Except almost none of them did. You’re suggesting going back to having next to zero food delivery options in a world that continues to see COVID spikes and could have future localized lockdowns. I also think this overlooks how much of a QoL increase these services are for people with limited transportation options or mobility problems or other health issues making it hard for them to get out of the house. These services are more than just conveniences to them. They are massive upgrades to their lives.
Maybe it’s different where you live, but over here many restaurants did have their own delivery service before Just Eat etc. entered the market. In the beginning, they made things cheaper and easier for the restaurants. But recently, I read a lot about how they increased the fees for the restaurants, who would encourage customers to go back to using their own website instead. Enshittification as always.
Definitely different in the US. The restaurant has to carry a special type of insurance that is ridiculously expensive if they employ delivery drivers. There’s an even more expensive insurance that no restaurant will get that would allow them to own the vehicles.
It’s a useful (though non-essential) service that leans toward a natural monopoly. Nationalisation or heavy regulation are the solutions to this.
Under regulation, profits flow to shareholders. Under nationalisation, they flow to treasury. Practicality of nationalisation in the current climate aside, I know which I’d prefer.
It’s a profitable service, like the post office was before they were sabotaged with pension requirements. Users would still be the ones paying, but a greater portion of the profits could go to the workers, and the remainder would go to public projects and other government expenses. That would be preferable to the services being used to continue drawing wealth and power from the working classes to the already wealthy and powerful. The only time it might end up subsidized is if it had to be commandeered for a public use purpose like delivery of food and living essentials during a disease outbreak.
Convenience isn’t the factor here - having a network of delivery drivers, many of whom can remain productive transporting people when they’d otherwise be idle, having established relationships with restaurants, the support infrastructure to work with them a, tech platform and a user base makes it difficult for new entrants.
…i could order from newdelivery with the 3 restaurants they’ve managed to sign, or I could use uber.
I agree with you until you said to nationalize Uber eats lol. Just stop using it.
Yeah, we can just go back to the restaurant hiring their own delivery people.
Except almost none of them did. You’re suggesting going back to having next to zero food delivery options in a world that continues to see COVID spikes and could have future localized lockdowns. I also think this overlooks how much of a QoL increase these services are for people with limited transportation options or mobility problems or other health issues making it hard for them to get out of the house. These services are more than just conveniences to them. They are massive upgrades to their lives.
Maybe it’s different where you live, but over here many restaurants did have their own delivery service before Just Eat etc. entered the market. In the beginning, they made things cheaper and easier for the restaurants. But recently, I read a lot about how they increased the fees for the restaurants, who would encourage customers to go back to using their own website instead. Enshittification as always.
Definitely different in the US. The restaurant has to carry a special type of insurance that is ridiculously expensive if they employ delivery drivers. There’s an even more expensive insurance that no restaurant will get that would allow them to own the vehicles.
It’s a useful (though non-essential) service that leans toward a natural monopoly. Nationalisation or heavy regulation are the solutions to this.
Under regulation, profits flow to shareholders. Under nationalisation, they flow to treasury. Practicality of nationalisation in the current climate aside, I know which I’d prefer.
No, just let it die. Please don’t force the rest of us to pay for this.
It’s a profitable service, like the post office was before they were sabotaged with pension requirements. Users would still be the ones paying, but a greater portion of the profits could go to the workers, and the remainder would go to public projects and other government expenses. That would be preferable to the services being used to continue drawing wealth and power from the working classes to the already wealthy and powerful. The only time it might end up subsidized is if it had to be commandeered for a public use purpose like delivery of food and living essentials during a disease outbreak.
If they nationalize Uber before Amtrak, I’ll blow a gasket
I certainly can’t disagree with that.
In what way is it a natural monopoly?
Economies of agglomeration, similar to Amazon. Having one app to order everything from is very convenient and the average person prefers that.
That doesn’t make something a natural monopoly. Nor does “I’m lazy.” And I say this as person who is VERY lazy about a lot of things.
I don’t doubt it’s convenient but that’s what you’re paying for. Anyone complaining about the prices at convenience stores?
Convenience isn’t the factor here - having a network of delivery drivers, many of whom can remain productive transporting people when they’d otherwise be idle, having established relationships with restaurants, the support infrastructure to work with them a, tech platform and a user base makes it difficult for new entrants.
…i could order from newdelivery with the 3 restaurants they’ve managed to sign, or I could use uber.
Why not both