Hacker News Reader

Comment by JumpCrisscross | Hacker News Reader

> I can see how a delivery can take, on average, one hour

In New York?

> will essentially kill these platforms

It will curtail them. They will need to trim their driver network, which will reduce the number of drivers and increase delivery times. Restaurants and consumers outside high-density areas no longer make sense to cater to. Dropping restaurants who don’t meet minimums will also, likely, be necessary. In summary, this is entirely solved with densification—food delivery in New York predates these platforms.

View on HN

Even in the kinda rural area I grew up in it was common for Italian restaurants to have their own delivery drivers. Many still do, because the customer experience of the delivery apps is often inferior. If we go back to a pre-food delivery app time, my general take would be "and nothing of value was lost." Restaurants will still be able to have their own delivery services, people will still be able to simply pick up their food. Getting your Hamburger from that special place across town (lukewarm) is nice, but it won't kill you if its not possible anymore.

> Getting your Hamburger from that special place across town (lukewarm) is nice, but it won't kill you if its not possible anymore

It might kill that special place across town, or at least cause it to reduce hours.

If their existence is predicated on the exploitation of gig workers they should go under. The general demand for food won't be impacted by that one bit. Either people will be willing to pay more for their fancy burger or demand will shift to other businesses that can afford to pay their people a living wage.

EDITED TO ADD: Something that isn't often mentioned in these discussions is that the existence of businesses predicated on exploiting labour is narrowing the space for businesses that would be willing and able to compensate their workers fairly. Delivery apps are pricing out sustainable business models if they are allowed to skirt labour regulations, just like the common practice of Amazon and other companies treating delivery drivers as independent contractors.

I suspect if the loss of these delivery drivers had such an impact on this hypothetical special place, they would hire their own delivery drivers to compensate. Worst case, you have to a call a number or use a mobile-friendly website instead of using an app.

But we don't go back because millions of customers use these apps every day. Just not HN apparently because people here are special.

The OP was talking about uber eats and similar apps potentially shutting down in New York if delivery drivers have to be paid minimum wage. None of these apps currently have a sustainable business model if they have to treat their drivers as employees under the laws of the local jurisdiction. Maybe they will adjust their business model if forced to comply with the law. Or they will shut down. Either way is fine with me.

I can see it working in New York City (and closer denser areas) but these platforms operate in the broader US and other markets (which can have now laws influenced by the US).

Adopted nationally, this would absolutely kill the platforms as well as a number of restaurants. This law is particular to New York, whose density both makes it work and raises living costs.

Nobody forced them to use this business model. If it isn't profitable without exploiting workers, it was a bad idea to begin with.

> If it isn't profitable without exploiting workers

There are two classes of gig workers whose interests are at odds: the ersatz full time and true part time. The former, whom worker rights activists highlight, is being exploited. The latter, which companies like to talk about, benefit from a high-flexibility additional source of income.

The ratio of the former to the latter increases with density; there is more work to fill the hours. Below a certain level of density, the former cannot exist. It’s absolutely possible that the optimum for New York is not the same as in rural Kentucky, where outlawing the odd job an otherwise stay-at-home parent takes to earn extra cash does more harm than good.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com