[HN Gopher] Five companies now control over 90% of the restauran...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Five companies now control over 90% of the restaurant food delivery
       market
        
       Author : goinggetthem
       Score  : 109 points
       Date   : 2025-07-13 20:23 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (marketsaintefficient.substack.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (marketsaintefficient.substack.com)
        
       | tptacek wrote:
       | I would care a lot more if this market had even existed as
       | recently as 15 years ago, but most of what this article is making
       | a case for is that the next 5 years in this space are almost
       | completely unpredictable.
        
         | mattmaroon wrote:
         | And the alternative to restaurant delivery service is really
         | the way we get the other 98% of our food. Anything I can ignore
         | without being at some sort of disadvantage I don't really get
         | worked up about consolidation.
         | 
         | I wish we had more than 3 cell phone networks, this could all
         | be one and I'll just drive to the restaurant.
        
           | tptacek wrote:
           | There was a discourse prior to the last election about how
           | cost of living was out of control based on people sharing
           | delivery bills from their "burrito taxi". I do get that this
           | article isn't "about" that discourse, it's about an
           | investment thesis, but my real point is just: there is no
           | reason to believe any part of this market has settled to the
           | point where you could make reliable predictions. Everything
           | is very new.
        
         | morsch wrote:
         | I don't understand, are you saying the market was so small that
         | it might as well not have existed? I don't have the impression
         | that it's gotten magnitudes bigger here in Germany, maybe in
         | China it did (what hasn't), in the US...? People just use the
         | web instead of using a phone. AT&T didn't charge a commission.
        
           | tpmoney wrote:
           | Realistically in the US before the various online delivery
           | companies figured out how to make it work, most places just
           | didn't do delivery at all. Traditionally pizza places and
           | Chinese food were something you could order delivered. Almost
           | everything else was either drive through or take-out.
        
             | asdff wrote:
             | What is sort of crazy is that these delivery services
             | didn't even supplant pizza delivery. All the major chain
             | pizza delivery places and most of the local spots all still
             | run their own delivery service long into this app era.
             | 
             | It kind of makes sense. App delivery is notorious for being
             | pretty terrible service quality and having the food end up
             | worse with more time spent between kitchen and you eating
             | it. Pizza delivery on the other hand has been seen as quick
             | with drivers interested in earning their tip, pizza places
             | being conservative with delivery radius to not overextend
             | their drivers, etc. Customers don't like getting an
             | inferior product or service one day.
        
               | to11mtm wrote:
               | > App delivery is notorious for being pretty terrible
               | service quality and having the food end up worse with
               | more time spent between kitchen and you eating it. Pizza
               | delivery on the other hand has been seen as quick with
               | drivers interested in earning their tip, pizza places
               | being conservative with delivery radius to not overextend
               | their drivers, etc. Customers don't like getting an
               | inferior product or service one day.
               | 
               | Additionally, at least in my experience it's pretty easy
               | to get to where just paying the delivery fee of a pizza
               | place is cheaper than paying for inflated per-item rates.
        
           | TeaBrain wrote:
           | >are you saying the market was so small that it might as well
           | not have existed?
           | 
           | They're saying that the space these companies are competing
           | in literally did not exist. It didn't in the US, maybe not 15
           | years ago, but 20 years ago it was nonexistent.
        
             | toast0 wrote:
             | Waiters on Wheels was founded in 1987 and had cornered the
             | market. But they really only did large orders as far as I'm
             | aware; used more for a corporate lunch than a dinner for
             | two at home.
        
               | zoky wrote:
               | B2B and B2C are so different from each other they are
               | essentially entirely different market segments, even if
               | they are providing roughly equivalent services.
        
       | ro_bit wrote:
       | The title scared me a bit before I opened the article and
       | realized it was talking about restaurant->consumer food delivery
       | services. While that isn't great, I was initially thinking was
       | that the companies that facilitate the food delivery supply
       | chains around the world were massively consolidated (I sure hope
       | they aren't)
        
         | Tostino wrote:
         | I built one of the trade promotion management (TPM) tools used
         | in that space and had to deal with these companies daily for
         | the last decade.
         | 
         | There are absolutely a bunch of acquisitions/ consolidation in
         | that food distribution space, but there are still hundreds of
         | different distributors just in the US. However, most volume
         | does flow through the largest distributors.
         | 
         | For example, I had to build a specific feature to merge
         | distributors after an acquisition happens in the industry, to
         | make the product work properly because that's such a common
         | occurrence. Had the same type of feature for manufacturers (my
         | customers) also, because they kept buying each other.
        
           | ro_bit wrote:
           | Thanks for your response! I love this forum for how many
           | experts chime in in the comments section
        
         | ks2048 wrote:
         | I'm pretty sure the food supply sources are massively
         | consolidated. I don't know about the delivery part or why that
         | would matter more than the actual food production.
         | 
         | A quick search will lead to quotes like "Four companies now
         | control more than half of the market in chicken processing
         | (Tyson, JBS, Perdue, and Sanderson), close to 70 percent in
         | pork (Smithfield, JBS, Tyson, and Hormel), and nearly three
         | quarters in beef (JBS, Tyson, Cargill, and National Beef)"
        
           | khurs wrote:
           | Margins on food staples like Chicken are very low, which
           | suggests that consolidation is inevitable.
           | 
           | Supermarket margins are also very low.
        
           | Tostino wrote:
           | I've worked in the industry for over a decade and food
           | distributors can squeeze the manufacturers more than the
           | other way around. That's a very silly statement if you read
           | it with any knowledge of the space.
        
         | Reason077 wrote:
         | The food service industry certainly has some major global
         | players too. Names like Bidfood, Sysco, PFG, etc. In some
         | cases, these same companies cater/supply everything from
         | prison, school, and hospital kitchens through to fancy airline
         | lounges and high-end restaurants!
        
           | dataviz1000 wrote:
           | Sysco runs on some tight margins too. I heard a rumor that
           | the a while back the price of fuel sharply went up which
           | would cause Sysco's beef subsidiary to lose money getting
           | beef from ranch -> packing -> market so they went out and
           | killed 80,000 heads of cattle because it was less of a loss
           | than bringing them all to market.
           | 
           | The catering company you are thinking of is Aramark.
        
           | robocat wrote:
           | > Bidfood
           | 
           | Wow - I didn't realise bidfood.co.nz was a US chain
           | bidfood.com (Bidcorp).
           | 
           | Food markets keep closing down.
           | 
           | The consolidation of restaurant suppliers really affects the
           | quality of taste a restaurant can get. My ex was a cook and
           | the worse restaurants wouldn't even make their own sauces
           | like Hollandaise - she would tell me what brand it was (often
           | a restaurant supplier brand). It is noticeable when the chef
           | has hand-selected their supplies e.g. tomatoes that have
           | flavour.
           | 
           | The root cause is that consumers tend to optimise for cost.
           | 
           | Quality is harder to give a number to.
           | 
           | We're not completely screwed yet - with time/effort (and
           | moderate means) you can find some amazing places at normal
           | prices.
           | 
           | And there are people willing-enough to spend time/effort plus
           | wealthy-enough but that market is much smaller (more
           | exclusive). And unfortunately there are a lot of expensive
           | places that don't optimise for food quality (because people
           | desire other things for their money e.g. obsequiousness,
           | rent-a-vibe cuisine, gastroflex, mealfluencing, yadayada).
           | Aside: Roget's gets spanked by AI when looking for modern
           | words.
        
           | Tostino wrote:
           | As somebody that built a TPM product for the industry, I hate
           | prison and school bids. It's so fucking dystopian.
        
         | hammock wrote:
         | restaurant food distribution is event more consolidated. For
         | example in the Midwest there is really only 1-2 companies you
         | can get your seafood from. It has its pros and cons. Source: I
         | work in restaurants and I also supply these distributors
        
       | closewith wrote:
       | > total food delivery market worldwide
       | 
       | This is the article's claim, but I'm fairly certain it's of the
       | food delivery aggregator market. There's still plenty of
       | independents.
        
         | flymasterv wrote:
         | Yeah, there's no way Domino's doesn't appear on that chart.
        
       | mrweasel wrote:
       | One of those companies are available where I live, and I'll never
       | use them, because they make my pick ups insufferable.
       | 
       | I have kids, and can see McDonalds from my bedroom window, so I
       | have more McDonalds points than I care to admit. Wolt is pissing
       | me off every time. The amount of time the McDonalds staff needs
       | to dedicate to Wolt staff is insane. They could easily serve
       | twice the customer in resturante/drive-through if they didn't
       | have to help a borderline incompetent Wolt staffer on a moped.
       | It's actually rude to priorities deliveries over in restaurant
       | customers. For that alone I will never use Wolt. Fortunately
       | every single good pizza place nearby have their own drivers, who
       | are actually polite and competent.
        
       | salomonk_mur wrote:
       | Rappi is missing. It's huge in all of Latin America.
        
       | hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
       | 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 usually on a much
       | smaller regional scale. I think that many of the growing problems
       | in society today are fundamentally attributable to the extreme
       | concentration of wealth and power that modern tech enables.
        
         | JumpCrisscross wrote:
         | It's the story of most mature industries. Food delivery also
         | remains cutthroat enough that this is a strange place to launch
         | this complaint from.
        
           | sroussey wrote:
           | It is also weird that there isn't a company with 2/3 of the
           | market. Eventually it will happen i guess.
        
             | TylerE wrote:
             | Sysco is probably pretty close if you ignore the extremes
             | of the market.
        
         | AndrewKemendo wrote:
         | >This is essentially the story of tech companies across nearly
         | every industry where they have come to dominate.
         | 
         | It is the only possible result of consumptive transactional
         | organizations.
         | 
         | Conquest in all forms is accretion and consumption based, until
         | the organization gets to large to sustain a consistent
         | direction, then it collapses and the people get pulled into
         | many smaller companies.
         | 
         | Those companies get accreted into a new superset
         | monopolist/duoploist etc... and the bubble grows again and then
         | explodes.
         | 
         | Wash rinse repeat forever at different abstraction levels.
        
         | koakuma-chan wrote:
         | 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?
        
           | fabian2k wrote:
           | How can a company make delivery 10x better?
           | 
           | The expected result of a monopoly are rising prices and at
           | best indifferent service and quality.
        
             | miki123211 wrote:
             | > How can a company make delivery 10x better?
             | 
             | By improving the consumer experience. Better optimizations
             | of which couriers go where and by what routes, faster
             | delivery times (and hence warmer food), menus and
             | restaurant directories optimized to show you what you
             | actually want, better delivery time estimation, no need to
             | talk to a human or re-enter your details for each new
             | restaurant, that sort of thing.
             | 
             | At Uber scale, you have people working on improving
             | metrics, and those improvements translate across all the
             | restaurants that exist across the world. "John's Chicken"
             | won't hire their own guys to do A/B testing on which
             | pictures of their food generate more sales.
        
           | teddyh wrote:
           | A monopoly _could_ be 10 times as good, but what is their
           | incentive to _be_ 10 times as good?
        
             | miki123211 wrote:
             | We have to distinguish between monopolies that keep their
             | status by being great versus monopolies that have something
             | else going on.
             | 
             | Google (search) is an example of the former. Search is a
             | very expensive business to be in, but most of the costs are
             | in scraping, indexing and software development, not actual
             | query execution. The more users you have, the more you can
             | spend while still keeping margins constant, and the more
             | you spend, the better your engine is, which gives you more
             | users.
             | 
             | This leads to the situation where you only have two
             | competing search engines[1], one of which sucks and only
             | exists because it's propped up by Microsoft. However, this
             | is only true as long as Google keeps their quality up. If
             | Bing suddenly became significantly better than Google,
             | people would gradually start switching.
             | 
             | 20th century AT&T is an example of the latter phenomenon.
             | It was a monopoly because of US regulations, which made the
             | barriers to entry insanely high. This meant AT&T could set
             | almost whatever prices they wanted, as consumers didn't
             | have a choice anyway.
             | 
             | [1] Engines like Kagi or DDG don't count, as they still
             | fundamentally rely on Google's or Bing's indexes.
        
           | paulryanrogers wrote:
           | Large and dominant companies can be a net good, at least in
           | theory. In practice they become corrupted because of
           | incentives to maximize profit by any means possible, with few
           | who can oppose them.
           | 
           | When well regulated one can have most of the benefits without
           | many of the downsides. Sadly, even the regulators become
           | captured.
        
           | nomadygnt wrote:
           | 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?
        
             | cjbgkagh wrote:
             | Not innovating, maintaining high prices, and price-gouging
             | are unstable activities for a monopoly, as in it would open
             | up a void for effective competition. The real anti-
             | competitive actions is that it becomes cost effective to do
             | regulatory capture / pay bribes to politicians. A monopoly
             | can pay to play in a way that fledging competitors cannot.
             | Once the industry has been captured then they can do rent
             | seeking behaviors without worrying about competition.
        
               | A1kmm wrote:
               | If allowed, an incumbent monopoly will do the minimum
               | innovation or tactical pricing necessary to keep out
               | competitors - even if it means they suffer a temporary
               | loss.
               | 
               | This can effectively create a barrier to entry high
               | enough that no small company has a chance to beat them.
               | Since insolvency before overcoming the barrier is
               | foreseeable, no one even tries, and the monopoly gets to
               | keep high prices (compared to a competitive market if
               | they weren't there).
        
               | Herring wrote:
               | > Not innovating, maintaining high prices, and price-
               | gouging are unstable activities for a monopoly
               | 
               | Depends how good their moat is. Or how deep their pockets
               | are, because they can often bribe to keep their
               | competitors out (Intel vs AMD). Or just buy their
               | competitor outright.
        
           | yoyohello13 wrote:
           | Man who believes monopolies are good says they are 10x
           | better? Color me shocked...
        
           | astrange wrote:
           | Five companies in an industry isn't a monopoly. That's very
           | competitive actually.
        
         | tiahura wrote:
         | What tech companies? These are food delivery brokers that have
         | an app.
        
         | gandalfian wrote:
         | And long before that Warren Buffet talking about only backing
         | companies who have built a competitive moat.
        
       | Reason077 wrote:
       | Less competition would certainly be bad for consumers and
       | drivers. But has that actually happened here?
       | 
       | Doordash and Deliveroo do not operate in the same markets, so
       | their merger would not reduce competition in any given market.
       | 
       | Prosus is a big conglomerate with its fingers in many different
       | industries. But unless it starts buying multiple delivery
       | companies that operate in the same markets, its acquisition of
       | Just Eat also doesn't appear to be reducing competition.
        
         | asdff wrote:
         | I think tech companies that are in sectors like this with a
         | great deal of money moving around a few different entities tend
         | to inadvertently operate as de facto cartels in a lot of ways.
         | They tend to mirror business decisions due to poaching
         | eachother for the same talent and consulting with the same
         | agencies who are giving them the same information and findings.
         | The way they set up their companies and operate is all pretty
         | much the same and designed to be similar so as to be useful for
         | investors looking to compare businesses in the sector. ux
         | patterns are the same or similar enough. How they pay their
         | drivers also the same or similar enough. When there is this
         | much similarity of behavior in the sector one has to ask if
         | there would even be a difference for the consumer between
         | having all delivery under 1 company or 10000 companies all
         | operating the same business model? No different than a small
         | town restaurant scene lost to 15 different chain fast food
         | restaurants all operating the same franchise model: customers
         | have diversity of business on paper, but not really since it is
         | all just more or less the same sort of business with marginally
         | different offerings.
        
       | andybak wrote:
       | I still tend to discover a takeaway or restaurant and then figure
       | out how to get them to deliver.
       | 
       | I've never _not_ ordered from somewhere I was keen on based on
       | their choice of delivery service.
       | 
       | If the consolidation results in price hikes and poor service,
       | what's the lock-in? Why can't the takeaways just go rogue and
       | offer independent deliveries?
        
         | spacephysics wrote:
         | Lots of their infrastructure for handling orders (iPads,
         | software integration into their payment system) was done around
         | Covid, and some have started to integrate in-person orders
         | through the same "single unified system" creating a higher and
         | higher cost to switch delivery systems.
         | 
         | AFAIK there's no well-supported open source order/delivery
         | management software. The companies that were ready during covid
         | took all the extra, enormous demand for building delivery and
         | order online systems built atop a typically antiquated order
         | management system and have stuck around since
         | 
         | Sometimes i'll get a cheaper delivery/food cost calling vs
         | ordering online, but now some places are just raising their
         | other prices to match online
        
           | bbarnett wrote:
           | And yet, why do you need software?
           | 
           | In the 80s, I delivered pizza with no software. The place had
           | a normal cash register, for pickups.
           | 
           | People would call, order, and we'd write it down. They it'd
           | go on a wire with a clothes pin, until made. Then it went
           | with the driver.
           | 
           | Each delivery was written down before leaving with it.
           | 
           | This worked for decades for everyone in the industry,
           | flawlessly, perfectly, without issue.
           | 
           | Why is software required? Any given reasons are an
           | unneccessary complication.
           | 
           | And here's the thing. Even in Palo Alto I order from
           | companies still doing it this way.
           | 
           | The above system, paperwork wise .. again, is perfect. It's
           | been done forever. It is faster and far less expensive than
           | any unified payment and order system.
           | 
           | Seems to me, they're the smart ones.
        
             | asdf6969 wrote:
             | Everyone hates calling and apps give customers a list of
             | restaurants with menus to browse. Restaurants also do all
             | of their in-restaurant management with software (why not
             | paper? ask them idk) which I assume has some integration
             | with the app.
             | 
             | I can imagine some type of open protocol that lets them
             | self-host an order service though, or at least an open
             | solution that's hosted by many providers and many separate
             | apps. That would be nice for everyone
        
               | bbarnett wrote:
               | Maybe we should all make the world a better place, suck
               | it up, and just call?
               | 
               | Maybe making the world a better place, means human
               | interaction and less automation.
        
               | asdf6969 wrote:
               | That would make my own world worse
        
               | pizza wrote:
               | Say what you will but customers pay to _not_ suck it up
        
             | notatoad wrote:
             | as long as you've got enough order volume to keep a
             | delivery driver consistently busy, that works fine and the
             | apps are unnecessary. for a pizza restaurant, or anybody
             | else focused on delivery orders, the apps aren't necessary
             | 
             | the utility of the apps is to distribute the load from
             | multiple restaurants across a shared pool of delivery
             | drivers, so a restaurant who otherwise wouldn't be able to
             | offer delivery can tap into that labour pool for infrequent
             | delivery orders. food delivery apps have greatly expanded
             | the number of places that offer delivery. most restaurants
             | simply didn't offer it before the apps.
        
               | bbarnett wrote:
               | Once you have multiple restaurants, you leave the mom and
               | pop shop scenario, and move into realms of more sensible
               | optimization.
               | 
               | But there are so many independents. And they make very
               | good food. And they still do it without apps, and do very
               | well.
        
         | 6510 wrote:
         | I only order from places that deliver themselves.
        
         | to11mtm wrote:
         | > Why can't the takeaways just go rogue and offer independent
         | deliveries?
         | 
         | Because many of these delivery 'ad-hoc contractors'[0],
         | sometimes even eating cost [1].
         | 
         | Pre-covid, you were often best off as a business either doing
         | something that was 'known' to be delivery offered (i.e. pizza)
         | or your next best option was to aggressively advertise it and
         | have an extra staffer on hand willing to do the deed.
         | 
         | Then, you've also got the other form of arbitrage (or perhaps a
         | cost thereof), of smaller independent restaurants/chains being
         | unwilling or unable to handle the costs of properly covering
         | drivers [2] and their pay when not driving [3].
         | 
         | Some restaurants started doing delivery during covid and kept
         | it going. However most around here dropped because the volume
         | wasn't worth it to them, on top of the 'streamlined flow'
         | (don't need to give a route, the app the person picking up the
         | 'pick-up' order is handling, does that for them.)
         | 
         | I'm not saying I _like_ it but I get how it got here.
         | 
         | [0] - Remember that in the early days some of these companies
         | would do all sorts of weird things like just have someone order
         | on behalf.
         | 
         | [1] - There's an article about this involving 'pizza arbitrage'
         | here https://www.readmargins.com/p/doordash-and-pizza-arbitrage
         | 
         | [2] - To be clear, both the startups as well as locals have a
         | checkered history when it comes to proper coverage...
         | 
         | [3] - One can argue that such a person can be made 'useful'
         | during the waiting time, however it becomes a complicated
         | equation between 'what can this person be paid to do' vs 'are
         | they willing to do it for that base'.
        
           | NaOH wrote:
           | Regarding your link to the article on pizza arbitrage,
           | 
           |  _DoorDash and Pizza Arbitrage (2020)_ -
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40806356 - June 2024
           | (147 comments)
           | 
           |  _DoorDash and pizza arbitrage (2020)_ -
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32086170 - July 2022
           | (230 comments)
           | 
           |  _Doordash and Pizza Arbitrage_ -
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23216852 - May 2020 (518
           | comments)
        
         | bawolff wrote:
         | > Why can't the takeaways just go rogue and offer independent
         | deliveries?
         | 
         | Because delivery is really expensive. To do it well over a
         | large area you have to have a lot of staff. You also want to
         | keep them all busy, so it works better with a lot of
         | resturants. Margins are thin, lots of risk in an area that is
         | very different from the core activity of the resturant.
         | 
         | Its an almost textbook example of a situation where a
         | specialist company makes sense.
        
       | daedrdev wrote:
       | 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.
        
         | to11mtm wrote:
         | Restaurant delivery... I tend to agree.
         | 
         | 'nonperishable food' or 'properly packed short travel' (i.e.
         | dairy/frozen) IMO is a fairer niche of 'could be non-luxury
         | with better societal outcomes', _except_ for the  'as close to
         | JIT as possible'. There's ways to optimize the process to where
         | something on the scale of 10-20 homes could get their main
         | groceries delivered two or 3 times a week and the overall cost
         | would be lower than all of them doing so. Yeah you'd need a
         | reefer van or an otherwise replenishable source of cold for
         | dairy/frozen but at that scale the cost of such makes a lot
         | more sense. Biggest problem is getting the right buy-in and
         | mindset from consumers.
        
           | watwut wrote:
           | Difference is you can stock large quantity of frozen foods
           | any time it is convenient to shop. As in, frozen food
           | delivery is not all that useful.
           | 
           | When you work from home and cant cook, delivery can happen
           | right now. Or if you are having a small gathering with
           | friends, delivery makes your life easier exactly when you
           | need it.
        
         | Aurornis wrote:
         | Seeing how many Gen Z people use food delivery services on a
         | weekly or even daily basis was mind blowing to me. I've had
         | numerous conversations where I've had to bite my tongue when
         | younger colleagues complained about finances after also
         | explaining that they DoorDash dinner nearly every night. It's
         | bizarre.
         | 
         | Not all Gen Z, of course. Most of the younger people I've
         | worked with have been generally smart about finances. It's a
         | subset who fall into the normalization of luxury services as a
         | standard cost.
        
       | esco27 wrote:
       | The food industry is due for a good old opensource disruption,
       | where each restaurant can setup their private menu hub (like you
       | would an instagram account), add their payment processing
       | details, and start delivering their own orders. It's a win-win
       | for the restaurant and their recurring customers.
        
         | redleader55 wrote:
         | What about users? Will they install one app for each restaurant
         | they order from on their phone or will they prefer to do
         | everything in the same app?
        
           | nickjj wrote:
           | There are middle man services for certain types of food in
           | certain areas.
           | 
           | For example Slice is a popular one for pizza. I know a
           | business owner who uses it.
           | 
           | They have an app and optionally an online menu on your custom
           | domain to take online orders and physical hardware for taking
           | orders in your store. Think POS system, register, terminal,
           | printers, etc..
           | 
           | For a business owner that covers you for accepting online and
           | offline orders, and you can deliver direct to your customers.
           | 
           | 95% of his online delivery orders go through this system
           | because DoorDash charges him (the business owner) 30% for
           | each order so he raised his prices there to partially offset
           | that. Slice on the other hand is 5% cheaper than his baseline
           | price for online orders for customers so it's a no brainer
           | most use that. With that said, way more people call in or
           | come in person than using the app. Probably a 90% / 10%
           | split.
        
         | Reason077 wrote:
         | These certainly exist. My local favourite Thai restaurant has
         | its own ordering website and has its own staff deliver the
         | order, with no markup over the in-restaurant menu prices.
         | 
         | The company that operates their ordering platform is mobihq.com
         | (I have no affiliation with them)
        
         | afavour wrote:
         | Stuff like this already exists (AFAIK not open source but cheap
         | enough that restaurants would prefer to use it if they could).
         | The problem is modifying user behaviour: people _used_ to go
         | directly to the restaurant to order food but are now very used
         | to opening the food delivery app, browsing it, and ordering.
         | 
         | You could have the slickest ordering experience in the world
         | and it won't help you if no one sees it.s
        
           | racedude wrote:
           | This.
        
         | Workaccount2 wrote:
         | Worked years ago at a restaurant that had its own website and
         | app ordering...
         | 
         | Ubereats and the like still dominated the orders even with the
         | 15% upcharge _and even after notifying repeat customers that
         | they can save money ordering direct_
         | 
         | The convenience of having one centralized app with one account
         | that can summon any food from any restaurant in a 10 mile area
         | is just way too strong.
        
         | Aurornis wrote:
         | The target audience for consolidated food delivery apps isn't
         | the person who wants to manage the fine details of ordering
         | from 10-20 different local restaurants.
         | 
         | The majority of people using these apps just want to scroll
         | some restaurants and order something quickly. Saving 10% by
         | going through extra steps, installing extra apps, going to a
         | company's website, and doing custom orders isn't what most of
         | their repeat customers want to do.
         | 
         | It's a convenience thing.
        
       | thisisit wrote:
       | I think this will be even more consolidated in the future. Or
       | mostly duopoly in many markets. Food delivery is capital
       | intensive. It is unlikely that new players enter the market.
        
       | Neywiny wrote:
       | I think 5 is a good number based on no data or experience. Feels
       | like enough where you could reasonably tell one to pound sand if
       | they start getting too greedy, while not being forced to just
       | take the other 1.
        
       | faizshah wrote:
       | Meanwhile I have seen a lot of local restaurants advertising how
       | ordering through their own delivery/pickup service can be 30%
       | less than Uber Eats or DoorDash on their takeout boxes (and
       | consequently in your uber/doordash order). It's interesting that
       | some of the POS companies are getting into the market:
       | https://www.toasttab.com/local
       | 
       | There's huge room for disruption in this model when a $12
       | chipotle order costs the consumer $30 after higher menu prices +
       | delivery fees + tip.
        
         | Workaccount2 wrote:
         | When I worked at a restaurant that did Ubereats/door
         | dash/GrubHub, we had a 15% upcharge on order through those
         | platforms.
         | 
         | We would tell repeat customers they could use our
         | website/app/phone to order directly and save the 15%. Almost no
         | one converted. Convenience really is king.
        
           | faizshah wrote:
           | So what this POS company is doing that's kind of interesting
           | is they have a mobile app just like Uber Eats/Doordash but it
           | seems to be direct through the restaurant:
           | https://apps.apple.com/us/app/local-by-toast/id1362180579
           | 
           | Actually when I ordered through it I paid $45 instead of $60
           | via DoorDash/Uber Eats but the order was delivered by Uber.
           | 
           | The reason why I think this version will work is because it's
           | the same level of convenience in a centralized mobile app so
           | single payment method, single portal to browse restaurants
           | etc.
           | 
           | (I have no association with this company I just was looking
           | into this last week on the train)
        
       | TheMagicHorsey wrote:
       | I know these are three sided marketplaces and difficult to
       | coordinate demand and supply ... but why isn't there more locally
       | hosted town and city level options that undercut the
       | national/international conglomerates? Food delivery is ultimately
       | a local thing.
        
       | Aeolun wrote:
       | Two companies now control 90% of the phone market. I think the
       | restaurant food delivery market is quite healthy.
        
         | khurs wrote:
         | Do you mean the App Stores rather than the phone market? That
         | is soon to be 3, as Harmony OS takes hold in China and other
         | markets.
        
       | bawolff wrote:
       | 5 companies dominate a market that 5-10 years ago didn't even
       | exist. That doesn't exactly sound terrible.
        
         | afavour wrote:
         | Of course it did. People have been ordering delivery food for
         | decades. They just called up the restaurant to do it.
        
           | bawolff wrote:
           | I dont know where you live, but that was absolutely not true
           | where i lived.
           | 
           | The only exception was chinese and pizza. Nobody else offered
           | delivery. The current delivery market is much more than that.
        
       | throwpoaster wrote:
       | Sounds like a fairly normal market structure.
        
       | v5v3 wrote:
       | My understanding is that the drivers are non-exclusive and can
       | work for multiple companies at the same time.
       | 
       | So as their is a ready supply of drivers, anyone who can raise an
       | amount of money, and find a niche can enter the fray?
       | 
       | The suppliers (restaurants) are not happy with 30% or so being
       | taken by the giants.
        
       | kurofune wrote:
       | Is this surprising?
       | 
       | This is what our actual economic system is all about: a series of
       | market oligopolies whose greed is unchecked by our political
       | establishment and legal apparatus with the complicity of the
       | voting masses. Any attempt to implement measures to palliate the
       | social decay and corruption it breeds will be branded as chinese
       | communism and opposed by the media and the public.
       | 
       | We have collectively decided that the economy shouldn't be in
       | service of the people, canis canem edit.
        
       | gonzo41 wrote:
       | Regardless of market position, are food delivery companies
       | actually making money at the moment?
        
       | paxys wrote:
       | I can't think of a single industry or segment, whether consumer
       | or enterprise, where 90%+ of the market _isn 't_ controlled by
       | 1-5 companies. That's just how business works.
        
         | readthenotes1 wrote:
         | Chinese food restaurant? Lawn service
         | 
         | If I spent more than 2 seconds I could probably think of others
        
       | thaumasiotes wrote:
       | This post doesn't appear to present any evidence that five
       | companies control any significant share of the food delivery
       | market. It looks at transaction volume of major deliverers,
       | comparing them _to each other_.
       | 
       | But it's not at all clear that major deliverers are even a
       | majority of the delivery market. There are no pizza chains on the
       | list. There are certainly no individual restaurants on the list.
       | 
       | > Why is my $8 burger $23 after fees - An average reddit user
       | 
       | Delivery in China (through Alipay, which may or may not be backed
       | by Meituan) is generally _cheaper_ after fees than it would be if
       | you just went and bought the food in person. This might explain
       | why Meituan has so much more transaction value than Doordash and
       | Uber Eats. But it 's not something I'd imagine drives a lot of
       | user complaints.
        
       | mupuff1234 wrote:
       | I honestly just can't comprehend how people so easily just throw
       | away money on these apps - The fees are ridiculous on top of
       | already expensive restaurant prices.
        
       | bravesoul2 wrote:
       | > As long as food delivery is better than other ways of consuming
       | food, like cooking, takeaways, or dining out, it will be able to
       | keep customers in the network.
       | 
       | Made me laugh out loud. It's strictly the worst option. Only use
       | it if my job wants to pay, or if very sick.
       | 
       | Cold food. Unpredictable delivery times. More expensive than
       | eating out. Usually less nutritious than cooking yourself. And of
       | course expensive as hell.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-07-13 23:00 UTC)