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

DoorDash from Application to IPO

blog.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 277 posts

Re: DoorDash from Application to IPO

#131

Post by bonestamp2 »

sxg wrote: post #15

As a customer, DoorDash is just consistently a terrible experience. I have the DashPass, which was advertised as free delivery for many restaurants. Turns out it only works if you spend $12, and even then sometimes it doesn’t apply. If you check prices between the app and the actual restaurants’ websites, there’s often an extra $2-3 added on for each item on DoorDash (I don’t blame the restaurants). When it’s all sai…

The biggest problem with doordash is when there's a problem with your order. They can't resolve that problem adequately, all they can do is refund an item and that's not the right solution. Someone needs a meal, and if that item is forgotten or wrong to the point where the person can't eat the meal then I still have a problem after they've given me my money back. I don't need that money, I need a meal to feed someone.

Ya sure, I can dig around in the fridge and find something for that person to eat but by not replacing that meal, Doordash makes that person feel completely unimportant. Yes, of course it would be expensive for them to dispatch another driver to bring one meal. But, that's the right thing to do. Even if I pay another delivery fee and another tip to reorder the refunded food, then I'm taking the hit for someone else's mistake.

When it goes right, it's great. When it goes wrong, it's one of the worst customer experiences you could design because nobody wins, not even DoorDash. Well, maybe they win a little bit in the short term, but not long term.

Re: DoorDash from Application to IPO

#133

Post by sxg »

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #61
sxg wrote: post #15

As a customer, DoorDash is just consistently a terrible experience. I have the DashPass, which was advertised as free delivery for many restaurants. Turns out it only works if you spend $12, and even then sometimes it doesn’t apply. If you check prices between the app and the actual restaurants’ websites, there’s often an extra $2-3 added on for each item on DoorDash (I don’t blame the restaurants). When it’s all sai…

Why would you assume the per-item upcharge would not apply if you bought DashPass? The advertising says free delivery only, it isn't marketed as no upcharge.

I did not assume the up charge would go away. I assumed I would get free delivery as advertised, but there are additional caveats to free delivery that were not advertised.

Re: DoorDash from Application to IPO

#134

Post by majormajor »

nondeveloper wrote: post #132

> “We need to make them succeed so that I can keep getting food delivered to my house.” I love that. Bizarre to reflect on how such a ubiquitous service was novel.

It's surprising to me that the post doesn't discuss Grubhub, which I used in early 2012, while that quote is from the middle of 2013. I think Seamless was around in my area too, then. Was it just not widely available?

Re: DoorDash from Application to IPO

#135

Post by jannotti »

jeff18 wrote: post #110
strictnein wrote: post #21

Another example of tech "disruption", which typically just means siphoning money from an established system and adding little in return.

You were able to get sushi, dim sum, boba, bagels, or even steaks promptly delivered in a few clicks before 2013? DoorDash is an easy example of a startup that has made my life better, especially during a pandemic.

Grubbhub, Seamless, Eat24, Foodler, DiningIn. They were all around and fairly large by then. But they didn't go big on spending VC money, so over time DoorDash wins. Pretty interesting, however it turns out.

Re: DoorDash from Application to IPO

#136

Post by Spivak »

nondeveloper wrote: post #132

> “We need to make them succeed so that I can keep getting food delivered to my house.” I love that. Bizarre to reflect on how such a ubiquitous service was novel.

My getting on in years parents pretty much feel the same way. They live just outside the delivery range of every restaurant because their house is right on the border of the city. When these delivery companies started popping up it was the first time in years they got to have someone else cook for them since they have a hard time walking.

Re: DoorDash from Application to IPO

#137

Post by staysaasy »

pmiller2 wrote: post #113

The most interesting data point here for me is that they went from nothing to IPO in about 7 years. That seems to be much shorter than the typical or median time to IPO of other startups these days. Am I correct on this? What does the distribution of time to IPO look like for more recently IPO'ed tech companies?

It looks to me like they're roughly on-target for consumer startups. It's quite industry-dependent. https://about.crunchbase.com/blog/startup-exit/

That said, most of these companies IPOed at much lower valuations than Doordash.

Re: DoorDash from Application to IPO

#138

Post by umeshunni »

strictnein wrote: post #37
danenania wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The users apparently feel they are getting something in return. Otherwise why download and use the app (and pay extra for the food)?

Users get something, restaurants lose, delivery people are abused and underpaid, but the founders will be very rich. Looking at the entire system there was very little added, there's just a lot of money being shifted to a small group of people.

> restaurants lose

I don't know if you've noticed, but we're in the middle of a pandemic and something like 85%[1] of restaurants have closed in some areas. For most restaurants, something like Doordash is the only way they're actually staying alive at this time.

[1] https://www.sfgate.com/food/article/It-s-decimated-down-here...

Re: DoorDash from Application to IPO

#139

Post by dmitriid »

akarma wrote: post #105
dmitriid wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd love to see data, but I can intuitively imagine this being true, and the common view of "underpaid" being a view that isn't consistent with the history of the space. Except, you know, the history of the space is consistent with delivery drivers being consistently underpaid, cheated out of tips and hazard pay etc. etc. With Doordash alone multiple lawsuits against it for payments alone. So far Doordash has been…

> the history of the space is consistent with delivery drivers being consistently underpaid If that's the case, how can one say that, for all of history, they have been underpaid? What is the standard that defines underpaid? If we agree that this is an issue that DoorDash has done better on than historical alternatives, should they receive as much flak as they do? > With Doordash alone multiple lawsuits against it fo…

> If that's the case, how can one say that, for all of history, they have been underpaid? What is the standard that defines underpaid?

Your original statement was: "the common view of "underpaid" being a view that isn't consistent with the history of the space."

And this statement is false. Now you're trying to wiggle out of this by pretending that "being underpaid" is undefined because we haven't decided the concept of paid/underpaid and other demagoguery.

1) Delivery drivers are underpaid

2) Doordash and all the rest of gig economy businesses systematically underpay and make conditions even worse because they force people into becoming external contractors with zero rights and protections, and shift many additional costs to these contractors.

> When we talk about delivery people being underpaid, though, that seems directly against the initial pitch

The pitch doesn't matter in the least. Especially if you essentially argue that "Doordash's pitch is true because the common view of "underpaid" isn't consistent with the history of the space."

1) Delivery drivers are underpaid

2) Doordash and all the rest of gig economy businesses systematically underpay people who work for them

Re: DoorDash from Application to IPO

#140

Post by dmitriid »

908B64B197 wrote: post #114
akarma wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in DoorDash's YC application, they pitched that delivery drivers wanted to make more money. When the drivers worked for one restaurant only, they would be sitting around most of the time waiting for an order. By delivering for many restaurants at once on DoorDash, they would be able to make more money and have less idle time. I'd love to see data, but I can intuitively imagine this being true, and the common…

I like how the drivers are always depicted as underpaid yet... they flock to the app! If it paid more to have a minimum wage job, why are there so many drivers on the platform?

- Because the economy isn't doing that great

- There are not that many jobs to go around

- More and more companies force people into the gig economy

Post reply on HN