• WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s a useful (though non-essential) service that leans toward a natural monopoly. Nationalisation or heavy regulation are the solutions to this.

    Under regulation, profits flow to shareholders. Under nationalisation, they flow to treasury. Practicality of nationalisation in the current climate aside, I know which I’d prefer.

      • Pipoca@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Economies of agglomeration, similar to Amazon. Having one app to order everything from is very convenient and the average person prefers that.

        • Alexstarfire@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That doesn’t make something a natural monopoly. Nor does “I’m lazy.” And I say this as person who is VERY lazy about a lot of things.

          I don’t doubt it’s convenient but that’s what you’re paying for. Anyone complaining about the prices at convenience stores?

          • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Convenience isn’t the factor here - having a network of delivery drivers, many of whom can remain productive transporting people when they’d otherwise be idle, having established relationships with restaurants, the support infrastructure to work with them a, tech platform and a user base makes it difficult for new entrants.

            …i could order from newdelivery with the 3 restaurants they’ve managed to sign, or I could use uber.