“Delivery boys and dukaandari?” Goyal’s Remarks Spark Outrage Among Indian Startup Leaders and Investors

At the recent Startup Mahakumbh 2025 in New Delhi, Union Minister Piyush Goyal’s comments sparked a heated discussion about the trajectory of India’s startup landscape. He questioned whether startups should be content with roles like “delivery boys and girls” and accused them of focusing on “dukaandari” (shopkeeping) instead of pioneering deep technological innovations. His comparison of Indian consumer internet startups to China’s advancements in high-tech sectors has led to widespread debate among entrepreneurs and investors.​

Related: Complete List of Brands Sponsoring IPL 2025 Teams Like CSK, MI, RCB and Others

During his speech, Goyal expressed concern that many startups are concentrating on services such as food and grocery delivery, which he believes offer short-term convenience but lack long-term economic value. He challenged the community by asking, “Are we going to be happy being delivery boys and girls? Do we have to make ice cream or chips? Dukaandari hi karni hai?” Goyal emphasized the need for a shift towards deep tech areas like semiconductors, robotics, artificial intelligence (AI), and 3D manufacturing, highlighting China’s progress in these fields.​

Goyal’s remarks were met with swift reactions from the startup ecosystem. Aadit Palicha, CEO of Zepto, highlighted the company’s rapid growth, noting the creation of nearly 150,000 jobs and significant tax contributions. He argued that consumer internet companies are foundational to innovation, leveraging extensive data, attracting top talent, and securing substantial investments. Palicha acknowledged the challenges in comparing Indian startups to those in the US and China, emphasizing the unique context of India’s market.​

Mohandas Pai, former CFO of Infosys, questioned the fairness of Goyal’s comparisons, pointing out systemic challenges such as limited capital, regulatory support, and policy hurdles that deep-tech startups face in India. He urged the government to reflect on its role in supporting these ventures, suggesting that the lack of ambition isn’t the issue, but rather external constraints.​

Ashneer Grover, former managing director of BharatPe, suggested that politicians might need a “reality check” and highlighted that China’s journey into deep tech also began with consumer-oriented services.

He advocated for a supportive environment that allows startups to evolve naturally. Similarly, Anupam Mittal, a judge on Shark Tank, emphasized that Indian entrepreneurs are eager to excel in areas like AI and space tech but are hindered by insufficient funding and a robust growth ecosystem. Mittal stressed that without necessary capital and infrastructure, even the most innovative ideas might struggle to scale globally.​

The startup community’s response extended to social media platforms, where founders, investors, and industry veterans expressed their views. Many felt that reducing startups to mere “shopkeeping” overlooks their multifaceted roles in job creation, tax revenue, and innovation. Virtual protests and online campaigns emerged, calling for a more nuanced discussion about the value of consumer internet companies and urging policymakers to recognize the complex ecosystem in which startups operate.​

At the core of this controversy is a larger conversation about the future direction of India’s startup ecosystem. Critics of Goyal’s comments argue that dismissing consumer internet startups is unfair, as they have been instrumental in bridging service gaps, generating employment, and contributing to the GDP.

These companies have rapidly scaled by addressing immediate consumer needs, laying the groundwork for future technological innovations. On the other hand, proponents of Goyal’s perspective believe that India must focus on research-intensive and high-value sectors to compete globally, suggesting that an emphasis on convenience-based models may limit the country’s potential in deep tech innovation.​

The controversy has prompted policymakers to reevaluate the role of regulatory support in nurturing a diverse startup ecosystem.

Critics like Mohandas Pai have highlighted longstanding issues such as stringent regulations, inadequate funding mechanisms, and bureaucratic hurdles that stifle innovation.

They argue that if the government’s goal is to propel India into the deep tech arena, it must first address these systemic issues rather than merely urging startups to shift focus without offering tangible support.​

The debate has also sparked calls for an integrated approach where consumer-focused startups are viewed as vital components of the entrepreneurial landscape. Industry leaders emphasize that innovation in consumer tech has historically driven breakthroughs in data analytics, cloud computing, and AI industries that now power the global tech economy. Acknowledging and supporting consumer internet startups ensures that the immediate needs of millions are met, contributing to broader economic stability and growth.​

As the immediate uproar subsides, the lasting impact of Goyal’s remarks remains to be seen. The conversation has prompted critical self-reflection within the ecosystem. Startups and investors are now more vocal about the need for balanced policy support that encourages both high-tech innovation and recognizes the value of consumer-centric business models. The protests and public outcry represent a call for an environment where diverse forms of entrepreneurship can coexist and flourish.​

This debate also presents an opportunity for policymakers to recalibrate their approach. By addressing systemic issues that hinder the growth of deep-tech startups, such as limited capital, regulatory burdens, and infrastructure deficits, India can pave the way for a more inclusive and dynamic entrepreneurial future. Supporting consumer internet startups ensures that the immediate needs of millions are met, contributing to broader economic stability and growth.​

Piyush Goyal’s statements have undeniably resonated with India’s startup community. The resulting backlash- from passionate social media posts and public protests to thoughtful critiques from industry leaders- reveals profound frustrations regarding policies and support mechanisms in the country. As the ecosystem navigates these differing perspectives, a balanced approach is essential to foster both deep tech and consumer innovation. Only then can India fully leverage its entrepreneurial spirit and secure a prominent position in the global technology landscape.