12 ms·
Amazon to shut down its Amazon Restaurants business in the U.S.
- ronnier 7y agoSad to see it go. I was on the original Amazon Local team for about two years, that ultimately turned into restaurants. A lot of my growth came from the people on amazon local, really solid people and good people, the product just had trouble catching on. That’s amazon, they’ll give just about everything a solid try and do their best knowing it may not work out.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- Maven911 7y agoAre you able to discuss some of the lessons learnt, like generically without going into too much private detail
- civility 7y agoI wonder if Amazon would ever dive into the home real estate market. With modern day search, realtors provide very little value above doing the paper work, and that seems very automatable. There's just no reason to pay 6% of every house sale to middle men, but that's the way it currently works. A large company like Amazon or Google could make a ton of money at a much lower rate. I think this makes a lot more sense than going into the restaurant delivery business.
- adrianmonk 7y agoThey already have trucks and people used to moving things around. They could sell you a house and have your stuff moved in 2 days. I even have the branding figured out for the moving service: Amazon Prime Movers.
- hi5eyes 7y agogive you a discount on furniture/moving/house if you sign up for prime then onboard your entire life into amazons ecosystem, get great exclusive prime deals on the echo/whatever smart shit they want to dump on you
- civility 7y agoThere's already lots of healthy competition in moving companies. Imagine if the movers wanted a percentage of your home price instead of few hundred for the day's work. The problem with realtors is that they've got a lock on the bureaucratic side, and the existing realty sites (Zillow, Trulia, etc...) are aligned with them. There are upstarts in some cities, but the existing realtors in those places collude to keep the process inefficient. It'll take a behemoth to crack it open, but there'll be a lot of reward for someone big enough to pull it off.
- llamataboot 7y agoHow does the collusion work? Just curious since it seems like such an inefficient market (our realtor was a good friend of ours, he /did/ have good local market knowledge and things to say, but no way did he have to do more than 4 or 5 hours of work total for us...)
- civility 7y agoAs an example, buyer's agents will not show, or disparage, homes where the agent's get less than their approx 3%. For instance, Trelora in Denver offers a discount to the seller, but they'll offer full rate to the buyer's agent because they know they'll get more traffic that way. You can kind of read that between the lines in their FAQ: https://corporate.trelora.com/faq https://corporate.trelora.com/faq Even if the buyer finds one of these homes on their own, all the buyer's agent needs to say is something scary like, "I've seen deals like this fall apart, and I wouldn't risk tying up your money if you're not dealing with a responsible realtor". Then they'll say something like, "besides, the seller pays the closing costs!" ... which is a huge lie if you consider that the buyer is the only person bringing any money to closing.
- cherioo 7y agoRedfin is already in that market and it doesn't seem to be doing very well. I'm actually fairly surprised how slow redfin is able to grow and expand their market. Their website felt second to none in terms of usability.
- civility 7y agoRedfin looks like they're trying to be a "discount agent". Here is a quote from their front page: > We're full-service, local agents who get to know you over coffee and on home tours, and we use online tools to make you smarter and faster. This isn't what I had in mind at all, and I'm not surprised they have trouble getting traction with that approach. If they save you 1.5% on your half, but the other agent still gets their 3%, you'd only save 25% of the thousands you spent in middle man costs. Meanwhile, all the 3% agents out there are applying pressure to see it fail. In the ideal case where they get both sides, Redfin is only saving you 50%. There is no reason home sale paperwork should cost thousands of dollars to process. Someone like Amazon could eliminate agents altogether. Here is another analogy - imagine TurboTax charged you a percentage of your yearly income instead of a hundred dollars for the "Deluxe" version. That would be insane.
- sokoloff 7y ago> There is no reason home sale paperwork should cost thousands of dollars to process. Someone like Amazon could eliminate agents altogether. It’s a mistake to think that the real estate commission is primarily for paperwork or executing transactions that would have happened anyway. I brought my house to our agent and pushed the sale through. That’s probably a rarity when I think about all the time friends of mine have spent with agents “house hunting”. That time costs money and to a great extent, the fat commissions are paying for a lot of “no commissions”. People seeking to disrupt the “fill out the final transactional paperwork” part of real estate need to figure out how to disrupt the whole value chain, not just the part that looks outrageously overpriced.
- dagw 7y agoIn Sweden agents that help with house hunting basically don't exist outside the very very top end of the market. Everybody finds their own houses via ads, book their own viewings with the sellers agent and handles the bidding process themselves. When it comes to paper work the buyer and seller "shares" the same agent who has a fiduciary duty to both parties (even though they're paid by the sellers). With the internet being what it is people should be able to "hunt" their own houses and set up their own viewings.
- prostoalex 7y agoIt's expensive to have boots on the ground in every zip code. RedFin hires their own agents full time. OpenListings and Zillow refer online buyers to their affiliated agents who cut them a deal on commission in exchange for leads. You can always list a place with photos and all on Zillow or CraigsList and mention that seller will not pay an agent's commission. End of the day there's a "For Sale by Owner" sign for those driving or walking by. But considering that in the US it's the seller who pays both agents, there are no immediate savings for potential buyers, and some, being new to the home-buying process in general or new to that zip code, would prefer some hand-holding and chit-chatting provided by their agent at no cost to them. Among some not so obvious valuable tidbits that the buyer's agent can provide: * general feel about the neighborhood, whether it's on the rise or in decline * previous scandals and issues, like contaminated water, city attempting to pass an additional levy or tax, house being on the airport path, etc. * potential future improvements, like a light rail station planned nearby * referrals to various local professionals, like inspectors, surveyors, painters, or movers * any other new developments in town or neighborhoods that the buyer might not have considered, especially when shopping remotely
- ralph84 7y agoTheoretically agents could do these things, but most don't. They want deals to close. Giving you reasons not to buy doesn't close deals. If it turns out you don't like the house they'll be happy to sell it for you later.
- prostoalex 7y agoIt probably varies by the agent, but I have had good experience with a real estate agent being on the buying side. His reasoning was that the seller's agent was on the clock to close the deal on that one property he got assigned, whereas the buyer's agent would make roughly same amount of money on any property I would end up purchasing, so he had no reason to pressure me into closing.
- civility 7y agoA good conman leaves you feeling that you weren't cheated.
- craz8 7y agoFor the last few weeks they’ve been hitting me with exactly the same offers as Bite Squad - including free delivery for both last month AND this. Despite the convenience of purchasing with Amazon, it’s just an expensive way to buy food! At least they never just threw it over the gate like tonight’s Amazon delivery!
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- r32a_ 7y agoAmazon has heavily invested in Deliveroo. Will probably buy them out eventually
- dawnerd 7y agoShame, they were the best restaurant delivery service I've used.
- dewitt 7y agoI'm not surprised. Amazon's entire MO is a relentless focus on the customer. They do that by methodically optimizing and controlling every aspect of the supply chain right up to the moment the product is handed off to the customer. And they get better at it every day. Restaurant delivery breaks that model. There is too much variability. Too much can go wrong outside their control, and they don't have enough leverage to change it. If they can't win (even at zero margin) and can't make customers consistently happy, why be in it at all?
- sametmax 7y agoMac donald's seems to do exactly that.
- csallen 7y agoMcDonald's delivers?
- sametmax 7y agoIn some countries yes.
- alaskamiller 7y agoMcDonalds been delivering in Asia for years. They deliver in USA with UberEats. Taco Bell partnered with GrubHub and Wendy's partnered with DoorDash. The future's already here.
- mcrae 7y agoYeah, and it is like the best delivery service ever. In urban areas in Asia, it is always less than 20 minutes. Occasionally it arrives in less than 10 minutes. Which is as close to instant as is possible. Mind blasting. I don't even like the food but find myself ordering as it is just too convenient.
- 8draco8 7y agoKFC too
- Animats 7y agoAmazon had a restaurant business? The funny thing is, Amazon probably could do a good delivery restaurant business. There are already many "delivery only restaurants"[1] Uber Eats encourages others to start them. But Amazon, unlike Uber, is capable of building physical infrastructure. The future of this is "food fulfillment centers", large warehouse spaces which house various specialty kitchens. Common functions, such as shipping, cleaning, equipment maintenance, and order handling are shared. Surprising that Amazon didn't go that way. [1] https://ny.eater.com/2016/9/26/12717518/delivery-only-restaurants-nyc https://ny.eater.com/2016/9/26/12717518/delivery-only-restau...
- hbosch 7y agoI think you might be partially on to something here; generally the idea being that food delivery is essentially commoditized and Amazon is uniquely suited to thrive in commoditized industries with their vast infrastructural advantages. They do have Whole Foods and Amazon Go, which both supply ready-to-eat foods along with meal kits. It would be a minor logistical challenge to simply start preparing their own meal kits on-demand and delivering them via Prime Now (which operates inside the exact same markets as Amazon Restaurants?) with the bonus benefit of owning quality control in the kitchens.
- bobthepanda 7y agoThe main problem is that kitchens operate with dirt cheap labor costs. In a market like New York, all those cheap hole in the walls are paying their workers cash under the table and running with razor thin margins. It’s one thing to target a cushy market like bookstores, but restaurants are cutthroat, and on top of that meal kit customers are fickle.
- chrisseaton 7y ago> a cushy market like bookstores Haven’t book stores been in a perilous position for decades?
- 7y ago
- John_Michael 7y agoThis is bad news, it was one of the best food delivery services in the U.S
- icelancer 7y agoAh, this is too bad. We used it at home occasionally. Everything we've used has either gone out of business, cut ingredients to an embarrassing portions, or raised prices way too high (probably to where they need to be to be sustainable). It's not a viable business, I think. Not without some big leaps forward.
- imgabe 7y agoNot surprising. I got a number of promotions for this but every time I went to see what restaurants were available it was just fast food. Nothing that wasn't already available from Uber eats or Caviar.
- tracer4201 7y agoDisclaimer: Amazon investor I’m glad. I didn’t see this going anywhere. I’ve tried the service several times when I was living in Seattle. Pretty much every option had terrible ratings and everything I tried was generally a bad experience. Delivery was always on time, but paying $15-25+ per person for a soggy, wet meal just wasn’t worth it. We ordered a pizza one time arrived completely cold with soggy crust.
- NotPaidToPost 7y agoThe market is already crowded with Uber Eats, Deliveroo, etc. All of the incumbents are bleeding money. Amazon decided to invest in Deliveroo not to miss the boat but it seems sensible not to pursue their own platform.
- pxtail 7y agoI'm amazed and amused reading some replies - it looks like some people would love to live in a world where single corporation fulfills all their basic needs: * restaurants from amazon * home real estate market[0] * shopping from amazon * entertainment from amazon * alexa from amazon, listening all the time * education (already some basic form of it exists - alexa is used to answer kids questions) Although many important key services are still missing: healthcare, insurances, banking.. etc. edit: banking-related product already out [1] [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20152956 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20152956 [1] Banking - Amazon.com Credit Builder - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20149304 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20149304
- whoevercares 7y ago> healthcare Forget about Haven already?
- TuringNYC 7y agoKeep in mind feudalism, though far from ideal, had benefits. Good lord if Haven can fix the broken US healthcare system, I'd happily embrace the feudal estate.
- lukifer 7y agoThere is perhaps an appeal to megacorps as voluntary nation-state membership; it is not trivial to leave one's tech ecosystem, but it's much easier than leaving one's nation, and there are advantages to all the components of the stack working together. (Blood and souls for my Lord Apple of Cupertino!) On the other hand, I think Douglas Rushkoff and Bruce Schneier are correct in comparing the FAANG ecosystem to feudalism: https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2012/11/when_it_comes_to_sec.html https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2012/11/when_it_com...
- zrobotics 7y agoI haven't used the restaurant service, but I'm starting to be shocked at how quickly Amazon is going downhill in most of their consumer-facing businesses. I dropped prime last month after maybe 6 years, since the price keeps climbing and the value of the service keeps dropping. I used to make nearly all of my online purchases through them, but between the fakes and poor customer service I couldn't justify the cost of prime anymore. Although I think this is a good thing, I'd rather not see one company control the entirety of e-commerce. And out of the big tech companies Amazon is the easiest to drop (excluding AWS, strictly consumer services). I'm still not Google-free, but switching email and search was much more difficult than leaving Amazon.
- Nasrudith 7y agoThis seems to be a trend with big tech companies - they try to get into a new domain under their name and then when it succeeds half-heartedly kill it off. It looks very dysfunctional and inefficient even from a venture capital "recycle it and risk it for another moonshot again" perspective and makes it look like they have lost their ability to innovate entirely once they start posting positive income to justify their stock cost. I am not sure if it is as dysfunctional as it looks or I am missing something.
- ryanmercer 7y agoI've been an Amazon customer (via my parents) since late 1995 or early 1996, this is the first I've heard of a restaurant branch.
- bredren 7y agoThis biz unit kept spamming me. I had to complain multiple times to Amazon about their dumb emails. Sorry but good riddance.