It would be a lifeline if restaurants made money from Doordash orders. Some do and for them it's been a lifeline.
But many restaurants don't make any profit after the 25% cut. Pre-covid you could write it off as a marketing expense but when in-person dining disappears you're faced with option to close or keep open and make a loss or no money on every DD you get.
This is partly why 110,000 restaurants have closed since the pandemic
How exactly is tech pouring fuel on the fire though? If DD simply didn't exist, what better option would these closing restaurants suddenly have?
Like you said here, with DD around it does give some restaurants a lifeline they wouldn't otherwise have. Plus the government gets more tax revenue, over time some large percentage of the currently $60B valuation created by Doordash, which could be used to help the rest of those hit hardest by the pandemic if our democracy wasn't being held hostage by one Mitch McConnell.
I think the implication wasn't that DD was pouring fuel on to the fire of "restaurants closing", but rather that when they, a company that works with restaurants (many of which are closing) are doing so well that they can IPO to the tune of $60B and make their founders/investors VERY rich, this can pour fuel onto the fire of "tech companies making money at the expense of others".
I feel that regardless of your feelings on the truth of that last quote, the connection can still (and will) be made by many people.
If DD didn’t exist it’s be someone else.. but if there was no delivery most people would pick up take out like before. I don’t mind paying a delivery fee. It’s kinda like the tip when you dine in person..
The 25% fee goes mostly to DD, not to the driver who delivered. DD and other app's value is removing the friction of ordering and paying. Of all the participants in the supply chain- farmer, cook, business owner, delivery guy- the ordering app (tech) took the most outsized piece of the pie.
To be fair though, not all tech is similar. I don't think people mind Amzn charging the seller 5-15% and paying the delivery guys whatever it takes. I hope food delivery apps become more reasonably priced- or then maybe Amzn comes after their margin!
2 years ago, I could order 4 entrees from a local Indian restaurant for $50 + $20 tip. The same restaurant is DoorDash only now and the same order is $70 with no tip.
I don't order delivery anymore, for $20 I'll pick it up myself.
I'm not a fan of delivery apps (I prefer calling in my order and picking up), but I thought I'd investigate the oft-repeated refrain that restaurants either make no money or a loss. I think it depends.
From my back of the envelope calculations, it seems that the conditions necessary for a restaurant to break even or make a tiny profit with delivery apps that take a 30% cut exist but are narrow. For the restaurant to cover that fee, it would have to increase its online prices by 1/(1-0.7) - 1 = 43%, which would make it less competitive to a segment of its consumer base.
On the other hand, if the app's fee was 15% (which it is in Chicago, due to a city-wide cap), a restaurant only has to increase its prices 1/(1-0.15) - 1 = 18%, which is more palatable and less noticeable.
It does also create cash flow, and there are various things you can do with cash flow.
If you can increase sales velocity, the increased returns might be able to help profitability (though the counterfactual is hard to prove -- if you didn't have the apps, would velocity have been lower? Hard to measure).
But many restaurants don't make any profit after the 25% cut. Pre-covid you could write it off as a marketing expense but when in-person dining disappears you're faced with option to close or keep open and make a loss or no money on every DD you get.
This is partly why 110,000 restaurants have closed since the pandemic