More than anything, what seems to be lacking is long-term vision for the platform as a business.
Finding a someone a place to stay in jakarta, indonesia is much different than a place to stay in Boston, London, ect. The person, service, lication and time are all variables. This is complex, hard and valuable. The same goes for uber/lyft. There is expediency and significant variables to account for as each pickup and drop off is dynamic so while it appears to be a commodity; it isnt.
To your point, some ideas sound great and get funding but are not complex, urgent nor particularly valuable. On demand "lunch" competes with either direct ordering, a local option or brown bagging it. Eat 24 provides a directory & information search engine not physical delivery(in most cases). So while it seems like they violate what I said, they dont have huge infa costs. Other "similar" providers will go get you the food and deliver it. A user is not willing to pay a huge premium for that in most cases, and the volume must be significant amd clustered. Eat24 takes a small percentage for a software solution, the other type needs a large percentage for a phys solution.
So they comvince vcs to back them until they get "big" which they wont and achieve economies of scale. However, they cant, because expenses scale pretty in line in those models