261–270 of 580 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've had delivery takeaways in British towns and cities for 2 decades, well before the likes of ubereats and deliveroo. Those companies do their own deliveries and manage to make enough money to not even charge more for delivery (or offer a collection discount) - although usually a minimum cost of say £20. Why can't VC companies do it that efficently?
It's a harder problem, though. I can order from practically any restaurant at any distance on ubereats. It's trivial for me to concoct an order that will take ~1h to deliver. With a $15/h minimum wage, that means ubereats needs to charge $15 in fees before making any money just to cover labor.
It probably takes at least twice as long as an equivalent uber ride. The delivery person needs to find somewhere to park twice and spend time waiting in line.
There are legitimate abuses of market power. But this is not one of them. Nobody's forcing restaurants to enter these partnerships, there's competition, and delivery people still need to be paid. There are two obvious outcomes here: either food delivery apps will restrict delivery to profitable orders only (stop working for some restaurants, require higher order minimums, etc.), or they'll stay to avoid bad press but…
It's amazing how many commenters have not read the article. This is not a cap on the total price of delivered food, but rather a restriction on the delivery service misrepresenting the price of the food itself. The obvious outcome is that the delivery services move their total fee into the appropriate line item labeled "Delivery Fee". Also, there is an apparent lack of competition in this space, given that restaurant…
This is a cap on the commission charged. The article doesn't say anything about total price or about misrepresenting prices. Where are you getting that? Why are you saying people aren't reading the article?
And the fraudulent number thing is a separate issue, totally unrelated to level of competition. It's scummy but irrelevant to this particular issue.
Competition exists because there are multiple mainstream food delivery services and restaurants have been delivering food on their own for decades.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I'm not talking about lockdown laws. I'm talking about observing proper quarantine procedures. If you are leaving your house for any reason, you are not properly quarantining even if you aren't violating lockdown laws, and you are actively _part_ of the reason your state "has one of the highest new-cases-per-day number". I am under a proper, strict quarantine. > Your choice. You failed to plan, so you planned to fail…
You are, apparently, a reasonably intelligent person capable of highly-structured thoughts. Survival in the world is not guaranteed, and it is your responsibility to work around hardships you encounter. Please refrain from the "victim" word, as this is just the hand of cards you were dealt. We all have a hand of cards that we have to play. Nobody's life is perfect.
(Just saw your profile. Let me know if you need me to drop off anything, we are allowed by Abbott to go out -- he's in a wheelchair and still makes it happen.)
Earlier 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…
> It's absurd to think that people are so lazy that they cant pick up a phone or walk a few blocks/cycle/drive to get their meal. You don’t have kids. Calling me lazy because I don’t have time to load up for small children in the car to drive a few miles then have to wait 0-25 minutes — potentially having to get out of the car and unloading said four kids to pick up the food, then reloading them to return home. Such…
If people ARE paying 25%, (i.e. 60% of US consumers order at least once a week [1]) then the service is valuable enough to them (for whatever reason) to pay that much.
[1] https://upserve.com/restaurant-insider/online-ordering-stati...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Sounds like a win to absolutely everyone involved. Let's pare it down to only you and the unsolicited service - You come home from work and the neighbor kid from six blocks down you've never met bills you for mowing your lawn while you were away. Let's pare it down to only the unsolicited service and the business - Hi, we put out a bunch of ads that say we're you and have a bunch of customers lined up ready to orde…
But Doordash don't charge for an unsolicited service. They aren't charging the restaurant at all in this case. They're paying the restaurant's full price for food. Like anyone could. Then they charge the customer for an additional service actually rendered - the delivery. They charge this as a delivery fee and a markup that they can vary on more expensive items. This is pretty normal for a retail business to do.
When they're marking the item price up, that claim is false. Given these apps' SEO juice and ubiquity, users are left with the false impression that Restaurant X sells a pretty expensive burger.
This is the right move - local restaurants are hurting and, sadly, the internet is a place where big corps with large budgets have leverage over passionate little guys working their butts off. For those who want to help, I built a chrome extension similar to Honey that shows a local restaurant's direct ordering website as you're about to order from that restaurant thru a third party service. If direct ordering isn't…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is fundamentally not what Doordash says. Doordash or whatever says 'for $x we will put a $y WhateverBurger burger into your hand,' but $y is already higher than a WhateverBurger costs. People are left thinking that $x isn't that high a cost for delivering a $y burger, but the actual delivery cost is $x plus some percentage of $y, so both the numerator and denominator are falsified. They're lying about their valu…
> Doordash or whatever says 'for $x we will put a $y WhateverBurger burger into your hand,' but $y is already higher than a WhateverBurger costs. So add $x and $y together. If that price works for you go for it, if not, don't. A markup plus a fee is already a common thing. It's done so that there is a minimum to cover expenses plus something that can vary with higher value items because you can get more profit from p…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Doordash or whatever says 'for $x we will put a WhateverBurger burger into your hand'. As long as that's what they achieve, this seems fundamentally honest to me. That's not what they do, though. The receipt shows line items with a cost for the food, a fee for the service, and a delivery fee. The problem is there's an additional fee for the service hidden in the supposed cost of the food; customers don't actually k…
> customers don't actually know what Doordash's cut really is But why would you care? I don't need to know the bill of materials for all my transactions. When I buy a coffee I don't expect to know how much they paid for the beans.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The 25% delivery fee is fine as long as it's explicitly charged to the consumer and not charged as commission from the "restaurant cost" I have no qualms if I order on the system and it shows, let's say: - Pizza: $15 - Delivery fee: $9 And the entirety of the $15 goes to the restaurant But that doesn't seem to be happening
The restaurants have this option, and I frankly have no idea why they don't pass the entire cost of delivery onto the customer. I'm happy to pay a delivery fee, though not everyone will, but the restaurant can strike a balance -- they can choose to raise their prices in general, to fund some of the delivery cost from their direct-ordering and in-person traffic. That's what they're doing anyway, just not being explici…
Out of a $15 order at a restaurant. There is $5 paying for the food (30% of the price, general practice in the industry). The other $10 are supposed to cover waiters, chefs, service, rent, taxes, profits, etc...
But there is no service and no large rent when doing delivery rather than dine in. The extra money should be enough to cover delivery. Yet restaurants and apps prefer to tack on another $5-10 in delivery fees, easy margin.