Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What DoorDash pays, after expenses, and what’s happening with tips

payup.wtf

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 572 posts

Re: What DoorDash pays, after expenses, and what’s happening with tips

#71

Post by cc439 »

marcell wrote: post #30

> “These orders don’t pay for our expenses or our time. We actually lose money when we take those orders. If I pick up an order that is 10 miles away and deliver it 6 miles I’m traveling 16 miles for a $3 order — so I have lost money. I’m in the negative when I account for gas, wear and tear, and other expenses. Not to mention my time.” This begs an obvious question: why are people choosing to do this if it pays $0/h…

"However, if a worker rejects too many jobs too frequently, they may receive fewer job offers as a result."

They take those jobs because they lose all access to the chance of profitable jobs otherwise. The people working for door dash aren't exactly the sort of person with the ability to fully understand probabilities and statistics either. I'd say it's fair to assume their business model works by bullying the same psychological behaviors as videogame loot crates, lottery tickets, and casinos. That one huge order that pays $30 after tips quiets the anxiety of losing money on the previous ten orders even if the actual math places the driver in the red. Most people have a very poor sense for overhead costs like vehicle maintenance. The link between miles driven and the rate of repairs required just isn't there.

Re: What DoorDash pays, after expenses, and what’s happening with tips

#72

Post by notwedtm »

CriticalCathed wrote: post #54

The other thing is that these services aren't even a good deal for the customers. I can order chinese from a local place by calling them and pay 30 instead of 20 w/ delivery, but with Doordash it ends up being almost double not including a tip. I'm not sure where the customers are coming from outside of drunks. It's not a good value.

Because you're prioritizing for value. A lot of people prioritize for convenience.

Re: What DoorDash pays, after expenses, and what’s happening with tips

#73

Post by notwedtm »

cm2012 wrote: post #22

This is an incredibly open market. If someone doesn't like DoorDash's payments, they can literally just install the Uber or Seamless or one of many other delivery apps and deliver that way. Since DoorDash is the market leader and does the most deliveries (according to the article), that leads me to believe most delivery folks would rather deliver with them, and not trust random articles like this.

Everything about your argument is just wrong.

Re: What DoorDash pays, after expenses, and what’s happening with tips

#75

Post by BurningFrog »

marcell wrote: post #30

> “These orders don’t pay for our expenses or our time. We actually lose money when we take those orders. If I pick up an order that is 10 miles away and deliver it 6 miles I’m traveling 16 miles for a $3 order — so I have lost money. I’m in the negative when I account for gas, wear and tear, and other expenses. Not to mention my time.” This begs an obvious question: why are people choosing to do this if it pays $0/h…

> This begs an obvious question: why are people choosing to do this if it pays $0/hr?

The obvious answer is that it actually pays more.

Re: What DoorDash pays, after expenses, and what’s happening with tips

#76

Post by notwedtm »

burlesona wrote: post #67

What I struggle with is why anyone would deliver for Door Dash if the pay is so bad. The article closes with a statement that they want $15/hour plus expenses for drivers. The obvious problem is that I can’t see customers paying that much for delivery - ie. at those wages Door Dash can’t exist. The fact that people choose to do the work makes me think there are people who find it worthwhile, and I can explain a few s…

I hardly think that customers are going to want to wait even n+5 minutes while DoorDash lets drivers bid on jobs.

Re: What DoorDash pays, after expenses, and what’s happening with tips

#77

Post by myrloc »

marcell wrote: post #30

> “These orders don’t pay for our expenses or our time. We actually lose money when we take those orders. If I pick up an order that is 10 miles away and deliver it 6 miles I’m traveling 16 miles for a $3 order — so I have lost money. I’m in the negative when I account for gas, wear and tear, and other expenses. Not to mention my time.” This begs an obvious question: why are people choosing to do this if it pays $0/h…

My brother works for Uber Eats while between gigs in LA TV; he's actively working towards a full-time job.

In certain cities, I'd be willing to bet much of the demographic who takes this kind of job are in similar positions. That is, they're looking for full-time work while wanting to make a little income on the side. In my brother's case, he makes minimum wage or better.

Re: What DoorDash pays, after expenses, and what’s happening with tips

#79

Post by cc439 »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #10
mushufasa wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> There's just too many drivers I think. That's fascinating. Seems like the free market really would drive the wage to 0. DoorDash's "innovation" is the black box to obscure the fact. If they paid more fairly like their competitors, they wouldn't be growing as fast. Seems kindof like a cyberpunk future, with corporations negating regulations through advanced technology. Also in those cyberpunk futures, society break…

Wages can't drop to zero unless there's an infinite supply of labor. As time has gone by fewer and fewer of the gig economy drivers I see speak English, and fewer of them are the person whose name/face is on the account, so I suspect the pseudo-infinite labor supply is working as intended.

There isn't infinite labor on a global scale but there sure is infinite labor willing to work for what first worlders consider a pittance. This basically highlights why I consider open borders immigration to be worse for everyone overall. The first world gets dragged down the societal ladder while the rest of the world is robbed of everyone with initiative plus the lost productivity they'd glean from uncompromised first world economies.
Post reply on HN