However, in the last year or so, that's all changed (in Berlin at least) with the introduction of the Finnish "Wolt" (which everyone here is pronouncing like "volt", but come to think of it, perhaps should be pronounced the English way). Like lieferando, they have salaried employees, but the app is much more akin to the deliveroo experience, with people who are on-time and great pictures/food etc. Prices are comparable with what deliveroo had before.
I'm sure VC money has something to do with the ability to execute, but assuming that deliveroo had the same, it doesn't seem impossible to run a food delivery service with real employees without huge price hikes.
That and them handling the order process.
Which means they might order less food than they would have with lower prices. Or that they might decide it's too expensive, and order from another restaurant.
Ok so if that's an option then what's the problem?! I don't get the fury here.
Restaurants are free to partner with delivery companies.
Restaurants are free to not partner with delivery companies.
Delivery companies are free to buy and resell product from restaurants and add their own markup.
Restaurants are free to decline to sell product to delivery companies who add their own markup.
Everyone can do what they want here.
Which is fine. I think the problem is that they are representing themselves as if they are the restaurant, not a reseller. Customers might go to the website the delivery company setup (restaurant-name-location.com instead of restaurant-name.com or whatever their pattern is) instead of the restaurant's website, see the high prices, and decide to try a cheaper place.
That's exactly my point - and your last touch is the Deliveroo worker. So take it up with them. They can then take it up with the restaurant if it was the restaurant's fault, but that's their job as the reseller.
Option A - 100% for a dining area at a trendy location
Option B - 80% w/o dining area at a trendy location
There are many cases where people say it is Option B but Option A doesn't exist.
Preparing food for takeaway actually saves a lot and that's why restaurants that traditionally offer takeaway in addition to on-premises service often offer 10-15% discount for takeway as a matter of course.
Deliveroo is not "robbing" restaurants if they charge 20%...
Anyway, at least in the UK and some other EU countries there is no obligation to lower the price because tax is lower (since prices to consumers are inclusive of all taxes) so if tax is indeed lower it can be a bonus for the restaurant (on top of cost savings), which makes Deliveroo's fee even less of a "robbery".
The other factor here is the absurd losses these players are chasing. The capital being pumped in to prop them up feels like a hugely distorting factor that is hiding the actual costs of the sector and preventing new entrants/alternatives from entering the market.
The upside is convenience. I definitely prefer paying by card/web based ordering but I wonder if there's a way of providing the benefits of these services without handing control over to that middleman.
That's not my impression, but the pandemic has had a radical effect.
> I wonder if there's a way of providing the benefits of these services without handing control over to that middleman.
There is but again this has a cost and if you're an independent restaurant it may make more sense to outsource all of this by using a platform. Some platforms allow you to only use them for handling online order taking and payments (Just Eat?) if you think handling delivery in-house makes sense (but I think it often does not).
Deliveroo allows this too, but frankly I'd happily pay a premium to have those restaurants deliver using Deliveroo rather than themselves, as when it's the restaurant themselves you lose visibility of how far along the delivery is in the app. As a result, for restaurants that deliver themselves that will count against them when I consider where I want to order from.