I thought they were built on "time is money". If you make the equivalent of $70 an hour, do you care about spending $15 for someone to bring you lunch and save you 15-30 minutes of your workday?

▲

itopaloglu83 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

It’s not just “time is money”, but also the convenience as well. Sometimes you’re sick and need a hot meal, or you’re busy helping someone, etc.

Edit: Spelling. “right” to “sick”.

▲

odyssey7 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It was kind of fun doing this math back when I was a freelancer. An hour saved would literally produce more money than the order cost. But really, it would have been better to save the money by making food ahead of time.

▲

WesleyJohnson an hour ago | parent | next [-]

I've always struggled with this thinking. Yes, you have finite hours in a day and if you spend an hour going to get food then you can't necessarily also be doing freelance work. But if you planned on working 8 hours to earn X dollars, you can still work 8 hours after spending an hour going to get food and still make X dollars. Sure, that hour has to come from somewhere so maybe it's lost leisure time or an hour of sleep. I guess it makes sense if you're trying to work every waking moment; and I can appreciate that some choose to and some have to.

	▲	Joker_vD an hour ago \| parent [-]
		> Sure, that hour has to come from somewhere so maybe it's lost leisure time or an hour of sleep. Well, if you value an hour of your sleep or entertainment less than $15 dollars (if, for instance, you like to cook), then sure, spend it on cooking instead. Many of people would rather not, and their revealed preferences show it pretty clearly.

▲

drop_star 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Ya I dont get this argument. Takes me all of 2 mins to grab my lunch in the morning. It's also not a greasy burger that shortens my lifespan and physically disable's me.

	▲	drdaeman an hour ago \| parent [-]
		The whole point of food delivery is for the occasions you can’t (e.g. sudden illness, or time management mishaps) or don’t want to (laziness/tiredness) cook or drive to grab a takeout. You pay a premium for the convenience, someone else takes care of it. Nothing wrong with that, no “suckers” in the general scheme.

▲

dieselgate 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The gig workers are still suckers because gig work sucks. But yes the service is most sensible for higher paid consumers.

	▲	moate an hour ago \| parent [-]
		...only because the company is committing wage theft to subsidize costs. I don't think it feels reasonable to say "Your employer has to meet certain wages, but they didn't so you're a sucker". If you can't pay the wage you're required to then the whole house of cards starts coming down because now you can't create a large enough network to meet demand, which shrinks demand, which increases costs, which makes it accessible to fewer and fewer high paid consumers. Like a lot of capitalism "it's better than starving to death in the streets" is the appeal of the job and nothing more. Anything else is a paid message brought to you by UberDoorHub.

▲

someonebaggy 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Tony Xu spent three times as much time as the driver did, did he?

▲

gennarro an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Except they increase the charges of the food also, so you are getting taken advantage of there as well.