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
June 13, 2025
Hiral Goyal, The Morning Context
13 June 2025
Several smart, well-to-do Indians believe they have an opportunity to build a successful business by selling apparel to affluent people. Armed with this hypothesis and with venture capital in tow, these entrepreneurs are having a go at the market.
Some are building a business just around undergarments, for instance. Others are focusing on premium T-shirts. Or denim wear. There’s also ethnic wear. And work clothes. Even workout clothes. It would appear that every niche in the apparel market is being exploited by someone who believes they have a product that can disrupt the category and create a large, sustainable business.
Amid this sea of ventures, BlissClub stands out.
In only five years of operations, the Bengaluru-based startup has made a name for itself. By simply focusing on premium activewear for women. Now that’s a niche within a niche.
Founded by Minu Margeret in 2020, BlissClub’s story goes something like this. Drawing on her personal experience as a frisbee player, Margeret started BlissClub to address the needs of Indian women who struggled to find comfortable and functional activewear. With inclusive sizing and tiny details such as pockets and wide waistbands in leggings, the startup catered to Indian women with products that were specifically designed for them and their body types.
The idea clicked. Women were willing to experiment with BlissClub’s clothing and, on the back of its early success, the company has grown from zero to revenue of over Rs 85 crore as of 31 March 2024. The startup has also been able to raise capital from VC investors like Elevation Capital, Eight Roads Ventures and Alteria Capital, who’ve come on board hoping that Margeret is onto something. Just last month, the company raised Rs 45 crore (around $5.3 million) in a Series B funding round, a mix of debt and equity. This took its total fundraise to nearly $26 million (Rs 222 crore), according to Entrackr.
Except that’s all the good news there is. Five years in, it looks like BlissClub is at a crossroads. Its revenue growth has slowed-from 360% year-on-year in 2022-23 to just 27% in 2023-24-and its valuation remains flat at $67 million.
Already, women’s activewear as a category is far too niche. It doesn’t help that BlissClub now faces intense competition from legacy players like Page Industries (Jockey’s India licensee), Aditya Birla Group and French sporting goods retailer Decathlon as well as startups like HRX and Clovia. All of them are trying to grow their sales to keep up with the rapidly growing trend of casual attire, where product differentiation is now largely down to marketing. It is another matter altogether that these customers are price-conscious, and disposable income to spend on premium clothing is limited to a few million people in India.
That’s the reality of the market where BlissClub operates. “The greatest challenge for the new athleisure brands, apart from capital and internal execution discipline, is to maintain brand integrity rather than get sucked into price battles and discounting, which is a race to the bottom that only the businesses with large balance sheets can win,” says Devangshu Dutta, founder and chief executive of Third Eyesight, a management consulting firm focused on the retail and consumer goods industry.
Questions sent to Margeret did not elicit a response. But it’s important to ask, what should BlissClub do? It may have had a great start, but is that enough to scale? This is what we’ve set out to explore in this story.
Fighting the big guns
Almost every customer in India who’s out to buy activewear or athleisure-has enough well-known brands to choose from. There’s Jockey, Decathlon, Nike, Puma, Adidas, Asics and Skechers, to name a few. And there’s something for everyone at every possible price point.
So, what particular need is BlissClub trying to fulfill?
Margeret says she started the company because she could never find appropriate activewear in the Indian market. From BlissClub’s website about its origin story: “While some clothes were comfortable, they simply did not stretch enough. Those that did stretch, were too compressive.” With BlissClub, Margeret focused on inclusive sizes and comfortable fabric that was ideally suited to India’s hot climate.
But are inclusivity and quality enough when it comes to having a differentiating factor? Not really.
Nothing, for instance, would stop other brands from copying BlissClub’s designs or offering comparable quality to gain customers. Additionally, BlissClub risks losing customers to other brands if it fails to keep up with its promise of top-most quality products. Some customers have already taken to social media recently to share their grievances (here, here, here and here). Their most common complaint? The quality of BlissClub’s fabric has gone down and there’s a lot of pilling.
On top of this, there is unrelenting competition from legacy players, most of whom have been building their athleisure portfolio for sometime now. Take Page Industries, for example. The company launched its athleisure portfolio in 1995, but it only doubled down on making it a key growth pillar in 2014-15. Just a couple of years later, Aditya Birla Group entered the men’s athleisure business with Van Heusen in 2016 and later expanded into women’s wear as well. Both these brands were quick to identify the shifting fashion trend to casual wear and benefited handsomely when the category finally exploded during the COVID-19 pandemic-as people started working from home and focusing on their physical health. Here’s what Page Industries’ CEO Karthik Yathindra told Mint in 2022 about the company’s decision to focus on athleisure: “So, the timing worked out for us very well. Demand has also been healthy across innerwear for men and women, but athleisure really surged a lot more than what we had anticipated or planned for. I would say, we jumped a year or two in terms of demand with athleisure compared to pre-pandemic days. We literally doubled our business. Whereas, overall, as an organization, we clocked 37-38% jump in revenue in the last financial year.”
It is no surprise then that these companies are well positioned in terms of the distribution network and the range of choices they offer to take on the Indian athleisure market as compared to BlissClub and other small players. Page Industries, for example, has more than 111,000 multi-brand stores and 1,453 exclusive brand stores, besides its digital presence through its own website and third-party marketplaces. BlissClub, on the other hand, has largely been an online player, selling products through its own website or through marketplaces like Myntra and Amazon. At present, it runs 14 retail stores across nine cities.
That’s no small gap, and competition is only going to heat up. So, what options does BlissClub have?
Stretched thin
From where BlissClub stands today, there are only a few ways it can grow its top line. Mostly because the size of India’s athleisure market remains small; it’s even smaller for women. “Athleisure is a $15 billion market with a CAGR of 20%. Of this, women are -30-40%,” says Gaurav Verma, co-founder and head of consumer investments at venture capital fund Ortella Global Capital. This $5-billion market for women’s activewear becomes smaller if we take into account only the premium space. (We couldn’t independently verify this estimate as there are no reliable reports available.)
In a niche market like this, there’s limited room to scale. Unless you cut down prices, introduce more categories, start catering to all genders or open retail stores. Let’s look at each of these options.
First up, the prices. Any premium brand that cuts prices risks diluting itself. Now, BlissClub has been handing out discounts and buy-one-get-one offers more liberally than ever before. For example, its Ultimate Leggings the company’s bestselling product -is priced at Rs 2,299 and sold at Rs 1,399 after discount. But when you compare it with Decathlon or homegrown brands like Hrithik Roshan-backed HRX or Clovia, you’d find that BlissClub remains in the premium segment even after discounts. And while lowering prices further might help BlissClub gain more customers, its margins-already EBITDA-negative-will most likely suffer.
The second strategy is introducing more categories. This is something BlissClub seems to be interested in. The startup entered the innerwear category with sports bras. The latest additions have been swimwear and travel wear. But in these segments, BlissClub is yet to replicate the kind of success it saw with its flagship products-Ultimate Leggings and Ultimate Flare Pants.
There is a bigger problem here. When it comes to athleisure startups, says Verma, “there are growth concerns beyond the top 3-5 SKUs [stock keeping units) like leggings, tops.” He goes on to say, “Unless we see growth in [direct-to-consumer) on higher-priced SKUs like jackets, shoes and accessories, we will continue to see pressure on both top line and bottom line growth.”
To make matters worse for BlissClub, the new categories the company is venturing into are witnessing increased competition. Take innerwear, for example. Influencer Kusha Kapila recently announced her shapewear brand Underneat, backed by Fireside Ventures and Mamaearth co-founder Ghazal Alagh. Besides this, players like Jockey, Clovia and Van Heusen have also been fighting for market share.
The third option, then, is to enter the menswear category. Though a natural extension for any athleisure brand, it does not promise scale. Let’s look at Technosport for some perspective. The A91 Partners-backed company, which sells affordable activewear for men and women across categories, reported a revenue of Rs 382 crore (around $44.5 million) in 2023-24. But that is after 18 years of operations and catering to the mass market with a fairly well-established distribution in the offline channel.
An even bigger challenge for BlissClub here would be to shake off its identity as a brand for women. Take the case of Lululemon. When the Canadian activewear company entered the men’s business in 2014, the biggest concern was that the brand was popularized by women and it would be tough to convince male customers to buy its products. The breakthrough here was the company’s ABC pants-short for anti-ball crushing pants-which helped Lululemon acquire male customers. Still, Lululemon continues to struggle with its identity as a women’s brand. Its latest effort to fight this was by making seven-time Formula 1 champion Lewis Hamilton its brand ambassador.
Finally, there’s the option of opening physical stores to acquire more customers. A digital-first strategy, says Dutta, allows the newer niche brands to directly connect with their target customers and achieve a critical mass. However, to get greater scale, “they need to add offline presence as well,” he notes. “Offline stores are not just a mainstreaming opportunity but also a way to create a brand immersion experience for the consumers, which can strengthen the connect with their core consumer segment.”
However, considering that BlissClub is a premium brand, it only makes sense for the brand to open outlets in high-street markets. But this would entail some serious expenditure. After all, opening retail stores requires capital.
Raising capital, though, does not look like a tall order for BlissClub. Its most recent fundraise, which will be used towards growth and expansion, is a testament to that. Before that, the company had raised $15 million in its Series A round. The credit for this partly goes to Margeret and Vidit Aatrey’s connections in the VC ecosystem. Aatrey, Margeret’s husband, is Meesho’s co-founder and CEO (the e-commerce company itself has raised $1.61 billion in total funding.)
Thanks to the funds it has been able to raise, BlissClub has had a good run so far.
However, with competition brewing in this space, the company risks losing its edge and becoming one of many. To give credit where it’s due, BlissClub has done a great job at building brand equity in the Indian activewear market. To grow beyond where it is today, though, it will need to rethink its strategy.
Perhaps it already is. In the last year, BlissClub has entered into categories beyond activewear; this includes innerwear, swimwear and most recently, travel wear. At the same time, it is also opening retail stores across the country.
How BlissClub scales will leave cues not just for Margeret but everyone else who believes they can build a niche apparel company in India successfully.
(Published in The Morning Context)
admin
May 5, 2025
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)
admin
August 30, 2024
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
admin
February 29, 2024
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
