California law bans delivery apps from listing a restaurant without an agreement

Post by tw25601814 » Fri, Jan 01, 2021, 3:47 PM UTC

chongli wrote: post #249

listenallyall wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Careful there... Apple (or any manufacturer) could say the same thing about Ebay. Any sports team or band could say it about Stubhub. Nike could say it about StockX.

I think we can carve out an exception specifically for food and food services. Why? Because of the extremely limited shelf life of hot food. That’s what sets it apart from your other examples.

Post by criddell » Fri, Jan 01, 2021, 3:49 PM UTC

DGAP wrote: post #187

swyx wrote: post #15

always entertaining how regulation unintentionally acts to increase barriers to entry for incumbents. in this case closing the barn doors almost a decade after the horse left the stable. you couldn't pay politicians enough for the favors they perform in earnest. edit:to elaborate, the growth hacks of the likes of Doordash and Postmates doing exactly this got them their start, now it will be illegal to compete with th…

Exactly. If I'm in California and I want to challenge the incumbents with my cool new idea about how to do delivery better, now I can't. There's no way to effectively scale a sales team in the beginning to reach out to all these restaurants. And as you said, all the successful incumbent players already used this strategy to become big, now this won't materially affect them. They already have sales agreements in place…

Post by criddell » Fri, Jan 01, 2021, 3:52 PM UTC

MisterBastahrd wrote: post #159

ghaff wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but companies (and individuals) pass off things all the time. Shipping is perhaps the most obvious example. If I'm an eBay seller and ship something to you, once I give you a tracking number, it's mostly between you and UPS. (Unless, e.g., an item was improperly packed and UPS won't honor a claim, etc.)

That isn't the case with these delivery services. If ANYTHING is wrong with your order, they will refer you to the business that cooked the food unless you blow them up on the phone.

Post by jstanley » Fri, Jan 01, 2021, 3:54 PM UTC

m3kw9 wrote: post #228

ramphastidae wrote: post #105

This is undeniably a good thing if you put yourself in the shoes of the restaurant. Imagine if someone went around impersonating your business online, leveraging the good name you have built for yourself over the decades. They create ads offering your expert development services, ostensibly competing with your existing website, but with intentionally slashed pricing and a ‘creatively’ misrepresented offering (aka gro…

If my resturant didn’t sign up for a middle man, don’t force yourself in between. That seems reasonable

Post by wolco2 » Fri, Jan 01, 2021, 3:55 PM UTC

jiofih wrote: post #209

jimmaswell wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're frustrated by free advertising and new customers? The smart thing to do is krep taking the business and just put a leaflet in the pizza box/whatever saying ordering directly is cheaper/faster, if that's the case.

That “free” advertising is competing with your own channels (without the 30% commission). Also there are uncountable reports of them fucking up the delivery itself by not having appropriate containers, when the restaurant they are dealing doesn’t actually do deliveries. That will lose you customers and hurt your brand.