Mint, 5 May 2026

Priyamvada C., Sneha Shah

Urban India’s pet parents are driving a wave of investor interest in the pet care space. A clutch of startups such as Heads Up For Tails, Supertails, and Vetic are now in fundraising talks amid rising demand for premium products and services

While Supertails looks to raise about ₹200 crore by the end of this year, Heads Up For Tails is eyeing an investment from domestic investment firm 360 One Asset over the next few months, according to mul tiple people familiar with the matter.

Vetic, a tech-enabled chain of pet clinics, is looking to raise a sizeable round and has begun discussions with investors, they said, adding that some of these transactions may see existing investors part exit their stake.

Supertails and Vetic did not immediately respond to Mint’s requests for a comment. While 360 One declined to comment, Heads Up For Tails’ founder Rashi Narang denied the development.

Investor interest in pet care surged in the years following the pandemic, driven by a wave of new pet adoptions and rising disposable incomes. In 2023, pet care startups raised a record $66.3 million across 16 rounds, led by one major transaction ― Drool’s $60 million fundraise.

While 2023 saw a funding spike driven by Drool’s large deal, overall funding activity in 2024 was more broad-based, with fundraising at $17.9 million spanning 13 rounds, as per Tracxn.

“Pet ownership in India is estimated to be less than 10% of overall households, but growing at a rapid pace with rising incomes, especially among urban consumers. In developed economies, pet ownership can exceed three in four households, and that headroom for growth is reflected among the upper income segments in India,” said Devangshu Dutta, chief executive of Third Eyesight, a management consulting firm.

He added that urban couples and singles in many cases are even opting to become “pet parents” instead of having children.

Platforms such as Supertails, Drools and Heads Up For Tails have been the big beneficiaries of this shift. Drools raised $60 million from LVMH-backed private equity firm L Catterton in 2023, while Supertails raised $15 million led by RPSG Capital Ventures in February last year.

Similarly, Supertails, which is in talks to acquire Blue 7 Vets, a multi speciality veterinary clinic, as part of its strategy to expand offline, will also raise capital to fund the acquisition of new customers, investments in technology, and the expansion of healthcare services, including Super-tails Pharmacy and build an omni-channel experience for consumers.

The company raised about $15 million in its series B funding round last year led by RPSG Capital Ventures and existing investors Fireside Ventures, Saama Capital, DSG Consumer Partners and Sauce VC.

(Published in Mint)

In a startup world, founders are typically creators first while investors see themselves as the monitors. Therefore, conflicts between the two are almost a default feature of a relationship that in effect funds a dream. From ‘off’ chemistry to differences of opinion to what some founders see as shackles on entrepreneurial freedom, the reasons could be any or a mix of all. Watch this discussion, with a mega-panel of intense start-up founders on the one hand and investors with VC funds on the other, addressing the pain points on Cash, Control, Creativity, Chemistry and Culture in a supercharged encounter. Session Anchor, Devangshu Dutta (Founder, Third Eyesight) reflected, “Those who have heard classical music jugalbandi or witnessed jazz musicians jamming will appreciate the creative tension, the give and take that was the thread throughout this discussion, reflecting the reality of the relationship between entrepreneurs and VCs.”

Watch the video

INVESTORS:
Ankita Balotia, VP, Fireside Ventures
Aashish Vanigota, Principal – Investments, IvyCap Ventures Advisors Private Limited
Bhawna Bhatnagar, Co-founder, We Founder Circle
Nitya Agarwal, VP-Investments, 3one4 Capital
Harmanpreet Singh, Founder & Managing Partner, Prath Ventures
Vamshi Reddy, Partner, Kalaari Capital
Zoeb Ali Khan, Vice President, Sauce.vc

D2C FOUNDERS:
Abdus Samad, Founder, Sam & Marshall Eyewear
Akshay Mahendru, Co-Founder & CEO, The Pet Point & Nootie
Malvika Jain, Founder, SEREKO
Nitin Jain, Founder, Indigifts
Puneet Tyagi, Egoss Shoes
Radhika Dang, CEO & Founder, The Good Karma Company
Rahul Aggarwal, Coffeeza
Udit Toshniwal, Founder & Director, The Pant Project
Vaani Chugh, Co-founder & Director, D’chica
Yash Kotak, Co-founder, Bombay Hemp Co.
Yashesh Mukhi, Co-founder, Chupps

29 February 2024, Mumbai

Prince M. Thomas, TheMorningContext

Prataap Snacks should have been an easy sell for Peak XV Partners. The venture capital firm, which till recently was known as Sequoia Capital India, is the largest shareholder in the snack maker with a 47.56% stake. It first invested in Indore-based Prataap Snacks in 2011 and has since seen the company become the sixth largest player in the industry. An exit now would give Peak XV returns that would match some of its best exits, like those from Zomato and Go Fashion.

The reality is, finding a buyer for Prataap Snacks isn’t as easy as selling a packet of “chatakedaar” rings bearing its Yellow Diamond brand. In fact, those packets of rings may be one of the reasons why the company seems to have lost some of its spice with suitors. We will come to that in a bit, but first it’s remarkable how many doors Peak XV has knocked on without any luck…

The company’s choice of products, most of them falling under the category of “western snacks”, was prudent. “When it comes to snacks, the Indian market is very diversified. Each region has its own flavour and there are local nuances,” says Devangshu Dutta, founder of consulting firm Third Eyesight. That means a regional snack, like the gathiya that is popular in Gujarat, will have fewer takers in eastern and southern states. Prataap Snacks’s products had no such problem as chips and rings were not region-specific…

Read more at: https://themorningcontext.com/business/sequoia-struggles-to-sell-prataap-snacks

An insightful must-watch discussion, moderated by Devangshu Dutta (Founder, Third Eyesight), with venture capital fund managers, investors and entrepreneurs in retail on what factors attract investors to retail businesses.

The panelists included Vikram Gupta (Founder & Managing Partner, IvyCap Ventures), Amar Nagaram, (Co-Founder, Virgio), and Vikram Gawande (Vice President, Growth, Blume Ventures).

T. Surendar, The Morning Context

25 March 2020

Standing on the porch of the Grand Hyatt Hotel in Mumbai suburbs, Diwakar Vaish, co-founder of Noida-based AgVa Healthcare, was trying to catch the attention of software industry executives. This is at the annual conference hosted by IT trade body Nasscom. Vaish’s stall was a side-show for startups to exhibit digital technologies in the healthcare sector.

On a cool, breezy February day, the atmosphere was nothing as grim you would expect in a hospital emergency ward. Vaish’s rig, comprising an iPad-like device on a short steel column mounted on wheels with dangling wires, was a cost-effective version of a ventilator used in critical care. There wasn’t much excitement about his solution, as few executives really understood the medical problem he aimed to solve.

Today, a robotic engineer by training, Vaish is super busy.

It is not easy to get him on the phone, as AgVa’s ventilator is suddenly in demand from all parts of the country. The company is running three shifts fulfilling orders, which have been pouring in since it became apparent that Indian hospitals did not have enough ventilators for patients rendered ill by the novel coronavirus.

Unwittingly, the need for ventilators has once again drawn attention to India’s medical devices industry or the lack of it. So much so that Anand Mahindra, chairman of the $17 billion Mahindra group, which has interests in automobiles, software and resorts, said that he was finding ways to manufacture ventilators in his factories. It isn’t easy putting together a ventilator, not when you are racing against time, but Mahindra is a hardy businessman with deep pockets, and maybe, just maybe, he will succeed.

In many ways, the Indian medical devices industry is an anomaly. India has a space programme, a nuclear programme, it is among the few countries that has developed patented medicines and a low cost version of anything from power turbines to trucks but when it comes to medical equipment, it fares poorly.

India is also the biggest supplier of FDA-approved drugs to the US, the biggest pharmaceutical market in the world. Even as the Indian market for medical equipment has grown at double-digit rates in the last five years to Rs 1 lakh crore, two-thirds of its needs are met by foreign companies such as Philips, GE Healthcare, Siemens and Abbott.

Import domination is all pervasive extending to even non-critical but common equipment like sonography machines, dentistry chairs and diagnostic equipment. Less than five Indian companies had revenue of more than Rs 500 crore a year and 90% were classified as small scale, with annual revenue less than Rs 10 crore. The biggest player in the domestic market is the Rs 1,300 crore Mumbai-based Transasia Bio-Medicals, which makes in vitro diagnostic solutions that are exported to Western markets too.

“For a long time, the government was the biggest buyer of medical equipment and they always preferred imported equipment. That meant that it was not lucrative for local entrepreneurs to invest their capital in the sector,” says G.S.K. Velu, managing director of Trivitron Healthcare, which makes and exports imaging equipment.

The proliferation of private hospitals in the last two decades also did not change things much. With well-entrenched foreign players and a liberal import duty structure to make available the best facilities in India, there were few local companies of scale who could invest big money to fend off competition. AgVa’s ventilators were priced at a fifth of the ones sold by the foreign competitors, yet it couldn’t make inroads into big hospitals. “It’s almost as if our cost was our barrier to sell. Being critical equipment, customers had a lot of inertia to even place test orders,” says Vaish.

Thanks to meagre domestic manufacturing. India also could not set standards of equipment specifications to suit the local needs. It had to tweak its own equipment standards to fall in line with those of foreign manufacturers. For example, in the US, defibrillators used to restore heartbeats by giving shock to patients had to last at least two shock cycles. But, in India, since access to hospitals and medical care was not as easy. patients arrive long after they have suffered heart attacks and Indian doctors use defibrillators for even 10 cycles at a time.

The local standards did not specify this need and as a result many imported defibrillators were not of much use in Indian conditions. “We still don’t have an act to regulate medical devices and it falls under the drugs category. Everything is still borrowed from the West,” says Aniruddha Atre, co-founder and director of Pune-based Jeevtronics Pvt. Ltd, which makes the world’s first hand-cranked defibrillator.

Trivitron’s Velu says that the share of locally produced medical equipment will increase within the next decade. This will be a combination of help from the government which will enforce more domestic manufacturing by overseas firms and increased entrepreneurship.

There is also a view that more global manufacturing will come to India, as firms de-risk their strategy of manufacturing everything in China. “In the past, when labour costs went up in the Chinese west coast, Indian garment companies were beneficiaries of increased orders even though other countries like Bangladesh and Vietnam too got a big share of it. The availability of labour and ability to scale up operations is something global players look for and to that extent India will always be an important outsourcing destination,” said Devangshu Dutta, managing partner at consultancy firm Third Eyesight.

The trend started even before the COVID-19 pandemic as companies in the US began to brace themselves for a trade war with China. For example, a US-based company has started sourcing Indian tyres at a 10-15% premium as it wants to diversify its risk from China. “India has witnessed a surge in mobile phone manufacturing. This is bound to increase the ecosystem in electronic manufacturing which in turn create ecosystems for industries like medical equipment,” says Sharad Verma, senior partner who oversees industrials at Boston Consulting Group.

The timing is also right for increase in local manufacturing, argues Verma. One of the important criteria for that is viable domestic consumption. It’s happened time and again in sectors like automobiles, mobile phones and more recently in manufacture of metro bogies after domestic consumption has reached a scale where it makes sense for companies to set up manufacturing facilities. “The industry is no longer small and the incidence of medical technology will only go up from here making it viable for even foreign companies to look at a manufacturing set up in India,” says Verma.

It will be interesting to see how it all plays out. The sector, so far, hasn’t seen much by way of private equity or venture investment. The most prominent one was an investment by a Morgan Stanley fund and Samara Capital in Surat-based Sahajanand Medical Technologies and Fidelity Growth Partners’s investment in Trivitron. But starting 2014, a government fund run by the Biotechnology Industry Research Assistance Council-incubated several companies who are slowly bringing their products to market. As some of these products hit home, especially in the wake of COVID-19, the action is definitely bound to pick up.

(published in The Morning Context)