1556
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] neptune@dmv.social 108 points 1 year ago

Uber eats etc pulled all the money out of the community. No longer does the restaurant make money and pay a little bit to the driver, who back in the day might have been the owner or the owners kids. No, now the restaurant margins are impossibly thin and so the food is shit, and the driver isn't an employee and spends it all on gas and oil changes.

Uber eats takes all the money and sends it to investors.

Uber and all the other Ubers for X no longer provide a service. They made an app that helps deliver goods and services, but now what? If we nationalized these companies and made them owned by the people, or the people in that industry, we could actually keep the money in your own city.

Instead we have $80 pizzas and poor, disaffected workers.

[-] madcaesar@lemmy.world 59 points 1 year ago

I stopped using uber eats after like 2-3 times. I was sick of the bait and switch pricing.

Restaurant promotion near you! Two pizzas for 20 $!

Ok I guess I'll get that, delivery gotta be like 5$ no big deal...

Meanwhile the total is somehow 37.85...

Ugh...ok I guess everyone has to make money and at least everyone is compensated, and it's convenient...

click next

Would you like to tip the driver? It's only fair he gets some too! 15%?18%?20%?

Fuck off wtf was the deliver charge then? Wtf were all the fucking charges.

App uninstalled.

[-] CoderKat@lemm.ee 21 points 1 year ago

In theory, the delivery charge should have been the money that goes to Uber to cover their costs. It's expensive to develop quality web apps, manage drivers, do customer support, etc. But in practice, Uber double dips. There's the delivery fee and restaurant paid fees (often resulting in higher menu prices).

[-] Fiivemacs@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago
[-] visak@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Sure, but on a per delivery basis that should be like $1.00? And yes, they need to make a profit, so the fee should be $1.10?

[-] mycoxadril@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

This makes me curious, now. I ordered pizza this weekend and there’s the $5 delivery charge. Plus we tip, of course. But I do order through the app. So if that $5 is going toward app maintenance or whatnot, I wonder if calling them directly to place a delivery order will eliminate that extra $5 fee. Somehow I doubt it.

[-] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 6 points 1 year ago

I purposely avoid delivery apps and will frequently simply call ahead to order for pickup. It varies by business but usually you pay exactly the same ordering ahead by calling them as you would rolling right up and ordering to go in person

[-] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Often? Is there any case where it's not, apart from promotions/coupons/etc?

[-] CoderKat@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

It's always hard to tell because there often isn't an easy way to check. But for some fast food, I've definitely seen the prices as identical.

And for their grocery shopping service, some stores specifically advertise having in-store prices.

[-] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 34 points 1 year ago

I agree with you until you said to nationalize Uber eats lol. Just stop using it.

[-] maltasoron@sopuli.xyz 16 points 1 year ago

Yeah, we can just go back to the restaurant hiring their own delivery people.

[-] LegionEris@feddit.nl 2 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] maltasoron@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] WaxedWookie@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] AlDente@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago

No, just let it die. Please don't force the rest of us to pay for this.

[-] LegionEris@feddit.nl 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

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.

[-] UristMcHolland@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

If they nationalize Uber before Amtrak, I'll blow a gasket

[-] WaxedWookie@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I certainly can't disagree with that.

[-] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

In what way is it a natural monopoly?

[-] Pipoca@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Economies of agglomeration, similar to Amazon. Having one app to order everything from is very convenient and the average person prefers that.

[-] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

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?

[-] WaxedWookie@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] neptune@dmv.social -1 points 1 year ago
[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 6 points 1 year ago

Or the fast food places could employ a delivery driver or two, like they used to. Or still do, in the case of most of my local places.

this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2023
1556 points (98.7% liked)

Memes

45151 readers
2968 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS