Phoenix would be a city where this will be less of an issue for sure, but you still have two and three story apartment buildings that require customers to go downstairs for their food.
Having to go outside significantly reduces the benefit of delivery. Now customers have to interrupt what they’re doing, make sure they look OK so the neighbors don’t see their underwear and bed hair, put on a jacket or raincoat in bad weather, possibly wait on 2 elevators, and pick up their food right next to their own car in the parking lot. In some cases, this could take five minutes. Customer realizes that they could just get in their car and drive to the restaurant at this point, so why order for delivery?
> but you still have two and three story apartment buildings that require customers to go downstairs for their food.
Everyone keeps ignoring you on this part, but they aren't thinking about people with disabilities or mobility issues that rely on delivery services to get their groceries because alternative or public welfare programs don't exist for this.
What happens when DoorDash, UberEats, Instacart, etc. all go autonomous? People with disabilities get screwed in the name of profit. They are already getting screwed with higher prices as is.
These customers can't simply "go downstairs and meet the car" the point of delivery specifically in this case is to have it brought right to your door. Automated cars miss this usecase entirely.
> In some cases, this could take five minutes. Customer realizes that they could just get in their car and drive to the restaurant at this point, so why order for delivery?
What? They’d stumble down in pyjamas. If they’re in a building that probably means exiting and re-entering a parking garage. Also, it’s Phoenix. Nothing is five minutes away—the urban plan is one of sprawl.
I agree it’s less convenient than door delivery. But against that is the cost of tipping and humans getting lost. For it is the fact that in many major cities, people routinely order food delivery despite being required by building policy to pick it up downstairs.
I think we’ve exhausted this discussion. It’s reduced down to simple individual opinions about whether it’s worth it to drive to a restaurant or not.
I only wanted to point out that The customers are getting less not more. And the companies will make less money because the automated cars are more expensive than drivers that are willing to take food for 2 to 3 dollars a delivery. If you fail to see that or recognize it, I’ll leave it at that.
When I order food delivery I try to limit myself to locations nearby because I don't want to be a hassle and make a driver drive 10 miles out and 10 miles in. I also factor in a tip for the delivery itself.
If it's a robot delivering to me I don't care if I make the robot drive 30 miles out to get me food (as long as the food is something that won't taste notably worse after such a long drive of course). Plus I'm not going to tip the machine.
I think plenty of Phoenicians will tip themselves to walk to the curb.
> the companies will make less money because the automated cars are more expensive than drivers
Disagree. The marginal cost for a late-night Waymo is probably already comparable to that of a driver, and that’s before we get to California’s Prop 22.
Having to go outside significantly reduces the benefit of delivery. Now customers have to interrupt what they’re doing, make sure they look OK so the neighbors don’t see their underwear and bed hair, put on a jacket or raincoat in bad weather, possibly wait on 2 elevators, and pick up their food right next to their own car in the parking lot. In some cases, this could take five minutes. Customer realizes that they could just get in their car and drive to the restaurant at this point, so why order for delivery?
Makes no sense.