admin
August 6, 2025
Naini Thaker, Forbes India
Aug 06, 2025
It’s a known fact that of the thousands of startups founded each year, only a small fraction survive—and even fewer scale to become unicorns. Rarer still are those unicorns which, after reaching dizzying heights, come crashing down. The Good Glamm Group is one such cautionary tale.
Once celebrated as a unicorn that cracked the code on content-to-commerce, the company’s meteoric rise was matched only by the speed of its unravelling. At the heart of its downfall lies a critical misstep: The relentless pursuit of growth through acquisitions and brand launches, even as cracks in its house-of-brands model began to show. Instead of pausing to consolidate and build sustainably, Good Glamm doubled down—prioritising valuation over viability.
That strategy came to a head on July 23 when founder and CEO Darpan Sanghvi announced the dissolution of the group’s house-of-brands structure. In a LinkedIn post, Sanghvi confirmed that lenders would now oversee the sale of individual brands, effectively ending the company’s vision of building a digital-first FMCG conglomerate.
Despite raising $30 million in 2024 and undergoing multiple rounds of restructuring, the group failed to integrate its acquisitions or generate sustainable profitability. With key investors such as Accel and Bessemer Venture Partners exiting the board and leadership turnover accelerating, the company’s ambitious empire—built on rapid expansion and aggressive brand aggregation—has now been reduced to a lender-led breakup.
In the aftermath of the announcement, Sanghvi offered a candid reflection on what went wrong. “In hindsight, it wasn’t one decision, one market force, or one acquisition. It was three levers we pulled, which together, turned Momentum into a Trap,” he wrote in a LinkedIn post. According to Sanghvi, the group’s downfall stemmed from doing “too much, too fast and too big”.
He elaborated: “At first, Momentum feels like your greatest ally. Every headline, every funding round, every big launch is a shot of adrenaline. And you start believing you can do more and more and more. But momentum has a dark side. If you stop steering and go in a hundred different directions, it doesn’t just carry you forward, it drags you faster and faster until you can’t breathe.”
Where The Model Broke?
In October 2017, Sanghvi launched direct-to-consumer (DTC) beauty brand MyGlamm. Most brands at the time were big on selling on marketplaces such as Amazon or Nykaa. However, Sanghvi believed, “We wanted to be truly DTC and not just digitally enabled. We believed that to own the customer, the transaction needs to happen on our own platform.”
But the biggest challenge with being a DTC brand is its customer acquisition cost (CAC). Towards the end of 2019, the company was spending about $15 (over ₹1,000) to acquire a customer to transact on their website. “Around the same time, our revenue run rate was ₹100 crore. We were spending about $0.5 million to acquire 30,000 customers a month. That’s when we realised it was time to solve the CAC problem,” Sanghvi told Forbes India in 2022. In an attempt to find a solution, Sanghvi turned to the content-to-commerce model.
And then, started the acquisition spree. According to Sanghvi, with a single brand in a single category one can’t build scale. He told Forbes India, “The most you can scale it is ₹1,000 crore, if you want a company that’s doing ₹8,000 or ₹10,000 crore in revenue, it has to be multiple brands across multiple categories.” In hindsight, this perspective might be debatable.
As Devangshu Dutta, founder of consultancy Third Eyesight, points out, the “house of brands” model is essentially a modern-day consumer-facing business conglomerate—and its success hinges on multiple factors working in harmony. While there are examples globally and in India of such models thriving, both privately and publicly, the reality is far more nuanced. “Brands take time to grow, and organisations take time to mature,” Dutta notes, emphasising that rapid aggregation of founder-led businesses under a single ownership umbrella is no guarantee of success.
In recent years, Dutta feels the influx of capital into early-stage startups and copycat models—often seen as lower risk due to their success in other geographies—has shortened business lifecycles and inflated expectations. The hope is that synergies across the portfolio will unlock outsized value, but that rarely plays out as planned. “It is well-documented that more than 70 percent of mergers and acquisitions fail,” he adds, citing reasons such as weak brand fundamentals, lack of synergy, inadequate capital, limited management bandwidth, and internal misalignment.
In the case of Good Glamm, these fault lines became increasingly visible as the group expanded faster than it could integrate or stabilise.
Scaling Without Steering
In FY21, the company had losses of ₹43.63 crore, which rose to ₹362.5 crore in FY22 and went up to ₹917 crore in FY23. Despite the mounting losses, Good Glamm marked its entry into the US market, in a joint venture with tennis player Serena Williams to launch a new brand—Wyn Beauty by Serena Williams. The launch was in partnership with US-based beauty retailer Ulta Beauty.
For its international expansion, it invested close to ₹250 crore over three years. “We anticipate that the international business will account for 25 to 35 percent of our total group revenues by the end of next year. This strategic focus on international expansion is pivotal as we prepare for our IPO in October 2025,” he told Forbes India in April 2024.
Clearly, things didn’t pan out as expected. As Sanghvi rightly points out, it was indeed a momentum trap. “You tell yourself you’ll fix the leaks after the next milestone. But the milestones keep coming, and so do the leaks. Soon, you’re running from fire to fire, never realising that the whole building is getting hotter. And somewhere along the way, you lose the stillness to think,” he writes on his LinkedIn post.
Dutta feels that a strong balance sheet is the most fundamental requirement, “to provide growth-funding for the acquisitions or for allowing the time needed for the acquisitions to mature into self-sustaining businesses over years. In the case of VC-funded businesses, the pressure to scale in a short time can go against what may be best for the business or for its individual brands”.
The Good Glamm Group’s fall is a reminder that scale alone doesn’t build resilience. Its story reflects the risks of expanding faster than a business can integrate, and of prioritising valuation over value. The house-of-brands model can work—but only when backed by strategic clarity, operational discipline, and patience. This is less a warning and more a reminder for founders: Scale is not success, and speed is not strategy.
(Published in Forbes India)
admin
July 28, 2025
By Meenakshi Verma Ambwani, Hindu Businessline
New Delhi, July 28, 2025
Nykaa said that Kay Beauty, co-founded with actor Katrina Kaif, has crossed the ₹240 crore mark in terms of Gross Merchandise Value.
Stars from the tinsel town are donning the entrepreneurial hat to venture into the beauty and fashion business space. Some have even succeeded in growing their brands sustainably, earning big bucks.
Take for instance Skincare brand Hyphen, co-founded by actor Kriti Sanon with Pep Brands, which recently touched the ₹400 crore-mark in Annual Recurring Revenues.
Tarun Sharma, CEO and co-founder, Hyphen told businessline: “The brand is witnessing healthy growth rate quarter-on-quarter. In the first year itself, it touched ₹100 crore ARR. We had aimed for ₹500 crore ARR in 3-4 years and, within two years, we are at ₹400crore ARR.” Pep Brands led by Sharma owns mCaffeine and Hyphen.
The model that works
Sharma believes an operator-led, celebrity anchored model works better. ”The operator can bring in the necessary financial and execution muscle. If a celeb partners with an operator that has deep expertise in the space, then there is huge potential for growth,” he added.
“Product launches, marketing and distribution are very data-driven at Pep Brands. It guides us on what to launch, when to launch, and how to launch products. That has helped Hyphen in achieving this kind of growth rate. It is by design that the majority of the business of Hyphen is D2C,” Sharma explained.
In May, Nykaa said that Kay Beauty, co-founded with actor Katrina Kaif, has crossed the ₹240 crore mark in terms of Gross Merchandise Value. On an earnings call for Q4FY25, Adwaita Nayar, Executive Director, Chief Executive Officer, Nykaa Fashion, said: “Kay Beauty is one of the fastest-growing brands on the platform. It’s hit about ₹240 crore of GMV. The innovations have been fantastic this year. So, it is quite a premium brand, and I think the consumers are accepting it even at that price point. It’s got great gross margins.”
Earlier this year, Reliance Retail Ventures announced that it has decided to acquire 51 per cent stake in Ed-a-Mamma , a kid and maternity wear brand founded by actor Alia Bhatt. According to some reports, Hrithik Roshan’s sportswear brand HRX is a ₹1,000 crore brand.
Among the recent entrants are Ranbir Kapoor, who has decided to foray in the apparel and accessories space with ARKS. Launched in February, the brand has also launched its first store in Mumbai, followed by a second store in New Delhi and another with Broadway in Hyderabad.
‘Shift in preferences’
Abhinav Verma, co-founder and CEO, ARKS, told businessline: “We are seeing a shift in consumer preferences towards made-in-India brands. We decided to leverage on the strong manufacturing capability that India has to build a brand that is both aspirational and offers value. We are looking to build a ₹100 crore brand in the next 3-4 years with a strong omni-channel strategy.”
“The success of some of these brands demonstrates that building on consumer relevance and with powerful time-bound execution, celebrity ventures can become significant players in a crowded market. With consumer demand for relatability and digital-first branding on the rise, this segment will definitely grow. However, only brands that offer genuine value to consumers, and not just star appeal, are likely to endure,” said Devangshu Dutta, CEO, Third Eyesight.
(Published in The Hindu-Businessline)
admin
July 28, 2025
Ananditha Anand, Deccan Chronicle (Hyderabad Chronicle)
Hyderabad, 28 July 2025
Beauty is borrowing from the bakery. Be it glazed donut skin, popularised by Hailey Bieber, jam lips, or strawberry freckles – food related makeup looks, as well as cosmetic marketing trends have been at an all-time high. In June 2025, around 2 lakh users looked up latte makeup on the image-based social media platform, Pinterest.
The Novelty Value
According to social-media-influencer Yashvi Bhaia, these trends bring a sense of novelty to cosmetic products. “Take a look at one of the body washes called Whipped Lush. It feels exactly like whipped cream – fluffy, foamy and sweet. This visual being attached to the product brings a pleasant connection,” she says.
Devangshu Dutta, founder of Third Eyesight, a management consulting firm, says, “Terms like choco mousse blush or berry lip tint evokes indulgence, comfort, and a sense of reward, transforming cosmetics into emotional experiences rather than just functional items.” Dutta likened these products to comforting treats, exuding warmth and a nostalgia for food they have consumed before, bottled in these makeup products.
Dhanashree Kavitkar is an avid follower of makeup trends on platforms like Instagram, as well as Chinese sites like Douyin and Red Note. She observes that the melding of the sensory elements of food and makeup “satisfied” the consumer.
“It works almost the same way ASMR does. When I think of jelly lips, I think edible, with a plump and glossy texture. And it just hits the right spot in my brain,” she says.
She also believes that many of these beauty trends, under the guise of novelty, are repackaging pre-existing makeup trends to make it appealing again. “Take strawberry freckle makeup for example, it is literally just drawing freckles on your face, but they gave it a new name to intrigue people,” she says.
Bina Punjani, owner of Bina Punjani Hair Studio says, “These are all marketing buzz-words created by online makeup companies, who wish to advertise to a younger audience.” She explains that food related nomenclature has existed forever in the realm of hair care products, with wines, chocolates, and caramels dominating the hair colour market.
“Sensory feelings have been a huge part of marketing and communication, be it on television, or anywhere else,” said Bhaia. “Now that marketing is so video-forward online, brands will create visuals associated with food,” she says.
Dutta adds that rather than a new concept, the increased intensity and consistency of these beauty brands employing food-related marketing on social media platforms differentiate it from their marketing in the 1980s – when it was first popularised.
Cultural Adaptation
Talking about the virality aspect of these makeup trends, Kavitkar points out how the looks trending in India (and around the world right now), were popular in East Asian countries like China and South Korea a year ago.
“Thanks to the matcha wave now, strawberry matcha makeup is popular. More East Asian food items like mochi and tanghulu have also picked up steam in the makeup space, and have gotten popular globally. But they can feel a bit alien to Indian consumers who don’t know these trends beforehand,” she says. Bhaia talks about how Indian cosmetic products adapted these trends to cater to the Indian “taste.” A leading brand has come up with lip products named masala chai, and jalebi glaze.
“These are such Indian terms, and they’ve been marketed so well. When you think of jalebi, you think of this shiny, orange-ish kind of thing, and you have a very clear visual of it.”
Just Another Trend
What keeps the novelty of these trends alive? Punjani thinks that it is the familiarity that we as humans draw towards nature and ourselves. “Suppose you look at your skin tone, and you see that exact shade in a pear – you end up drawing a psychological connection between the two,” she says.
Kavitkar thinks that they bring in a new wave of experimentation. She says, “Look at tangerine dream makeup. It is a mix of yellow and orange blush on your face, which looks so weird. If you saw someone wearing yellow blush outside, you’d be like, what the hell is she wearing? But that’s the beauty of this look, it’s so out of the box.”
Dutta notes that the frequency of usage of any imagery in the industry ebbs and flows with fashions. “Food, however, consistently provides an intuitive, emotional, and relatable entry point for consumers to engage with beauty, and will remain a versatile tool for building stories around pleasure, nostalgia, authenticity, and self-care,” he says.
While the world goes ‘bananas’ over ‘latte makeup’ and ‘gingerbread nails’ you can try the silent power of ‘smokey eyes’ and nude lips!
(Published in Deccan Chronicle)
Devangshu Dutta
June 30, 2025
In every strategy meeting today, one metric is invariably mentioned: Customer Acquisition Cost (CAC). Whether you’re a well-funded corporate retailer, or raising your first angel round, or a well-established digital duopolist brand scaling Series C, CAC is one of the key performance metrics. “Real” spend that is neatly broken down by channel, optimised by funnel tweaks, scrutinised to the last rupee or dollar.
But there’s a metric we almost never hear about that could be costing brands far more in the long run.
Let’s call it Customer Forfeiture Cost (CFC), the residual lifetime value that is lost when a customer walks away from your business not because of price, competition, or even shifting needs, but because of a “burn”: a delivery missed or messed up, a refund that took weeks, an arrogant customer service call, or a product that failed spectacularly against the promise. In other words, when your brand hurts someone enough to make them walk away. Probably for ever.
It’s a paradox: brands are pumping thousands of crores into acquiring users, but they’re bleeding value at the other end. Yet, while CAC is a line item in every financial statement, CFC is invisible in management dashboards. CEOs don’t announce, “We’ve cut our forfeiture cost by 20% this quarter.”
Yet. every CXO knows it exists. The NPS scores, the social media complaints, the “never again” comments in reviews, the sinking feeling when repeat purchase rates fall.
Why CFC Matters More Than Ever
In every business, during the early stages each sale is a victory. Whether it was the retail chains that grew in the 1990s and early-2000s or the digital upstarts that came up through 2010s and 2020s, scale has been the mantra, and investors have poured money into scaling through the growing consumption of India 1 and India 2 customers.
Today customer acquisition isn’t cheap. The same person who clicked impulsively in 2020 now thinks twice before confirming payment. In this landscape, retention isn’t optional, it’s existential.
Every lost customer isn’t just a refund processed, or a cart abandoned. It’s the long tail of future repeat purchases that will never happen, negative word of mouth and brand distrust in the customer’s circle of influence, and increased future CAC due to declining organic reach.
Way back in 1967, management consultant Peter Drucker wrote in his book “The Effective Executive”: “What gets measured, gets managed”.
Today your CAC may be Rs. 500-1,000. If the average customer life time value (LTV) is Rs. 10,000, and a single burn causes churn after just one order worth Rs. 2,000, your CFC is Rs. 8,000, and that doesn’t even include reputational spillover.
Why We Don’t Measure It
Yes, CFC is hard to quantify. It’s not as easily attributable as ad spends. There’s usually no neat model telling you why someone never returned, because tech stacks aren’t typically designed to track emotional exits. And let’s face it, introspection about broken relationships is uncomfortable, even for management teams.
But that doesn’t mean it’s not real. If a customer leaves because your delivery executive messed up, or because your app crashed during checkout twice in a row, that’s on you, not the market. And in a business climate where sustainable growth is the mantra, LTV is king.
Ignoring CFC is like watching your roof leak and blaming the rain.
Toward a New Discipline
Brands and retailers must start measuring CFC, the value lost when customers disengage due to friction, mistrust, or neglect, and then start working on reducing it. This can be done by:
The Competitive Edge We’re Not Using
In a crowded space where everyone’s vying for eyeballs, trust is the true moat. Customers don’t expect perfection – they do expect accountability, authenticity, and recovery when things go wrong.
Brands that understand and act on Customer Forfeiture Costs will quietly start building a powerful edge: deeper brand loyalty, lower CAC over time thanks to referrals and repeats and greater lifetime value per user.
In other words, real, compounding value.
As the Indian brand ecosystem matures, Customer Forfeiture Cost needs to be as visible and valued as CAC. Acquisition is the invitation; experience is the relationship. Relationships, once broken, are expensive to rebuild; if they can be rebuilt at all.
In the end, growth isn’t just about who comes in. It’s about who stays, and why.
(Written by Devangshu Dutta, Founder of Third Eyesight, this was published in Financial Express on 2 July 2025)
admin
May 7, 2025
Shalinee Mishra, Exchange4Media
May 7, 2025
Bollywood’s biggest stars, Katrina Kaif and Deepika Padukone, have reputed beauty businesses to their names — Kay Beauty and 82°East, respectively.
Kay Beauty, launched in late 2019 in partnership with Nykaa, has crossed the ₹200 crore revenue mark in 2024. In contrast, 82°E, launched by Deepika in November 2022, has managed around ₹25 crore, according to industry estimates.
Both actors have massive social media pull, strong brand equity, and sizable fan followings. They are matched in popularity, but the same cannot be said about their respective brands. One clearly has an edge over the other. In this case, it is Kay Beauty.
What went wrong with 82°E?
A core difference between the two brands is pricing.
Kay Beauty’s average product is priced affordably at around ₹299, making it accessible to a large portion of Indian beauty consumers. It hits the sweet spot of mass affordability and aspirational branding.
Katrina seems to have built the line keeping in mind India’s price-sensitive but beauty-conscious audience, especially women who look for functional, everyday products without shelling out a fortune.
On the other hand, 82°E positions itself as a luxury skincare brand, with products starting at ₹2,500 and going up to nearly ₹4,000. While targeting the premium market is a valid strategy, it demands either a very clear value proposition or a unique, standout offering that sets it apart from both domestic and global competitors.
According to multiple marketing and retail experts, 82°E currently lacks such a defining “hero” product. In contrast, top-tier global brands like Estée Lauder (Advanced Night Repair) and L’Occitane (Immortelle Divine Cream) have built their entire portfolio identity around one or two iconic products.
Devangshu Dutta, CEO of retail consultancy Third Eyesight, cautions against overestimating the power of celebrity equity alone. “Celebrity involvement, even with an equity stake, doesn’t automatically ensure brand success,” he says. “What matters is how well the product and brand resonate with the end consumer. Many factors—category selection, pricing, accessibility, and retail strategy—determine scalability.”
He adds, “A high-priced D2C brand with limited-use products will always scale slower than a more affordably priced, high-rotation brand with widespread retail availability.”
Missing the emotional connect
Another crucial area where 82°E falters is brand recall without Deepika. Experts argue that if Deepika’s face were to be removed from the branding, very little would remain to emotionally anchor consumers.
While celebrity-founded brands enjoy the initial boost of recognition, long-term consumer connection demands storytelling, product efficacy, and relevance.
For a product priced between ₹2700–₹3900, the experience and results need to justify the cost. But user feedback suggests the perceived benefits don’t dramatically exceed what one might get from a ₹999 serum in the market.
Katrina’s Kay Beauty, in contrast, positioned itself as a homegrown solution for Indian skin types, with products that worked well for deeper skin tones and humidity-prone weather.
The brand tapped into inclusivity and practicality—two emotional hooks that resonate deeply with Indian consumers. Additionally, it responded to functional needs by launching waterproof and sweat-resistant products, which especially make sense during monsoons.
On Instagram, Katrina actively promotes her products, collaborates with influencers, and shares content that resonates with her target audience. In contrast, Deepika’s brand presence on social media lacks the same level of relatability and consistent engagement, suggesting a need for a more tailored and active digital strategy.
Link: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DI_wjSRoZTM/? utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIWHG1DSR5f/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==
Retail footprint and distribution strategy
Skincare, particularly in the premium category, remains an experiential purchase. Consumers often want to try and test products before committing, especially at a higher price point. 82°E launched as a D2C-only brand, relying heavily on its website and social media advertising for discovery and sales with no store opening.
The strategy meant substantial upfront investment in paid media and influencer partnerships to generate traction, but lacked the physical visibility or tactile experience needed to convert high-end skincare buyers.
In contrast, Kay Beauty quickly became visible across Nykaa’s extensive online and offline retail network, giving shoppers a chance to explore products across price tiers in-store and online. The Nykaa tie-up served not only as a strong distribution engine but also as a brand endorsement in itself, given the platform’s dominant position in Indian beauty retail.
As Kushal Sanghvi, a media and marketing strategist, puts it, “Kay Beauty got its pricing, packaging, promotion, and place—basically the key P’s of marketing—spot on. Deepika’s brand, though elegant, is caught in a niche premium wellness space with limited scale.”
Kay Beauty was developed with a clear understanding of what works in India: colour cosmetics tailored for Indian skin tones and seasonal weather. The brand focused on frequently-used products like lipsticks, kajal, and foundation sticks that had both a functional and emotional appeal, allowing it to drive repeat purchases.
In contrast, 82°E focused on skincare rooted in self-care and holistic wellness, a space that is already crowded with local and international competitors, and where product effectiveness needs to be proven over time. Moreover, Indian consumers still tend to see skincare as utilitarian, rather than indulgent, which makes higher pricing even more of a challenge.
Short-Term Results vs. Long-Term Vision
It’s important to contextualise these figures within brand age. Luxury brands, globally, have often taken decades to establish loyalty. From Estée Lauder to Chanel, brand equity is built slowly through repeated use, reliable results, and consistent positioning.
But time alone won’t change the equation unless the core approach is recalibrated. If Deepika’s brand intends to build a long-lasting business, it will need to think beyond elite appeal and D2C strategy. Offline presence, a wider retail network, and possibly a reimagining of its product portfolio to include lower price points or trial-sized options could open the door to a broader consumer base.
India’s beauty and wellness market is growing at over 15% year-on-year, and opportunities abound at both the premium and affordable ends of the spectrum. But clarity of positioning and accessibility remain critical to long-term success.
(Published in Exchange4Media)
