Discover third-party food delivery market economy at global stage: Global food delivery revolution has its own regional ways of operation, which results in sharp contrast between Western litigation and eastern interaction. In Chicago, one local taqueria has already found out that they made a loss in almost every delivery to DoorDash, after 40,000 orders. In Mumbai the restaurant owners are also involved in various forums where the CEO of the platform presents the economics of the business. These two scenarios demonstrate a cornerstone revolution to the manner in which the 1 trillion world delivery market is going to operate by the year 2028.
Table of Contents
The Global Disruption of Food Delivery Market Economy
The quantum of modern food delivery is a challenge at large. Normal profit margins of restaurants are between 3-9 percent and platform charges are between 15-40 percent of the overall value of the orders. Such difference imposes a radical change of restaurant finances.
Global Food Delivery Market Statistics (2025-2026)
U.S. Market Domination: 67 percent of the market is dominated by the DoorDash with Uber Eats coming in at 23 percent.
Legal Allegations of DoorDash Food Delivery Costs
DoorDash paid Chicago a 18-million-dollar settlement in November 2025 over false premises. DoorDash Inc deceived diners in 2014-2021 by imposing service fee, small order fee, and $1.50 Chicago fee in addition to delivery fees but concealing them to consumers by combining them with taxes, indicating they were imposed by the government, the city alleged.
Legal Objection on Strategies of DoorDash
The city alleged that the food prices listed on DoorDash may also vary with the ones available in the restaurant location and online, which DoorDash did not disclose. DoorDash also reportedly prominently gave discounts that were only applied in the cases of diners who attained a minimum order requirement.
The city also accused DoorDash of providing free publicizing and conveyance to eateries that are not in any contractual relationship with the site and not partners in DoorDash though utilizing tips provided by diners to cover its expenses to its drivers.
The $18 million settlement that DoorDash will pay will not reach other organizations: 3.25 million will be paid to the restaurants that were on the DoorDash roster without their approval and are not on the app currently. The company will show instructions to the food establishments that are not part of the company on how to be included in settlement payment and ultimately will not include the food establishments without prior consent.
Zomato & Swiggy Dominating Indian Food Delivery Market
Zomato and Swiggy are in duopoly and Zomato is using a commission of between 15-30%. Baseline 2020 Both firms commenced the year operating at virtually the same level, with each of them controlling about 45 percent of the organized food delivery market share. This was a duopolistic competition where the market position was barely differentiated.
Zomato’s Domination in Indian Food Delivery Market 2021-22
Divergence 2021-2022: In July 2021, Zomato enjoyed great capital benefits as a result of its July IPO which allowed it to afford heavy customer. acquisitions and growths of restaurants partners. In 2021 and then 2022, the market share of Zomato increased to 48 and 52 percent, respectively. At the same time, the share of Swiggy went down to 43% and 40% as the company not only gained share with Zomato, but also smaller regional players entered the market.
Rise of Zomato’s Market Share in Indian Food Delivery Market 2023
2023 Widening Gap: The gap was at its highest in 2023, the market shares of Zomato dominated 55% over Swiggy, 37% – an 18 percentage point difference. This time was observed during the acquisition of Uber Eats India by Zomato and intensive growth in the tier 2/3 cities.
Stabilization of Swiggy And Rise of Zomato in 2024-25
Stabilization 2024-2025: The market share of Swiggy regained the 40 percent mark in 2024, and 42 percent by Q1 2025, which narrowed the gap to 16 percentage points. This recovery was based on Swiggy making a reinvestment in service quality, innovation with Swiggy Bolt, and better unit economics. The expansion of Zomato to 58% of the market is an indication of expansion in the market and not loss in the market share.
Projected Growth of Global Food Delivery Market: The world delivery market is going to surpass the value of a trillion dollars by 2028.
Why US Restaurants are Fighting With Delivery System
The American delivery system is based on the high-margin commissions levels, which determine the restaurant presence. DoorDash has three major levels such as Basic (15%), Plus (25%), and Premier (30%). The majority of restaurants choose the Premier tier due to its ability to gain the search visibility needed to maintain the order volume.
The base commission is not the only financial weight. The real costs to be incurred attend to the restaurant may thus be higher than 40 percent when payment processing costs, marketing expenses, and small-order charges are included. In a survival strategy, restaurants normally increase the cost of their menu to the delivery client by 15% to 25%.
Deception and Contractual Friction in US Food Delivery Market
The U.S. paradigm is closely criticized about price parity provisions. Such provisions in the past kept the restaurants off of lowering their price in dine-in or direct ordering, in effect compelling walk-in customers to pick up the delivery infrastructure expenses.
The publicity of the $18 million settlement by Chicago at the end of 2025 showed some systemic problems:
- Unauthorized Listings: Restaurants were platformed against their will.
- False Promises: The Chicago Fee was false promises to the consumers concerning the destination of their money.
- Tip Subsidies: The platforms subsidised customer tips to achieve guaranteed pay requirements to drivers instead of paying them on top of bottom pay.
These activities make restaurants a kind of an order fulfillment center of platforms that own the customer data and manage the virtual storefront.
The View of Deepinder Goyal (CEO of Zomato)
Deepinder Goyal, the founder of Zomato, was featured in a 4.5-hour podcast on Raj Shamani show, Figuring out in January 2026. This discussion was a break to the austerity of western high-tech CEOs. Goyal has gone through the less-than-clean economics of the platform platform it framed the business as a set of tough trade-offs.
The Karma System and Gig Worker Economics in Zomato
The number of delivery partners canceled by Zomato amounts to about 5,000 every month, and it happens mostly because of fraudulent activities or system abuse. In the event of conflicts that involve the uncertain presence of the at-fault party, Zomato uses a karma system. This system reports the past behavior with a view to ascertain reliability. According to Goyal, in most ambiguous cases, where a dispute takes place (50 to 70 per cent.), the loss that will be incurred will go to the platform, other than punishing the driver or the restaurant.
The 10 Minute Delivery Explained By Zomato’s CEO
The 10-minute controversial model of delivery is built on the basis of logistics and not the speed of the rider. The Blinkit network of Zomato attains the following speeds:
- Hyper-local Proximity: Location of dark-stores or kitchens into high density population centres.
- Predictive Positioning: Making moves to inventory with the advancement of algorithms to bring the inventory nearer to the customers prior to the peak hours.
- Automatized Routing: Removes the delays in delivering the decision to the riders.
Goyal insists that the delivery partners do not have regular schedules or imposed time schedules. The efficiency lies in the network structure, but not the speed augmented by a rider.
Transparency as a Strategy
Zomato also involves the National Restaurant Association of India, unlike U.S. platforms, which normally take the disputes to court. In 2025, long-distance charges (Rs. 20-40) caused a commotion, and Goyal negotiated with the leaders of the mentioned association. In September 2025, the parent company, Eternal, of Zomato started looking to reduce commission rates based on the response of the restaurants.
Food Delivery Commission Rate India vs USA
The strategy that India has adopted in regard to regulation is to focus on a consolidated fee ceiling. Zomato has a 30 percent commission limit which incorporates all the service fees. This offers some predictability on costs, which U.S. city-by-city controls (such as New York or San Francisco) usually do not offer.
| Feature | India (Zomato/Swiggy) | United States (DoorDash/Uber Eats) |
| Basic Commission | 15% | 15% |
| Maximum Commission | 30% (Capped) | 30% + Marketing/Processing (Uncapped) |
| Fee Structure | Tiered Transparency | Variable/Hidden Fees |
| New Competition | Rapido (8-15% commission) | High Barrier to Entry |
The move by Rapido into the Indian food delivery market at commission rates up to 8% is also putting pressure on the incumbents to seed their 30 percent margins. Competition in the market is becoming more effective in reducing cost as compared to legislation requirements.
What is Really Working with Restaurants For Delivery
The effective restaurants are moving to an Omni-channel type. This approach will combine dine in/ direct ordering and smart platform utilization into a solid business plan.
Smart Platform Strategies
- Discovery vs. Retention: Acquire new customers on platforms, and move to first-party platforms, such as WhatsApp or branded websites.
- Menu Optimization: Only use high-margin goods on delivery apps. Bigger packages to boost the average order value (AOV) that would soften the effect of flat delivery fees.
- Self-Delivery Benefits: Uber Eats provides restaurants with a lower commission rate of 15% as opposed to the normal rate of 30%.
- Selective Marketing: Only do platform advertising during special peak time periods and not on the 24/7 expenditure.
In the direct ordering model, flat-fee subscriptions have become available (such as $50- $200 per month) to enable restaurants receive 100 percent of per-order income. The issue here is to get customers to out wit the ease of having a one-stop app, or super-app.
What Food Delivery Platforms Should Do
Food delivery of the future demands that there is a re-alignment of interests between the courier, the kitchen, and the platform.
- In the case of Platforms: Transparency should be the norm. This involves the distribution of efficiency benefits with its partners and allowing restaurant ownership of customer information.
- In the case of Restaurants: It is essential to change the emphasis on how to get the most reviews. to “How do I create a brand that will be sought out by the customers?
- To the Policymakers: antitrust inspection must be re-examined on price parity provisions and application of commission cap to suppress the workaround of hidden fees.
The emergence of low-commission carriers like Rapido, market forces are pointing to the departure of the 30% margin. Moreover, the recent investment of Deepinder Goyal of 25m in longevity research is an indication that platform leaders are starting to think decades as opposed to quarters.
What Can Customers do to avoid Fee Hikes?
The key to causing a price ceiling to materialize can be as simple as right before it, the social media. Since restaurants do not have many ways to escape paying commissions to the traditional food delivery applications, the social media can be the solution.
These consumers are strong champions, and they can embrace the alternative strategy of the restaurant in terms of ordering with ease and shape the entire delivery industry with their actions and opinions via social media. To be more precise, when consumers enter a social media, say, an Instagram page of a restaurant, as a gateway, most people placing orders in a restaurant can be redirected to a channel that the restaurant would prefer.
And there is no charge on the restaurant to make a profile which can also contain a link to the least commission or margin intensive delivery ordering platform. The consumers can change the commission further and even force the price down by utilizing their behavior across social media to create the desired change.
The customers make strong promoters which can justify the alternative ordering tactic which the restaurant favors and also shape the overall delivery environment with their online actions and expressions.
Since most of the population between 18-44 and almost 1/3 between 45-60 have already used online delivery services, and are therefore, digitally proficient, the fix of defining a single source of social media to get information about the restaurant and redirect people to the desired strategy costs the consumer low.
Conclusion
The fundamental argument of the delivery age is the conflict between platform economics and restaurant survival. Their variation as compared to the Russian markets is the resolution mode in the U.S. and India. The American platforms stand their grounds in courts and end up paying off millions of dollars. The management of Zomato do four-hour podcasts explaining the trade-offs of the system.
The math is inhumane across the board, but such is the partnership form of business that is preferred in the Indian market and as opposed to the adversarial form of business observed in most American cities. The owners of restaurants should be tactful and consider the delivery platforms as a growth tool and not a survival tool.
