3 ms·

> You can't have the same quality with one cook and 10 tables than one cook, 10 tables and 50 deliveries per hour. I mean, the solution is fairly obvious - hir

> You can't have the same quality with one cook and 10 tables than one cook, 10 tables and 50 deliveries per hour. I mean, the solution is fairly obvious - hire more cooks if you are serving more food. Resturants will either handle this properly or quickly go out of business.

CogitoCogito 3y ago
I’d expect them to just limit the number of take out orders so that they could handle it. Food establishments already do this.
Animats 3y ago
For a while, the solution seemed to be "ghost kitchens" - central commissary operations that pretend to be restaurants in their ads. The first Doordash Kitchen is in Redwood City, CA, near the intersection of Woodside Road and El Camino Real. It seems to be much less busy than it used to be. That industry has collapsed.[1] [1] https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/05/business/ghost-kitchens-were-supposed-to-be-the-future-of-fast-food-theyre-flaming-out/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/05/business/ghost-kitchens-were-...
pjerem 3y ago
More cooks = bigger kitchen which is impossible in tiny restaurants of city centers. I also doubt it’s a good decision to invest in bigger real estate and more employees while the delivery companies are always on the edge of going bankrupt or being regulated. Also, a restaurant is not an easy to scale business : most of their value is a mix between the location and the cooking team. You can’t easily change one (or both) without changing your restaurant uniqueness.
- bawolff 3y ago
  Sure, the alternative is to not accept online orders. There is no middle ground here. Either the business needs to expand to be able to service more customers or the business needs to refuse customers. Doing neither won't work.
mns 3y ago
>Restaurants will either handle this properly or quickly go out of business. Whenever I read something like this on HN it makes me realise just how out of touch tech people are with the real world. Most of the people here work on companies that never were or never will be profitable or break even, it's just burning investors money or building your business on huge amounts of money until you get a monopoly on the market. Restaurants are working in the real world, where you don't get all that free money, you can't realistically scale, the margins are thin and the employees are hard to keep.
- bawolff 3y ago
  Which is why in the real world most resturants go out of business. Money being tight doesn't mean you no longer have to provide good service to attract customers. Running a business is hard for a reason. If it was easy, everyone would do it.

CogitoCogito 3y ago

I’d expect them to just limit the number of take out orders so that they could handle it. Food establishments already do this.

Animats 3y ago

For a while, the solution seemed to be "ghost kitchens" - central commissary operations that pretend to be restaurants in their ads. The first Doordash Kitchen is in Redwood City, CA, near the intersection of Woodside Road and El Camino Real. It seems to be much less busy than it used to be. That industry has collapsed.[1] [1] https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/05/business/ghost-kitchens-were-supposed-to-be-the-future-of-fast-food-theyre-flaming-out/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/05/business/ghost-kitchens-were-...

pjerem 3y ago

More cooks = bigger kitchen which is impossible in tiny restaurants of city centers. I also doubt it’s a good decision to invest in bigger real estate and more employees while the delivery companies are always on the edge of going bankrupt or being regulated. Also, a restaurant is not an easy to scale business : most of their value is a mix between the location and the cooking team. You can’t easily change one (or both) without changing your restaurant uniqueness.

bawolff 3y ago
Sure, the alternative is to not accept online orders. There is no middle ground here. Either the business needs to expand to be able to service more customers or the business needs to refuse customers. Doing neither won't work.

mns 3y ago

>Restaurants will either handle this properly or quickly go out of business. Whenever I read something like this on HN it makes me realise just how out of touch tech people are with the real world. Most of the people here work on companies that never were or never will be profitable or break even, it's just burning investors money or building your business on huge amounts of money until you get a monopoly on the market. Restaurants are working in the real world, where you don't get all that free money, you can't realistically scale, the margins are thin and the employees are hard to keep.

bawolff 3y ago
Which is why in the real world most resturants go out of business. Money being tight doesn't mean you no longer have to provide good service to attract customers. Running a business is hard for a reason. If it was easy, everyone would do it.