organization. These individuals, who had played instrumental roles in establishing Nokia as a leading company, were no longer part of the decision-making process.
The shift to a matrix structure also brought about internal challenges, as stability in top management, a crucial element for organizational coherence, was disrupted. Over just five years, Nokia experienced two CEO replacements, preventing employees from fully adapting to new leadership goals and visions. The frequent leadership changes created instability and hindered consistent strategic direction. The lack of continuity in leadership contributed to employee dissatisfaction and impacted the overall cohesiveness of the organization. Employees and other stakeholders found it challenging to align with successive CEOs, leading to a breakdown in communication and a sense of disconnect within the company.
The Symbian vs. MeeGo OS Dilemma at Nokia
Nokia’s problem arose when its R&D division underwent a split, with one faction dedicated to enhancing the Symbian operating system and the other focused on developing MeeGo. Nokia’s failure story is largely attributed to its outdated OS, as the company stuck with Symbian OS for too long, ignoring the growing dominance of Android and iOS. The competing claims of superiority between the two teams led to internal friction, causing delays in the release of new phones. The company grappled with the challenge of harmonizing divergent technological directions, impacting its ability to bring innovative products to market in a timely manner. This internal competition within the R&D division created a complex dynamic, hindering Nokia’s efficiency and potentially affecting its competitive edge in the rapidly evolving smartphone market.
Nokia’s downfall can be attributed to its failure to analyze market trends and adjust its strategy accordingly. The company neglected the burgeoning smartphone market, ultimately missing a significant opportunity for growth. Rather than capitalizing on this evolving landscape, Nokia could have revitalized its position by enhancing its existing software, such as Symbian. Unfortunately, the lack of strategic foresight and adaptability led to a missed chance to stay competitive in the dynamic tech industry.
Moreover, the oversight in market analysis and strategic planning eroded Nokia’s market share and diminished its relevance in the rapidly changing consumer electronics landscape. The company’s reluctance to pivot and innovate in response to market dynamics ultimately contributed to its decline in the face of evolving consumer preferences and technological advancements.
Poor Strategic Decisions
Nokia’s management made key strategic errors, including underestimating the shift toward lifestyle-driven smartphones like the iPhone and overvaluing the demand for mobile phones and cameras as standalone products. The company was slow to adapt to the growing importance of software ecosystems and app-based user experiences. As competitors embraced innovation, Nokia struggled to keep pace, eventually losing its dominant position in the mobile market.
Summary of Nokia’s Downfall
Cause
Impact
Ignored smartphone trends
Fell behind Apple and Android
Stuck with outdated Symbian OS
User experience lagged behind competitors
Poor leadership decisions
Delayed innovation, weak developer ecosystem
Microsoft partnership (Windows)
Failed to gain traction against Android/iOS
Underestimated importance of apps
Weak app store ecosystem compared to Apple App Store and Google Play
Fragmented product lineup
Confused customers and diluted brand value
Inconsistent marketing
Failed to excite global markets compared to Apple/Samsung hype
Focused on hardware, not software
Missed the shift to integrated software-hardware experiences
Internal bureaucracy
Slowed decision-making and innovation
Failure to attract developers
Limited app ecosystem, especially for Windows Phone platform
Late adoption of touchscreen tech
Competitors set new user expectations
Conclusion
The fall of Nokia company can be attributed to a combination of factors that hindered its ability to adapt, innovate, and stay competitive in the mobile phone market. The resistance to smartphone evolution, missed opportunities, ineffective marketing strategies, and the deal with Microsoft all contributed to its downfall. Ultimately, Nokia’s decline serves as a reminder of the importance of staying agile, embracing change, and continuously evolving to meet consumer demands.
FAQs
Why did Nokia fail?
Not switching to Android, lack of innovation, not upgrading the software, and overestimating the brand value were some of the reasons that led to Nokia’s failure.
What is Nokia?
Nokia is a consumer electronics company popular for its mobile phones. It is one of the largest mobile phone manufacturers in the world.
Is Nokia still around?
Yes, the company is still running, but it has shut down some of its plants.
What happened to Nokia?
Once a dominant force, Nokia clung to outdated software, allowing Android and iOS to surge ahead, leaving the brand lagging. Despite its focus on new technologies, Nokia’s legacy now lives on in the realm of Android.
Why Nokia company failed to compete with Samsung and Apple?
Nokia didn’t adopt Android and focused on its hardware more than its software, which is why it failed to compete against Samsung and Apple.
Are there any new Nokia smartphones coming in the near future?
Though Nokia might seem dominant on the phone front, the company occasionally comes up with some new phones/smartphone devices. Here are some of the Nokia smartphones that are likely to be launched in 2022:
Nokia 2760 Flip 4G
Nokia C21 Plus
Nokia 6.4
Nokia Suzume
Nokia C2 2nd Edition
Nokia C21
Who took over Nokia?
Nokia phones were robust and dependable companions of the pre-smartphone era. However, Nokia’s Java and Windows phones failed to stand out in the market dominated by Apple and Android phones. The Android phone manufacturing companies like Samsung, LG, HTC, Sony, Motorola, and other Chinese smartphone developers like MI, Realme, Oppo, Vivo, and the Apple IOS devices took over Nokia in the mobile sector.
What lessons can other businesses learn from Nokia’s failure?
Nokia’s failure highlights the importance of embracing change, anticipating market trends, and continuously innovating to meet customer expectations. It underscores the need for effective marketing strategies, strategic partnerships, and an unwavering commitment to adaptation and innovation in today’s rapidly evolving business landscape.
Was Nokia’s lack of innovation a significant factor in its decline?
Yes, Nokia’s lack of innovation in its product lineup played a significant role in its downfall. The company failed to keep pace with rivals who consistently introduced advanced devices and embraced evolving market demands, which resulted in Nokia losing its competitive edge.
Why did Nokia fail in India?
Nokia lost its phone industry dominance by sticking to outdated software, missing the smartphone revolution, and experiencing a significant sell-off. Despite not going out of business, Nokia’s cautionary tale highlights the vital role of innovation in a rapidly evolving tech landscape, with the company still present in network tech and patents.
Why Nokia stopped making phones?
Nokia stopped making phones because it failed to keep up with smartphones. It stuck with old software (Symbian), reacted slowly to iPhone and Android, and lost market share. Microsoft bought its phone business in 2014.
Naturally, one of the world’s largest and most influential firms would prefer to sweep any rare mistakes and misfires under the rug and claim they never occurred.
Amazon originally started when founder Jeff Bezos began selling ebooks from his basement in Washington. It is presently the world’s largest online marketplace. So, you can understand Jeff’s desire to focus on his company’s incredible triumph rather than explaining the occasional failure.
Jeff’s failings are treated with refreshing candor. He’s more than willing to discuss how he lost billions on failed business projects. It’s all part of his vast master plan, and he doesn’t think it’s a big deal to take large chances that sometimes backfire. And, as the firm expands, everything has to double, including the magnitude of your unsuccessful trials, according to him. You won’t be created at a scale that will genuinely shift the dial if the size of your flops doesn’t expand.
That’s great news since Amazon has had its fine dose of flops, turkeys, and wrecks over the years. But it’s nice to know that none of them is causing Jeff any sleepless nights. So, let’s look at Amazon failures with a list of failed products:
With the launching of a new smartphone, you’d expect that a firm like Amazon would be on relatively safe ground, given its popularity with Kindle gadgets, tablets, and streaming devices. This Fire phone seems to be the natural next step amid a flurry of marketing hoopla in 2014.
The new device is described by Jeff as “beautiful, elegant, and sophisticated.” The device’s four front cameras worked in tandem to offer a broader view, which was one of the phone’s best features. This effectively meant that the parallax effect was applied to your pics, giving them depth and a wonderful 3d feel.
So you could flaunt your plate of spaghetti bolognese at that hip new eatery. A similar approach might be used for Amazon products, enabling you to simulate that dazzling green mankini in spectacular 3d before making a purchase. Initially offered for $200 with a two-year contract. Sadly, it took several months for the rate to drop drastically to $0.99 cents, and Amazon still could transfer them.
Despite this, Amazon did not discreetly halt production, given the fact that the fire phone had shed 170 million dollars. So, what’s the issue? Well, Amazon stunned the industry by charging top-tier pricing for Kindle tablets and Fire TV. Amazon had built an image for offering top quality at cheap rates. Not only was it good, but it was also cost-effective.
The Fire phone’s upscale costs implied something was spectacular about Amazon’s new device, but there wasn’t; it looks tacky and a little unpleasant. Technically, the 3D stuff was great, but it was essentially a ploy. Amazon had arrived far too late to the game with an overpriced item that didn’t offer anything novel or beneficial, making Amazon Fire Phone one of the biggest failures of the company.
This time, there wasn’t such a blazing fire. It’s more of a smoldering ember.
Pets.com
Amazon Failed Products – Pets.com
Over the course of the year, Amazon has made several really smart investments, as well as a few bad ones. They poured money into the disastrous pets.com’s initial round of fundraising in 1999, yet only own 54% of the company. Simultaneously, the CEO of pets.com, Julie Wainwright, defined the corporate partnership as “a match made in heaven.” When the dot com bubble burst a year later in 2000, pets.com became the most well-known victim.
In the same year, Amazon put nearly $60 million into kozmo.com, a promising internet endeavor. Free one-hour shipping of DVDs, games, and books was made available via bicycle, van, and, most likely, skateboard.
Business insiders cautioned from the outset that the free shipping model would never be economically feasible for the firm, and it appears that they were true, as Kozmo did ultimately try to charge shipping costs, but it was too late to cancel the firm from going bankrupt, taking Amazon’s $60 million worth with it.
Askville
Amazon Failed Products – Askville by Amazon
In 2006, Amazon released Askville.com, which was one of the oddest Amazon products. Perhaps the loss of the Kozmo hasn’t been thoroughly learned. This was a fresh collaboration with Kozmo co-founder Joseph Park, who had come up with a novel plan for a user-driven Q&A portal where users could pose and reply to pressing topics of the day.
The notion wasn’t entirely awful, and it’s a model that later evolved into flourishing groups on sites like Quora. However, the Askville method was a little cringe-worthy, as it assumed that the portal needed to be more than just faqs to retain users. They devised a fun gamification concept in which players win or lose XP points based on the merit of their responses. Players were also urged to acquire quest gold, which could be traded for Gift vouchers or Askville shop items.
Finally, the overly convoluted concept fizzled out, leaving the comment sections essentially blank and meaningless. “Why does Amazon continue sponsoring askville.com?” was one of the last comments made on the site before the forums were permanently shut.
Say you’re using the Kindle app on your Android, and you’re in the middle of an Amazon-Apple verbal battle. You peruse a list of intriguing books. You finally make up your mind about which book you’ll read soon. You press the large, cheery buy now button, and the book is quickly installed on your phone. It’s that easy. That’s how apps were designed to work.
Now, imagine you’re on your iPhone, surfing the Kindle app. You peruse a list of enticing books. You finally decide which book to read next. You press the huge cheery buy now button and are forced to halt since you are unable to proceed. There’s no button because, in a bizarre twist of fate, you can’t buy books inside the iPhone version of the Kindle app.
The issue began when Apple demanded a 30% cut of all orders placed through its apps. Amazon was not pleased with this because they also required a part in writer earnings from each eBook sale, and paying Apple a 30% cut wasn’t gonna work. Sadly, the two business behemoths were unable to strike a deal.
Amazon attempted to avoid the app toll by embedding URLs to the Kindle app in their web-based Kindle store, ensuring that eBook purchases were not made inside the app.
When Apple tightened the regulations even more and disallowed external buy URLs, iPhone owners were put in the perplexing scenario of having to navigate and leave the app, seek the web edition of the shop, buy books, and then return to the app. On your iPhone, you can use the Amazon Kindle, which is insanely difficult and completely ludicrous.
However, given that the Kindle app was created to be a medium for acquiring and reading, the iPhone edition is among Amazon’s lengthiest flops, failing to meet half of its purpose.
Well, here is a brief live experience on Amazon. There was a high chance of victory, but he was yanked so swiftly that they’d just lost out if he blinked. Amazon Destination was the firm’s foray into the hotel reservation business, enabling weekend breaks and utopian escapes at regularly quoted costs.
Their hotel partners were ecstatic with the latest arrangement, noting a spike in traffic and reservations after using Amazon’s novel tool. The pricing wasn’t precisely bargained, but the notion was that Amazon’s massive internet persona might help place regular hotel ads in front of a far wider public than ever.
Widely expected to be a big leader in the OTA business, Amazon appeared to be on the correct path with this latest product but then abruptly disappeared from the web a few months later, like it took a tragic trip into the Bermuda Triangle.
Nobody knows why Amazon has been unusually quiet on the topic. We can surmise that Amazon’s new business was harmed by the rising presence of other key OTAs like Expedia. Some corporate analysts claim that a highly effective operator must devote their entire attention to the offering rather than being one of several other goods offered by the firm.
We’ll never know why Amazon destinations tend to drop so soon because Amazon hasn’t disclosed the numbers from this failed idea. One should probably post a query on Askville.com.
Is Amazon Prime Video Failing?
Amazon Local
Amazon Failed Products – Amazon Local
In 2011, Amazon developed a portal for localized discounts. The design was identical to Groupon and LivingSocial, both of which have struggled. Amazon stated in October that Amazon Local would close down on December 18th, 2015. It is one of the most disastrous failed Amazon products, highlighting the challenges companies may face when introducing new innovations to the market.
Amazon Wallet
Amazon shut down its digital wallet just six months after it was released in the spring of 2015. Users could save vouchers and loyalty cards on their phones to pay for in-store and e-shopping, but credit/ debit cards were not supported. Amazon still accepts electronic purchases through Pay with Amazon, but unlike Apple and Google, it doesn’t offer a user-facing wallet. This closure marked one of the notable failed Amazon products in the company’s history.
Amazon Local Register
Amazon Failed Products – Amazon Local Register
Local Register was a new effort to assist local shops in accepting payments via a smart card processing system. It was similar to Square’s and PayPal‘s, but it never gained traction, and Amazon announced in February 2016 that it would be discontinued.
TestDrive
Amazon Failed Products – Amazon Test Drive
This service was launched in 2011 and allows customers to try new apps before acquiring them from the Amazon App. The initiative was shuttered by Amazon in April, claiming a drop in demand and the recent surge of the “free to play” biz paradigm. This move marked one of the instances where Amazon fails to sustain a service due to shifting market trends and customer preferences.
Music Importer
Amazon Failed Products – Amazon Music Importer
In 2012, Amazon introduced the Music Importer, which allowed customers to import any tracks they’ve saved to their PC and build an online collection. However, Amazon then developed Prime Music, a similar-to-Spotify-and-Pandora-style streaming site that rendered Music Importer outdated. In October, Amazon notified the end of Music Importer.
Crucible
Amazon Failed Products – Crucible
Cruciblewas a free-to-play team-based shooter game developed and published by Amazon Game Studios. It was officially launched on May 20, 2020. It was Amazon’s first major original title published by their gaming division, which had previously focused on tablet games.
Several factors contributed to the failure of Crucible. Firstly, the game faced criticism for its lack of originality and failure to stand out in the competitive online gaming market. The gameplay mechanics were not well-received, and the game struggled to find its target audience. Additionally, technical issues and a lack of polish further hindered the player experience. The decision to revert the game to closed beta shortly after its initial release and ultimately discontinue it in November 2020 indicated that Amazon acknowledged the challenges and limitations of Crucible and chose to shift its focus elsewhere in the gaming industry.
Amazon Spark
Amazon Failed Products – Amazon Spark
Amazon Sparkwas a feature within the Amazon mobile app that allowed users to discover and shop for products through photos shared by other users. It was essentially a social shopping platform where customers could post pictures, write reviews, and engage with others in a social feed. It was launched in 2017 to replicate the influencer-driven social commerce experience of platforms like Instagram and Pinterest.
Spark failed to gain significant traction and was eventually shut down in 2019 due to a combination of factors: lack of authenticity, poor integration, limited reach, inadequate moderation, and a changing social media landscape. Amazon’s attempt to create a social media platform specifically for Prime members fell short due to its inauthenticity, poor integration with the overall Amazon shopping experience, limited reach to non-Prime members, ineffective moderation, and the rise of short-form video platforms that shifted user attention away from static image-based social commerce.
Amazon Restaurants
Amazon Failed Products – Amazon Restaurants
Amazon Restaurantswas a food delivery service offered by Amazon. It allowed customers to order food from local restaurants through the Amazon website or mobile app, and the service would facilitate the delivery. It was launched in 2015 in Seattle and gradually expanded to other cities in the United States and internationally. The service aimed to leverage Amazon’s vast logistics network and customer base to compete with other popular food delivery platforms.
Amazon Restaurants ceased operations in the United States in June 2019. The decision to shut down the service was attributed to intense competition in the food delivery industry, where other established players like Uber Eats, DoorDash, and Grubhub dominated the market with a 75% share of the US online delivery market. Amazon did offer free delivery to Prime members and a selection of 200 dining establishments, but this was not enough of a competitive advantage. Amazon likely found it challenging to capture a significant market share and achieve sustainable profitability in the face of such competition.
Amazon WebPay
Amazon WebPaywas a free-to-use online payment service launched by Amazon in 2007. It allowed users to send and receive money from friends and family, pay bills, and make online purchases. WebPay was designed to compete with other online payment services such as PayPal and Google Checkout. Amazon invested an estimated $10 million in WebPay in its first year of operation. The company hoped the service would attract new customers to its website and increase its share of the online payment market.
Despite Amazon’s backing, Amazon WebPay failed to gain traction in the competitive online payment market. The service’s high fees, limited features, poor marketing, and inability to keep up with the evolving industry landscape all contributed to its downfall. It failed to address customers’ requirements better than other services. In 2014, Amazon announced the closure of WebPay, acknowledging the challenges of competing in a crowded market and the importance of differentiation.
Amazon Dash Button
Amazon Failed Products – Amazon Dash Button
Amazon Dash Button was a physical, Wi-Fi-enabled device launched in March 2015 that allowed users to reorder specific products with the push of a button. Each button was associated with a particular product, such as laundry detergent or pet food. When pressed, the Dash Button would order that specific item through the user’s Amazon account.
Numerous issues resulted in the discontinuance of the Amazon Dash Buttons. Vice President of Amazon Daniel Rausch agreed that the idea of physical buttons for reordering was a terrific first step toward the linked home but that having more than 500 buttons for different things created an enormous obstacle. The physical buttons became redundant when the Amazon Prime app introduced Virtual Dash buttons as a more convenient option. Appliance manufacturers incorporated automated replenishment systems through the Dash Replenishment Service, which removed the requirement for manual ordering. The final factor contributing to Dash Buttons’ demise was Amazon’s Subscribe and Save program, which offered discounted recurring monthly deliveries. Consequently, in February 2019, Amazon formally terminated the Dash Button program.
Amazon Tap
Amazon Failed Products – Amazon Tap
Amazon Tap, launched in 2016, was a portable Bluetooth speaker with Alexa, requiring a tap to activate. Despite standard features like Wi-Fi and USB charging, it failed to gain popularity due to the lack of hands-free voice activation. Competing in a tough Bluetooth speaker market, users preferred other options for better sound quality. By 2018, Amazon discontinued the Tap, focusing instead on its successful “Alexa Everywhere” strategy, expanding Alexa beyond speakers. Meanwhile, the Echo Dot thrived, becoming Amazon’s best-selling product in 2019, while the Tap never saw a second generation.
Amazon Cloud Player
Amazon Failed Products – Amazon Cloud Player
Amazon Music Importer, launched in 2012, let users upload and stream music from the Amazon Cloud Player with 5GB of free storage. However, by 2015, streaming services like Spotify and Apple Music had taken over, reducing the need for MP3 collections. Amazon shut down Music Importer as users shifted to streaming, and its features were already integrated into the Amazon Music app, making it redundant.
Conclusion
The real kicker is that Amazon is indeed bracing for more setbacks ahead. Jeff seemed to like the prospect of losing large sums. “If you feel that’s a significant failure, we’re planning on even greater setbacks presently, and I’m not joking,” he said when questioned about the Fire phone screwup.
In the latest shareholder letter, Jeff mentioned that if Amazon periodically experiences mega-dollar fails, the company will explore the ideal scale for a firm of its size, emphasizing the need to learn from and navigate through any Amazon fails. Of course, such tests will not be undertaken lightly. We’ll try to place smart bets, but not all will pay off. Amazon product failures highlight how even major companies can struggle with innovation, as some products fail to meet user expectations or adapt to market changes.
I’m excited to see what incredibly amazing Amazon failures the company encounters in the next few years, as it will provide me with more content to blog about and analyze.
That’s all, folks, for today.
FAQs
What failures did Amazon endure?
Amazon Fire Phone, Pets.com, Askville, and Amazon Destinations are some of the biggest product failures of Amazon.
What year was Amazon founded?
Jeff Bezos founded Amazon in 1994.
Who is the owner of Amazon?
Jeff Bezos is the founder and former CEO of Amazon; he founded Amazon in 1994.
What is Jeff Bezos’s response to the failure of products?
Jeff Bezos responded that they are bracing for more setbacks ahead when questioned about the Fire phone screwup.
What are Amazon CEO notable failures?
Amazon CEOs have faced notable failures, including the Fire Phone, which failed due to poor sales, and the Amazon Tap, which lacked hands-free voice activation. Other missteps include the shutdown of Amazon Restaurants and the discontinuation of Dash Buttons, showing that even tech giants face challenges in innovation.
Why did Amazon Fire Phone fail?
One of the reasons Amazon Fire Phone failed is Amazon arrived far too late to the game with an overpriced item that didn’t offer anything novel or beneficial.
A well-known phrase in the advertising industry states, “When all else fails, use emotion. And when that seems a trifle out-of-sync proposition in the product category, rush to good ol’ mother’s love“.
In India, “maa ka pyaar” (a mother’s love) is a surefire winner. This is exactly what the snack brand “Hippo” did with its munchies variant. Initially, Parle Agro tried to tackle the global hunger issue with their product but then shifted their focus to selling it based on the promise of love and care.
However, none of the strategies could stop Parle Agro from discontinuing Hippo chips. In this article, we’ll examine the issues and failures that contributed to Hippo Chips’ demise and explore the causes of its failure.
Let’s discuss what happened to Hippo chips and why Hippo Chips failed.
Launched in 2009, Hippo Chips were a common snack found in lunchboxes and pantries all over the nation. Hippo Chips soared to fame and were well-known for their distinctive form and delightful crunch. But as time went on, the brand gradually disappeared, leaving people to wonder what went wrong.
Hippo’s packaging was larger than the average snack packet, with a giant hippo logo on the front, bright colours intended to stand out from the crowd, and distinct flavours. The word HIPPO was spelled out in big, bold letters to match the personality of the creature on the front of the packet, a hefty fat hippo.
Hippo Snacks were launched in the following flavors:
Chinese Manchurian
Indian Chatpatta
Hot-n-Sweet Tomato
Italian Pizza
Yoghurt Mint Chutney
Thai Chilli Cream
Afghani Tikka Masala
Greek Yogurt
The brand sought to be a guilt-free snack during hunger moments; hence, the tagline “Hippo Fights Hunger” was chosen. Hippo was promoted with ‘Hunger is the root of all evil. So, don’t go hungry.’
Hippo chips had several unique features that set them apart from other snacks:
They were made from wheat
Instead of being fried, they were baked
Their marketing approach was excellent
They quickly became popular in the market shortly after their introduction.
Following its demand and supply issues, Hippo Snacks India recognized the problem it was encountering and did not want the consumers to take the empty retail shelves as a manifestation of the brand’s failure in a short period.
They did not want to spend huge amounts of money outsourcing the distribution and supply tasks to withstand the demand-supply problem, so they directly communicated with their customers. This led to the beginning of the Plan-T campaign. To solve their difficulty, they urged their Twitter followers to submit a tweet with the hashtag @HelloMeHippoabout.
The goal of this campaign was to include customers in every step of Hippo’s supply chain across multiple locations, and it was successful since it drew a large number of enthusiastic participants.
Using Twitter, Hippo recruited 400 new workers to help with sales and distribution at no expense. Its sales increased by 76% in the preliminary phase of its takeoff. Before the campaign launch, Hippo Snacks India had 800 followers on Twitter, which soon increased by 300% to 4000 followers, which was equal to 50% of its sales and distribution network.
Hippo gathered data from Twitter, analyzed it, and forwarded it to regional distributors in the affected locations, who then refilled the shop shelves, ensuring that customers were satisfied within hours.
Hippo was qualified to evaluate markets and observe potential markets for its business development with the help of this campaign. The good thing about Hippo was that it recognized its shortcomings and modified them into strengths by leveraging social media. Hippo used social media to connect with consumers and procure real-time outcomes to availability problems. The Twitter handle of Hippo was very active indeed! Before getting deactivated, it had more than 4000 tweets posted daily on everyday titbits.
2. Indian Food League
In 2012, Hippo inaugurated an online campaign named IFL (Indian Food League) to attract cricket fans during the IPL (Indian Premier League) session.
Indian Food League was modeled to fascinate all cricket fans and apprehend the emotional rivalry amongst Indian cities during the IPL. The IFL rode on the already existing rivalry among T20 teams by pitting these regions’ popular flavors and dishes against each other and getting people to comment in support of their favorite flavor on the IFL microsite.
The dishes chosen were the specialty of that particular city, like Papdi Chat from Delhi, Kanda Poha from Pune, Dum Biryani from Hyderabad, Paratha from Punjab, Idli Sambhar from Chennai, Pav Bhaji from Mumbai, Dal Bati from Rajasthan, Masala Dosa from Banglore and Rosgolla from Kolkata.
The front of the pack would inform Hippo munchers to join the IFL. The back of the pack bore a QR Code that would direct Hippo munchers directly to the IFL microsite. They had to be as funny as possible to win that contest. Winners were declared daily and awarded with Hippo bean bags. IFL earned a stupendous acknowledgment, with Hippos sales going up during the IPL season.
Now the question arises: if they were so great, then why were they discontinued? What happened to Hippo Chips?
Hippo Snacks: Various Hypothesis for Failure
Market Share of Potato Chips Brands in India
As per the statistics from Statista for FY23, Lay’s holds thirty percent of the market, followed by Bingo and Balaji with ten percent each. Haldiram has seven percent, while Yellow Diamond accounts for four percent. The remaining thirty-nine percent is shared by other brands.
Even though Hippo Chips is no longer sold, it still has a very loyal fanbase. Many fans call it a “Successful Failure.”
Several hypotheses floating around the internet claim that Hippo toasties could not survive the competition, and thus, the product died down. However, it is hard to believe so. Also, Parle kept quiet on the issue and never disclosed why they had to discontinue their product.
On the other hand, many Hippo loyalists believe that it stopped manufacturing because the company couldn’t handle its production due to the massive demand, and the success destroyed Hippo.
1. Advertising and Branding Problems
Hippo Chips or Hippo Wafers didn’t include any MSG (Monosodium Glutamate), had no GMO (Genetically Modified Organism), zero cholesterol, and zero trans-fat; Parle claimed the product was healthier than many others available at the time. The manufacturers claimed that they were baked rather than fried.
On the other hand, Parle never advertised it for its purported health benefits, so people never had a practical reason to switch to Hippo. The snack was not marketed as a healthier option because no one knows whether a specialty positioning such as health food as a snack option would be successful.
Hippo also had its branding problems, like putting a huge fat hippo on the front of the packet while promoting it as a healthier alternative to other snacks.
2. Demand Problem
Within a few months of its takeoff, demand was becoming more and more, and it was becoming problematic to meet the heightening demand.
After its launch, Hippo, a Parle Agro product earned a tremendous response from customers all over India. The retail racks at several stores were becoming empty quicker than anticipated, leading to a demand-supply situation for the company, leaving the racks across 200,000 stores empty.
3. Competition
Hippo brand had to deal with a lot of competition, which was one of their main challenges. Other well-known businesses, including Lays, Monaco, and Bingo, followed suit after its inception. It had to stand out in a crowded snack industry and build strong brand importance in consumers’ thoughts.
It needed to come up with something unique that would set it apart from the competition. But other than its flavors and packaging, it failed to come up with something else that would help it conquer all the other brands.
Product: Parle introduced an excellent product named Hippo Chips. These chips were free from MSG (Monosodium Glutamate) and GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms). They contained zero cholesterol and zero trans fat. According to Parle, these chips were healthier than many other competitors in the market at that time. The manufacturer claimed that the chips were baked and not fried. Therefore, we can conclude that the product was made with healthy components.
Price: The snacks were priced at Rs. 10 and Rs. 20, making them competitive.
Place: The products were readily available at all grocery stores, and in case of a shortage, volunteers ensured quick restocking.
Promotion: It could be argued that the company failed to position its product effectively. Despite receiving positive feedback for their marketing campaigns, Parle neglected to emphasize all the unique advantages that their product had to offer. Some of these advantages included being free of MSG, GMOs, trans fats, and cholesterol, as well as being baked instead of fried. Promoting the chips as a healthy snack could have been a major selling point for the brand. Meanwhile, Hippo faced branding issues, such as using a large, overweight hippo on its packaging while marketing the product as a healthy snack option.
Staying Relevant: Brands must continuously evolve and adapt to changing trends and consumer preferences. Hippo Chips failed to keep up with these changes, which ultimately led to its downfall.
Innovation: To succeed in the competitive snack industry, brands must continuously innovate and offer new and unique products. Hippo Chips failed to do so, leading to a lack of excitement and interest among consumers.
Market Research: Conducting market research and understanding your target audience is crucial for success. Hippo Chips may have failed to recognize shifting consumer preferences, leading to a decline in popularity.
Competition: In any industry, it’s important to be aware of your competition and the strategies they are using. Hippo Chips may have failed to keep up with the innovations and strategies of its competitors, leading to a loss of market share.
Huge Factory Making of Potato Chips
Conclusion
Everything appeared to be in order, but the product still died. In the late 2000s, the brand managed to overwhelm other brands for a period. Perhaps because the production costs were too high, consumers were too fixated on traditional chips, and because the Parle Hippo Chips were not advertised or branded properly, the excitement fizzled out. It was discontinued, much to their loyalists’ displeasure. Their Twitter account was disabled in 2014. Only old tweets and an online petition demanding the brand’s relaunch exist today.
FAQs
Why Hippo chips discontinued?
Hippo Chips was not marketed correctly and faced a lot of competition, leading to its failure.
Which is Hippo Chips company?
Parle Agro was the manufacturer of Hippo Chips.
What were Hippo Chips flavours?
Hippo Chips flavours include:
Chinese Manchurian
Indian Chatpatta
Hot-n-Sweet Tomato
Italian Pizza
Yoghurt Mint Chutney
Thai Chilli Cream
Afghani Tikka Masala
Greek Yogurt
Which company made Hippo Chips?
Parle Agro manufactured and launched Hippo Chips India in 2009.
What are the key takeaways from the failure of Hippo chips for entrepreneurs and start-up founders?
The key takeaways for entrepreneurs and start-up founders are the importance of thorough market research, securing adequate resources, and staying up-to-date on industry standards and requirements.
Are hippo chips still available?
Hippo Chips were discontinued in 2014 by Parle Agro, the manufacturer.
Are Hippo Chips banned in India?
Hippo Chips are not banned but are discontinued by the manufacturer Parle Agro due to certain reasons.
Where can I buy Hippo Chips?
Hippo Chips cannot be bought as they have been discontinued since 2014.
Sustaining a startup is perhaps the most difficult phase for any entrepreneur. While everyone advocates entrepreneurship as a shortcut to mint money and get rich scheme, the uncertainty and constant pressure to perform is a huge responsibility even for the toughest of individuals. The team at StartupTalky decided to analyze some unsuccessful startups in India.
As of April 2024, India is home to over 1.28 lakh startups, a significant increase from just 450 in 2016, making it the third-largest startup ecosystem in the world.
The startup failure case study discussed below covers unsuccessful entrepreneurs’ stories in India and will give you insights into the failure of some Indian startups that were destined to reach new heights.Learn from the mistakes these Indian ventures made so that you don’t end up repeating the same.
Summery on why Startups fail and how to bounce back from Startup failure
Serving home-cooked food is becoming a trend among today’s startups. Yumist was one such venture. It was launched in 2014 to cover the daily meals segment in India, a largely untapped market. The founders were Alok Jain and Abhimanyu Maheshwari who managed to raise nearly $3 million in funding. It is one of the top 10 failed startups in India.
Reason for failure:A business model with a high burn rate that required extensive capital beyond Yumist’s reach for achieving growth. Enough funding was also not available to run the startup. So the startup had to shut down. The Yumist case study is often mentioned when one talks about famously failed startups in India.
Let’s be honest, a chance to talk with your favorite celebrity is on everyone’s bucket list. Banking on this wish, Dial-A-Celeb was a short-lived yet exciting concept founded in 2016 by Gaurav Chopra and Ranjan Agarwal and they could be considered as unsuccessful entrepreneurs in India. In addition to video chats with actors and celebs, the platform also allowed customers to get autographed items such as toys and diaries. However, the startup closed its doors within a year.
Reason for failure: The major reason for Dial-A-Celeb’s failure was that celebrities were coming up with their apps to interact with fans. This trend resulted in immense competition for Dial-A-Celeb and a direct impact on profitability. Dial-A-Celeb was shut down in 2017. Know your rivals well and also brace yourself for competition that may arise in the future.
Once on the path to becoming the largest homestay network in India, Stayzilla is reminiscent of a riches-to-rags story. With around $33.5 million in funding and establishing itself in the hotel-rental segment, this brainchild of Yogendra Vasupal, Rupal Yogendra, and Sachit Singhi started crumbling after it failed to repay vendors. The troubles were then aggregated and in February 2017, Yogendra Vasupal officially announced the closure of Stayzilla’s operations.
Reason for failure: Stayzilla was way ahead of its time when launched. People were not ready for such Hi-Fi technology. However, the company somehow managed some time on the funding it received. But when people started becoming familiar with online booking, new competitors emerged with better discounts and deals. Stayzilla was unable to provide the same due to the unavailability of funds. Additionally, legal disputes and a lack of focus on growing the business destroyed Stayzilla.
Roder
Industry
Cab Service
Founder(s)
Abhishek Negi, Ashish Rajput, and Siddhant Matre
Founded
2014
Dissolved
2017
Roder – Failed Startups in India
Inter-city travel has become a mainstream requirement— traveling 100 km or more every day is deemed as just another day to some. The reason may be anything: office location, excursion, meeting a friend, etc. These journeys can burn a hole in the pocket.Roder (earlier known as Insta Cabs) was founded by Abhishek Negi, Ashish Rajput, and Siddhant Matre in 2014 to ease inter-city rides. One of Roder’s highlights was offering one-way rides at nearly half the market price. It is one of the famous startups that failed in India.
Reason for failure:The inability to cope with customer acquisition costs and not keeping up with the user retention rates. Moreover, increased competition from experienced ventures like Ola and Uber added to Roder’s woes. Having a bigger competitor that is more aggressively funded makes the entrepreneurs lose their zeal. And this is one of the major causes of entrepreneurial failure.
Turant Delivery
Industry
Logistics
Founder(s)
Ankur Majumder and Satish Gupta
Founded
2015
Dissolved
May 2017
Turant Delivery| Failed Startups in India
TheB2B startup was an intra-city logistics provider that was launched in 2015 to bring a new flavor to the Indian logistics industry. The algorithm followed by Turant Delivery permitted it to offer services at a price as much as 15% less than what fellow competitors charged for the same trip (as per the endeavor’s claim) and is one of the top 10 failed startups in India.
Reason for failure: The company did not have the funds to sustain itself in the long run.A logistics service provider needs intensive cash flow to run. Hence, funding is essential for any logistics startup.
Students are the new target audience when it comes to offering small loans. Acting on this, Finomena came out with an app that provided ‘EMI without cards’. The aim was to allow students to purchase mobile phones and other electronics on a loan. In March 2016, Finomena raised its seeding funding and then made quick strides before going down in 2018.
Reason for failure: Finomena is counted amongst those Indian startups that failed unexpectedly despite having enough funding. It was a fintech startup that focused on providing loans, a segment already dominated by established players before its entry. Fierce competition from rivals like ZestMoney was the major reason behind Finomena’s failure. Also, burning cash where it was not needed was another cause. Before you launch your startup, check if the target segment has reached its saturation levels. Also, use your funding wisely!
MrNeeds
Industry
Grocery Delivery
Founder(s)
Hitashi Garg, Ravi Verma, Ravi Wadhwa, and Yogesh Garg
Founded
2016
Dissolved
2018
MrNeeds | Failed Startups in India
MrNeeds was a grocery delivery startup founded by Hitashi Garg, Yogesh Garg, Ravi Wadhwa, and Ravi Verma. It provided a subscription-based grocery delivery service. People could easily pay for their subscriptions and receive their groceries on the set date. MrNeeds, a Delhi-based startup, did well with more than 10,000 deliveries in Noida alone.
Reason for failure:MrNeeds was a subscription-based Indian startup that failed. Hence, turnover might not have been that great given how frugal Indians usually’ tend to be. So it is possible that the startup had a lack of funding to sustain itself. The entry of funded grocery delivery startups like Grofers and Big Basket can also be another reason for MrNeeds’ failure. It is considered as one of the top 10 failed Indian startups.
CardBack
Industry
Fintech
Founder(s)
Nidhi Gurnani and Nikhil Wason
Founded
2013
Dissolved
2017
CardBack logo | Failed Startups in India
A fintech platform founded by Nidhi Gurnani and Nikhil Wason, CardBack lets credit and debit cardholders with multiple cards know which card provider would offer the best rewards and points on transactions. The venture was funded by famous angel investors such as Alok Mittal and Sunil Kalra and managed to raise $170k in five years. It is one of the unsuccessful startups in India.
Reason for failure: CardBack could not secure funds after 2014, and the number of multiple cardholders in India was less than what the fintech startup had expected. Hence, the main reason for CardBack’s failure was its over-expectation of market growth. The plan to shift the headquarters to Singapore, where the multiple credit card culture abounds, also failed. The failure to move to Singapore was the final nail in the coffin for CardBack.
Overcart
Industry
Re-Commerce
Founder(s)
Saptarshi Nath and Alexander Souter
Founded
2012
Dissolved
2017
Overcart logo | Failed Startups in India
Overcart was the first Indian fintech player to provide a platform for purchasing refurbished, overstock, and pre-owned items. It was founded in 2012. People could buy and sell their electronic devices on the website. Overcart received substantial angel investment; however, the company failed to capitalize on it.
Reason for failure: Overcart did not seem to be very focused on its business. Unsatisfactory services such as late delivery, poor quality of purchased items, and bad customer service led to customer rebuke, thereby causing Overcart to shut down in 2017.
RoomsTonite
Industry
Hospitability
Founder(s)
Suresh John
Founded
2014
Dissolved
2017
RoomsTonite logo | Failed Startups in India
Last-minute hotel bookings usually end up in a mess and utter disappointment. RoomsTonite was launched to deal with this issue. It received around $1.5 million in funding and ceased functioning by September 2017. The startup rose and crumbled within three years! It is one of the unsuccessful startups in India.
Reason for failure: Having strong rivals in the form of MakeMyTrip and OYO was one reason for RoomsTonite’s failure. The credit crunch also added to RoomsTonite’s woes. Facing a sudden reduction in the loan’s availability is called a credit crunch. Roomstonite faced a credit crunch in 2016 which didn’t allow it to flourish. It is one of the famous startups that failed in India.
Founded in 2015, Doodhwala was a subscription-based platform that delivered milk and grocery items directly to the customer’s doorstep. Founded by Ebrahim Akbari and Aakash Agarwal, Doodhwala claimed to complete about 30,000 deliveries in a day. It is also considered one of the top failed startups in India.
Reason for failure: According to experts, lack of funds and tough competition from the big shots like BigBasket, Milkbasket, and SuprDaily caused Doodhwala to shut down.It is a prime example of startups that failed in India that failed due to strong competitors.
Russsh, one of the failure companies in India, was founded in 2012 by Bharat Ahirwar. Russsh offered both first-mile and last-mile on-demand delivery services to individuals and businesses. The company claimed to have a database of over 50,000 loyal clients and completed 500,000 transactions. However, on June 3rd, 2019, the company announced its closure and is considered a failed business in India.
Reason for failure:The major reason for Russsh’s failure was the lack of funds. It was a self-funded startup and in the absence of enough funds, Russsh was unable to resist the intense competition from its rivals. Bharat Ahirwar also admitted that being a single-founder venture and the absence of a strong team were equally responsible for Russsh’s shutdown.
Rakesh Yadav, Rahul Raj, and Aditya Naikfounded Koinex in August 2017, and in no time the company established itself as India’s largest cryptocurrency exchange. With a user base of over 1 million, Koinex claimed to have a trading volume of over $3 billion and the successful execution of 20 million+ orders.
Reason for failure: Koinex suspended its services on 27th June 2019. The cryptocurrency trading business has seen many ups and downs in India and this instability affected Koinex. The founders stated the lack of a clear regulatory framework for cryptocurrencies in India to be a major deterrent that prevented them from running Koinex’s operations smoothly. Koinex is one of the famous startups that failed in India.
DocTalk
Industry
Health-tech
Founder(s)
Goenka, Chamakura and Aluru
Founded
2016
Dissolved
2018
DocTalk | Failed Indian Startups
Founded in 2016, by Krishna Chaitanya Aluru, Akshat Goenka, and Vamsee Chamakura, Doctalk connected doctors with patients. Through the Doctalk app, one could find good doctors in the vicinity and after just one in-person visit, the patient could connect to the doctor through the Doctalk app for further consultation and queries.
The patients had to pay a subscription fee, whereas the doctors were charged an initiation fee. In 2018, Doctalk pivoted to a new business model wherein it built an electronic medical record (EMR) solution to help doctors write digital prescriptions on customized prescription templates. The EMR business was launched under a new brand name ‘Pulse’ and was sold to the doctors as a tool that let them digitalize the entire consultation, and share the same with the patients.
Reason for failure: Doctalk’s pivot from its initial business model into the electronic medical record solution (EMR) business was not successful; it is often cited as the cause of DocTalk’s closure by company insiders. It is considered as one of the biggest startup failures in India.
LoanMeet
Industry
Fintech
Founder(s)
Ritesh Singh and Sunil Kumar
Founded
2016
Dissolved
May 2019
LoanMeet | Failed Startups in India
P2P lending platform LoanMeet was started in 2015 by Ritesh Singh and Sunil Kumar to help small businesses grow through ultra-short-term loans (for 15, 20, or 30 days) for buying inventories. LoanMart’s services included B2B marketplace financing, working capital financing, cash credit line, and channel financing in the range of Rs 5,000 to 5 lakh for a period of 15 days to 9 months. The company claimed to have an average lending ticket size of Rs 50,000 at around an 18% interest rate.
Reason for failure: LoanMeet raised funding from Chinese investors Cao Yibin and Huang Wei in 2017 but failed to secure any funding after that. LoanMart’s shutdown is attributed to the lack of funds and tough competition from players like Capital Float, Loan Frame, and Happy Loan.
Houseparty
Industry
Social Media, Video Chat
Founders
Ben Rubin, Sima Sistani, Itai Danino, Scott Ahn
Founded
2016
Dissolve
2021
Houseparty | Failed Startups in India
Houseparty was a social media and video chat application that was founded in 2016 by Ben Rubin, Sima Sistani, Itai Danino, and Scott Ahn. The app gained popularity for its unique feature that allowed users to connect with friends in group video calls and play games together in real-time.
Reasons for failure: Houseparty’s closure was influenced by multiple factors, including the decline of the pandemic, insufficient funding, and Epic Games’ prioritization of other areas, and is considered one of the biggest startup failures in India.
Dark Sky
Industry
Weather and Forecasting
Founder
Adam Grossman, Jack Turner
Founded
2011
Dissolve
June 2021
Dark Sky | Failed Startups in India
Dark Sky was a weather forecasting app that provided hyperlocal weather information and accurate forecasts to users. It was founded in 2011 by Adam Grossman and Jack Turner. Dark Sky gained popularity for its user-friendly interface and precise weather predictions, which were based on real-time data and advanced algorithms.
Reasons for failure: Sky announced that it had been acquired by Apple and would be discontinued on other platforms, including Android. The acquisition by Apple led to the dissolution of Dark Sky as an independent entity, and its features were integrated into Apple’s own weather services.
ShopX
Industry
E-commerce
Founder
Amit Sharma, Apoorva Jois
Founded
2015
Dissolve
2022
ShopX | Failure Company in India
Amit Sharma and Apoorva Jois founded the startup, which had secured a total funding of $56.4 Mn from multiple rounds since its inception. The startup had received backing from prominent investors, including Infosys co-founder Nandan Nilekani and Fung Investments.
Reasons for failure: The B2B e-commerce startup operated by 10i Commerce Services had to close its operations and file for bankruptcy. In a filing with the Registrar of Companies (RoC), the startup informed its board that it faced challenges in generating sufficient cash flow or raising new capital through the sale of stakes. It is considered one of the top 10 companies that failed in India.
Lido Learning
Industry
Education Technology (EdTech)
Founder
Sahil Seth
Founded
2019
Dissolved
Feb 2022
Lido | Failed Startups in India
Lido Learning was a Mumbai-based Indian educational technology (EdTech) startup that focuses on providing online education. February 2022, Lido Learning made headlines as the first tech startup to lay off more than 150 employees, using the term “pink-slipped,” which raised concerns about the company’s employment practices.
Reasons for failure: Lido Learning faced a concerning situation when payments to their teachers and employees were not being adequately taken care of.
Amazon Food, Distribution
Industry
Food
Founder
Jeff Bezos
Founded
May 2020
Dissolve
Dec. 29, 2022
Amazon Food | Failed Startups in India
In May 2020, Amazon Food entered the competitive Indian food delivery market. However, after trying it out for more than two and half years, Amazon decided to shut down its food delivery platform, which was being piloted in Bengaluru, India, by 29 December 2022.
Reasons for failure: Amazon Food failed in India due to stiff competition from established players like Zomato and Swiggy, localization challenges in catering to diverse culinary preferences, operational complexities in building a reliable network of restaurants and delivery partners, and broader cost-cutting measures undertaken by Amazon in a challenging economic environment.
Koo was an Indian-language microblogging site designed for connecting, commenting, and engaging. The platform was available in multiple Indian languages and included features such as English-to-regional language keyboards, local language news feeds, and hyper-local hashtags. It allowed users to express themselves on various topics through text, audio, and video.
Reasons for failure: Koo shut down after failing to secure deals with several major internet companies, conglomerates, and media houses. Although Koo had successfully expanded to Brazil, gaining over 1 million downloads within 48 hours of its launch, it struggled to gain traction in the Indian market. It is considered as one of the famous failed companies in India.
Lack of understanding of the market and preparedness
Doodhwala
2015
2019
Aakash Agarwal and Ebrahim Akbari
Online Milk Delivery
Unfavorable circumstances and lack of Margin
Local Banya
2012
2016
Amit Naik, Karan Mehrotra & Rashi Choudhary
E-Commerce
Lack of operation capability and margin
Tiny Owl
2014
2016
Saurabh Goyal
Online Food Delivery Apps
Lack of experience of founders in handling business
Bite Club
2014
2016
Prateek Agarwal
Online Food Delivery App
Lack of capability to handle expansion and competition
Dazo
2014
2015
Monica Rastogi & Shashank Sekhar Singhal
Food Delivery
Lack of funds and management due to intense competition
Yumist
2014
2017
Alok Jain and Abhimanyu Maheshwari
Food Delivery
Lack of funds and high cost of operation
GrocShop
2015
2016
Rahul Kumar and Ayush Garg
Grocery Delivery
Lack of
Mr.Needs
2016
2018
Hitashi Garg, Ravi Verma, Ravi Wadhwa, and Yogesh Garg
Online Milk Delivery
Intense competition and low margin
Monkey Box
2015
2018
Sanjay Rao
Food Delivery
Lack of execution, and planning & model
iProf
2009
January 2014
Sanjay Purohit and Saurabh Jain
Ed-Tech
Intense competition and low margin
Purple Squirrel
2013
May 2016
Aditya Gandhi and Sahiba Dhandhania
Ed-Tech
Intense competition and poor product service
GoZoomo
2014
2016
Arnav Kumar and Himangshu Hazarika
Food Delivery
Intense competition and management
Zebpay
2014
September 2018
Sandeep Goenka, Saurabh Agarwal, and Mahin Gupta
Fintech and Finance
Legal Challenges and Issues
Koinex
2017
June 2019
Rahul Raj, Rakesh Yadav, and Aditya Naik
Fintech and Finance
Legal Challenges and Issues
Card Back
2013
2017
Nidhi Gurnani and Nikhil Wason
Fintech
Lack of funds and execution
DocTalk
2016
2018
Goenka, Chamakura and Aluru
Health Tech
Intense competition
BabyBerry
2012
2018
Bala Venkatachalam and Subhashini Subramaniam
Child Care
Flaws in the revenue model
Doormint
2014
2016
Abhinav Agarwal
E-Commerce
Lack of funds and flaws in the model, poor management
Task bob
2014
January 2017
Amit Chahalia
House Hold
Lack of funds and low-profit margin
GetNow
2014
2016
Jayesh Bagde
Local Electronics Shop Provider
Poor choice for business and low margin
Flashdoor
2015
–
–
House Hold Solution
RUSSSH
2012
June 2019
Bharat Ahirwar
Logistics
Lack of funds and intense competition
Jabong
2012
February 2020
Arun Chandra Mohan, Praveen Sinha, Lakshmi Potluri and Manu Kumar Jain
E-Commerce
Poor service and intense competition
Buttercups
2011
2019
Arpita Ganesh
E-Commerce
Poor execution
Wooplr
2013
May 2019
Zacharia, Praveen Rajaretnam, Soumen Sarkar and Ankit Sabharwal
Social Commerce Platform
Merger
Klozee
2015
2016
Aman Haji, Pratik Moona, and Prashant Jain
E-Commerce
Low sales and poor techniques
Just Buy Live
2015
2022
Rituraj Singh
E-Commerce
Lack of understanding of the market and preparedness
Shopo
2017
2017
Rithika Nelson and Theyagarajan S
E-Commerce
Lack of funds
Finomena
2015
August 2017
Abhishek Garg & Riddhi Mittal
Fintech
Lack of funds
Fashionara
2011
2016
Arun Sirdeshmukh and Darpan Munjal
E-commerce
Lack of funds, Intense competition
Shotang
2013
2021
Roy Singh and Vishal BG
E-commerce
Niche-specific failure and no funds
Hike Messenger
2012
January 2021
Kavin Bharti Mittal
Social Platform
Intense competition
COGXIO
2014
July 2016
Layak, Kinshuk Bairagi and Sarit Prajna Sahu
Dating Platform
Lack of revenue
Parcelled
2014
2016
Bhandari, Xitij Kothi, Abhishek Srivastava, Nikhil Bansal, and Rikin Kachhia
Courier Service
Intense competition and poor service
Ezytruck
2015
2018
Srikanth Maheswarappa, Anand Mutalik, and Narasimha Bs
Logistic
Intense competition
Truckmandi
2015
2016
Ankit Singh, Anurag Jain, and Nishant Singh
E-Commerce
Cash burn and lack of funds
Roder
2014
2017
Abhishek Negi, Ashish Rajput, and Siddhant Matre
Transportaion Service
Cash burn due to corruption involved in the field and also poor management
Tazzo Technologies
2015
January 2018
Priyam Saraswat, Priyank Suthar, Shivangi Srivastav, and Vikrant Gossain
Transportaion Service
Poor business model
AUTOnCab
2014
2016
Surendra Goel and Vinti Doshi
Transportaion Service
Poor business model
Hey Bob
2015
2016
Vishal Kumar, Vinay Reddy, Girish Nadig and Suman Kundu
Transportaion Service
Poor business model
Freshconnect
2018
2022
Amit Kashyap and Tarun Gupta
Agri Tech
Lack of awareness and low-profit margin
Dial-a-Celeb
2016
2017
Gaurav Chopra and Ranjan Agarwal
Media and Entertainment
Poor business model
App Surfer
2011
May 2022
Akshay Deo, Amit Yadav, Aniket Awati, and Ratnadeep Deshmane
Mobile Solution Provider
Intense competition
Intelligent Interfaces
2015
2016
Azeem Zainulbhai and Rahul Yadav
Software Solution
Legal Challenges and Issues
InoVvorX
2010
2020
Maxim Dsouza
IT
Poor business model and management
Stayzilla
2006
February 2017
Yogendra Vasupal
Tourism
Lack of funds
Rooms Tonite
2014
2017
Suresh John
Hospitability
Intense competition
Job Bridge
2017
–
–
Job consultancy
Lack of proper management
Turant Delivery
2015
May 2017
Ankur Majumder and Satish Gupta
Logistic Provider
Lack of funds
Overcart
2012
2017
Saptarshi Nath and Alexander Souter
Cryptocurrency Exchange
Lack of clear regulatory framework for cryptocurrencies in India
LoanMeet
2016
May 2019
Ritesh Singh and Sunil Kumar
Finance (Short-term)
Tough competition from other big players
Main Reasons Why Startups Fail in India
The above-mentioned examples shed light on major issues that are responsible for the failure of nearly 90% of the emerging startups in India:
Lack of funds: On close observation, it is evident that insufficient funding or the lack of it caused most of the startups to shut down.
Highly anticipated model, not in sync with the nature and lifestyle of the Indian population: Some of the startups listed above failed because their highly anticipated models were not appropriate for Indians. Startups should either wait for the right time or educate their future consumers about their technology in advance. Also, the company should pivot only after a thorough market study.
Poor customer service and sub-par quality of the products offered: Be it an online startup or a brick-and-mortar store, customer service is of utmost importance. Some startups compromise on customer service and the quality of their products; the compromise always results in the closure of business.
Lack of focus and legal disputes: It is imperative for any startup to focus on building a solid foundation and then growing it further. Entrepreneurs should also focus on the legalities which may cause disruptions in the future. What if you ignore these two factors? You cease to operate like Stayzilla.
Why Do Startups Fail?
How to Bounce back from your Startup’s Failure
Panic doesn’t help in failure; relaxation and progressive thinking will prove to be useful. Successful people have seen failures and have overcome all challenges.
Here are some tips to bounce back from your startup’s failure:
Share Your Feelings
Don’t think that life ends after a failure. Don’t spend time criticizing yourself or anyone else, but feel proud of the takeaways from that failure. Keep in touch with friends, family, and relatives to stay calm and relaxed in times of failure. Find a mentor or a group of experienced people. Learn from them. Seek guidance and mental support from mentors and entrepreneurs who have seen both success and failure.
Find Different Sources Of Income To Recover Your Loss
Failures will lead to financial difficulties. So work on expanding your income stream. Contact mentors and entrepreneurs for suggestions on income generation. Do not get depressed because money is meant to come and go. Calculate how long your savings will last and plan accordingly. It will be great if you already have a secondary source of income. If not, spend some time creating a source of income through freelancing or consulting.
Prepare And Plan With Consciousness
A lot of lessons are learned after hard times. Use these lessons to prepare and prioritize. Make a survival plan. Startup founders are very comfortable with planning and execution. Appoint suitable founders and workers to assist you. Hard work always pays off, so work until you achieve success. If your startup fails, create an Excel sheet, and write down the skills in one column and the potential income from those skills in the second column. By doing this simple exercise, one will get some clarity on how to keep the business running for a few more months.
Wait For The Right Time To Get The Right Opportunities
Don’t take any important decision at the time of failure because the mind is depressed at such a time. Wait and then plan for the future. Take whatever time is required to make up your mind but once the thought process is in place, do not go back to thinking about the failure. Great opportunities do not come frequently. So wait for the right moment. It is better to wait for several months for the right kind of work than to get stuck on the wrong assignment.
Actions Speak Louder Than Words
Be mindful of your actions after a bout of failure. The right attitude is important during stressful moments. Take the right action with the right attitude. Say no to poor opportunities. Work to the best of your abilities. Aim high and let your failures be the stepping stones to success.
Failure is not an end. It’s the first step to success. Whether you are running a startup or are planning to launch one, note down the mistakes discussed in this post. Nothing hurts more than committing a mistake you were already aware of. If this case study on the failure of some promising Indian startups was useful to you, let us know in the comments.
Recent studies as of August 2024, show that up to 90% of startups in India fail within their first few years, highlighting the crucial need for strategic planning, market research, and strong financial management for entrepreneurs.
What happens when startups fail?
The startup may gather outstanding accounts, take up loans to settle outstanding debts, sell resources for paying debts, and cater to the investors who funded the startup. Venture capitalists and other investors usually end up at a loss when a startup fails.
Why do 90% of startups fail or why do most Indian startups fail?
Here are some of the major reasons: 1. Lack of funds. 2. Highly anticipated model against the nature and lifestyle of the target audience. 3. Poor customer service and low-quality products. 4. Lack of focus and legal disputes.
Which are the failed startups in India 2024?
The startups that failed in 2024 are Resso, Rario, OKX, Muvin, GoldPe, and many more.
What is the hardest business to start?
Businesses that require huge funds to start off with are the hardest to start. Businesses pertaining to logistics, restaurants, and travel agencies are deemed some of the most difficult businesses to start.
What is the safest business to start?
Businesses that require low investment are the safest. Things that can be done entirely from the comfort of your home are the easiest. Some examples are logo designing, digital marketing, website building, online tutoring, virtual assistance, and so on.
Am I too old to start a business?
There is no age limit for starting a startup. You can be 50 and have a unique idea that might take off in the market.
With the increase of technology and advancement in the broadcast industry, government funding channels such as Doordarshan need to be more outspoken. The Indian TV industry has grown massively, as of today, there are around 890 channels.
Like every other household has a television in their houses, the demand for more variety in channels increased which resulted in India being the third-largest market across the world, right after China and the US. However, Doordarshan was not inclined toward this race. The channel lost a large proportion of viewers, mainly because of satellite TV.
There was a time when Doordarshan reached over 90 percent of households in the country, but with such huge channel options, it is not preferred by most households.
The triggering fact is, that this isn’t limited to Doordarshan only, almost every government-based organization such as BSNL and AIR, lost audiences and customers in a very large number.
As private organizations are facing extreme difficulty in surviving in the market, competition has risen massively. Because of this, the government established a committee under Sam Pitroda to improve the marketing strategies and revenue styles in Prasar Bharati, under which Doordarshan is controlled. However, there is still a long run for Doordarshan to boost up its revenue source and face the growing competition in the market.
Since private television channels were allowed in 1991, Doordarshan has seen a sharp drop in viewership. Despite generating substantial advertising revenue from mandatory broadcasts of major national events, such as cricket matches, there has been a proposal to introduce a television ownership license fee in India to support its funding.
Now, this brings us to the main content of this article, that is, how Doordarshan was the biggest marketing channel, what went wrong, and why it failed.So, let’s get started!
History of Doordarshan
Doordarshan started as an experimental broadcaster in the year 1959, with a small transmitter along with a makeshift studio. It is the first-ever TV channel in India, also called the Free Dish as being a free entertainment platform.
Within a few years, Doordarshan became a huge success in the broadcast industry and reached over 25 million households. It covered all fields such as information & news, education, entertainment, and others.
The reason why Doordarshan was praised so much by the Indian audience was that it carried the interests of all the geographical, linguistic, and cultural groups. With time, Doordarshan grew into a large network of 36 satellite channels, which provided a free DTH service of 110 in its Bouquet.
Leading Television Channels Across India in Week 14 of 2024, by Weekly Viewership
What Led to the Downfall of Doordarshan
The Massive Decline in Doordarshan’s Ratings
With the growing demand for commercialization, Doordarshan began auctioning slots to private broadcasters. This resulted in 80 channels, 24 DD, and around 25 private with auctioning every month. However, this didn’t turn out as expected as a large portion of Doordarshan’s audience base shifted massively towards the private broadcasters. This led to a massive decline in the ratings and revenue of DD.
Disastrous Advertising Model
The advertising model of Doordarshan was a bit of a disaster for it as it stipulated that the private channels would not share their revenue with the DD platform. So, earlier, the private channels paid INR 8 crore per annum to DD Free Dish for transmission, annually which generated INR 2,500 crore in its total revenue, and became zero after its new advertising model.
This resulted in the fall of Doordarshan’s advertising revenue from INR 1,301 crore to INR 475.7 crore. And among this, around INR 318.06 crore entirely came from government ads so the final revenue that DD generated was INR 157.59 crores.
Absence of Proper Marketing Division
Another big flaw in the marketing strategy of Doordarshan is the lack of a proper and independent marketing division. And because of this, when the private channel charged INR 90,000 to INR 1.2 lakh for a 10-second slot, Doordarshan charged merely INR 65,000 for the same slot.
They didn’t have any team for strategic planning, research, advertising, internet handling, product management, branding, or any other. This played a major role in the downfall of Doordarshan and gave major advantages to private channels.
Conclusion
In conclusion, we can say that there was a time when Doordarshan used to rule the broadcast industry in India. But to stand still in the market, one needs to adapt to the advancement in technology and marketing. And Doordarshan failed in both of these. Plus, as being funded by the Government it did not make enough profit and in fact, runs in a loss.
The former Prasar Bharti chief Jawhar Sircar blamed the incompetence, poorly backed policies, and lack of ambition, for the failure of Doordarshan rather than the competition. The irony here is, that most of the famous shows preset on Doordarshan were created by private producers.
When they found better opportunities, they grasped onto them. For now, the best strategic planning of Doordarshan is to take the BBC model to enhance its marketing planings and strategies. Stay tuned for more such content!
Formerly a Big Tech giant, Facebook (now Meta) isn’t even among the top 20 most valuable American companies today. Facebook, which has a market cap over $1 trillion, was one of the top five most valuable American businesses last year. The company is currently valued at around $270 billion.
Most people don’t expect a business the size of Facebook failing with any of its creations or products. However, this is untrue! Well-known businesses have experienced numerous setbacks along the way. Facebook has had some particularly severe setbacks among these.
Facebook has always been open about its development plans. Few people are aware Facebook struggled in many areas during its early years. Many of Facebook’s inventions either received harsh criticism or weren’t working for general users. Some of the products violated both internet neutrality and user privacy.
There have been instances where Facebook received harsh criticism in the US and Europe for some of its monetized services that ultimately proved to be a complete failure. In this article, we’ll talk about some of Facebook’s most notable mistakes. Let’s get going!
By the end of 2012, Poke, a Facebook application resembling the well-known Snapchat, was released. Since it copied Snapchat’s feature of disappearing photos and texts exactly, it was initially quite popular.
In an interview, Mark Zuckerberg claimed that Poke was entirely developed in just 12 days by a small team of programmers. It was a result of a marathon coding session called a hackathon.
Later, in comparison to other well-known Facebook products, Poke was One of Facebook’s biggest failures.
Parse
Parse
Facebook purchased Parse, a mobile app development platform, in 2013. Facebook had a good feeling about running Parse and growing it to heights, as the business was doing well and had big clients. But when Facebook bought it, things didn’t turn out as planned. Facebook discontinued Parse citing a desire to focus more on its core offerings.
Beacon
Facebook Beacon
Beacon, a 2007 release from Facebook, was yet another resounding failure. It was essentially a tracking program that recorded about 50 online activities and purchases of the users. Beacon then published the user’s purchase to its News Feeds without getting the user’s permission.
Thousands of Facebook users signed petitions calling for the removal of Beacon as it went into effect. Following this, about a month later, Facebook finally stopped using the tracking program Beacon.
Later, Mark Zuckerberg apologized to its users for the bizarre design and promised to do better.
Facebook Credits
Facebook Credits
Facebook developed a new shopping app for users to shop using the credits they accrued from playing games like Farmville. It was entirely for customers’ fun and benefits. However, it was a complete failure because the user couldn’t comprehend the procedure. Facebook credits ultimately shut down because of their complicated functioning and process.
Creative Labs
Facebook Creative Labs
To encourage designers and developers to create more inventive and distinctive mobile apps, Facebook introduced a new product in 2013 called Creative Labs. But the outcome was the opposite. In fact, because of this alone, Facebook experienced two significant failures: the first was Paper, a new reading app, and the second was Slingshot (the second failure of an attempt to duplicate Snapchat).
The majority of Facebook’s unsuccessful apps were products of Creative Labs. If it had persisted, it would have led to more failures for Facebook and was the primary reason for the low overhead.
Sponsored Stories
Sponsored Stories by Facebook
Sponsored Stories, one of Facebook’s most complicated and controversial products, was immediately banned because it might have to misuse risks and threats. But later, Facebook revived it with altered specifications.
Conclusion
One of the most popular social media platforms is Facebook. It has many incredible features and services that enchant the users in all regards. Initially, it faced criticisms and failures with its unusual yet innovative products. Although the ideas were pretty good in most cases, it was not enough to hold onto the audience.
This article clarified a few things regarding the unsuccessful Facebook products. Stay tuned for more articles like this!
FAQ
What are some of the failed Facebook products?
Beacon, Sponsored Stories, Creative Labs, and Facebook Credits are some of the failed Facebook products.
What are some of the companies owned by Facebook?
Messenger, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Oculus are some of the Facebook owned companies.
What are some of Mark Zuckerberg’s failures?
Facebook crisis, Criticism for his inventions, Securing investment and funding, Invasion of privacy scandal, and Critical need for massive users are some of Mark Zuckerberg’s failures.
Who is Facebook’s biggest rival??
Facebook relies on Ads as a source of revenue. So Google is the biggest competitor of Facebook when it comes to advertising.
As early as a day ago, the news headlines screamed about Snapchat losing USD 10 billion as its stock fell at a 52-week low. The company lost nearly 40% of its value and reported a net loss of USD 422 million. This is a consecutive loss after it reported a loss of USD 152 million the previous year as well.
Snapchat Inc. later renamed Snap Inc., developed the American multimedia instant messaging app Snapchat. It was created by Evan Spiegel, Bobby Murphy and Reggie Brown, all former students of Stanford University. Snapchat app became known for representing the new mobile-first direction for social media. It places significant importance on users interacting with virtual stickers and augmented reality objects.
Snapchat’s principal feature is that pictures and stories are available only for a short time to their recipients. Over time the app has evolved from a person-to-person photo sharing to now sharing ‘stories’ of 24 hours of chronological content. It also allows brands to show ad-supported short-form content. Its privacy includes allowing users to keep their personal photos in a password-protected space called ‘my eyes only’.
Snapchat exchanges more than four billion snaps a day. It registered a 23% growth last year in its user base registering a total of 293 million daily active users. Due to its popularity among the younger generation, specifical users under the age of 16 years, it has raised privacy concerns for the parents.
The Rising Fame of Snapchat
Evan Spiegel, Bobby Murphy and Reggie Brown worked closely together to develop the app, which was initially, launched in July 2011 as ‘Picaboo’. The app was so named due to its feature of disappearing pictures. It was relaunched as Snapchat in September 2011. From thereon, the company turned its focus from branding efforts to usability and technical aspects.
2012 – Trouble started brewing between the three app developers over the partnership and it took on the form of a legal battle.
2012 – The CEO of Snapchat, Evan Spiegel described the company’s mission – “Snapchat isn’t about capturing the traditional Kodak moment. It’s about communicating with the full range of human emotion—not just what appears to be pretty or perfect.” He further elaborated and positioned Snapchat as the solution to the stress that was created due to the longevity of personal data on social media
2012 – This resulted in an increase of Snapchat images sent per second from 25 in May 2012 to 20 million images per day by November of that year. Within a space of 6 months, users had shared over one billion photos on the Snapchat iOS app
2012 – Snapchat also released the Android app in October this year
2013 – A new version 5.0 of Snapchat was released for iOS. New features were available in this updated version like speed and design enhancements, swipe navigation, an improved friend finder and in-app profiles
2013 – In June Snapchat introduced Snapkidz. This app was made for children under 13 years of age. It was a part of Snapchat and activated only when the user verified their age by keying in his/her birthdate. This app only allowed users to click photos and draw restricting them to send to other users. Also, any photos could only be saved locally on the device being used.
2014 – In September Reggie Brown settled with Spiegel and Murphy for USD 157.5 million and was also credited as one of the authors of Snapchat
2015 – Snapchat’s users were sending 6 billion videos per day by November
2016 – In a few short months that figure reached 10 billion videos per day
2016 – By May of this year, Snapchat had generated strong investor interest and raised USD 8.1 billion in equity offering
2017 – The app’s popularity had grown its daily active user base of 166 million by May
2017 – In November Snapchat ran into a spot of trouble when its redesign was not received enthusiastically. This caused Snap Inc., to lose USD 1.3 billion in market value
2019 – Snapchat rallied and by the end of the year had ranked as the fifth most downloaded app of the decade
2020 – Snapchat acquired AI Factory, a computer vision start-up to boost its video capabilities
2020 – In November Snapchat announced ‘Snapchat Spotlight’. It declared a total pay out of USD 1 million a day to users posting viral videos. However, the criteria for a video to be considered viral was not specified, nor was there any clarification on the distribution of the prize money
2022 – Last month Snapchat announced its plans to launch Snapchat Plus – a subscription-based model. The subscription will allow its users access to additional features and an ability to change the app icon.
The Reason for the Loss
Snap Inc., the camera and social media company went public in 2017 with a share value of USD 27. In October of 2021 its stock price peaked at USD 83. The stock saw a deep plunge of 25% just a few days before after the company posted a Q2 loss of USD 422 million.
The company’s second-quarter investor letter read – “The second quarter of 2022 proved more challenging than we expected, Our financial results for Q2 do not reflect the scale of our ambition. We are not satisfied with the results we are delivering, regardless of the current headwinds.”
Although Snap’s user base has grown from the first-quarter’s 332 million to second-quarter’s 347 million daily active users, the company’s losses have been attributed to a few broader reasons
Increase in cost of revenue – payments to content partners, costs of creating content and inventory costs for Spectacles – the company’s camera-enabled sunglasses.
Snapchat’s rejection of USD 3 billion from Facebook resulted in Facebook turning Instagram into a formidable competition to Snapchat. Instagram offers the same features made better than Snapchat.
The reduced advertising content on Snapchat is increasing pressure on revenue.
Economic challenges mean Snap is facing rising inflation and interest rates, supply chain shortages, labour disruption, policy changes as regards to the platform and, of course, the effects of the ongoing war.
The company has announced a significant slow-down of the hiring process.
The Future of Snapchat
Apple’s change in privacy policy has adversely affected many social media platforms and Snapchat is no exception. In April 2021, Apple announced it would ask iPhone users for permission before allowing social media apps to track their activity. This move is likely to be replicated by Google for Android devices. This move threatens companies like Snap whose revenue is largely dependent on selling smartphone ads.
However, the company is already on a quest of diverse revenue streams. It has already launched or has begun developing several new features designed to encourage users to buy products from brands within the app. It will allow Snap to earn commissions and increase revenue.
The company is, although going through a troubled time, by no means finished. It is already ideating and creating new revenue streams to emerge stronger and post substantial profits in the future.
FAQs
Why did Snapchat lose $10 billion?
Apple’s change of privacy policy, tough competition, and rescued advertising content were some of the reasons why Snapchat stocks dropped.
What is the future of Snapchat?
The future of Snapchat depends on the new features the app may introduce and its subscription services.
Have you ever wondered about the next level of revolution in technology? Well, a world-famous company had thought this through years ago. In fact, they were very near to making this revolutionary development in wearable technology. But, they failed! Must be wondering why? That company was Google, which took the initiative of bringing the most evolved technology measure.
Years ago, Google developed a smart wearable product named Google Glass. This was known to be Google “moonshot” technology. The image behind the invention was utterly brilliant but, the product didn’t come to stand on its expectations. The product was highly criticized around every aspect from price to safety.
Google focused on hyping and uplifting people’s expectations for its products but didn’t bring out the harsh reality or its lacking in the market. This led to the major failure of Google Glass. The product’s marketing campaign kept on promoting the product as the future’s precursor technology.
But with so much dedication and evolved technology, how and why did the Google Glass fail? This revolutionary high potential holder product was largely rejected by the consumers from the mass-market. Google Glass failed in many elements such as health and safety concerns, extensively high price, heat issues and many more.
In this article, we have discussed these issues briefly and brought out a case study on how Google Glass failed!
As soon as the announcement and description of Google Glass came out among the people, there were some major concerns regarding its safety measures and how it could adversely affect our health.
People were concerned whether it would be safe to use Google Glass every day. Because as per the description, the product was expected to radiate carcinogenic radiation very close to our minds and eyes. However, other brand’s products also emit many harmful radiations, but they don’t make direct contact with our skin.
Moreover, Google Glass could capture any image at any time so there were some concerns raised for the privacy and piracy of lives. It could capture anything randomly without the knowledge of other people.
No clear Functioning
Google Glass
When a new product is launched in the market, the first question that comes is what issues does this product resolve. The functioning of the product is set before its invention. You cannot build a product based on whether people would be interested or not. Because planning the functionality of any product establishes the ground goals you are achieving with that product. Marketing strategy, promotion, target marketing and everything should be pre-planned.
However, Google Glass didn’t stand on any of these scenarios. It had two functions: capturing pictures very quickly and searching anything on the Internet in seconds. There wasn’t any usual or practical usage of this product. Therefore, it doesn’t bring any major benefits to the customers.
Google Glass had a fixed battery limit of 4 hours, which means you need to keep on charging the glass after every four hours. The product could be discharged any time without your knowledge and then, it would be just useless until you charge it completely.
The energy consumption in this product was much more than usual. This would result in some major problems after purchasing. And, also there aren’t any standard charging specifications. No matter how many times you charge it, it will be down after a few hours.
Overprice
Even with these drawbacks, Google Glass cost around $1,500. Although people were highly disappointed with this product, Google didn’t minimise the pricing. It kept on with the price of $1,500.
The concerns related to Google Glass were not just random, these issues majorly affect the usage and functioning of this product. These issues couldn’t be resolved after 2-3 sales, in fact, these required some well-researched and evolved changes.
Language Issues
Google Glass only worked properly with a native English speaker from the US or UK. But when it comes to sending or commanding in any other language, Google Glass wouldn’t recognise it.
The major drawback is it cannot be corrected with the keyboard (as in smartphones) because there isn’t any. So it means you can only command in British or American English. That’s why it would become absolutely tough to handle.
There were some critical concerning issues regarding the heating of Google Glass. When you record a video of 10-15 minutes, it becomes excessively heated because of the intensive computation working. Then, you would need to cool it down immediately otherwise it could cause some high damage not definitively wrong for health.
Marketing Lessons to learn from Google Glass Failure
Before launching any revolutionary and high-tech product, you must take a look at the lessons to be learnt from the failure of Google Glass. These lessons are widely described in the following points.
Underline the everyday benefits of your product boldly, with the help of paid media who strengthen your product’s PR.
Release the product with a short and quick scheduled time to embrace the momentum of purchasing.
Do not repeat the mistakes done by Google in the case of Google Glass.
Launch your product with utter clearance on what goals you expected to achieve through your product.
Google had put a great fraction of creativity and technology with Google Glass. It did try to monetize wearable technology. But, it lacked some major elements which resulted in a complete backup for this product. Google may have some very great and interesting plans and ideas for technology but, it does lose in the basic points of checklist.
Technology is evolving but, with this evolving technology, you must keep in mind that the requirements of consumers are fulfilled. The evolution of technology is in the hands of companies like Google but, the question is, whether the future is products like Google Glass or others?
FAQs
What does Google Glass do?
Google Glass was a wearable computer that could function as a hands-free smartphone, letting users access the mobile internet browser, camera, maps, calendar, and other apps by voice commands.
When was Google Glass launched?
Google Glass was launched for public retail on 15 May 2014. The early prototype version “Glass Explorers” was launched in the US in 2013.
How much money did Google Glass lose?
Google lost around $895 million on moonshot projects – Google Glass.
Why did Google Glass fail?
One of the biggest reason Why Google Glass failed is because it lacked the clarity on why the product exists. The designers did not clearly define or validate, what solutions Google Glass would give for its users, or how customers would use the glasses.
What were the main reasons for Google Glass failure?
The main reasons for Google Glass failure were the issues in the wearable device:
The famous ride-hailing platform Ola has decided to shut down its used cars division, Ola Cars and its quick commerce business, Ola Dash.
At a time when the quick commerce segment in India is expected to reach $5.5 billion by 2025, growing 15 times its current size, why did Ola decide to close Ola Dash operations?
Ola Cars which allowed customers to buy and sell second-hand cars is also being closed down within one year of its launch. For what reasons Ola Cars was shut down? Find answers to all of these questions in this article.
Ola said that they decided to shut down both of their businesses since they wanted to focus more on Ola Electric. But, is that it? Or is there something more to it? Let’s uncover the exact reasons that led to the closing down of Ola Cars and Ola Dash.
No Laser-Sharp Focus
Ola originally started with a ride-hailing business model. In that sector, Ola became very successful. Although the company has always tried to enter new sectors. This is not the first time that Ola is closing one of its startups.
In 2015, the company founded a food delivery service Ola Cafes, a similar service to UberEats.
Ola Cafe
The company also launched a grocery delivery service Ola Stores. Both of these businesses were shut down a year later because the company was not able to attract a lot of customers.
In 2019, the company again tried to jump into the food delivery service by acquiring Foodpanda. However, the company was not able to gain the expected revenue and the company was shut down.
Even after shutting down 3 of its subsidiaries Ola’s will to experiment didn’t stop. In 2019, the company launched Ola Foods, a cloud kitchen business where the company planned to build 500 facilities across the country. But, only 50 cloud kitchens were set up in 2020.
Unfortunately, Ola Foods also failed and now the company is selling its cloud kitchen equipment at a 30-50% discount.
This year Ola tried to leverage the rapidly growing quick commerce segment with Ola Dash but, as you know, this business failed as well.
All these things show us that the company lacked the laser-sharp focus that any business needs in order to be successful in the market. There is nothing wrong with entering different markets but, you should first understand the market conditions.
Ola has 4 failed startups because the company never understood the competition and market conditions. When Ola tried to enter 3-4 different markets where the company didn’t have any expertise the company was not able to properly strategize and allocate resources to different sectors.
On top of that, Ola’s primary ride-hailing service was incurring heavy losses as well. A lot of drivers were leaving the company due to huge salary cuts. Customers as well were not using Ola due to a surge in prices.
Due to all of these reasons the company had no option other than closing down Ola Cars and Ola Dash.
Uncertain Nature of Quick Commerce
As we all know all the companies which are in the quick commerce segment are facing heavy losses. Be it Dunzo, Zomato or Swiggy Instamart.
Ola was also one of those companies which were incurring heavy losses in the quick commerce segment. But, why are these companies incurring losses?
There are two reasons for this: No customer loyalty and heavy discounts. Let’s understand both of these aspects in great detail.
To acquire customers in the quick commerce segment, you need to give heavy discounts to customers on groceries and other items in order to encourage them to try the app. When companies are giving discounts they are not making any profits. But, still, the companies are giving heavy discounts because this is the only way to make customers habituated to your app.
But, here the question arises: How long can you give customers discounts? At a certain point in time, any company like Zomato or Ola Dash have to stop giving discounts.
As customers are using their service just for discounts, there is no customer loyalty. Due to this Ola was not able to make a loyal customer base.
Apart from this, the increased competition in the market from newly launched startups like Zepto and Dunzo made things worse for Ola and the company decided to shut down Ola Dash.
Future Plans of Ola
The quick commerce segment is booming in India. There is a tough fight going on with so many startups like Zepto, Dunzo and Swiggy Instamart in order to capture the quick commerce market in India.
In December 2021, Swiggy invested $700 million into Instamart.
On the other hand, Zomato recently acquired Blinkit, a quick-commerce grocery delivery platform for Rs 4,447.
Zepto, a very popular 10-minute delivery platform, raised $200 million, taking the total valuation of the company to $900 million.
If so many companies are draining millions of money in this sector why did Ola decide to shut down Ola Dash?
Ola said that the company wants to focus more on Ola Electric. Instead of dabbling between multiple businesses Ola has reassessed its priorities and decided to use all of its resources in strengthening its electric sector.
Ola Car’s infra, technology and capabilities will be repurposed towards growing Ola Electric’s sales and service network, the company said in a statement.
Ola’s decision to shift its complete focus on the electric business makes sense because, within months of its launch, Ola Electric has already become India’s largest EV company.
Ola Electric
Ola Electric is delivering huge profits for the company, Rs 500 crore revenue in its first two months of FY 22-23. The company is on its way to surpassing a $1 billion run rate by the end of this year.
Due to all of these positive correlations the company has understood that if they want to stay in the race for a long time it must focus on its electric scooters. Ola has also planned to launch its second electric scooter before the end of this year.
Apart from focusing on its electric sector the company also wants to invest in new areas like cell manufacturing and financial services. To enter the world of fintech Ola has acquired Avail Finance, India’s first neobank that aims to provide financial services to the blue-collared workforce.
Conclusion
As Ola is now allocating all their resources towards Ola Electric it would be interesting to see the future of this company. Even though Ola Electric is India’s largest EV company, it did face a lot of problems in the past for its faulty batteries.
The competition in the electric sector has increased tremendously with players like TATA Motors, Mahindra, Okinawa, Tunwal and Kia Motors. Ola needs to continuously innovate and understand the market conditions if they want to be successful in the EV sector.
FAQs
Why did Ola shut down Ola Cars and Ola Dash?
Ola decided to shut down its used car division, Ola Cars and its quick commerce business, Ola Dash because the company wants to use all of its resources in strengthening Ola Electric. Ola Car’s infra, technology and capabilities will be repurposed towards growing Ola Electric’s sales and service network.
What is Ola Cars?
Using Ola Cars customers could buy and sell their used cars. Under this business, the company would purchase used cars from people and from the company’s driver-partners and would sell them to interested buyers.
Roshni Tamta
Roshni Tamta
