3 ms·

It sounds like, in one case: 1) Doordash takes order on their site 2) Courier shows up to pick it up 3) Order never got to the restaurant, customer is confus

It sounds like, in one case: 1) Doordash takes order on their site 2) Courier shows up to pick it up 3) Order never got to the restaurant, customer is confused, customer blames restaurant. In the phone example: 1) Doordash connects the customer to the restaurant 2) Customer tries to place an order based on outdated info 3) Restaurant is now trying to convince the customer that the menu they are looking at is wrong. And restaurant looks like a fool because they can't even publish a menu. In both of these cases, Doordash is damaging the restaurant (at least their reputation and wasting their time) and doesn't sound like they're making any good-faith effort to be a good actor here. Also, in your example, if it gets to food being made and then an argument about price, what happens to the restaurant if someone refuses to pay? They don't really get to put that cooked meal into a fridge and wait for someone else to order it. It's garbage (straight up lost money) now.

kazinator 7y ago
Even the bona fide affiliated people can cause screwups, sometimes assisted by the restaurant staff. Here is an experience I had. I ordered a meal, and made it clear that I'm picking it up in person. (Why would you use a delivery service and opt for pick-up? There was a good coupon discount involved which made them look more attractive than phoning the restaurant, and they charged quite a bit for delivery.) Anyway, the courier got there a minute before I did and took the meal away. This happened while I was on the phone with someone at restaurant, informing them that I'm walking there, less than two blocks away, coming to get my order! They didn't have the phone number of that delivery person, and so had no way to contact him to bring the meal back. They had to make me another instance of that meal while I waited.
- xref 7y ago
  You made them cook you a second meal because the first one was picked up by the courier you hired to pick it up?! It sounds like you’re at fault in this case, ordering from Doordash or whoever then trying to slip yourself in the middle of a transaction that is actually between the courier-and-restaurant, not you-and-restaurant
  - kazinator 7y ago
    Pick up versus delivery is an option that you select in the UI. Literally while I was talking with the person at the restaurant, they gave all the orders to the pony to take away. The courier is working with the restaurant as far as I'm concerned; it's their outsourced delivery, not a freelancer working for me. The operation is tightly integrated: the restaurant gets the orders directly from the website and processes them. The yahoo who ran off with my meal sure wasn't delivering it to me; I never even entered my address into the system!
ISL 7y ago
Agreed that in all cases Doordash damages the restaurant, but in your first case, and in my example, Doordash is damaged even more (the restaurant will have to eat the loss in the short-term, but they have a VC-backed company they can sue for order-and-run+damages, perhaps in a class-action, if they don't get paid). After a platform-driven screw-up or two, it is hard to see a customer using Doordash ever again. Your second example, however, damages primarily the restaurant, as the customer has attempted to disintermediate Doordash, but is doing so with incorrect information. The restaurant's best defense here may be communication, informing the buyer of the price, and correcting misconceptions, at the time of ordering. As quipped eloquently in another thread here, "Move fast and break other people's things" may work in the short term, but lawsuits and grumpy attorneys-general seem like they could catch up to a bad actor pretty quickly when there is real money on the line.
- patrickyeon 7y ago
  Does Doordash get damaged here? Or does the story become "all these other restaurants work when I order from Doordash, except that this one screws it up"? Because that's what people will assume. Doordash has VC money to burn on this kind of garbage; restaurants in general already have a tough business to make work. In my mind I know who should take on the responsibility of getting this right.

kazinator 7y ago

Even the bona fide affiliated people can cause screwups, sometimes assisted by the restaurant staff. Here is an experience I had. I ordered a meal, and made it clear that I'm picking it up in person. (Why would you use a delivery service and opt for pick-up? There was a good coupon discount involved which made them look more attractive than phoning the restaurant, and they charged quite a bit for delivery.) Anyway, the courier got there a minute before I did and took the meal away. This happened while I was on the phone with someone at restaurant, informing them that I'm walking there, less than two blocks away, coming to get my order! They didn't have the phone number of that delivery person, and so had no way to contact him to bring the meal back. They had to make me another instance of that meal while I waited.

xref 7y ago
You made them cook you a second meal because the first one was picked up by the courier you hired to pick it up?! It sounds like you’re at fault in this case, ordering from Doordash or whoever then trying to slip yourself in the middle of a transaction that is actually between the courier-and-restaurant, not you-and-restaurant
- kazinator 7y ago
  Pick up versus delivery is an option that you select in the UI. Literally while I was talking with the person at the restaurant, they gave all the orders to the pony to take away. The courier is working with the restaurant as far as I'm concerned; it's their outsourced delivery, not a freelancer working for me. The operation is tightly integrated: the restaurant gets the orders directly from the website and processes them. The yahoo who ran off with my meal sure wasn't delivering it to me; I never even entered my address into the system!

ISL 7y ago

Agreed that in all cases Doordash damages the restaurant, but in your first case, and in my example, Doordash is damaged even more (the restaurant will have to eat the loss in the short-term, but they have a VC-backed company they can sue for order-and-run+damages, perhaps in a class-action, if they don't get paid). After a platform-driven screw-up or two, it is hard to see a customer using Doordash ever again. Your second example, however, damages primarily the restaurant, as the customer has attempted to disintermediate Doordash, but is doing so with incorrect information. The restaurant's best defense here may be communication, informing the buyer of the price, and correcting misconceptions, at the time of ordering. As quipped eloquently in another thread here, "Move fast and break other people's things" may work in the short term, but lawsuits and grumpy attorneys-general seem like they could catch up to a bad actor pretty quickly when there is real money on the line.

patrickyeon 7y ago
Does Doordash get damaged here? Or does the story become "all these other restaurants work when I order from Doordash, except that this one screws it up"? Because that's what people will assume. Doordash has VC money to burn on this kind of garbage; restaurants in general already have a tough business to make work. In my mind I know who should take on the responsibility of getting this right.