社区

New bills passed in New York City could curb some appeal of companies like Grubhub, DoorDash and Uber Eats.

The New York City Council has long had a bone to pick with food delivery platform Grubhub.During the pandemic, that animus seems to extend to reach the sector more broadly as market share has leveled. Home to about 10% of the U.S. market, and a possible harbinger of local measures elsewhere, the city’s attitude matters a great deal.

The conflict heated up last week. On Thursday, the council said it passed five bills meant to shift some of the balance of power away from food delivery platforms toward “struggling mom and pop shops.” The bills include some straightforward legislation like providing a restaurants’ direct telephone number to eaters and prohibiting platforms from charging restaurants for phone orders that don’t result in transactions.

But they also include more controversial and likely more consequential rules. One, if put into effect as anticipated, wouldextend temporary capsplaced on the commissions food-delivery platforms can charge restaurants at least until mid-February, 2022. Beyond what was decided last week, the city council says it is also scheduled to review a permanent commission cap bill this month.

Long-term caps sound ominous for food delivery companies, but the true extent of their effects isn’t fully known. U.S. market leaderDoorDash,DASH-2.12%for example, has reported profits on the basis of adjusted earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization for the last four quarters—pretty much the entirety of the pandemic.

At the same time, the company said in an April blog post that commission caps have caused a “tangible impact” to its business in terms of lessening demand as prices paid by customers have risen to recoup lost dollars.

Food delivery companies don’t typically break out their economics by city, but a spokesperson for Uber Eats did say it had lost more than $60 million in New York City alone due to pandemic-related commission caps. For food delivery companies, consumers’ price sensitivity is likely to increase post-pandemic as they gain access to in-person dining andrely less on delivery.

There are also other threats. The council also voted to require delivery services to share monthly eater information with restaurants if restaurants request it. While it remains unclear as to exactly what data this rule will cover, a summary of the bill suggests it could include eaters’ names, phone numbers, email addresses, home addresses and what is ordered.

That would arm restaurants with information they could use to determine where their orders are coming from, helping them to assess delivery platforms’ individual worth. It could also significantly lower switching costs between platforms and help enable restaurants to better access customers themselves.

While a lot has been said of commission caps in food delivery, deciding who has access to eaters’ data is no less controversial. Food-delivery platforms have argued such a law would put eaters’ personal information at risk, noting consumers should be able to opt-in to data sharing rather than opt-out. Others have described third-party delivery as a “gatekeeper” of data with one source likening platforms to a “diner cartel” that is finally being busted.

New York’s move is of particular importance to Grubhub since the city is its largest U.S. market. As of June, Bloomberg Second Measure data show Grubhub and DoorDash were tied with the market share lead in New York City with 35% a piece to Uber Eats’ 29%. Elsewhere, temporary caps have been put into place across many cities and suburbs nationwide. In June, San Francisco became the first city in the U.S. to pass a permanent fee cap.

New York looms large for food delivery. If you can’t make it there, can you make it anywhere?