So if you're a Portland resident and you see a fee above 10%, what do you do?
Portland approves 10% cap on fees that food delivery apps can charge restaurants
241–250 of 580 posts
Re: Portland approves 10% cap on fees that food delivery apps can charge restaurants
#242Earlier quoted context omitted.
This discriminates against deaf/mute customers and customers with severe social anxiety who can't speak to another person. Charging higher prices to the disabled violates the Americans with Disabilities Act.
You could always obtain a TDD terminal, use those facilities to call the restaurant (call TDD, interpreter then calls the restaurant, ..) to place the order. IANAL. You could also sue and see how it comes out.
The ADA requires the restaurant to make the accommodation, not the disabled person.
And that still doesn't solve the problem of people with social anxiety who are unable to engage in a conversation with another person.
Re: Portland approves 10% cap on fees that food delivery apps can charge restaurants
#243Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you misunderstand. There are a number of restaurants listed on Yelp in my area for whom the phone number listed is answered by GrubHub. I refuse to deal with GrubHub, so I make an effort to search for a direct number, but it is often difficult to find. I'm not sure how GrubHub is getting themselves set as the primary number for restaurants in Yelp, but it's happening.
The solution to that is using google maps or Apple Maps or duck duck go or a phone book. If people don’t understand that a middleman adds cost as an adult, then that is an education issue.
>If people don’t understand that a middleman adds cost as an adult, then that is an education issue.
I think the point is that middlemen are now using deceptive business practice to obscure the fact they are involved and in many ways cannibalizing direct business to the restaurants using "dark patterns". In the case of middlemen changing the phone number of the restaurant on services like Yelp/Google Maps without the consent of the restaurant should be fraud...its almost like I go to a bank and put my ATM machine in front of the bank ATM machines and charge customers withdraw fees...then claiming well I am a 3rd party of course I had fees (even disclosed it in order to proceed), while ignoring the totality of the circumstances.
Re: Portland approves 10% cap on fees that food delivery apps can charge restaurants
#244Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The End game is to be the dominant food ordering platform in any given town where you get to dictate rates like 25%. You fight back by calling your order in and having them deliver it or pick it up yourself. I do this 99%* of the time as I refuse to pay a web server $8+ order+delivery fee for a meal that costs the same. It's absurd to think that people are so lazy that they cant pick up a phone or walk a few blocks…
Many of these platforms charge a fee for phone calls to the restaurant too. Platforms like Seamless go so far as to set up websites for restaurants (that often have better SEO than the restaurant's original website), so the phone number listed routes through Seamless, helping to ensure they get their cut of any order.
If a restaurant doesn't comply, wouldn't this be fraudulent representation?
Re: Portland approves 10% cap on fees that food delivery apps can charge restaurants
#245Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Although the FTC examines claims of predatory pricing carefully, courts, including the Supreme Court, have been skeptical of such claims." Which means that predatory pricing rarely, if ever, exists. If you don't like the 25% delivery fee, GET OFF YOUR ASS AND GO GET YOUR OWN FOOD.
Yes, this is a completely unnecessary law. Restaurant phone numbers are seconds away using the same device used to order from these apps, and a phone call is free. Absolutely no reason a restaurant can’t recoup extra costs by charging the app users more or simply refusing to do business with the app.
Almost every restaurant I order from also has their own website you can order from.
Re: Portland approves 10% cap on fees that food delivery apps can charge restaurants
#246Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, this is a completely unnecessary law. Restaurant phone numbers are seconds away using the same device used to order from these apps, and a phone call is free. Absolutely no reason a restaurant can’t recoup extra costs by charging the app users more or simply refusing to do business with the app.
Almost every restaurant I order from also has their own website you can order from.
Same with my experience, which makes it even more perplexing to me why people use these apps.
Re: Portland approves 10% cap on fees that food delivery apps can charge restaurants
#247Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or just regulate the dumb behavior of these dumb start ups to not distort the market in dumb damaging ways,
Do you need these services that badly that you're willing to get the government involved? If you don't like the product or the company ethics then don't give them money. The only lesson greed will ever learn from is No Sale.
Pretty sure a lot more greedy people have taken lessons from the carceral state than a no sale.
Re: Portland approves 10% cap on fees that food delivery apps can charge restaurants
#248Earlier quoted context omitted.
In at least some cases ... the prices you see on grubhub may be higher than the actual prices the restaurant is charging. E.g $17.99 vs $14.99
So the restaurants are getting the option of delivery and the increased customer base and advertising... for absolutely no change to themselves? And the customers who use delivery are the ones paying for it? And if they don't want to pay it they can still go straight to the restaurant who will again make the same money? Sounds like a win to absolutely everyone involved. What is everyone's problem? Why do we want to i…
>What is everyone's problem? Why do we want to interfere with this?
Pricing is very important. There's a reason a lot of manufactures won't allow a company to discount their prices. If my discount pizza shop who usually sells a large cheese pie for $8 gets a reputation for selling a large cheese pie for $15, it could negatively effect branding. The $8 pie place doesn't want to compete with gourmet pizza shops, and a way they do that is by pricing. Having someone inflate your prices without consent could put your restaurant out of business.
Re: Portland approves 10% cap on fees that food delivery apps can charge restaurants
#249Earlier quoted context omitted.
I live in a state which has one of the highest new-cases-per-day number, and we can still go get take-out. 1) I call in my order. 2) I drive to the restaurant. 3) I put my mask on. 4) I go inside, get my sack of food. 5) I drive home. We do a lot of cooking at home, which we find to be enjoyable, so this doesn't happen very often. Costco same-day (via Instacart), even when it tacks on 20% to the cost of items, is per…
Quarantine means quarantine. It sounds like you're failing to properly observe quarantine. 1. I don't have a vehicle of any kind. 2. I am at severely high risk for COVID-19 complications due to multiple medical problems, and I cannot enter a building other than my house under any circumstances. 3. Masks do absolutely nothing to protect you; they protect other people from you. You should wear a mask in case you're sic…
[flagged]
Re: Portland approves 10% cap on fees that food delivery apps can charge restaurants
#250Next week there will be complaints that food delivery services are no longer catering to certain areas. Instead of accepting that it is just not profitable for them, journalists will label it as backslash or an act of punishment. Same thing happened in others states/cities that implemented similar rules. The winners are people living in central areas of the city with lots of restaurants. The losers are the poorer out…
>The winners are people living in central areas of the city with lots of restaurants. The losers are the poorer outskirts.
Not sure this holds in most US cities. Outskirts are usually wealthier suburbs and lots of Urban Cores are quite poor.