4 ms·

At the end of the day do these restaurants not cook and sell the food, or is Google running a secret shadow kitchen and swapping out the cuisine too? If you pu

At the end of the day do these restaurants not cook and sell the food, or is Google running a secret shadow kitchen and swapping out the cuisine too? If you put a service on the Internet (restaurant website, or making order pickup available from food delivery service), it's going to be consumed. You really have no right to complain about how - Firefox, text based browser, screen reader, printed and physically mailed, or wrapped in another website. Interoperability is a beautiful thing, and if anything, should be made more legal. Your restaurant website probably isn't accessible either. At least Google's is.

ceejayoz 5y ago
No one's asserting they're swapping out the food. I'd bet it's more on the "trademark violation" end of things.
- akersten 5y ago
  > No one's asserting they're swapping out the food. With the amount of vitriol in this thread one wouldn't have been blamed for thinking they were, is my point. We call ourselves Hackers and we're mad about this?
  - ceejayoz 5y ago
    Yes, I'd be mad if someone was using the name of my business to siphon off 30% of my revenue.
    - akersten 5y ago
      To be charged a 30% fee, is part of the business agreement that the restaurant voluntarily entered with that food delivery company though?? I'm gonna leave this thread now, complaining about this is just nuts...
      - ceejayoz 5y ago
        > The restaurant voluntarily entered a relationship with that food delivery company though?? In many cases, no. https://www.eater.com/21537215/restaurants-sue-third-party-delivery-service-grubhub-for-listing-businesses-without-permission https://www.eater.com/21537215/restaurants-sue-third-party-d... > Grubhub has explicitly made this false partnership part of their business strategy. Last October, CEO Matt Maloney said the company would be piloting a new initiative of adding more restaurants to its searchable database without entering into an official partnership with them, so customers would believe they had more delivery options with Grubhub, and wouldn’t switch to competitors. Re: your edit... > To be charged a 30% fee... If you don't have a deal with them, they can raise prices to get their cut. Shitty customer experience; they'll likely blame the restaurant for gouging them. Same if they list items not available from an old menu; restaurant gets blamed. There are some funny arbitrage opportunities with the non-consensual listings: https://www.readmargins.com/p/doordash-and-pizza-arbitrage https://www.readmargins.com/p/doordash-and-pizza-arbitrage
        akersten 5y ago
        More restaurants to the database but that doesn't mean those restaurants are paying the fee. Likely loss leaders for GrubHub. The listing fee mentioned in this Ars article says it is only if you have a relationship, which makes sense. > If the restaurant has a relationship with the food delivery company, it gets charged a fee.
        ceejayoz 5y ago
        > Likely loss leaders for GrubHub. Using someone else's trademark for your business in this fashion is still likely a trademark violation, even if you're losing money on it.
        akersten 5y ago
        Does this same logic apply to something like Visa concierge service (or other procurement company), where they show you the brand item and store logo from where it comes, and then go buy it for you? Why can they do that, but not Google?
masswerk 5y ago
If true, what is this authenticity of origin discussion all about, after all? Why is Google promoting https in the search ranking? Why should users know with whom they are interacting with on a contract level?

ceejayoz 5y ago

No one's asserting they're swapping out the food. I'd bet it's more on the "trademark violation" end of things.

akersten 5y ago
> No one's asserting they're swapping out the food. With the amount of vitriol in this thread one wouldn't have been blamed for thinking they were, is my point. We call ourselves Hackers and we're mad about this?
- ceejayoz 5y ago
  Yes, I'd be mad if someone was using the name of my business to siphon off 30% of my revenue.
  - akersten 5y ago
    To be charged a 30% fee, is part of the business agreement that the restaurant voluntarily entered with that food delivery company though?? I'm gonna leave this thread now, complaining about this is just nuts...
    - ceejayoz 5y ago
      > The restaurant voluntarily entered a relationship with that food delivery company though?? In many cases, no. https://www.eater.com/21537215/restaurants-sue-third-party-delivery-service-grubhub-for-listing-businesses-without-permission https://www.eater.com/21537215/restaurants-sue-third-party-d... > Grubhub has explicitly made this false partnership part of their business strategy. Last October, CEO Matt Maloney said the company would be piloting a new initiative of adding more restaurants to its searchable database without entering into an official partnership with them, so customers would believe they had more delivery options with Grubhub, and wouldn’t switch to competitors. Re: your edit... > To be charged a 30% fee... If you don't have a deal with them, they can raise prices to get their cut. Shitty customer experience; they'll likely blame the restaurant for gouging them. Same if they list items not available from an old menu; restaurant gets blamed. There are some funny arbitrage opportunities with the non-consensual listings: https://www.readmargins.com/p/doordash-and-pizza-arbitrage https://www.readmargins.com/p/doordash-and-pizza-arbitrage
      - akersten 5y ago
        More restaurants to the database but that doesn't mean those restaurants are paying the fee. Likely loss leaders for GrubHub. The listing fee mentioned in this Ars article says it is only if you have a relationship, which makes sense. > If the restaurant has a relationship with the food delivery company, it gets charged a fee.
        ceejayoz 5y ago
        > Likely loss leaders for GrubHub. Using someone else's trademark for your business in this fashion is still likely a trademark violation, even if you're losing money on it.
        akersten 5y ago
        Does this same logic apply to something like Visa concierge service (or other procurement company), where they show you the brand item and store logo from where it comes, and then go buy it for you? Why can they do that, but not Google?

masswerk 5y ago

If true, what is this authenticity of origin discussion all about, after all? Why is Google promoting https in the search ranking? Why should users know with whom they are interacting with on a contract level?