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

Five companies now control over 90% of the restaurant food delivery market

marketsaintefficient.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 350 posts

Re: Five companies now control over 90% of the restaurant food delivery market

#101

Post by fasterik »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #11

This is essentially the story of tech companies across nearly every industry where they have come to dominate. This is one reason that I see most tech companies as essentially a net negative for society at large, as the goal is nearly always to control a large monopoly (and this is fully admitted by many tech leaders, e.g. Thiel) which the Internet makes possible. Pre-Internet you would see the same dynamics, but usu…

There's a George Carlin bit about politicians. The punchline is "the problem isn't the politicians, it's the people." His point is that nothing emerges from a vaccuum.

Politicians are people just like everyone else, they're just responding to incentives created by a majority vote. Tech companies are just like any other company, except a lot more people are willing to pay for their goods and services. If Carlin were alive, he'd say that the problem isn't the tech companies, it's their customers.

I'm actually far from convinced that tech companies are a net negative for society. Amazon makes billions because everyone wants competitively priced goods delivered to their doorsteps. Google makes billions because they provide free access to a large portion of humanity's information.

My theory is that if you're extremely pessimistic about technology or politics, you probably won't like anything that happens when large groups of humans make collective decisions. There's an air of let's go back to the good old days when we were hunter gatherers to the whole thing. Personally, I've accepted that it's always going to be messy and chaotic, but a lot of good things are going to come out of it as well.

Re: Five companies now control over 90% of the restaurant food delivery market

#102

Post by coffeebeqn »

astrange wrote: post #88
koakuma-chan wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And why is a large monopoly a net negative? I read his book and he says that monopolies are 10x better products, and if monopolies are 10x better then why are they bad? Are you arguing that it would be better to keep using 10x worse products, for the sake of there not being any monopolies?

Five companies in an industry isn't a monopoly. That's very competitive actually.

It’s more of a cartel if anything. Each owns a certain geography

Re: Five companies now control over 90% of the restaurant food delivery market

#103

Post by budududuroiu »

fasterik wrote: post #101
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #11

This is essentially the story of tech companies across nearly every industry where they have come to dominate. This is one reason that I see most tech companies as essentially a net negative for society at large, as the goal is nearly always to control a large monopoly (and this is fully admitted by many tech leaders, e.g. Thiel) which the Internet makes possible. Pre-Internet you would see the same dynamics, but usu…

There's a George Carlin bit about politicians. The punchline is "the problem isn't the politicians, it's the people." His point is that nothing emerges from a vaccuum. Politicians are people just like everyone else, they're just responding to incentives created by a majority vote. Tech companies are just like any other company, except a lot more people are willing to pay for their goods and services. If Carlin were a…

We don’t have to go back to hunter gatherer societies, just do some antitrust. I dislike the commentary that any pushback against tech companies means you’re a Luddite

Re: Five companies now control over 90% of the restaurant food delivery market

#104

Post by terminalshort »

nomadygnt wrote: post #45
koakuma-chan wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And why is a large monopoly a net negative? I read his book and he says that monopolies are 10x better products, and if monopolies are 10x better then why are they bad? Are you arguing that it would be better to keep using 10x worse products, for the sake of there not being any monopolies?

Monopolies are anti-competitive. Without competition there is no incentive for innovation, lowering prices, not price-gouging etc. Is a 10x better product really 10x better if it is also 10x more expensive and there is no alternative?

Depends a lot on what the monopoly in question is.

1. How much room for innovation is there?

2. How hard is it to substitute the good / service provided by the monopoly?

In the case of food delivery apps there isn't much room for service improvement. A monopoly here probably isn't preventing much innovation. How much better can you get at delivering food from a restaurant?

And there is an easy substitute in terms of driving to the restaurant yourself, so if the monopoly tries to jack up prices too much they will steadily lose customers. The prices now are so high that they have already lost me. I use those apps < 5 times a year.

Re: Five companies now control over 90% of the restaurant food delivery market

#105

Post by coffeebeqn »

daedrdev wrote: post #23

I think the truth is restaurant food delivery is a luxgury good, literally “private taxi for your burrito” yet many people spend like it isnt.

It wasn’t priced in for the first 5-10 years. There’s no way I would use an app like that (I even work for one) these days now that the VC subsidy is gone and the service costs 5x as much as a few years ago

Re: Five companies now control over 90% of the restaurant food delivery market

#106

Post by fasterik »

budududuroiu wrote: post #103
fasterik wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a George Carlin bit about politicians. The punchline is "the problem isn't the politicians, it's the people." His point is that nothing emerges from a vaccuum. Politicians are people just like everyone else, they're just responding to incentives created by a majority vote. Tech companies are just like any other company, except a lot more people are willing to pay for their goods and services. If Carlin were a…

We don’t have to go back to hunter gatherer societies, just do some antitrust. I dislike the commentary that any pushback against tech companies means you’re a Luddite

Anti-trust for an industry where there are at least five companies doing well in any given space? That's not called a monopoly, it's called competition.

Edit: I wasn't accusing everyone who is critical of tech of being a Luddite. The attitude that nearly every tech company is a net negative for society goes quite a bit beyond criticism.

Re: Five companies now control over 90% of the restaurant food delivery market

#107

Post by wyldfire »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #11

This is essentially the story of tech companies across nearly every industry where they have come to dominate. This is one reason that I see most tech companies as essentially a net negative for society at large, as the goal is nearly always to control a large monopoly (and this is fully admitted by many tech leaders, e.g. Thiel) which the Internet makes possible. Pre-Internet you would see the same dynamics, but usu…

> Pre-Internet you would see the same dynamics, but usually on a much smaller regional scale.

At least in the US we had national monopolies that took serious regulation to solve. That regulation, strangely enough, is still in place. Perhaps early on there's fear to regulate a nascent industry and by the time regulators realize the problem they're too afraid of the power wielded by the monopolists.

In any case, it's never too late to break up these monopolies. The problem is that the Robber Barons are too far in the past to serve as a lesson for current generations. And some folks might remember AT&T but not understand why it was such a big deal.

Re: Five companies now control over 90% of the restaurant food delivery market

#108

Post by budududuroiu »

fasterik wrote: post #106
budududuroiu wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don’t have to go back to hunter gatherer societies, just do some antitrust. I dislike the commentary that any pushback against tech companies means you’re a Luddite

Anti-trust for an industry where there are at least five companies doing well in any given space? That's not called a monopoly, it's called competition. Edit: I wasn't accusing everyone who is critical of tech of being a Luddite. The attitude that nearly every tech company is a net negative for society goes quite a bit beyond criticism.

You read an article that talks about consolidation of food delivery and increasingly high barriers to new entrants and think that’s competition?

Re: Five companies now control over 90% of the restaurant food delivery market

#109

Post by nimbius »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #11

This is essentially the story of tech companies across nearly every industry where they have come to dominate. This is one reason that I see most tech companies as essentially a net negative for society at large, as the goal is nearly always to control a large monopoly (and this is fully admitted by many tech leaders, e.g. Thiel) which the Internet makes possible. Pre-Internet you would see the same dynamics, but usu…

this is essentially the story of capitalism as it always results in monopoly concentration and the development of industry cartels. before tech it was oil, before oil it was rubber and tobbaco.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_monopoly_capitalism

Re: Five companies now control over 90% of the restaurant food delivery market

#110

Post by speff »

fasterik wrote: post #101
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #11

This is essentially the story of tech companies across nearly every industry where they have come to dominate. This is one reason that I see most tech companies as essentially a net negative for society at large, as the goal is nearly always to control a large monopoly (and this is fully admitted by many tech leaders, e.g. Thiel) which the Internet makes possible. Pre-Internet you would see the same dynamics, but usu…

There's a George Carlin bit about politicians. The punchline is "the problem isn't the politicians, it's the people." His point is that nothing emerges from a vaccuum. Politicians are people just like everyone else, they're just responding to incentives created by a majority vote. Tech companies are just like any other company, except a lot more people are willing to pay for their goods and services. If Carlin were a…

I generally agree with your point, but would like to mention in my opinion Amazon (not AWS) makes billions because they've captured the market and prevent any meaningful competition from arising due to their "Fair Pricing" policy rules. I'll be happy when there are meaningful alternatives to Amazon that don't have inflated prices due to price parity which have an excessive return cost built in...
Post reply on HN