You keep seeming to look at this from the perspective of the dark kitchen though, rather than from the perspective of Deliveroo. I never claimed the dark kitchen would be profitable, did I?
You claimed that the commission was "a reduction in their profits" which for the dark kitchen is 100% true, but for Deliveroo it isn't, it is their revenue stream. The service charge they then charge the consumer is also a revenue stream for Deliveroo, so they have multiple revenue streams.
Whether their revenue exceeds their costs is a different question, but their service charges are categorically not their only revenue stream.
PS I think anyone setting up a "dark kitchen" its a mug's game. Deliveroo are keen to get people setting them up, because they can then charge money for it but if you're not selling drinks etc to consumers then its going to be very difficult for anyone operating a dark kitchen to turn a profit while paying Deliveroo etc too.
But Deliveroo don't care if the restaurants they 'serve' go bust and are replaced by new investors looking to set up a restaurant. That's another injection of investment cash going on right there, without Deliveroo needing to raise a penny of it, instead they're parasites on that.
You mentioned Dominos originally. Could be a Dominos franchise. Or a chippy. Or Tesco Express - whatever. Those guys make money producing stuff.
Deliveroo are an order processing and delivery company. They make money generating and delivering orders.
The problem is that for the food producer they can't just use Deliveroo. Or Gorillas. Or Ubereats. They need to use all of them. And don't care which. Punters increasingly use umbrella sites like Just Eat rather than Deliveroo as there is more choice.
So the producer makes money producing stuff. The delivery firm makes money via tech and physical; delivery. And that is the problem. They cannot make money unless the tech is established and the volume is enormous. Their commission does not cover their costs and they can't charge more commission because competition lowers the bar - nobody cares who delivers the food.
So yes, Deliveroo do care. They only get volume if the restaurant keeps using them. And there is too much competition. Hence the new idea of Deliveroo operating their own dark kitchen -they can't lose the custom and there is actual profit that can be used to subsidise their losses.
You're wrong in saying the producer makes money producing stuff. The producer should make money producing stuff, but the problem is the producer is having a large slice of their ticket price they should be making on being withheld by Deliveroo etc instead.
And all the hundreds of FoodCo's in your local area feel like they have no choice to be on all platforms, even though the platforms withhold the cash they should be making, because the alternative is they get no cash.
Why do you think 40% commission (as per that real world Chinese example) plus 10% service charge can't be profitable?
Why? Because those figures are wrong. Their total charge is more like 30% including the service charge depending on the area. If someone is being ripped at 50% then they quit and use one of the competitors.
I'm going to park this because you aren't paying any attention. It isn't what I think. It is what their investors know. The investors who see the real figures not your best guess figures.
Please, go buy shares in Deliveroo as you are so convinced they are a winner. They are a bargain at the moment having lost 60% of their value since the start of the year.
I never said Deliveroo are a bargain at the minute, I said they have the potential of being profitable. That is two very different things. There is a world of difference between profitable and to infinite and beyond stock prices.
Do I think Deliveroo can make a profit in the future? Yes.
Do I think they will make a profit that justifies a £1.5 billion market cap? Let alone a nearly £4 billion market cap earlier this year? No, that's a very different question.
The investors who see the figures also think they can make a profit in the future, otherwise the share price would be 0.
The value they have, is in the brand itself. The underlying business is unlikely to ever be profitable.
Why don't you think they can make a profit charging 30-40% commission plus service charges, while only paying a pittance to the people delivering for them who are expected to do many deliveries per hour to get to £9 per hour?
Whether restaurants will make money with Deliveroo etc charging 30%+ commission is another matter.
For some reason Rochdale seems to think the fact that every FoodCo is on every DeliveryCo network now is bad news for the DeliveryCo's, it isn't. The fact that FoodCo feels they have no choice but to be on every network is precisely why they are and means DeliveryCo can charge exorbitant commissions and they get away with it.
Genuinely giggling reading this. Its another subject where you are taking your theoretical ideas disconnected from the real world and proceed to lecture the industry on how they are wrong. Bravo.
That last line in particular - genius. Having just spent half an hour reading how all the competitors are undercutting each other to fight for market share you are still saying they can "charge exorbitant commissions and [] get away with it"
As they lose money on each delivery - on their own figures - they are hardly exorbitant. And the market competition means that can't and DON'T get away with it. Why stick with Deliveroo if Gorillas are cheaper? Or why bother with any of them at all when you can use Just Eat and not care who does the delivery?
Please, you should do a Ted talk on it. Tell Deliveroo how they have got their industry wrong. We could watch. I'd pay!
Surely if you use Just Eat, Just Eat do the delivery.
On food banks. Those most in favour of them are, of course, those who are fortunate enough never to have to use them.
As for those who do use them. Well, they are of course very grateful that they exist. But many people who use them find it deeply humiliating to do so; using them is dehumanising, though not as much as begging.
I'm not persuaded that having world-beating food banks is something that we, as one of the richest countries in the world, should be particularly proud of. Rather, I see it as a badge of shame that poor people have to receive charity while so many of our citizens find that food constitutes a very small proportion of their outgoings. But I guess that's why I'm a leftie.
You keep seeming to look at this from the perspective of the dark kitchen though, rather than from the perspective of Deliveroo. I never claimed the dark kitchen would be profitable, did I?
You claimed that the commission was "a reduction in their profits" which for the dark kitchen is 100% true, but for Deliveroo it isn't, it is their revenue stream. The service charge they then charge the consumer is also a revenue stream for Deliveroo, so they have multiple revenue streams.
Whether their revenue exceeds their costs is a different question, but their service charges are categorically not their only revenue stream.
PS I think anyone setting up a "dark kitchen" its a mug's game. Deliveroo are keen to get people setting them up, because they can then charge money for it but if you're not selling drinks etc to consumers then its going to be very difficult for anyone operating a dark kitchen to turn a profit while paying Deliveroo etc too.
But Deliveroo don't care if the restaurants they 'serve' go bust and are replaced by new investors looking to set up a restaurant. That's another injection of investment cash going on right there, without Deliveroo needing to raise a penny of it, instead they're parasites on that.
You mentioned Dominos originally. Could be a Dominos franchise. Or a chippy. Or Tesco Express - whatever. Those guys make money producing stuff.
Deliveroo are an order processing and delivery company. They make money generating and delivering orders.
The problem is that for the food producer they can't just use Deliveroo. Or Gorillas. Or Ubereats. They need to use all of them. And don't care which. Punters increasingly use umbrella sites like Just Eat rather than Deliveroo as there is more choice.
So the producer makes money producing stuff. The delivery firm makes money via tech and physical; delivery. And that is the problem. They cannot make money unless the tech is established and the volume is enormous. Their commission does not cover their costs and they can't charge more commission because competition lowers the bar - nobody cares who delivers the food.
So yes, Deliveroo do care. They only get volume if the restaurant keeps using them. And there is too much competition. Hence the new idea of Deliveroo operating their own dark kitchen -they can't lose the custom and there is actual profit that can be used to subsidise their losses.
You're wrong in saying the producer makes money producing stuff. The producer should make money producing stuff, but the problem is the producer is having a large slice of their ticket price they should be making on being withheld by Deliveroo etc instead.
And all the hundreds of FoodCo's in your local area feel like they have no choice to be on all platforms, even though the platforms withhold the cash they should be making, because the alternative is they get no cash.
Why do you think 40% commission (as per that real world Chinese example) plus 10% service charge can't be profitable?
Why? Because those figures are wrong. Their total charge is more like 30% including the service charge depending on the area. If someone is being ripped at 50% then they quit and use one of the competitors.
I'm going to park this because you aren't paying any attention. It isn't what I think. It is what their investors know. The investors who see the real figures not your best guess figures.
Please, go buy shares in Deliveroo as you are so convinced they are a winner. They are a bargain at the moment having lost 60% of their value since the start of the year.
I never said Deliveroo are a bargain at the minute, I said they have the potential of being profitable. That is two very different things. There is a world of difference between profitable and to infinite and beyond stock prices.
Do I think Deliveroo can make a profit in the future? Yes.
Do I think they will make a profit that justifies a £1.5 billion market cap? Let alone a nearly £4 billion market cap earlier this year? No, that's a very different question.
The investors who see the figures also think they can make a profit in the future, otherwise the share price would be 0.
The value they have, is in the brand itself. The underlying business is unlikely to ever be profitable.
Why don't you think they can make a profit charging 30-40% commission plus service charges, while only paying a pittance to the people delivering for them who are expected to do many deliveries per hour to get to £9 per hour?
Whether restaurants will make money with Deliveroo etc charging 30%+ commission is another matter.
For some reason Rochdale seems to think the fact that every FoodCo is on every DeliveryCo network now is bad news for the DeliveryCo's, it isn't. The fact that FoodCo feels they have no choice but to be on every network is precisely why they are and means DeliveryCo can charge exorbitant commissions and they get away with it.
The issue is, that the many DeliveryCos have massive marketing costs, as they are competing with each other, and still can’t make close to a profit while they have humans doing the deliveries, despite the commissions they charge to restaurants.
You and I agree on most things, but @RochdalePioneers is right on this one. Unless we can get the robot overlords doing deliveries.
Absolutely marketing etc is a major cost and would remain a major cost even if they replaced all humans with robots.
Considering how shit these companies treat the drivers delivering for them, I'm not convinced robotics would make the businesses any more profitable. Robots would come with their own costs too and marketing would remain an issue. Robot drivers is vapourware to scam investors not the magic cure to make the business profitable.
Oh, there’s no chance whatsoever of robots doing deliveries anytime soon, other than well-supervised and rediculously expensive prototype demonstrations.
Thanks to the ending of FoM, and full employment, it’s becoming more expensive for these companies to exploit cheap labour at the bottom end. The apps are all struggling to recruit drivers, and are paying higher rates which erodes their own margins, which makes them even less likely to be profitable in the medium term.
Robots have been delivering food in China, during Covid
And drones could deliver food easily, given that they can now fly en masse through bamboo forests:
The London media bubble tosspots have got this one wrong. They are probably helping him.
Aside from the fact that £50 divided by 170 meals is just under 30p per meal, not 30p per day.. Other than the bad maths, I agree with him.
Its always cheaper to make bulk food than small quantities. 170 meals is a stupid thing to quote as the per meal cost will be a lot more if you are making a week's worth of meals for yourself instead of meals for 170 people to eat immediately.
He doesn't get it, but his "I did not patronise you" response is itself patronising.
And batch cooking, great as it is, does depend on having a large fridge, preferably a large freezer. Which in turn means having the space to put it in.
Once again- one trouble with being poor is that it makes things so expensive.
There is not going to be a one size fits sll solution for sure but given the scale of the crisis we face there needs to be room to address issues like the lack of cooking skills, lack of household budgeting skills, the need to look at value brands as a savings method etc without instantly provoking pretend pearl clutching from Pippa Crerar and company. In a world used to on demand everything and fast fashion we need to relearn the thrift and make do and mend of the pre 80s times and some creative, innovative and probably 'offensive' (to some idiotic melts looking to be offended) practical solutions found
You keep seeming to look at this from the perspective of the dark kitchen though, rather than from the perspective of Deliveroo. I never claimed the dark kitchen would be profitable, did I?
You claimed that the commission was "a reduction in their profits" which for the dark kitchen is 100% true, but for Deliveroo it isn't, it is their revenue stream. The service charge they then charge the consumer is also a revenue stream for Deliveroo, so they have multiple revenue streams.
Whether their revenue exceeds their costs is a different question, but their service charges are categorically not their only revenue stream.
PS I think anyone setting up a "dark kitchen" its a mug's game. Deliveroo are keen to get people setting them up, because they can then charge money for it but if you're not selling drinks etc to consumers then its going to be very difficult for anyone operating a dark kitchen to turn a profit while paying Deliveroo etc too.
But Deliveroo don't care if the restaurants they 'serve' go bust and are replaced by new investors looking to set up a restaurant. That's another injection of investment cash going on right there, without Deliveroo needing to raise a penny of it, instead they're parasites on that.
You mentioned Dominos originally. Could be a Dominos franchise. Or a chippy. Or Tesco Express - whatever. Those guys make money producing stuff.
Deliveroo are an order processing and delivery company. They make money generating and delivering orders.
The problem is that for the food producer they can't just use Deliveroo. Or Gorillas. Or Ubereats. They need to use all of them. And don't care which. Punters increasingly use umbrella sites like Just Eat rather than Deliveroo as there is more choice.
So the producer makes money producing stuff. The delivery firm makes money via tech and physical; delivery. And that is the problem. They cannot make money unless the tech is established and the volume is enormous. Their commission does not cover their costs and they can't charge more commission because competition lowers the bar - nobody cares who delivers the food.
So yes, Deliveroo do care. They only get volume if the restaurant keeps using them. And there is too much competition. Hence the new idea of Deliveroo operating their own dark kitchen -they can't lose the custom and there is actual profit that can be used to subsidise their losses.
You're wrong in saying the producer makes money producing stuff. The producer should make money producing stuff, but the problem is the producer is having a large slice of their ticket price they should be making on being withheld by Deliveroo etc instead.
And all the hundreds of FoodCo's in your local area feel like they have no choice to be on all platforms, even though the platforms withhold the cash they should be making, because the alternative is they get no cash.
Why do you think 40% commission (as per that real world Chinese example) plus 10% service charge can't be profitable?
Why? Because those figures are wrong. Their total charge is more like 30% including the service charge depending on the area. If someone is being ripped at 50% then they quit and use one of the competitors.
I'm going to park this because you aren't paying any attention. It isn't what I think. It is what their investors know. The investors who see the real figures not your best guess figures.
Please, go buy shares in Deliveroo as you are so convinced they are a winner. They are a bargain at the moment having lost 60% of their value since the start of the year.
I never said Deliveroo are a bargain at the minute, I said they have the potential of being profitable. That is two very different things. There is a world of difference between profitable and to infinite and beyond stock prices.
Do I think Deliveroo can make a profit in the future? Yes.
Do I think they will make a profit that justifies a £1.5 billion market cap? Let alone a nearly £4 billion market cap earlier this year? No, that's a very different question.
The investors who see the figures also think they can make a profit in the future, otherwise the share price would be 0.
The only way this entire sector can make money is if they have huge volume, have stable prices, and remove as much of their variable costs (delivery staff) as possible.
Its simply a fact that they lose money. A lot of money. Their own figures tell you that. Their c 30% fee doesn't cover their costs and there are always new competitors out there vying for business by undercutting even this loss-making position. They can't make money by doing more volume - their long term goal - because they lose money every transaction.
So to pull it all back to the beginning, this is a Tulip Bulbs ponzi scheme. There is money to be made speculating on the sector, but not from the sector itself. It will collapse spectacularly.
Huge volume ✅ - they have this. Stable Prices - no, they have been rapidly increasing prices in recent years, which is good for them. Remove as much variable costs as possible ✅ - They do this.
Yes they lose money, but they've been rapidly growing and are now in almost every part of the nation and have a very significant proportion of restaurants in the nation.
They're following a similar path to Amazon who are very profitable but weren't for years - a period of rapid expansion, then stop selling at below costs. They've got themselves embedded so people are hooked on using them, now they've started raising prices. I would be surprised if Deliveroo don't start registering profits within the next couple of years now.
You're categorically wrong in claiming that they lose money every transaction so lose more money by growing. In 2021 their revenues increased by 54% while their net loss fell from £317m to £223m.
Using your logic, their revenues increasing by 54% should have seen their net loss increase to £488m which is more than double what it actually was.
It's also worth noting that they have done a deal with Amazon so the service charge is removed for deliveries over a certain amount, for Prime customers. This is a smart move.
Incidentally have no idea what figures BR is quoting. Deliveroo quote their performance on their website, its what I quoted, not what BR posted. Whatever.
A 73% growth in orders (to 301m) led to a 40% growth in pre-tax losses (to £298m). So yes, the amount they lose decreases the more orders they take. Question is how many orders they need to break even. And then how many orders they need to actually make money on to repay this year's £298m loss plus last years £213 loss plus 2020 etc etc.
How much money do they need to burn to make a profit?
Also worth remembering just how much money the delivery side of Prime loses...
You keep seeming to look at this from the perspective of the dark kitchen though, rather than from the perspective of Deliveroo. I never claimed the dark kitchen would be profitable, did I?
You claimed that the commission was "a reduction in their profits" which for the dark kitchen is 100% true, but for Deliveroo it isn't, it is their revenue stream. The service charge they then charge the consumer is also a revenue stream for Deliveroo, so they have multiple revenue streams.
Whether their revenue exceeds their costs is a different question, but their service charges are categorically not their only revenue stream.
PS I think anyone setting up a "dark kitchen" its a mug's game. Deliveroo are keen to get people setting them up, because they can then charge money for it but if you're not selling drinks etc to consumers then its going to be very difficult for anyone operating a dark kitchen to turn a profit while paying Deliveroo etc too.
But Deliveroo don't care if the restaurants they 'serve' go bust and are replaced by new investors looking to set up a restaurant. That's another injection of investment cash going on right there, without Deliveroo needing to raise a penny of it, instead they're parasites on that.
You mentioned Dominos originally. Could be a Dominos franchise. Or a chippy. Or Tesco Express - whatever. Those guys make money producing stuff.
Deliveroo are an order processing and delivery company. They make money generating and delivering orders.
The problem is that for the food producer they can't just use Deliveroo. Or Gorillas. Or Ubereats. They need to use all of them. And don't care which. Punters increasingly use umbrella sites like Just Eat rather than Deliveroo as there is more choice.
So the producer makes money producing stuff. The delivery firm makes money via tech and physical; delivery. And that is the problem. They cannot make money unless the tech is established and the volume is enormous. Their commission does not cover their costs and they can't charge more commission because competition lowers the bar - nobody cares who delivers the food.
So yes, Deliveroo do care. They only get volume if the restaurant keeps using them. And there is too much competition. Hence the new idea of Deliveroo operating their own dark kitchen -they can't lose the custom and there is actual profit that can be used to subsidise their losses.
You're wrong in saying the producer makes money producing stuff. The producer should make money producing stuff, but the problem is the producer is having a large slice of their ticket price they should be making on being withheld by Deliveroo etc instead.
And all the hundreds of FoodCo's in your local area feel like they have no choice to be on all platforms, even though the platforms withhold the cash they should be making, because the alternative is they get no cash.
Why do you think 40% commission (as per that real world Chinese example) plus 10% service charge can't be profitable?
Why? Because those figures are wrong. Their total charge is more like 30% including the service charge depending on the area. If someone is being ripped at 50% then they quit and use one of the competitors.
I'm going to park this because you aren't paying any attention. It isn't what I think. It is what their investors know. The investors who see the real figures not your best guess figures.
Please, go buy shares in Deliveroo as you are so convinced they are a winner. They are a bargain at the moment having lost 60% of their value since the start of the year.
I never said Deliveroo are a bargain at the minute, I said they have the potential of being profitable. That is two very different things. There is a world of difference between profitable and to infinite and beyond stock prices.
Do I think Deliveroo can make a profit in the future? Yes.
Do I think they will make a profit that justifies a £1.5 billion market cap? Let alone a nearly £4 billion market cap earlier this year? No, that's a very different question.
The investors who see the figures also think they can make a profit in the future, otherwise the share price would be 0.
The value they have, is in the brand itself. The underlying business is unlikely to ever be profitable.
Why don't you think they can make a profit charging 30-40% commission plus service charges, while only paying a pittance to the people delivering for them who are expected to do many deliveries per hour to get to £9 per hour?
Whether restaurants will make money with Deliveroo etc charging 30%+ commission is another matter.
For some reason Rochdale seems to think the fact that every FoodCo is on every DeliveryCo network now is bad news for the DeliveryCo's, it isn't. The fact that FoodCo feels they have no choice but to be on every network is precisely why they are and means DeliveryCo can charge exorbitant commissions and they get away with it.
The issue is, that the many DeliveryCos have massive marketing costs, as they are competing with each other, and still can’t make close to a profit while they have humans doing the deliveries, despite the commissions they charge to restaurants.
You and I agree on most things, but @RochdalePioneers is right on this one. Unless we can get the robot overlords doing deliveries.
Absolutely marketing etc is a major cost and would remain a major cost even if they replaced all humans with robots.
Considering how shit these companies treat the drivers delivering for them, I'm not convinced robotics would make the businesses any more profitable. Robots would come with their own costs too and marketing would remain an issue. Robot drivers is vapourware to scam investors not the magic cure to make the business profitable.
Oh, there’s no chance whatsoever of robots doing deliveries anytime soon, other than well-supervised and rediculously-expensive prototype deliveries.
Thanks to the ending of FoM, and full employment, it’s becoming more expensive for these companies to exploit cheap labour at the bottom end. The apps are all struggling to recruit drivers, and are paying higher rates which erodes their own margins, which makes them even less likely to be profitable in the medium term.
Which is a good thing absolutely.
Its worth noting that Deliveroo's loss last year was not just down by a third while revenues increased by over 50% but it was also the first time I believe that their loss was less than their marketing spend.
Rochdale is making a fallacy in thinking that because there's a loss per transaction today, that means that loss is static, so growing equals more loss, but it isn't true. The per transaction loss in 2020 was quite literally a fraction of the per transaction loss in 2019.
2019 Revenue £771m, Profit (£317m) = 41.2% loss 2020 Revenue £1.2b, Profit (£223m) = 18.6% loss
That's quite a turnaround in a year. At that rate of turnaround per transaction it'd be possible for them to be profitable within a year.
On food banks. Those most in favour of them are, of course, those who are fortunate enough never to have to use them.
As for those who do use them. Well, they are of course very grateful that they exist. But many people who use them find it deeply humiliating to do so; using them is dehumanising, though not as much as begging.
I'm not persuaded that having world-beating food banks is something that we, as one of the richest countries in the world, should be particularly proud of. Rather, I see it as a badge of shame that poor people have to receive charity while so many of our citizens find that food constitutes a very small proportion of their outgoings. But I guess that's why I'm a leftie.
Yes, only the Left care about the poor. The rest of us loathe them and want them hunted for sport
On food banks. Those most in favour of them are, of course, those who are fortunate enough never to have to use them.
As for those who do use them. Well, they are of course very grateful that they exist. But many people who use them find it deeply humiliating to do so; using them is dehumanising, though not as much as begging.
I'm not persuaded that having world-beating food banks is something that we, as one of the richest countries in the world, should be particularly proud of. Rather, I see it as a badge of shame that poor people have to receive charity while so many of our citizens find that food constitutes a very small proportion of their outgoings. But I guess that's why I'm a leftie.
Share the shame..
“ Claim: There are more food banks in Germany than there are in the UK.
Verdict: We have not been able to find any evidence to support this claim. According to available statistics, Germany has about 2,000 food distribution centres - the same as the UK.”
You keep seeming to look at this from the perspective of the dark kitchen though, rather than from the perspective of Deliveroo. I never claimed the dark kitchen would be profitable, did I?
You claimed that the commission was "a reduction in their profits" which for the dark kitchen is 100% true, but for Deliveroo it isn't, it is their revenue stream. The service charge they then charge the consumer is also a revenue stream for Deliveroo, so they have multiple revenue streams.
Whether their revenue exceeds their costs is a different question, but their service charges are categorically not their only revenue stream.
PS I think anyone setting up a "dark kitchen" its a mug's game. Deliveroo are keen to get people setting them up, because they can then charge money for it but if you're not selling drinks etc to consumers then its going to be very difficult for anyone operating a dark kitchen to turn a profit while paying Deliveroo etc too.
But Deliveroo don't care if the restaurants they 'serve' go bust and are replaced by new investors looking to set up a restaurant. That's another injection of investment cash going on right there, without Deliveroo needing to raise a penny of it, instead they're parasites on that.
You mentioned Dominos originally. Could be a Dominos franchise. Or a chippy. Or Tesco Express - whatever. Those guys make money producing stuff.
Deliveroo are an order processing and delivery company. They make money generating and delivering orders.
The problem is that for the food producer they can't just use Deliveroo. Or Gorillas. Or Ubereats. They need to use all of them. And don't care which. Punters increasingly use umbrella sites like Just Eat rather than Deliveroo as there is more choice.
So the producer makes money producing stuff. The delivery firm makes money via tech and physical; delivery. And that is the problem. They cannot make money unless the tech is established and the volume is enormous. Their commission does not cover their costs and they can't charge more commission because competition lowers the bar - nobody cares who delivers the food.
So yes, Deliveroo do care. They only get volume if the restaurant keeps using them. And there is too much competition. Hence the new idea of Deliveroo operating their own dark kitchen -they can't lose the custom and there is actual profit that can be used to subsidise their losses.
You're wrong in saying the producer makes money producing stuff. The producer should make money producing stuff, but the problem is the producer is having a large slice of their ticket price they should be making on being withheld by Deliveroo etc instead.
And all the hundreds of FoodCo's in your local area feel like they have no choice to be on all platforms, even though the platforms withhold the cash they should be making, because the alternative is they get no cash.
Why do you think 40% commission (as per that real world Chinese example) plus 10% service charge can't be profitable?
Why? Because those figures are wrong. Their total charge is more like 30% including the service charge depending on the area. If someone is being ripped at 50% then they quit and use one of the competitors.
I'm going to park this because you aren't paying any attention. It isn't what I think. It is what their investors know. The investors who see the real figures not your best guess figures.
Please, go buy shares in Deliveroo as you are so convinced they are a winner. They are a bargain at the moment having lost 60% of their value since the start of the year.
I never said Deliveroo are a bargain at the minute, I said they have the potential of being profitable. That is two very different things. There is a world of difference between profitable and to infinite and beyond stock prices.
Do I think Deliveroo can make a profit in the future? Yes.
Do I think they will make a profit that justifies a £1.5 billion market cap? Let alone a nearly £4 billion market cap earlier this year? No, that's a very different question.
The investors who see the figures also think they can make a profit in the future, otherwise the share price would be 0.
The value they have, is in the brand itself. The underlying business is unlikely to ever be profitable.
Why don't you think they can make a profit charging 30-40% commission plus service charges, while only paying a pittance to the people delivering for them who are expected to do many deliveries per hour to get to £9 per hour?
Whether restaurants will make money with Deliveroo etc charging 30%+ commission is another matter.
For some reason Rochdale seems to think the fact that every FoodCo is on every DeliveryCo network now is bad news for the DeliveryCo's, it isn't. The fact that FoodCo feels they have no choice but to be on every network is precisely why they are and means DeliveryCo can charge exorbitant commissions and they get away with it.
The issue is, that the many DeliveryCos have massive marketing costs, as they are competing with each other, and still can’t make close to a profit while they have humans doing the deliveries, despite the commissions they charge to restaurants.
You and I agree on most things, but @RochdalePioneers is right on this one. Unless we can get the robot overlords doing deliveries.
Absolutely marketing etc is a major cost and would remain a major cost even if they replaced all humans with robots.
Considering how shit these companies treat the drivers delivering for them, I'm not convinced robotics would make the businesses any more profitable. Robots would come with their own costs too and marketing would remain an issue. Robot drivers is vapourware to scam investors not the magic cure to make the business profitable.
Oh, there’s no chance whatsoever of robots doing deliveries anytime soon, other than well-supervised and rediculously expensive prototype demonstrations.
Thanks to the ending of FoM, and full employment, it’s becoming more expensive for these companies to exploit cheap labour at the bottom end. The apps are all struggling to recruit drivers, and are paying higher rates which erodes their own margins, which makes them even less likely to be profitable in the medium term.
Robots have been delivering food in China, during Covid
And drones could deliver food easily, given that they can now fly en masse through bamboo forests:
You keep seeming to look at this from the perspective of the dark kitchen though, rather than from the perspective of Deliveroo. I never claimed the dark kitchen would be profitable, did I?
You claimed that the commission was "a reduction in their profits" which for the dark kitchen is 100% true, but for Deliveroo it isn't, it is their revenue stream. The service charge they then charge the consumer is also a revenue stream for Deliveroo, so they have multiple revenue streams.
Whether their revenue exceeds their costs is a different question, but their service charges are categorically not their only revenue stream.
PS I think anyone setting up a "dark kitchen" its a mug's game. Deliveroo are keen to get people setting them up, because they can then charge money for it but if you're not selling drinks etc to consumers then its going to be very difficult for anyone operating a dark kitchen to turn a profit while paying Deliveroo etc too.
But Deliveroo don't care if the restaurants they 'serve' go bust and are replaced by new investors looking to set up a restaurant. That's another injection of investment cash going on right there, without Deliveroo needing to raise a penny of it, instead they're parasites on that.
You mentioned Dominos originally. Could be a Dominos franchise. Or a chippy. Or Tesco Express - whatever. Those guys make money producing stuff.
Deliveroo are an order processing and delivery company. They make money generating and delivering orders.
The problem is that for the food producer they can't just use Deliveroo. Or Gorillas. Or Ubereats. They need to use all of them. And don't care which. Punters increasingly use umbrella sites like Just Eat rather than Deliveroo as there is more choice.
So the producer makes money producing stuff. The delivery firm makes money via tech and physical; delivery. And that is the problem. They cannot make money unless the tech is established and the volume is enormous. Their commission does not cover their costs and they can't charge more commission because competition lowers the bar - nobody cares who delivers the food.
So yes, Deliveroo do care. They only get volume if the restaurant keeps using them. And there is too much competition. Hence the new idea of Deliveroo operating their own dark kitchen -they can't lose the custom and there is actual profit that can be used to subsidise their losses.
You're wrong in saying the producer makes money producing stuff. The producer should make money producing stuff, but the problem is the producer is having a large slice of their ticket price they should be making on being withheld by Deliveroo etc instead.
And all the hundreds of FoodCo's in your local area feel like they have no choice to be on all platforms, even though the platforms withhold the cash they should be making, because the alternative is they get no cash.
Why do you think 40% commission (as per that real world Chinese example) plus 10% service charge can't be profitable?
Why? Because those figures are wrong. Their total charge is more like 30% including the service charge depending on the area. If someone is being ripped at 50% then they quit and use one of the competitors.
I'm going to park this because you aren't paying any attention. It isn't what I think. It is what their investors know. The investors who see the real figures not your best guess figures.
Please, go buy shares in Deliveroo as you are so convinced they are a winner. They are a bargain at the moment having lost 60% of their value since the start of the year.
I never said Deliveroo are a bargain at the minute, I said they have the potential of being profitable. That is two very different things. There is a world of difference between profitable and to infinite and beyond stock prices.
Do I think Deliveroo can make a profit in the future? Yes.
Do I think they will make a profit that justifies a £1.5 billion market cap? Let alone a nearly £4 billion market cap earlier this year? No, that's a very different question.
The investors who see the figures also think they can make a profit in the future, otherwise the share price would be 0.
The value they have, is in the brand itself. The underlying business is unlikely to ever be profitable.
Why don't you think they can make a profit charging 30-40% commission plus service charges, while only paying a pittance to the people delivering for them who are expected to do many deliveries per hour to get to £9 per hour?
Whether restaurants will make money with Deliveroo etc charging 30%+ commission is another matter.
For some reason Rochdale seems to think the fact that every FoodCo is on every DeliveryCo network now is bad news for the DeliveryCo's, it isn't. The fact that FoodCo feels they have no choice but to be on every network is precisely why they are and means DeliveryCo can charge exorbitant commissions and they get away with it.
The issue is, that the many DeliveryCos have massive marketing costs, as they are competing with each other, and still can’t make close to a profit while they have humans doing the deliveries, despite the commissions they charge to restaurants.
You and I agree on most things, but @RochdalePioneers is right on this one. Unless we can get the robot overlords doing deliveries.
Absolutely marketing etc is a major cost and would remain a major cost even if they replaced all humans with robots.
Considering how shit these companies treat the drivers delivering for them, I'm not convinced robotics would make the businesses any more profitable. Robots would come with their own costs too and marketing would remain an issue. Robot drivers is vapourware to scam investors not the magic cure to make the business profitable.
Oh, there’s no chance whatsoever of robots doing deliveries anytime soon, other than well-supervised and rediculously expensive prototype demonstrations.
Thanks to the ending of FoM, and full employment, it’s becoming more expensive for these companies to exploit cheap labour at the bottom end. The apps are all struggling to recruit drivers, and are paying higher rates which erodes their own margins, which makes them even less likely to be profitable in the medium term.
Robots have been delivering food in China, during Covid
And drones could deliver food easily, given that they can now fly en masse through bamboo forests:
They'll be driving us home ftom the pub in cities within a few years and definitely drone deliveries batched with a human central overseer/troubleshooter are just around the corner
On food banks. Those most in favour of them are, of course, those who are fortunate enough never to have to use them.
As for those who do use them. Well, they are of course very grateful that they exist. But many people who use them find it deeply humiliating to do so; using them is dehumanising, though not as much as begging.
I'm not persuaded that having world-beating food banks is something that we, as one of the richest countries in the world, should be particularly proud of. Rather, I see it as a badge of shame that poor people have to receive charity while so many of our citizens find that food constitutes a very small proportion of their outgoings. But I guess that's why I'm a leftie.
Yes, only the Left care about the poor. The rest of us loathe them and want them hunted for sport
The moral narcissism of left wingers. Lordy
The self-indulgent narcissism of right wingers who regale us with tales and pictures of their hugely expensive travelling lifestyles. Lordy.
(Edit - though I do find your stuff entertaining).
You keep seeming to look at this from the perspective of the dark kitchen though, rather than from the perspective of Deliveroo. I never claimed the dark kitchen would be profitable, did I?
You claimed that the commission was "a reduction in their profits" which for the dark kitchen is 100% true, but for Deliveroo it isn't, it is their revenue stream. The service charge they then charge the consumer is also a revenue stream for Deliveroo, so they have multiple revenue streams.
Whether their revenue exceeds their costs is a different question, but their service charges are categorically not their only revenue stream.
PS I think anyone setting up a "dark kitchen" its a mug's game. Deliveroo are keen to get people setting them up, because they can then charge money for it but if you're not selling drinks etc to consumers then its going to be very difficult for anyone operating a dark kitchen to turn a profit while paying Deliveroo etc too.
But Deliveroo don't care if the restaurants they 'serve' go bust and are replaced by new investors looking to set up a restaurant. That's another injection of investment cash going on right there, without Deliveroo needing to raise a penny of it, instead they're parasites on that.
You mentioned Dominos originally. Could be a Dominos franchise. Or a chippy. Or Tesco Express - whatever. Those guys make money producing stuff.
Deliveroo are an order processing and delivery company. They make money generating and delivering orders.
The problem is that for the food producer they can't just use Deliveroo. Or Gorillas. Or Ubereats. They need to use all of them. And don't care which. Punters increasingly use umbrella sites like Just Eat rather than Deliveroo as there is more choice.
So the producer makes money producing stuff. The delivery firm makes money via tech and physical; delivery. And that is the problem. They cannot make money unless the tech is established and the volume is enormous. Their commission does not cover their costs and they can't charge more commission because competition lowers the bar - nobody cares who delivers the food.
So yes, Deliveroo do care. They only get volume if the restaurant keeps using them. And there is too much competition. Hence the new idea of Deliveroo operating their own dark kitchen -they can't lose the custom and there is actual profit that can be used to subsidise their losses.
You're wrong in saying the producer makes money producing stuff. The producer should make money producing stuff, but the problem is the producer is having a large slice of their ticket price they should be making on being withheld by Deliveroo etc instead.
And all the hundreds of FoodCo's in your local area feel like they have no choice to be on all platforms, even though the platforms withhold the cash they should be making, because the alternative is they get no cash.
Why do you think 40% commission (as per that real world Chinese example) plus 10% service charge can't be profitable?
Why? Because those figures are wrong. Their total charge is more like 30% including the service charge depending on the area. If someone is being ripped at 50% then they quit and use one of the competitors.
I'm going to park this because you aren't paying any attention. It isn't what I think. It is what their investors know. The investors who see the real figures not your best guess figures.
Please, go buy shares in Deliveroo as you are so convinced they are a winner. They are a bargain at the moment having lost 60% of their value since the start of the year.
I never said Deliveroo are a bargain at the minute, I said they have the potential of being profitable. That is two very different things. There is a world of difference between profitable and to infinite and beyond stock prices.
Do I think Deliveroo can make a profit in the future? Yes.
Do I think they will make a profit that justifies a £1.5 billion market cap? Let alone a nearly £4 billion market cap earlier this year? No, that's a very different question.
The investors who see the figures also think they can make a profit in the future, otherwise the share price would be 0.
The value they have, is in the brand itself. The underlying business is unlikely to ever be profitable.
Why don't you think they can make a profit charging 30-40% commission plus service charges, while only paying a pittance to the people delivering for them who are expected to do many deliveries per hour to get to £9 per hour?
Whether restaurants will make money with Deliveroo etc charging 30%+ commission is another matter.
For some reason Rochdale seems to think the fact that every FoodCo is on every DeliveryCo network now is bad news for the DeliveryCo's, it isn't. The fact that FoodCo feels they have no choice but to be on every network is precisely why they are and means DeliveryCo can charge exorbitant commissions and they get away with it.
The issue is, that the many DeliveryCos have massive marketing costs, as they are competing with each other, and still can’t make close to a profit while they have humans doing the deliveries, despite the commissions they charge to restaurants.
You and I agree on most things, but @RochdalePioneers is right on this one. Unless we can get the robot overlords doing deliveries.
Absolutely marketing etc is a major cost and would remain a major cost even if they replaced all humans with robots.
Considering how shit these companies treat the drivers delivering for them, I'm not convinced robotics would make the businesses any more profitable. Robots would come with their own costs too and marketing would remain an issue. Robot drivers is vapourware to scam investors not the magic cure to make the business profitable.
Oh, there’s no chance whatsoever of robots doing deliveries anytime soon, other than well-supervised and rediculously expensive prototype demonstrations.
Thanks to the ending of FoM, and full employment, it’s becoming more expensive for these companies to exploit cheap labour at the bottom end. The apps are all struggling to recruit drivers, and are paying higher rates which erodes their own margins, which makes them even less likely to be profitable in the medium term.
Robots have been delivering food in China, during Covid
And drones could deliver food easily, given that they can now fly en masse through bamboo forests:
All a drone has to do is hold, carry and then gently drop a sealed plastic bag with food containers inside. That’s exactly what my Deliveroo guy does. He doesn’t lay the table and flambe the crepes
You keep seeming to look at this from the perspective of the dark kitchen though, rather than from the perspective of Deliveroo. I never claimed the dark kitchen would be profitable, did I?
You claimed that the commission was "a reduction in their profits" which for the dark kitchen is 100% true, but for Deliveroo it isn't, it is their revenue stream. The service charge they then charge the consumer is also a revenue stream for Deliveroo, so they have multiple revenue streams.
Whether their revenue exceeds their costs is a different question, but their service charges are categorically not their only revenue stream.
PS I think anyone setting up a "dark kitchen" its a mug's game. Deliveroo are keen to get people setting them up, because they can then charge money for it but if you're not selling drinks etc to consumers then its going to be very difficult for anyone operating a dark kitchen to turn a profit while paying Deliveroo etc too.
But Deliveroo don't care if the restaurants they 'serve' go bust and are replaced by new investors looking to set up a restaurant. That's another injection of investment cash going on right there, without Deliveroo needing to raise a penny of it, instead they're parasites on that.
You mentioned Dominos originally. Could be a Dominos franchise. Or a chippy. Or Tesco Express - whatever. Those guys make money producing stuff.
Deliveroo are an order processing and delivery company. They make money generating and delivering orders.
The problem is that for the food producer they can't just use Deliveroo. Or Gorillas. Or Ubereats. They need to use all of them. And don't care which. Punters increasingly use umbrella sites like Just Eat rather than Deliveroo as there is more choice.
So the producer makes money producing stuff. The delivery firm makes money via tech and physical; delivery. And that is the problem. They cannot make money unless the tech is established and the volume is enormous. Their commission does not cover their costs and they can't charge more commission because competition lowers the bar - nobody cares who delivers the food.
So yes, Deliveroo do care. They only get volume if the restaurant keeps using them. And there is too much competition. Hence the new idea of Deliveroo operating their own dark kitchen -they can't lose the custom and there is actual profit that can be used to subsidise their losses.
You're wrong in saying the producer makes money producing stuff. The producer should make money producing stuff, but the problem is the producer is having a large slice of their ticket price they should be making on being withheld by Deliveroo etc instead.
And all the hundreds of FoodCo's in your local area feel like they have no choice to be on all platforms, even though the platforms withhold the cash they should be making, because the alternative is they get no cash.
Why do you think 40% commission (as per that real world Chinese example) plus 10% service charge can't be profitable?
Why? Because those figures are wrong. Their total charge is more like 30% including the service charge depending on the area. If someone is being ripped at 50% then they quit and use one of the competitors.
I'm going to park this because you aren't paying any attention. It isn't what I think. It is what their investors know. The investors who see the real figures not your best guess figures.
Please, go buy shares in Deliveroo as you are so convinced they are a winner. They are a bargain at the moment having lost 60% of their value since the start of the year.
I never said Deliveroo are a bargain at the minute, I said they have the potential of being profitable. That is two very different things. There is a world of difference between profitable and to infinite and beyond stock prices.
Do I think Deliveroo can make a profit in the future? Yes.
Do I think they will make a profit that justifies a £1.5 billion market cap? Let alone a nearly £4 billion market cap earlier this year? No, that's a very different question.
The investors who see the figures also think they can make a profit in the future, otherwise the share price would be 0.
The value they have, is in the brand itself. The underlying business is unlikely to ever be profitable.
Why don't you think they can make a profit charging 30-40% commission plus service charges, while only paying a pittance to the people delivering for them who are expected to do many deliveries per hour to get to £9 per hour?
Whether restaurants will make money with Deliveroo etc charging 30%+ commission is another matter.
For some reason Rochdale seems to think the fact that every FoodCo is on every DeliveryCo network now is bad news for the DeliveryCo's, it isn't. The fact that FoodCo feels they have no choice but to be on every network is precisely why they are and means DeliveryCo can charge exorbitant commissions and they get away with it.
The issue is, that the many DeliveryCos have massive marketing costs, as they are competing with each other, and still can’t make close to a profit while they have humans doing the deliveries, despite the commissions they charge to restaurants.
You and I agree on most things, but @RochdalePioneers is right on this one. Unless we can get the robot overlords doing deliveries.
Absolutely marketing etc is a major cost and would remain a major cost even if they replaced all humans with robots.
Considering how shit these companies treat the drivers delivering for them, I'm not convinced robotics would make the businesses any more profitable. Robots would come with their own costs too and marketing would remain an issue. Robot drivers is vapourware to scam investors not the magic cure to make the business profitable.
Oh, there’s no chance whatsoever of robots doing deliveries anytime soon, other than well-supervised and rediculously-expensive prototype deliveries.
Thanks to the ending of FoM, and full employment, it’s becoming more expensive for these companies to exploit cheap labour at the bottom end. The apps are all struggling to recruit drivers, and are paying higher rates which erodes their own margins, which makes them even less likely to be profitable in the medium term.
Which is a good thing absolutely.
Its worth noting that Deliveroo's loss last year was not just down by a third while revenues increased by over 50% but it was also the first time I believe that their loss was less than their marketing spend.
Rochdale is making a fallacy in thinking that because there's a loss per transaction today, that means that loss is static, so growing equals more loss, but it isn't true. The per transaction loss in 2020 was quite literally a fraction of the per transaction loss in 2019.
2019 Revenue £771m, Profit (£317m) = 41.2% loss 2020 Revenue £1.2b, Profit (£223m) = 18.6% loss
That's quite a turnaround in a year. At that rate of turnaround per transaction it'd be possible for them to be profitable within a year.
The loss isn’t static, but the business is unprofitable unless they have a monopoly. And even then, the relatively low barriers to entry for another VC-backed startup mean they’ll always face continued competition.
You keep seeming to look at this from the perspective of the dark kitchen though, rather than from the perspective of Deliveroo. I never claimed the dark kitchen would be profitable, did I?
You claimed that the commission was "a reduction in their profits" which for the dark kitchen is 100% true, but for Deliveroo it isn't, it is their revenue stream. The service charge they then charge the consumer is also a revenue stream for Deliveroo, so they have multiple revenue streams.
Whether their revenue exceeds their costs is a different question, but their service charges are categorically not their only revenue stream.
PS I think anyone setting up a "dark kitchen" its a mug's game. Deliveroo are keen to get people setting them up, because they can then charge money for it but if you're not selling drinks etc to consumers then its going to be very difficult for anyone operating a dark kitchen to turn a profit while paying Deliveroo etc too.
But Deliveroo don't care if the restaurants they 'serve' go bust and are replaced by new investors looking to set up a restaurant. That's another injection of investment cash going on right there, without Deliveroo needing to raise a penny of it, instead they're parasites on that.
You mentioned Dominos originally. Could be a Dominos franchise. Or a chippy. Or Tesco Express - whatever. Those guys make money producing stuff.
Deliveroo are an order processing and delivery company. They make money generating and delivering orders.
The problem is that for the food producer they can't just use Deliveroo. Or Gorillas. Or Ubereats. They need to use all of them. And don't care which. Punters increasingly use umbrella sites like Just Eat rather than Deliveroo as there is more choice.
So the producer makes money producing stuff. The delivery firm makes money via tech and physical; delivery. And that is the problem. They cannot make money unless the tech is established and the volume is enormous. Their commission does not cover their costs and they can't charge more commission because competition lowers the bar - nobody cares who delivers the food.
So yes, Deliveroo do care. They only get volume if the restaurant keeps using them. And there is too much competition. Hence the new idea of Deliveroo operating their own dark kitchen -they can't lose the custom and there is actual profit that can be used to subsidise their losses.
You're wrong in saying the producer makes money producing stuff. The producer should make money producing stuff, but the problem is the producer is having a large slice of their ticket price they should be making on being withheld by Deliveroo etc instead.
And all the hundreds of FoodCo's in your local area feel like they have no choice to be on all platforms, even though the platforms withhold the cash they should be making, because the alternative is they get no cash.
Why do you think 40% commission (as per that real world Chinese example) plus 10% service charge can't be profitable?
Why? Because those figures are wrong. Their total charge is more like 30% including the service charge depending on the area. If someone is being ripped at 50% then they quit and use one of the competitors.
I'm going to park this because you aren't paying any attention. It isn't what I think. It is what their investors know. The investors who see the real figures not your best guess figures.
Please, go buy shares in Deliveroo as you are so convinced they are a winner. They are a bargain at the moment having lost 60% of their value since the start of the year.
I never said Deliveroo are a bargain at the minute, I said they have the potential of being profitable. That is two very different things. There is a world of difference between profitable and to infinite and beyond stock prices.
Do I think Deliveroo can make a profit in the future? Yes.
Do I think they will make a profit that justifies a £1.5 billion market cap? Let alone a nearly £4 billion market cap earlier this year? No, that's a very different question.
The investors who see the figures also think they can make a profit in the future, otherwise the share price would be 0.
The value they have, is in the brand itself. The underlying business is unlikely to ever be profitable.
Why don't you think they can make a profit charging 30-40% commission plus service charges, while only paying a pittance to the people delivering for them who are expected to do many deliveries per hour to get to £9 per hour?
Whether restaurants will make money with Deliveroo etc charging 30%+ commission is another matter.
For some reason Rochdale seems to think the fact that every FoodCo is on every DeliveryCo network now is bad news for the DeliveryCo's, it isn't. The fact that FoodCo feels they have no choice but to be on every network is precisely why they are and means DeliveryCo can charge exorbitant commissions and they get away with it.
The issue is, that the many DeliveryCos have massive marketing costs, as they are competing with each other, and still can’t make close to a profit while they have humans doing the deliveries, despite the commissions they charge to restaurants.
You and I agree on most things, but @RochdalePioneers is right on this one. Unless we can get the robot overlords doing deliveries.
Absolutely marketing etc is a major cost and would remain a major cost even if they replaced all humans with robots.
Considering how shit these companies treat the drivers delivering for them, I'm not convinced robotics would make the businesses any more profitable. Robots would come with their own costs too and marketing would remain an issue. Robot drivers is vapourware to scam investors not the magic cure to make the business profitable.
Oh, there’s no chance whatsoever of robots doing deliveries anytime soon, other than well-supervised and rediculously-expensive prototype deliveries.
Thanks to the ending of FoM, and full employment, it’s becoming more expensive for these companies to exploit cheap labour at the bottom end. The apps are all struggling to recruit drivers, and are paying higher rates which erodes their own margins, which makes them even less likely to be profitable in the medium term.
Which is a good thing absolutely.
Its worth noting that Deliveroo's loss last year was not just down by a third while revenues increased by over 50% but it was also the first time I believe that their loss was less than their marketing spend.
Rochdale is making a fallacy in thinking that because there's a loss per transaction today, that means that loss is static, so growing equals more loss, but it isn't true. The per transaction loss in 2020 was quite literally a fraction of the per transaction loss in 2019.
2019 Revenue £771m, Profit (£317m) = 41.2% loss 2020 Revenue £1.2b, Profit (£223m) = 18.6% loss
That's quite a turnaround in a year. At that rate of turnaround per transaction it'd be possible for them to be profitable within a year.
As I asked in a different reply above, how much cash do you want to burn chasing that eventual profit?
The real numbers are: 2020 174m orders = £213m loss = £1.22 loss per order 2021 301m orders = £298m loss = £0.99 loss per order.
That's definitely an improvement. But they lose a pound per order. I assume they may improve this further and do say 500m transactions this year and lose only £0.80 per order. But that's £400m loss, so nearly a billion burned in 3 years. The percentage loss per order is lower but significantly more orders means a much bigger cash loss. And cash is king.
On food banks. Those most in favour of them are, of course, those who are fortunate enough never to have to use them.
As for those who do use them. Well, they are of course very grateful that they exist. But many people who use them find it deeply humiliating to do so; using them is dehumanising, though not as much as begging.
I'm not persuaded that having world-beating food banks is something that we, as one of the richest countries in the world, should be particularly proud of. Rather, I see it as a badge of shame that poor people have to receive charity while so many of our citizens find that food constitutes a very small proportion of their outgoings. But I guess that's why I'm a leftie.
Yes, only the Left care about the poor. The rest of us loathe them and want them hunted for sport
The moral narcissism of left wingers. Lordy
Whilst I take your point there is a simple policy question to ask - are the Tory policies compassionate? Are they doing anything to help? Is their approach to by sympathetic to food bank users or chastise them?
Looking forward to the fluffers of the right demanding that this be put into context as they will inevitably do. There will always be a place for Mr Anderson in Douglas Ross's SCons if he feels he has to move on again.
You keep seeming to look at this from the perspective of the dark kitchen though, rather than from the perspective of Deliveroo. I never claimed the dark kitchen would be profitable, did I?
You claimed that the commission was "a reduction in their profits" which for the dark kitchen is 100% true, but for Deliveroo it isn't, it is their revenue stream. The service charge they then charge the consumer is also a revenue stream for Deliveroo, so they have multiple revenue streams.
Whether their revenue exceeds their costs is a different question, but their service charges are categorically not their only revenue stream.
PS I think anyone setting up a "dark kitchen" its a mug's game. Deliveroo are keen to get people setting them up, because they can then charge money for it but if you're not selling drinks etc to consumers then its going to be very difficult for anyone operating a dark kitchen to turn a profit while paying Deliveroo etc too.
But Deliveroo don't care if the restaurants they 'serve' go bust and are replaced by new investors looking to set up a restaurant. That's another injection of investment cash going on right there, without Deliveroo needing to raise a penny of it, instead they're parasites on that.
You mentioned Dominos originally. Could be a Dominos franchise. Or a chippy. Or Tesco Express - whatever. Those guys make money producing stuff.
Deliveroo are an order processing and delivery company. They make money generating and delivering orders.
The problem is that for the food producer they can't just use Deliveroo. Or Gorillas. Or Ubereats. They need to use all of them. And don't care which. Punters increasingly use umbrella sites like Just Eat rather than Deliveroo as there is more choice.
So the producer makes money producing stuff. The delivery firm makes money via tech and physical; delivery. And that is the problem. They cannot make money unless the tech is established and the volume is enormous. Their commission does not cover their costs and they can't charge more commission because competition lowers the bar - nobody cares who delivers the food.
So yes, Deliveroo do care. They only get volume if the restaurant keeps using them. And there is too much competition. Hence the new idea of Deliveroo operating their own dark kitchen -they can't lose the custom and there is actual profit that can be used to subsidise their losses.
You're wrong in saying the producer makes money producing stuff. The producer should make money producing stuff, but the problem is the producer is having a large slice of their ticket price they should be making on being withheld by Deliveroo etc instead.
And all the hundreds of FoodCo's in your local area feel like they have no choice to be on all platforms, even though the platforms withhold the cash they should be making, because the alternative is they get no cash.
Why do you think 40% commission (as per that real world Chinese example) plus 10% service charge can't be profitable?
Why? Because those figures are wrong. Their total charge is more like 30% including the service charge depending on the area. If someone is being ripped at 50% then they quit and use one of the competitors.
I'm going to park this because you aren't paying any attention. It isn't what I think. It is what their investors know. The investors who see the real figures not your best guess figures.
Please, go buy shares in Deliveroo as you are so convinced they are a winner. They are a bargain at the moment having lost 60% of their value since the start of the year.
I never said Deliveroo are a bargain at the minute, I said they have the potential of being profitable. That is two very different things. There is a world of difference between profitable and to infinite and beyond stock prices.
Do I think Deliveroo can make a profit in the future? Yes.
Do I think they will make a profit that justifies a £1.5 billion market cap? Let alone a nearly £4 billion market cap earlier this year? No, that's a very different question.
The investors who see the figures also think they can make a profit in the future, otherwise the share price would be 0.
The value they have, is in the brand itself. The underlying business is unlikely to ever be profitable.
Why don't you think they can make a profit charging 30-40% commission plus service charges, while only paying a pittance to the people delivering for them who are expected to do many deliveries per hour to get to £9 per hour?
Whether restaurants will make money with Deliveroo etc charging 30%+ commission is another matter.
For some reason Rochdale seems to think the fact that every FoodCo is on every DeliveryCo network now is bad news for the DeliveryCo's, it isn't. The fact that FoodCo feels they have no choice but to be on every network is precisely why they are and means DeliveryCo can charge exorbitant commissions and they get away with it.
The issue is, that the many DeliveryCos have massive marketing costs, as they are competing with each other, and still can’t make close to a profit while they have humans doing the deliveries, despite the commissions they charge to restaurants.
You and I agree on most things, but @RochdalePioneers is right on this one. Unless we can get the robot overlords doing deliveries.
Absolutely marketing etc is a major cost and would remain a major cost even if they replaced all humans with robots.
Considering how shit these companies treat the drivers delivering for them, I'm not convinced robotics would make the businesses any more profitable. Robots would come with their own costs too and marketing would remain an issue. Robot drivers is vapourware to scam investors not the magic cure to make the business profitable.
Oh, there’s no chance whatsoever of robots doing deliveries anytime soon, other than well-supervised and rediculously expensive prototype demonstrations.
Thanks to the ending of FoM, and full employment, it’s becoming more expensive for these companies to exploit cheap labour at the bottom end. The apps are all struggling to recruit drivers, and are paying higher rates which erodes their own margins, which makes them even less likely to be profitable in the medium term.
Robots have been delivering food in China, during Covid
And drones could deliver food easily, given that they can now fly en masse through bamboo forests:
All a drone has to do is hold, carry and then gently drop a sealed plastic bag with food containers inside. That’s exactly what my Deliveroo guy does. He doesn’t lay the table and flambe the crepes
Pretty sure drones are capable of this?
Of course drones are capable of it.
The problems come with takeoff locations, delivery landing locations, the chance of some arsehole of Delancey St picking up the drone and putting it in a skip.
Drone deliveries right now work for essential medicine deliveries in rural areas, but not much else.
On food banks. Those most in favour of them are, of course, those who are fortunate enough never to have to use them.
As for those who do use them. Well, they are of course very grateful that they exist. But many people who use them find it deeply humiliating to do so; using them is dehumanising, though not as much as begging.
I'm not persuaded that having world-beating food banks is something that we, as one of the richest countries in the world, should be particularly proud of. Rather, I see it as a badge of shame that poor people have to receive charity while so many of our citizens find that food constitutes a very small proportion of their outgoings. But I guess that's why I'm a leftie.
Yes, only the Left care about the poor. The rest of us loathe them and want them hunted for sport
The moral narcissism of left wingers. Lordy
The self-indulgent narcissism of right wingers who regale us with tales and pictures of their hugely expensive travelling lifestyles. Lordy.
(Edit - though I do find your stuff entertaining).
Self indulgent, narcissistic, right wing? - tick, tick, tick
“Hugely expensive?” Nah. 90% of this trip is generously funded by others. The odd night in between I have to pay for. Hence my pleasure at finding this inexpensive flat in Samos. Cheers
You keep seeming to look at this from the perspective of the dark kitchen though, rather than from the perspective of Deliveroo. I never claimed the dark kitchen would be profitable, did I?
You claimed that the commission was "a reduction in their profits" which for the dark kitchen is 100% true, but for Deliveroo it isn't, it is their revenue stream. The service charge they then charge the consumer is also a revenue stream for Deliveroo, so they have multiple revenue streams.
Whether their revenue exceeds their costs is a different question, but their service charges are categorically not their only revenue stream.
PS I think anyone setting up a "dark kitchen" its a mug's game. Deliveroo are keen to get people setting them up, because they can then charge money for it but if you're not selling drinks etc to consumers then its going to be very difficult for anyone operating a dark kitchen to turn a profit while paying Deliveroo etc too.
But Deliveroo don't care if the restaurants they 'serve' go bust and are replaced by new investors looking to set up a restaurant. That's another injection of investment cash going on right there, without Deliveroo needing to raise a penny of it, instead they're parasites on that.
You mentioned Dominos originally. Could be a Dominos franchise. Or a chippy. Or Tesco Express - whatever. Those guys make money producing stuff.
Deliveroo are an order processing and delivery company. They make money generating and delivering orders.
The problem is that for the food producer they can't just use Deliveroo. Or Gorillas. Or Ubereats. They need to use all of them. And don't care which. Punters increasingly use umbrella sites like Just Eat rather than Deliveroo as there is more choice.
So the producer makes money producing stuff. The delivery firm makes money via tech and physical; delivery. And that is the problem. They cannot make money unless the tech is established and the volume is enormous. Their commission does not cover their costs and they can't charge more commission because competition lowers the bar - nobody cares who delivers the food.
So yes, Deliveroo do care. They only get volume if the restaurant keeps using them. And there is too much competition. Hence the new idea of Deliveroo operating their own dark kitchen -they can't lose the custom and there is actual profit that can be used to subsidise their losses.
You're wrong in saying the producer makes money producing stuff. The producer should make money producing stuff, but the problem is the producer is having a large slice of their ticket price they should be making on being withheld by Deliveroo etc instead.
And all the hundreds of FoodCo's in your local area feel like they have no choice to be on all platforms, even though the platforms withhold the cash they should be making, because the alternative is they get no cash.
Why do you think 40% commission (as per that real world Chinese example) plus 10% service charge can't be profitable?
Why? Because those figures are wrong. Their total charge is more like 30% including the service charge depending on the area. If someone is being ripped at 50% then they quit and use one of the competitors.
I'm going to park this because you aren't paying any attention. It isn't what I think. It is what their investors know. The investors who see the real figures not your best guess figures.
Please, go buy shares in Deliveroo as you are so convinced they are a winner. They are a bargain at the moment having lost 60% of their value since the start of the year.
I never said Deliveroo are a bargain at the minute, I said they have the potential of being profitable. That is two very different things. There is a world of difference between profitable and to infinite and beyond stock prices.
Do I think Deliveroo can make a profit in the future? Yes.
Do I think they will make a profit that justifies a £1.5 billion market cap? Let alone a nearly £4 billion market cap earlier this year? No, that's a very different question.
The investors who see the figures also think they can make a profit in the future, otherwise the share price would be 0.
The value they have, is in the brand itself. The underlying business is unlikely to ever be profitable.
Why don't you think they can make a profit charging 30-40% commission plus service charges, while only paying a pittance to the people delivering for them who are expected to do many deliveries per hour to get to £9 per hour?
Whether restaurants will make money with Deliveroo etc charging 30%+ commission is another matter.
For some reason Rochdale seems to think the fact that every FoodCo is on every DeliveryCo network now is bad news for the DeliveryCo's, it isn't. The fact that FoodCo feels they have no choice but to be on every network is precisely why they are and means DeliveryCo can charge exorbitant commissions and they get away with it.
The issue is, that the many DeliveryCos have massive marketing costs, as they are competing with each other, and still can’t make close to a profit while they have humans doing the deliveries, despite the commissions they charge to restaurants.
You and I agree on most things, but @RochdalePioneers is right on this one. Unless we can get the robot overlords doing deliveries.
Absolutely marketing etc is a major cost and would remain a major cost even if they replaced all humans with robots.
Considering how shit these companies treat the drivers delivering for them, I'm not convinced robotics would make the businesses any more profitable. Robots would come with their own costs too and marketing would remain an issue. Robot drivers is vapourware to scam investors not the magic cure to make the business profitable.
Oh, there’s no chance whatsoever of robots doing deliveries anytime soon, other than well-supervised and rediculously-expensive prototype deliveries.
Thanks to the ending of FoM, and full employment, it’s becoming more expensive for these companies to exploit cheap labour at the bottom end. The apps are all struggling to recruit drivers, and are paying higher rates which erodes their own margins, which makes them even less likely to be profitable in the medium term.
Which is a good thing absolutely.
Its worth noting that Deliveroo's loss last year was not just down by a third while revenues increased by over 50% but it was also the first time I believe that their loss was less than their marketing spend.
Rochdale is making a fallacy in thinking that because there's a loss per transaction today, that means that loss is static, so growing equals more loss, but it isn't true. The per transaction loss in 2020 was quite literally a fraction of the per transaction loss in 2019.
2019 Revenue £771m, Profit (£317m) = 41.2% loss 2020 Revenue £1.2b, Profit (£223m) = 18.6% loss
That's quite a turnaround in a year. At that rate of turnaround per transaction it'd be possible for them to be profitable within a year.
As I asked in a different reply above, how much cash do you want to burn chasing that eventual profit?
The real numbers are: 2020 174m orders = £213m loss = £1.22 loss per order 2021 301m orders = £298m loss = £0.99 loss per order.
That's definitely an improvement. But they lose a pound per order. I assume they may improve this further and do say 500m transactions this year and lose only £0.80 per order. But that's £400m loss, so nearly a billion burned in 3 years. The percentage loss per order is lower but significantly more orders means a much bigger cash loss. And cash is king.
Glad its not my money.
I was looking at the 2020 financial report not the 2021 one. In 2021 they further massively increased their marketing spend.
But its a fallacy to think its a loss per order, because it isn't.
On per transaction costs they actually made a half a billion pound net profit in 2021. They lost money due to overheads, primarily marketing. Now the question that needs to be asked is whether the operating costs will continue to be as high as they are now in the future, or if rationally some of the DeliveryCo's will go out of business and the surviving ones will be able to cope with less marketing and people using them as force of habit.
The actual underlying business is already arguably in profit.
You keep seeming to look at this from the perspective of the dark kitchen though, rather than from the perspective of Deliveroo. I never claimed the dark kitchen would be profitable, did I?
You claimed that the commission was "a reduction in their profits" which for the dark kitchen is 100% true, but for Deliveroo it isn't, it is their revenue stream. The service charge they then charge the consumer is also a revenue stream for Deliveroo, so they have multiple revenue streams.
Whether their revenue exceeds their costs is a different question, but their service charges are categorically not their only revenue stream.
PS I think anyone setting up a "dark kitchen" its a mug's game. Deliveroo are keen to get people setting them up, because they can then charge money for it but if you're not selling drinks etc to consumers then its going to be very difficult for anyone operating a dark kitchen to turn a profit while paying Deliveroo etc too.
But Deliveroo don't care if the restaurants they 'serve' go bust and are replaced by new investors looking to set up a restaurant. That's another injection of investment cash going on right there, without Deliveroo needing to raise a penny of it, instead they're parasites on that.
You mentioned Dominos originally. Could be a Dominos franchise. Or a chippy. Or Tesco Express - whatever. Those guys make money producing stuff.
Deliveroo are an order processing and delivery company. They make money generating and delivering orders.
The problem is that for the food producer they can't just use Deliveroo. Or Gorillas. Or Ubereats. They need to use all of them. And don't care which. Punters increasingly use umbrella sites like Just Eat rather than Deliveroo as there is more choice.
So the producer makes money producing stuff. The delivery firm makes money via tech and physical; delivery. And that is the problem. They cannot make money unless the tech is established and the volume is enormous. Their commission does not cover their costs and they can't charge more commission because competition lowers the bar - nobody cares who delivers the food.
So yes, Deliveroo do care. They only get volume if the restaurant keeps using them. And there is too much competition. Hence the new idea of Deliveroo operating their own dark kitchen -they can't lose the custom and there is actual profit that can be used to subsidise their losses.
You're wrong in saying the producer makes money producing stuff. The producer should make money producing stuff, but the problem is the producer is having a large slice of their ticket price they should be making on being withheld by Deliveroo etc instead.
And all the hundreds of FoodCo's in your local area feel like they have no choice to be on all platforms, even though the platforms withhold the cash they should be making, because the alternative is they get no cash.
Why do you think 40% commission (as per that real world Chinese example) plus 10% service charge can't be profitable?
Why? Because those figures are wrong. Their total charge is more like 30% including the service charge depending on the area. If someone is being ripped at 50% then they quit and use one of the competitors.
I'm going to park this because you aren't paying any attention. It isn't what I think. It is what their investors know. The investors who see the real figures not your best guess figures.
Please, go buy shares in Deliveroo as you are so convinced they are a winner. They are a bargain at the moment having lost 60% of their value since the start of the year.
I never said Deliveroo are a bargain at the minute, I said they have the potential of being profitable. That is two very different things. There is a world of difference between profitable and to infinite and beyond stock prices.
Do I think Deliveroo can make a profit in the future? Yes.
Do I think they will make a profit that justifies a £1.5 billion market cap? Let alone a nearly £4 billion market cap earlier this year? No, that's a very different question.
The investors who see the figures also think they can make a profit in the future, otherwise the share price would be 0.
The value they have, is in the brand itself. The underlying business is unlikely to ever be profitable.
Why don't you think they can make a profit charging 30-40% commission plus service charges, while only paying a pittance to the people delivering for them who are expected to do many deliveries per hour to get to £9 per hour?
Whether restaurants will make money with Deliveroo etc charging 30%+ commission is another matter.
For some reason Rochdale seems to think the fact that every FoodCo is on every DeliveryCo network now is bad news for the DeliveryCo's, it isn't. The fact that FoodCo feels they have no choice but to be on every network is precisely why they are and means DeliveryCo can charge exorbitant commissions and they get away with it.
The issue is, that the many DeliveryCos have massive marketing costs, as they are competing with each other, and still can’t make close to a profit while they have humans doing the deliveries, despite the commissions they charge to restaurants.
You and I agree on most things, but @RochdalePioneers is right on this one. Unless we can get the robot overlords doing deliveries.
Absolutely marketing etc is a major cost and would remain a major cost even if they replaced all humans with robots.
Considering how shit these companies treat the drivers delivering for them, I'm not convinced robotics would make the businesses any more profitable. Robots would come with their own costs too and marketing would remain an issue. Robot drivers is vapourware to scam investors not the magic cure to make the business profitable.
Oh, there’s no chance whatsoever of robots doing deliveries anytime soon, other than well-supervised and rediculously-expensive prototype deliveries.
Thanks to the ending of FoM, and full employment, it’s becoming more expensive for these companies to exploit cheap labour at the bottom end. The apps are all struggling to recruit drivers, and are paying higher rates which erodes their own margins, which makes them even less likely to be profitable in the medium term.
Which is a good thing absolutely.
Its worth noting that Deliveroo's loss last year was not just down by a third while revenues increased by over 50% but it was also the first time I believe that their loss was less than their marketing spend.
Rochdale is making a fallacy in thinking that because there's a loss per transaction today, that means that loss is static, so growing equals more loss, but it isn't true. The per transaction loss in 2020 was quite literally a fraction of the per transaction loss in 2019.
2019 Revenue £771m, Profit (£317m) = 41.2% loss 2020 Revenue £1.2b, Profit (£223m) = 18.6% loss
That's quite a turnaround in a year. At that rate of turnaround per transaction it'd be possible for them to be profitable within a year.
So they need another billion in revenue assuming nothing else can be changed?
Apparently they've been funded to $1.7 billion. Might take a while to be a return on investment.
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
You keep seeming to look at this from the perspective of the dark kitchen though, rather than from the perspective of Deliveroo. I never claimed the dark kitchen would be profitable, did I?
You claimed that the commission was "a reduction in their profits" which for the dark kitchen is 100% true, but for Deliveroo it isn't, it is their revenue stream. The service charge they then charge the consumer is also a revenue stream for Deliveroo, so they have multiple revenue streams.
Whether their revenue exceeds their costs is a different question, but their service charges are categorically not their only revenue stream.
PS I think anyone setting up a "dark kitchen" its a mug's game. Deliveroo are keen to get people setting them up, because they can then charge money for it but if you're not selling drinks etc to consumers then its going to be very difficult for anyone operating a dark kitchen to turn a profit while paying Deliveroo etc too.
But Deliveroo don't care if the restaurants they 'serve' go bust and are replaced by new investors looking to set up a restaurant. That's another injection of investment cash going on right there, without Deliveroo needing to raise a penny of it, instead they're parasites on that.
You mentioned Dominos originally. Could be a Dominos franchise. Or a chippy. Or Tesco Express - whatever. Those guys make money producing stuff.
Deliveroo are an order processing and delivery company. They make money generating and delivering orders.
The problem is that for the food producer they can't just use Deliveroo. Or Gorillas. Or Ubereats. They need to use all of them. And don't care which. Punters increasingly use umbrella sites like Just Eat rather than Deliveroo as there is more choice.
So the producer makes money producing stuff. The delivery firm makes money via tech and physical; delivery. And that is the problem. They cannot make money unless the tech is established and the volume is enormous. Their commission does not cover their costs and they can't charge more commission because competition lowers the bar - nobody cares who delivers the food.
So yes, Deliveroo do care. They only get volume if the restaurant keeps using them. And there is too much competition. Hence the new idea of Deliveroo operating their own dark kitchen -they can't lose the custom and there is actual profit that can be used to subsidise their losses.
You're wrong in saying the producer makes money producing stuff. The producer should make money producing stuff, but the problem is the producer is having a large slice of their ticket price they should be making on being withheld by Deliveroo etc instead.
And all the hundreds of FoodCo's in your local area feel like they have no choice to be on all platforms, even though the platforms withhold the cash they should be making, because the alternative is they get no cash.
Why do you think 40% commission (as per that real world Chinese example) plus 10% service charge can't be profitable?
Why? Because those figures are wrong. Their total charge is more like 30% including the service charge depending on the area. If someone is being ripped at 50% then they quit and use one of the competitors.
I'm going to park this because you aren't paying any attention. It isn't what I think. It is what their investors know. The investors who see the real figures not your best guess figures.
Please, go buy shares in Deliveroo as you are so convinced they are a winner. They are a bargain at the moment having lost 60% of their value since the start of the year.
I never said Deliveroo are a bargain at the minute, I said they have the potential of being profitable. That is two very different things. There is a world of difference between profitable and to infinite and beyond stock prices.
Do I think Deliveroo can make a profit in the future? Yes.
Do I think they will make a profit that justifies a £1.5 billion market cap? Let alone a nearly £4 billion market cap earlier this year? No, that's a very different question.
The investors who see the figures also think they can make a profit in the future, otherwise the share price would be 0.
The only way this entire sector can make money is if they have huge volume, have stable prices, and remove as much of their variable costs (delivery staff) as possible.
Its simply a fact that they lose money. A lot of money. Their own figures tell you that. Their c 30% fee doesn't cover their costs and there are always new competitors out there vying for business by undercutting even this loss-making position. They can't make money by doing more volume - their long term goal - because they lose money every transaction.
So to pull it all back to the beginning, this is a Tulip Bulbs ponzi scheme. There is money to be made speculating on the sector, but not from the sector itself. It will collapse spectacularly.
Huge volume ✅ - they have this. Stable Prices - no, they have been rapidly increasing prices in recent years, which is good for them. Remove as much variable costs as possible ✅ - They do this.
Yes they lose money, but they've been rapidly growing and are now in almost every part of the nation and have a very significant proportion of restaurants in the nation.
They're following a similar path to Amazon who are very profitable but weren't for years - a period of rapid expansion, then stop selling at below costs. They've got themselves embedded so people are hooked on using them, now they've started raising prices. I would be surprised if Deliveroo don't start registering profits within the next couple of years now.
You're categorically wrong in claiming that they lose money every transaction so lose more money by growing. In 2021 their revenues increased by 54% while their net loss fell from £317m to £223m.
Using your logic, their revenues increasing by 54% should have seen their net loss increase to £488m which is more than double what it actually was.
It's also worth noting that they have done a deal with Amazon so the service charge is removed for deliveries over a certain amount, for Prime customers. This is a smart move.
Incidentally have no idea what figures BR is quoting. Deliveroo quote their performance on their website, its what I quoted, not what BR posted. Whatever.
A 73% growth in orders (to 301m) led to a 40% growth in pre-tax losses (to £298m). So yes, the amount they lose decreases the more orders they take. Question is how many orders they need to break even. And then how many orders they need to actually make money on to repay this year's £298m loss plus last years £213 loss plus 2020 etc etc.
How much money do they need to burn to make a profit?
Also worth remembering just how much money the delivery side of Prime loses...
But Prime isn't just about the delivery is it, it is about offering more than that.
I wonder when Deliveroo expect to break even and then start turning over a profit. Growth phase and burning money is fine but there has to be a stage where they turn a profit. There barriers to entry are minimal as well. It is not something I would actively invest in.
You keep seeming to look at this from the perspective of the dark kitchen though, rather than from the perspective of Deliveroo. I never claimed the dark kitchen would be profitable, did I?
You claimed that the commission was "a reduction in their profits" which for the dark kitchen is 100% true, but for Deliveroo it isn't, it is their revenue stream. The service charge they then charge the consumer is also a revenue stream for Deliveroo, so they have multiple revenue streams.
Whether their revenue exceeds their costs is a different question, but their service charges are categorically not their only revenue stream.
PS I think anyone setting up a "dark kitchen" its a mug's game. Deliveroo are keen to get people setting them up, because they can then charge money for it but if you're not selling drinks etc to consumers then its going to be very difficult for anyone operating a dark kitchen to turn a profit while paying Deliveroo etc too.
But Deliveroo don't care if the restaurants they 'serve' go bust and are replaced by new investors looking to set up a restaurant. That's another injection of investment cash going on right there, without Deliveroo needing to raise a penny of it, instead they're parasites on that.
You mentioned Dominos originally. Could be a Dominos franchise. Or a chippy. Or Tesco Express - whatever. Those guys make money producing stuff.
Deliveroo are an order processing and delivery company. They make money generating and delivering orders.
The problem is that for the food producer they can't just use Deliveroo. Or Gorillas. Or Ubereats. They need to use all of them. And don't care which. Punters increasingly use umbrella sites like Just Eat rather than Deliveroo as there is more choice.
So the producer makes money producing stuff. The delivery firm makes money via tech and physical; delivery. And that is the problem. They cannot make money unless the tech is established and the volume is enormous. Their commission does not cover their costs and they can't charge more commission because competition lowers the bar - nobody cares who delivers the food.
So yes, Deliveroo do care. They only get volume if the restaurant keeps using them. And there is too much competition. Hence the new idea of Deliveroo operating their own dark kitchen -they can't lose the custom and there is actual profit that can be used to subsidise their losses.
You're wrong in saying the producer makes money producing stuff. The producer should make money producing stuff, but the problem is the producer is having a large slice of their ticket price they should be making on being withheld by Deliveroo etc instead.
And all the hundreds of FoodCo's in your local area feel like they have no choice to be on all platforms, even though the platforms withhold the cash they should be making, because the alternative is they get no cash.
Why do you think 40% commission (as per that real world Chinese example) plus 10% service charge can't be profitable?
Why? Because those figures are wrong. Their total charge is more like 30% including the service charge depending on the area. If someone is being ripped at 50% then they quit and use one of the competitors.
I'm going to park this because you aren't paying any attention. It isn't what I think. It is what their investors know. The investors who see the real figures not your best guess figures.
Please, go buy shares in Deliveroo as you are so convinced they are a winner. They are a bargain at the moment having lost 60% of their value since the start of the year.
I never said Deliveroo are a bargain at the minute, I said they have the potential of being profitable. That is two very different things. There is a world of difference between profitable and to infinite and beyond stock prices.
Do I think Deliveroo can make a profit in the future? Yes.
Do I think they will make a profit that justifies a £1.5 billion market cap? Let alone a nearly £4 billion market cap earlier this year? No, that's a very different question.
The investors who see the figures also think they can make a profit in the future, otherwise the share price would be 0.
The value they have, is in the brand itself. The underlying business is unlikely to ever be profitable.
Why don't you think they can make a profit charging 30-40% commission plus service charges, while only paying a pittance to the people delivering for them who are expected to do many deliveries per hour to get to £9 per hour?
Whether restaurants will make money with Deliveroo etc charging 30%+ commission is another matter.
For some reason Rochdale seems to think the fact that every FoodCo is on every DeliveryCo network now is bad news for the DeliveryCo's, it isn't. The fact that FoodCo feels they have no choice but to be on every network is precisely why they are and means DeliveryCo can charge exorbitant commissions and they get away with it.
The issue is, that the many DeliveryCos have massive marketing costs, as they are competing with each other, and still can’t make close to a profit while they have humans doing the deliveries, despite the commissions they charge to restaurants.
You and I agree on most things, but @RochdalePioneers is right on this one. Unless we can get the robot overlords doing deliveries.
Absolutely marketing etc is a major cost and would remain a major cost even if they replaced all humans with robots.
Considering how shit these companies treat the drivers delivering for them, I'm not convinced robotics would make the businesses any more profitable. Robots would come with their own costs too and marketing would remain an issue. Robot drivers is vapourware to scam investors not the magic cure to make the business profitable.
Oh, there’s no chance whatsoever of robots doing deliveries anytime soon, other than well-supervised and rediculously expensive prototype demonstrations.
Thanks to the ending of FoM, and full employment, it’s becoming more expensive for these companies to exploit cheap labour at the bottom end. The apps are all struggling to recruit drivers, and are paying higher rates which erodes their own margins, which makes them even less likely to be profitable in the medium term.
Robots have been delivering food in China, during Covid
And drones could deliver food easily, given that they can now fly en masse through bamboo forests:
All a drone has to do is hold, carry and then gently drop a sealed plastic bag with food containers inside. That’s exactly what my Deliveroo guy does. He doesn’t lay the table and flambe the crepes
Pretty sure drones are capable of this?
Of course drones are capable of it.
The problems come with takeoff locations, delivery landing locations, the chance of some arsehole of Delancey St picking up the drone and putting it in a skip.
Drone deliveries right now work for essential medicine deliveries in rural areas, but not much else.
So then it’s just a question of timing, The drone would wait for YOU to come out of the door, only then - having clocked your face and ID’d you - would it drop down and deliver your food, then whizz off again
We’re not quite there yet and its proven harder than hoped, but it seems close
Agency bike riders refusing to work for certain delivery apps, despite a formal labour strike being illegal. (All of these workers are sponsored expatriates, with visas dependent on their employment).
You keep seeming to look at this from the perspective of the dark kitchen though, rather than from the perspective of Deliveroo. I never claimed the dark kitchen would be profitable, did I?
You claimed that the commission was "a reduction in their profits" which for the dark kitchen is 100% true, but for Deliveroo it isn't, it is their revenue stream. The service charge they then charge the consumer is also a revenue stream for Deliveroo, so they have multiple revenue streams.
Whether their revenue exceeds their costs is a different question, but their service charges are categorically not their only revenue stream.
PS I think anyone setting up a "dark kitchen" its a mug's game. Deliveroo are keen to get people setting them up, because they can then charge money for it but if you're not selling drinks etc to consumers then its going to be very difficult for anyone operating a dark kitchen to turn a profit while paying Deliveroo etc too.
But Deliveroo don't care if the restaurants they 'serve' go bust and are replaced by new investors looking to set up a restaurant. That's another injection of investment cash going on right there, without Deliveroo needing to raise a penny of it, instead they're parasites on that.
You mentioned Dominos originally. Could be a Dominos franchise. Or a chippy. Or Tesco Express - whatever. Those guys make money producing stuff.
Deliveroo are an order processing and delivery company. They make money generating and delivering orders.
The problem is that for the food producer they can't just use Deliveroo. Or Gorillas. Or Ubereats. They need to use all of them. And don't care which. Punters increasingly use umbrella sites like Just Eat rather than Deliveroo as there is more choice.
So the producer makes money producing stuff. The delivery firm makes money via tech and physical; delivery. And that is the problem. They cannot make money unless the tech is established and the volume is enormous. Their commission does not cover their costs and they can't charge more commission because competition lowers the bar - nobody cares who delivers the food.
So yes, Deliveroo do care. They only get volume if the restaurant keeps using them. And there is too much competition. Hence the new idea of Deliveroo operating their own dark kitchen -they can't lose the custom and there is actual profit that can be used to subsidise their losses.
You're wrong in saying the producer makes money producing stuff. The producer should make money producing stuff, but the problem is the producer is having a large slice of their ticket price they should be making on being withheld by Deliveroo etc instead.
And all the hundreds of FoodCo's in your local area feel like they have no choice to be on all platforms, even though the platforms withhold the cash they should be making, because the alternative is they get no cash.
Why do you think 40% commission (as per that real world Chinese example) plus 10% service charge can't be profitable?
Why? Because those figures are wrong. Their total charge is more like 30% including the service charge depending on the area. If someone is being ripped at 50% then they quit and use one of the competitors.
I'm going to park this because you aren't paying any attention. It isn't what I think. It is what their investors know. The investors who see the real figures not your best guess figures.
Please, go buy shares in Deliveroo as you are so convinced they are a winner. They are a bargain at the moment having lost 60% of their value since the start of the year.
I never said Deliveroo are a bargain at the minute, I said they have the potential of being profitable. That is two very different things. There is a world of difference between profitable and to infinite and beyond stock prices.
Do I think Deliveroo can make a profit in the future? Yes.
Do I think they will make a profit that justifies a £1.5 billion market cap? Let alone a nearly £4 billion market cap earlier this year? No, that's a very different question.
The investors who see the figures also think they can make a profit in the future, otherwise the share price would be 0.
The only way this entire sector can make money is if they have huge volume, have stable prices, and remove as much of their variable costs (delivery staff) as possible.
Its simply a fact that they lose money. A lot of money. Their own figures tell you that. Their c 30% fee doesn't cover their costs and there are always new competitors out there vying for business by undercutting even this loss-making position. They can't make money by doing more volume - their long term goal - because they lose money every transaction.
So to pull it all back to the beginning, this is a Tulip Bulbs ponzi scheme. There is money to be made speculating on the sector, but not from the sector itself. It will collapse spectacularly.
Huge volume ✅ - they have this. Stable Prices - no, they have been rapidly increasing prices in recent years, which is good for them. Remove as much variable costs as possible ✅ - They do this.
Yes they lose money, but they've been rapidly growing and are now in almost every part of the nation and have a very significant proportion of restaurants in the nation.
They're following a similar path to Amazon who are very profitable but weren't for years - a period of rapid expansion, then stop selling at below costs. They've got themselves embedded so people are hooked on using them, now they've started raising prices. I would be surprised if Deliveroo don't start registering profits within the next couple of years now.
You're categorically wrong in claiming that they lose money every transaction so lose more money by growing. In 2021 their revenues increased by 54% while their net loss fell from £317m to £223m.
Using your logic, their revenues increasing by 54% should have seen their net loss increase to £488m which is more than double what it actually was.
It's also worth noting that they have done a deal with Amazon so the service charge is removed for deliveries over a certain amount, for Prime customers. This is a smart move.
Incidentally have no idea what figures BR is quoting. Deliveroo quote their performance on their website, its what I quoted, not what BR posted. Whatever.
A 73% growth in orders (to 301m) led to a 40% growth in pre-tax losses (to £298m). So yes, the amount they lose decreases the more orders they take. Question is how many orders they need to break even. And then how many orders they need to actually make money on to repay this year's £298m loss plus last years £213 loss plus 2020 etc etc.
How much money do they need to burn to make a profit?
Also worth remembering just how much money the delivery side of Prime loses...
But Prime isn't just about the delivery is it, it is about offering more than that.
I wonder when Deliveroo expect to break even and then start turning over a profit. Growth phase and burning money is fine but there has to be a stage where they turn a profit. There barriers to entry are minimal as well. It is not something I would actively invest in.
On their current business model last I saw it they're expecting to be in profit by the second half of 2023 and returning a very significant profit by 2026.
Whether they achieve that is another question, but its possible. There's a lot of normalcy bias in thinking that just because there's a loss now, it must remain loss making.
I recall people for years insisting that Tesla had never turned a profit and they'd go out of business - they made a net profit over over $3bn last year.
The myth of the 'feckless poor' persists amongst the idle rich.
That would have been fair if the comment had been made by Rees-Mogg. Not so much by a former Labour councillor....
He may or may not be idle but he's certainly rich:
Lee Anderson MP, who today said poor people forced to use foodbanks 'cannot cook or budget properly' claimed £222,000 in expenses in 2020/21 - including £4,100 on travel and 'subsistence'
MP expenses are always a bit of a red herring: 1. They include office and staffing costs 2. These are higher when its a new MP as there are start-up costs
Still means they most likely never have to touch their salaries as they can claim almost anything and most have family members on the payroll so double dipping as well. That plus his 80K + salary mean he will not be worrying and no excuse for being a total uncaring arsehole.
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
On food banks. Those most in favour of them are, of course, those who are fortunate enough never to have to use them.
As for those who do use them. Well, they are of course very grateful that they exist. But many people who use them find it deeply humiliating to do so; using them is dehumanising, though not as much as begging.
I'm not persuaded that having world-beating food banks is something that we, as one of the richest countries in the world, should be particularly proud of. Rather, I see it as a badge of shame that poor people have to receive charity while so many of our citizens find that food constitutes a very small proportion of their outgoings. But I guess that's why I'm a leftie.
Yes, only the Left care about the poor. The rest of us loathe them and want them hunted for sport
The moral narcissism of left wingers. Lordy
Whilst I take your point there is a simple policy question to ask - are the Tory policies compassionate? Are they doing anything to help? Is their approach to by sympathetic to food bank users or chastise them?
Yes the Tories are compassionate and yes they are trying to help (that doesn’t mean they are succeeding)
All countries are struggling with poverty and post pandemic inflation and the like. It’s not a British Tory thing
On the other hand, are some Tory MPs arrogant fools who really don’t understand poverty, and are some of them stupidly tone deaf? Yes, quite a few
You keep seeming to look at this from the perspective of the dark kitchen though, rather than from the perspective of Deliveroo. I never claimed the dark kitchen would be profitable, did I?
You claimed that the commission was "a reduction in their profits" which for the dark kitchen is 100% true, but for Deliveroo it isn't, it is their revenue stream. The service charge they then charge the consumer is also a revenue stream for Deliveroo, so they have multiple revenue streams.
Whether their revenue exceeds their costs is a different question, but their service charges are categorically not their only revenue stream.
PS I think anyone setting up a "dark kitchen" its a mug's game. Deliveroo are keen to get people setting them up, because they can then charge money for it but if you're not selling drinks etc to consumers then its going to be very difficult for anyone operating a dark kitchen to turn a profit while paying Deliveroo etc too.
But Deliveroo don't care if the restaurants they 'serve' go bust and are replaced by new investors looking to set up a restaurant. That's another injection of investment cash going on right there, without Deliveroo needing to raise a penny of it, instead they're parasites on that.
You mentioned Dominos originally. Could be a Dominos franchise. Or a chippy. Or Tesco Express - whatever. Those guys make money producing stuff.
Deliveroo are an order processing and delivery company. They make money generating and delivering orders.
The problem is that for the food producer they can't just use Deliveroo. Or Gorillas. Or Ubereats. They need to use all of them. And don't care which. Punters increasingly use umbrella sites like Just Eat rather than Deliveroo as there is more choice.
So the producer makes money producing stuff. The delivery firm makes money via tech and physical; delivery. And that is the problem. They cannot make money unless the tech is established and the volume is enormous. Their commission does not cover their costs and they can't charge more commission because competition lowers the bar - nobody cares who delivers the food.
So yes, Deliveroo do care. They only get volume if the restaurant keeps using them. And there is too much competition. Hence the new idea of Deliveroo operating their own dark kitchen -they can't lose the custom and there is actual profit that can be used to subsidise their losses.
You're wrong in saying the producer makes money producing stuff. The producer should make money producing stuff, but the problem is the producer is having a large slice of their ticket price they should be making on being withheld by Deliveroo etc instead.
And all the hundreds of FoodCo's in your local area feel like they have no choice to be on all platforms, even though the platforms withhold the cash they should be making, because the alternative is they get no cash.
Why do you think 40% commission (as per that real world Chinese example) plus 10% service charge can't be profitable?
Why? Because those figures are wrong. Their total charge is more like 30% including the service charge depending on the area. If someone is being ripped at 50% then they quit and use one of the competitors.
I'm going to park this because you aren't paying any attention. It isn't what I think. It is what their investors know. The investors who see the real figures not your best guess figures.
Please, go buy shares in Deliveroo as you are so convinced they are a winner. They are a bargain at the moment having lost 60% of their value since the start of the year.
I never said Deliveroo are a bargain at the minute, I said they have the potential of being profitable. That is two very different things. There is a world of difference between profitable and to infinite and beyond stock prices.
Do I think Deliveroo can make a profit in the future? Yes.
Do I think they will make a profit that justifies a £1.5 billion market cap? Let alone a nearly £4 billion market cap earlier this year? No, that's a very different question.
The investors who see the figures also think they can make a profit in the future, otherwise the share price would be 0.
The only way this entire sector can make money is if they have huge volume, have stable prices, and remove as much of their variable costs (delivery staff) as possible.
Its simply a fact that they lose money. A lot of money. Their own figures tell you that. Their c 30% fee doesn't cover their costs and there are always new competitors out there vying for business by undercutting even this loss-making position. They can't make money by doing more volume - their long term goal - because they lose money every transaction.
So to pull it all back to the beginning, this is a Tulip Bulbs ponzi scheme. There is money to be made speculating on the sector, but not from the sector itself. It will collapse spectacularly.
Huge volume ✅ - they have this. Stable Prices - no, they have been rapidly increasing prices in recent years, which is good for them. Remove as much variable costs as possible ✅ - They do this.
Yes they lose money, but they've been rapidly growing and are now in almost every part of the nation and have a very significant proportion of restaurants in the nation.
They're following a similar path to Amazon who are very profitable but weren't for years - a period of rapid expansion, then stop selling at below costs. They've got themselves embedded so people are hooked on using them, now they've started raising prices. I would be surprised if Deliveroo don't start registering profits within the next couple of years now.
You're categorically wrong in claiming that they lose money every transaction so lose more money by growing. In 2021 their revenues increased by 54% while their net loss fell from £317m to £223m.
Using your logic, their revenues increasing by 54% should have seen their net loss increase to £488m which is more than double what it actually was.
It's also worth noting that they have done a deal with Amazon so the service charge is removed for deliveries over a certain amount, for Prime customers. This is a smart move.
Incidentally have no idea what figures BR is quoting. Deliveroo quote their performance on their website, its what I quoted, not what BR posted. Whatever.
A 73% growth in orders (to 301m) led to a 40% growth in pre-tax losses (to £298m). So yes, the amount they lose decreases the more orders they take. Question is how many orders they need to break even. And then how many orders they need to actually make money on to repay this year's £298m loss plus last years £213 loss plus 2020 etc etc.
How much money do they need to burn to make a profit?
Also worth remembering just how much money the delivery side of Prime loses...
But Prime isn't just about the delivery is it, it is about offering more than that.
I wonder when Deliveroo expect to break even and then start turning over a profit. Growth phase and burning money is fine but there has to be a stage where they turn a profit. There barriers to entry are minimal as well. It is not something I would actively invest in.
On their current business model last I saw it they're expecting to be in profit by the second half of 2023 and returning a very significant profit by 2026.
Whether they achieve that is another question, but its possible. There's a lot of normalcy bias in thinking that just because there's a loss now, it must remain loss making.
I recall people for years insisting that Tesla had never turned a profit and they'd go out of business - they made a net profit over over $3bn last year.
Thanks, interesting.
Tesla is doing pretty well now. It has brand recognition and it is in a sector of the automotive industry that will grow rapidly.
I noticed Subaru are looking to start to go electric as well now, somewhat late in the day.
Looking forward to the fluffers of the right demanding that this be put into context as they will inevitably do. There will always be a place for Mr Anderson in Douglas Ross's SCons if he feels he has to move on again.
I don't see the issue. Several public spaces have had to do the same.
Looking at the imminent by-election. Wakefield constituency LE result.
Lab 11382 Con 6792 Yorks 1395 (5 candidates from the 6 wards). Green 1213 LD 829 (4 candidates) Others 340
No date yet for the poll. Lump on might be an idea looking at those.
NB. Yorkshire polling best the more Tory the ward. David Herdson, formerly of this parish, and soon to be of this by-election, being one.
When it comes to the Wakefield byelection the all important question is can David Herdson finish in second place behind Labour and ahead of the Tories?
We know the winner but second place is slightly more open to debate / betting...
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
You know it’s not a Tory recession. It’s a post-plague, Ukraine-war recession, which is why it will be experienced right across Europe and beyond
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
The chippy we use when my sister and I visit Dad on a Friday for lunch has just put a quid on all fish due to Ukraine and inflation. In terms of the crisis Any solution that tackles all the underlying issues will be completely unacceptable to the cosseted and do nothing to lift those at the bottom (at best stick foundation and support under them) The country wants to wish away what's coming, Labour want to Toryblame it away and the Tories want it to just go somewhere else or put on a disguise so nobody notices it. Catastrophe incoming.
On food banks. Those most in favour of them are, of course, those who are fortunate enough never to have to use them.
As for those who do use them. Well, they are of course very grateful that they exist. But many people who use them find it deeply humiliating to do so; using them is dehumanising, though not as much as begging.
I'm not persuaded that having world-beating food banks is something that we, as one of the richest countries in the world, should be particularly proud of. Rather, I see it as a badge of shame that poor people have to receive charity while so many of our citizens find that food constitutes a very small proportion of their outgoings. But I guess that's why I'm a leftie.
You must be livid that they started under Labour. Can you list the european countries from example which do not have food banks? In fact they are supported by the EU.
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
The chippy we use when my sister and I visit Dad on a Friday for lunch has just put a quid on all fish due to Ukraine and inflation. In terms of the crisis Any solution that tackles all the underlying issues will be completely unacceptable to the cosseted and do nothing to lift those at the bottom (at best stick foundation and support under them) The country wants to wish away what's coming, Labour want to Toryblame it away and the Tories want it to just go somewhere else or put on a disguise so nobody notices it. Catastrophe incoming.
Far more worrying than the inevitable recession in the OECD countries, is the very real prospect of Famine in the “Global South”, and what generally comes with that - unrest, strife, war, you name it
Sri Lanka is already wobbling badly. If the Ukraine war grinds on, God help all of us, everywhere
How sorry does one feel for Jamie Vardy today? The poor sod is funding this.
He shouldn't have married a plastic, vacuous goober tbf Rooney had no choice given what a spud he is
I quite like Colleen Rooney. It's somewhat unusual for a footballer to marry his school girlfriend. And still be together despite everything. Shows she must have summat about her.
On food banks. Those most in favour of them are, of course, those who are fortunate enough never to have to use them.
As for those who do use them. Well, they are of course very grateful that they exist. But many people who use them find it deeply humiliating to do so; using them is dehumanising, though not as much as begging.
I'm not persuaded that having world-beating food banks is something that we, as one of the richest countries in the world, should be particularly proud of. Rather, I see it as a badge of shame that poor people have to receive charity while so many of our citizens find that food constitutes a very small proportion of their outgoings. But I guess that's why I'm a leftie.
You must be livid that they started under Labour. Can you list the european countries from example which do not have food banks? In fact they are supported by the EU.
On food banks. Those most in favour of them are, of course, those who are fortunate enough never to have to use them.
As for those who do use them. Well, they are of course very grateful that they exist. But many people who use them find it deeply humiliating to do so; using them is dehumanising, though not as much as begging.
I'm not persuaded that having world-beating food banks is something that we, as one of the richest countries in the world, should be particularly proud of. Rather, I see it as a badge of shame that poor people have to receive charity while so many of our citizens find that food constitutes a very small proportion of their outgoings. But I guess that's why I'm a leftie.
You must be livid that they started under Labour. Can you list the european countries from example which do not have food banks? In fact they are supported by the EU.
This whole debate is baffling. It isn't binary. Food Bank use has soared in recent years as more and more people - often working people - have struggled to feed themselves.
That there was a much smaller use of food banks pre 2010 does not remotely negate this reality. Nor does foodbanks in other countries.
The question is what this government in this country in this year is doing. Is it trying to be compassionate and help people not have to shame themselves using them? Or treating them with sneering condescension?
I'm struggling to be triggered by Lee Anderson's comments – he clearly presented them inelegantly but pretty sure they weren't malicious or of bad intent.
What does for him in general is that he presents generally an abrasive, ungracious and unpleasant bloke. His blunt, gauche comments about Christian Wakeford on GB News gave the impression of a man who you'd probably do your best to avoid down the pub.
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
You know it’s not a Tory recession. It’s a post-plague, Ukraine-war recession, which is why it will be experienced right across Europe and beyond
The Tories might get blamed, mind
Yes, I know, I was being a little facetious because although there are circumstances beyond their control I do think they will get the blame as they seem blase about it and oblivious to the real problems caused.
Just look at Boris's response to Susanna Reid with her Elsie who rode buses all day as her Fuel bill on her Band F home had gone from £17 a month to £81 a month.
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
The chippy we use when my sister and I visit Dad on a Friday for lunch has just put a quid on all fish due to Ukraine and inflation. In terms of the crisis Any solution that tackles all the underlying issues will be completely unacceptable to the cosseted and do nothing to lift those at the bottom (at best stick foundation and support under them) The country wants to wish away what's coming, Labour want to Toryblame it away and the Tories want it to just go somewhere else or put on a disguise so nobody notices it. Catastrophe incoming.
Far more worrying than the inevitable recession in the OECD countries, is the very real prospect of Famine in the “Global South”, and what generally comes with that - unrest, strife, war, you name it
Sri Lanka is already wobbling badly. If the Ukraine war grinds on, God help all of us, everywhere
The enormity hasn't quite entered western consciousness yet, it's a shadow on the edge of a restless dream. It stands a chance of reshaping everything. America is probably done and will sink into massive civil unrest and possible split, the fundamental differences there between the young and the radical democrats and the Bible belt and De Santis/Trump republicanism are irreconcilable currently being played out in the Roe vs Wade miasma
On food banks. Those most in favour of them are, of course, those who are fortunate enough never to have to use them.
As for those who do use them. Well, they are of course very grateful that they exist. But many people who use them find it deeply humiliating to do so; using them is dehumanising, though not as much as begging.
I'm not persuaded that having world-beating food banks is something that we, as one of the richest countries in the world, should be particularly proud of. Rather, I see it as a badge of shame that poor people have to receive charity while so many of our citizens find that food constitutes a very small proportion of their outgoings. But I guess that's why I'm a leftie.
Is it not people who call food banks a "badge of shame" who do the most to stigmatise those who use them?
I'm struggling to be triggered by Lee Anderson's comments – he clearly presented them inelegantly but pretty sure they weren't malicious or of bad intent.
What does for him in general is that he presents generally an abrasive, ungracious and unpleasant bloke. His blunt, gauche comments about Christian Wakeford on GB News gave the impression of a man who you'd probably do your best to avoid down the pub.
On food banks. Those most in favour of them are, of course, those who are fortunate enough never to have to use them.
As for those who do use them. Well, they are of course very grateful that they exist. But many people who use them find it deeply humiliating to do so; using them is dehumanising, though not as much as begging.
I'm not persuaded that having world-beating food banks is something that we, as one of the richest countries in the world, should be particularly proud of. Rather, I see it as a badge of shame that poor people have to receive charity while so many of our citizens find that food constitutes a very small proportion of their outgoings. But I guess that's why I'm a leftie.
Is it not people who call food banks a "badge of shame" who do the most to stigmatise those who use them?
I think its the people who feel ashamed working yet being unable to feed their kids who stigmatise them when they use them
How sorry does one feel for Jamie Vardy today? The poor sod is funding this.
He shouldn't have married a plastic, vacuous goober tbf Rooney had no choice given what a spud he is
I quite like Colleen Rooney. It's somewhat unusual for a footballer to marry his school girlfriend. And still be together despite everything. Shows she must have summat about her.
I'm struggling to be triggered by Lee Anderson's comments – he clearly presented them inelegantly but pretty sure they weren't malicious or of bad intent.
What does for him in general is that he presents generally an abrasive, ungracious and unpleasant bloke. His blunt, gauche comments about Christian Wakeford on GB News gave the impression of a man who you'd probably do your best to avoid down the pub.
An MP then
Thats unfair. There are good and bad MPs across the house.
How sorry does one feel for Jamie Vardy today? The poor sod is funding this.
He shouldn't have married a plastic, vacuous goober tbf Rooney had no choice given what a spud he is
I quite like Colleen Rooney. It's somewhat unusual for a footballer to marry his school girlfriend. And still be together despite everything. Shows she must have summat about her.
Aaron Ramsey met his wife (also called Colleen) when they were quite young.
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
The poorest have not got discretionary spending, let alone enough of it that 20% would offset the increases in fuel, energy, food and housing costs. The poorest spend either all they earn or more than all they earn and run into debt.
The average person probably needs to cut their discretionary spending by more than 20% to cope.
I'm struggling to be triggered by Lee Anderson's comments – he clearly presented them inelegantly but pretty sure they weren't malicious or of bad intent.
What does for him in general is that he presents generally an abrasive, ungracious and unpleasant bloke. His blunt, gauche comments about Christian Wakeford on GB News gave the impression of a man who you'd probably do your best to avoid down the pub.
An MP then
Thats unfair. There are good and bad MPs across the house.
I agree, it was a cheap shot joke I couldn't resist
On food banks. Those most in favour of them are, of course, those who are fortunate enough never to have to use them.
As for those who do use them. Well, they are of course very grateful that they exist. But many people who use them find it deeply humiliating to do so; using them is dehumanising, though not as much as begging.
I'm not persuaded that having world-beating food banks is something that we, as one of the richest countries in the world, should be particularly proud of. Rather, I see it as a badge of shame that poor people have to receive charity while so many of our citizens find that food constitutes a very small proportion of their outgoings. But I guess that's why I'm a leftie.
Is it not people who call food banks a "badge of shame" who do the most to stigmatise those who use them?
I think its the people who feel ashamed working yet being unable to feed their kids who stigmatise them when they use them
We should destigmatise it then. There have always been, and always will be, people who go through difficult times and it is better to have a safety net there for people who need it than for it not to be there.
Prior to 2014 people were still struggling but turning to payday lenders instead of food banks as the food bank infrastructure wasn't there. That it is there now and is available to people instead of loan sharks is a fantastic step forwards.
How sorry does one feel for Jamie Vardy today? The poor sod is funding this.
He shouldn't have married a plastic, vacuous goober tbf Rooney had no choice given what a spud he is
I quite like Colleen Rooney. It's somewhat unusual for a footballer to marry his school girlfriend. And still be together despite everything. Shows she must have summat about her.
Aaron Ramsey met his wife (also called Colleen) when they were quite young.
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
The chippy we use when my sister and I visit Dad on a Friday for lunch has just put a quid on all fish due to Ukraine and inflation. In terms of the crisis Any solution that tackles all the underlying issues will be completely unacceptable to the cosseted and do nothing to lift those at the bottom (at best stick foundation and support under them) The country wants to wish away what's coming, Labour want to Toryblame it away and the Tories want it to just go somewhere else or put on a disguise so nobody notices it. Catastrophe incoming.
Far more worrying than the inevitable recession in the OECD countries, is the very real prospect of Famine in the “Global South”, and what generally comes with that - unrest, strife, war, you name it
Sri Lanka is already wobbling badly. If the Ukraine war grinds on, God help all of us, everywhere
The enormity hasn't quite entered western consciousness yet, it's a shadow on the edge of a restless dream. It stands a chance of reshaping everything. America is probably done and will sink into massive civil unrest and possible split, the fundamental differences there between the young and the radical democrats and the Bible belt and De Santis/Trump republicanism are irreconcilable currently being played out in the Roe vs Wade miasma
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
The chippy we use when my sister and I visit Dad on a Friday for lunch has just put a quid on all fish due to Ukraine and inflation. In terms of the crisis Any solution that tackles all the underlying issues will be completely unacceptable to the cosseted and do nothing to lift those at the bottom (at best stick foundation and support under them) The country wants to wish away what's coming, Labour want to Toryblame it away and the Tories want it to just go somewhere else or put on a disguise so nobody notices it. Catastrophe incoming.
Far more worrying than the inevitable recession in the OECD countries, is the very real prospect of Famine in the “Global South”, and what generally comes with that - unrest, strife, war, you name it
Sri Lanka is already wobbling badly. If the Ukraine war grinds on, God help all of us, everywhere
The enormity hasn't quite entered western consciousness yet, it's a shadow on the edge of a restless dream. It stands a chance of reshaping everything. America is probably done and will sink into massive civil unrest and possible split, the fundamental differences there between the young and the radical democrats and the Bible belt and De Santis/Trump republicanism are irreconcilable currently being played out in the Roe vs Wade miasma
A possible split in the same way that the second coming or being visited on Tuesday morning by transexual fashionista stiletto-heeled aliens is possible.
Promoting the idea that the United States will split is PBism in its rawest form.
How sorry does one feel for Jamie Vardy today? The poor sod is funding this.
He shouldn't have married a plastic, vacuous goober tbf Rooney had no choice given what a spud he is
I quite like Colleen Rooney. It's somewhat unusual for a footballer to marry his school girlfriend. And still be together despite everything. Shows she must have summat about her.
She likes spuds? He's an odd bloke.
He has a very odd life and relationship to others. I watched Manchester completely grind to a halt as he visited a Jewellery Shop on Deansgate once.
The inability to do anything without the general public annoying you does have a high cost.
Looking forward to the fluffers of the right demanding that this be put into context as they will inevitably do. There will always be a place for Mr Anderson in Douglas Ross's SCons if he feels he has to move on again.
I don't see the issue. Several public spaces have had to do the same.
There is nothing wrong with this at all. Traveller incursions are a problem and need to be dealt with. Places by me have boulders to prevent incursions. Doesn't stop them of course they just move them.
Simpletons like Sarkar just want to see travellers, the homeless and others groups as though they are completely flawless and perennial victims.
How sorry does one feel for Jamie Vardy today? The poor sod is funding this.
He shouldn't have married a plastic, vacuous goober tbf Rooney had no choice given what a spud he is
I quite like Colleen Rooney. It's somewhat unusual for a footballer to marry his school girlfriend. And still be together despite everything. Shows she must have summat about her.
Aaron Ramsey met his wife (also called Colleen) when they were quite young.
Peter Crouch always won the award for self awareness of footballers often getting lucky with wives. He was asked what he'd have been if not a footballer and replied 'dunno, probably a virgin'
Today is an official flag day in Finland, celebrating Snellmann and Finnishness. Snellmann was a philosopher and a significant literary figure who promoted the Finnish language during the period in which Finland was a grand duchy of Russia. He opposed Russian rule over the country. So a good day for Finland to declare its intent to join Nato. Apparently Putin has said there will be consequences.
Lee Anderson is just saying what a lot of people think, probably a majority, albeit a silent one. It is good to have people like him because his views are not abhorrent, there is some truth in what he is saying. The underlying problem, is that foodbanks are providing the type of welfare that the state should be providing. They are a symptom of state failure. The correct role of this type of welfare plus, like foodbanks, should be helping people the state cannot help due to their own lifestyle choices and poor decision making. I would challenge him on the 30p meal idea, because one of the major problems is that cheap food is actually disappearing from the supermarket, ie the 7p tins of beans, the 19p pasta, 30 p orange juice etc. The cost of living crisis is such that, even if you are earning ok, you can't necessarily afford food, largely because of housing and energy costs. I would say, that the change that needs to take place, is that the government need to have as an objective providing a basic income to cover very basic housing, food, heating. There can be a debate as to what this should amount to, but the reality is that for many people the 'free market' doesn't work.
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
When you look at the prevailing narrative about how the economy is going to affect the poor going forward, its a marvel labour are not 20 points ahead in the polls.
How sorry does one feel for Jamie Vardy today? The poor sod is funding this.
He shouldn't have married a plastic, vacuous goober tbf Rooney had no choice given what a spud he is
I quite like Colleen Rooney. It's somewhat unusual for a footballer to marry his school girlfriend. And still be together despite everything. Shows she must have summat about her.
Aaron Ramsey met his wife (also called Colleen) when they were quite young.
Peter Crouch always won the award for self awareness of footballers often getting lucky with wives. He was asked what he'd have been if not a footballer and replied 'dunno, probably a virgin'
Yes, great quote. Crouch is a clever, witty bloke in fairness.
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
The chippy we use when my sister and I visit Dad on a Friday for lunch has just put a quid on all fish due to Ukraine and inflation. In terms of the crisis Any solution that tackles all the underlying issues will be completely unacceptable to the cosseted and do nothing to lift those at the bottom (at best stick foundation and support under them) The country wants to wish away what's coming, Labour want to Toryblame it away and the Tories want it to just go somewhere else or put on a disguise so nobody notices it. Catastrophe incoming.
Far more worrying than the inevitable recession in the OECD countries, is the very real prospect of Famine in the “Global South”, and what generally comes with that - unrest, strife, war, you name it
Sri Lanka is already wobbling badly. If the Ukraine war grinds on, God help all of us, everywhere
The enormity hasn't quite entered western consciousness yet, it's a shadow on the edge of a restless dream. It stands a chance of reshaping everything. America is probably done and will sink into massive civil unrest and possible split, the fundamental differences there between the young and the radical democrats and the Bible belt and De Santis/Trump republicanism are irreconcilable currently being played out in the Roe vs Wade miasma
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
The chippy we use when my sister and I visit Dad on a Friday for lunch has just put a quid on all fish due to Ukraine and inflation. In terms of the crisis Any solution that tackles all the underlying issues will be completely unacceptable to the cosseted and do nothing to lift those at the bottom (at best stick foundation and support under them) The country wants to wish away what's coming, Labour want to Toryblame it away and the Tories want it to just go somewhere else or put on a disguise so nobody notices it. Catastrophe incoming.
Far more worrying than the inevitable recession in the OECD countries, is the very real prospect of Famine in the “Global South”, and what generally comes with that - unrest, strife, war, you name it
Sri Lanka is already wobbling badly. If the Ukraine war grinds on, God help all of us, everywhere
The enormity hasn't quite entered western consciousness yet, it's a shadow on the edge of a restless dream. It stands a chance of reshaping everything. America is probably done and will sink into massive civil unrest and possible split, the fundamental differences there between the young and the radical democrats and the Bible belt and De Santis/Trump republicanism are irreconcilable currently being played out in the Roe vs Wade miasma
A possible split in the same way that the second coming or being visited on Tuesday morning by transexual fashionista stiletto-heeled aliens is possible.
Promoting the idea that the United States will split is PBism in its rawest form.
Yeah, in the current climate. But I'm not talking about the current climate. I'm quite prepared for you to chuckle at me in a few years when I'm wrong. I shall not be too unbearable if I'm right
Lee Anderson is just saying what a lot of people think, probably a majority, albeit a silent one. It is good to have people like him because his views are not abhorrent, there is some truth in what he is saying. The underlying problem, is that foodbanks are providing the type of welfare that the state should be providing. They are a symptom of state failure. The correct role of this type of welfare plus, like foodbanks, should be helping people the state cannot help due to their own lifestyle choices and poor decision making. I would challenge him on the 30p meal idea, because one of the major problems is that cheap food is actually disappearing from the supermarket, ie the 7p tins of beans, the 19p pasta, 30 p orange juice etc. The cost of living crisis is such that, even if you are earning ok, you can't necessarily afford food, largely because of housing and energy costs. I would say, that the change that needs to take place, is that the government need to have as an objective providing a basic income to cover very basic housing, food, heating. There can be a debate as to what this should amount to, but the reality is that for many people the 'free market' doesn't work.
You almost lost me at 'silent majority'
But, having read on, there's a lot to agree with in this.
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
When you look at the prevailing narrative about how the economy is going to affect the poor going forward, its a marvel labour are not 20 points ahead in the polls.
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
When you look at the prevailing narrative about how the economy is going to affect the poor going forward, its a marvel labour are not 20 points ahead in the polls.
That may be the narrative. The fact is it's going to affect everyone apart from the already well-off. That's a very different scenario. I'm not convinced the not poor but not well-off have fully twigged yet. Most seem to think this is a War-driven blip.
Looking forward to the fluffers of the right demanding that this be put into context as they will inevitably do. There will always be a place for Mr Anderson in Douglas Ross's SCons if he feels he has to move on again.
Exactly the attitude one might expect from a rich, middle-class Londoner - until the day a traveller camp turns up in her own neighbourhood.
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
The chippy we use when my sister and I visit Dad on a Friday for lunch has just put a quid on all fish due to Ukraine and inflation. In terms of the crisis Any solution that tackles all the underlying issues will be completely unacceptable to the cosseted and do nothing to lift those at the bottom (at best stick foundation and support under them) The country wants to wish away what's coming, Labour want to Toryblame it away and the Tories want it to just go somewhere else or put on a disguise so nobody notices it. Catastrophe incoming.
Far more worrying than the inevitable recession in the OECD countries, is the very real prospect of Famine in the “Global South”, and what generally comes with that - unrest, strife, war, you name it
Sri Lanka is already wobbling badly. If the Ukraine war grinds on, God help all of us, everywhere
The enormity hasn't quite entered western consciousness yet, it's a shadow on the edge of a restless dream. It stands a chance of reshaping everything. America is probably done and will sink into massive civil unrest and possible split, the fundamental differences there between the young and the radical democrats and the Bible belt and De Santis/Trump republicanism are irreconcilable currently being played out in the Roe vs Wade miasma
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
The chippy we use when my sister and I visit Dad on a Friday for lunch has just put a quid on all fish due to Ukraine and inflation. In terms of the crisis Any solution that tackles all the underlying issues will be completely unacceptable to the cosseted and do nothing to lift those at the bottom (at best stick foundation and support under them) The country wants to wish away what's coming, Labour want to Toryblame it away and the Tories want it to just go somewhere else or put on a disguise so nobody notices it. Catastrophe incoming.
Far more worrying than the inevitable recession in the OECD countries, is the very real prospect of Famine in the “Global South”, and what generally comes with that - unrest, strife, war, you name it
Sri Lanka is already wobbling badly. If the Ukraine war grinds on, God help all of us, everywhere
The enormity hasn't quite entered western consciousness yet, it's a shadow on the edge of a restless dream. It stands a chance of reshaping everything. America is probably done and will sink into massive civil unrest and possible split, the fundamental differences there between the young and the radical democrats and the Bible belt and De Santis/Trump republicanism are irreconcilable currently being played out in the Roe vs Wade miasma
A possible split in the same way that the second coming or being visited on Tuesday morning by transexual fashionista stiletto-heeled aliens is possible.
Promoting the idea that the United States will split is PBism in its rawest form.
Yeah, in the current climate. But I'm not talking about the current climate. I'm quite prepared for you to chuckle at me in a few years when I'm wrong. I shall not be too unbearable if I'm right
It wouldn't be allowed.
It is arguable that Britain should have aided the Confederacy to make that split permanent. Slavery-wise it would have been unethical. Perhaps that could habe been dealt with in exchange for support. But there is no doubt that the USA being topped and tailed by two British-sponsored territories would have changed the future of the world.
Mr. 1983/Mr. Sandpit, occasionally get gypsies around here. Last time they occupied part of a farmer's field adjacent to the primary school and left behind a charming arrangement of litter and human excrement.
Since then, the fencing off has been beefed up to try and stop it recurring.
Looking forward to the fluffers of the right demanding that this be put into context as they will inevitably do. There will always be a place for Mr Anderson in Douglas Ross's SCons if he feels he has to move on again.
I don't see the issue. Several public spaces have had to do the same.
Presumably that involves a legislative process rather than some dude with a pick up truck full of boulders going freelance?
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
The chippy we use when my sister and I visit Dad on a Friday for lunch has just put a quid on all fish due to Ukraine and inflation. In terms of the crisis Any solution that tackles all the underlying issues will be completely unacceptable to the cosseted and do nothing to lift those at the bottom (at best stick foundation and support under them) The country wants to wish away what's coming, Labour want to Toryblame it away and the Tories want it to just go somewhere else or put on a disguise so nobody notices it. Catastrophe incoming.
Far more worrying than the inevitable recession in the OECD countries, is the very real prospect of Famine in the “Global South”, and what generally comes with that - unrest, strife, war, you name it
Sri Lanka is already wobbling badly. If the Ukraine war grinds on, God help all of us, everywhere
The enormity hasn't quite entered western consciousness yet, it's a shadow on the edge of a restless dream. It stands a chance of reshaping everything. America is probably done and will sink into massive civil unrest and possible split, the fundamental differences there between the young and the radical democrats and the Bible belt and De Santis/Trump republicanism are irreconcilable currently being played out in the Roe vs Wade miasma
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
The chippy we use when my sister and I visit Dad on a Friday for lunch has just put a quid on all fish due to Ukraine and inflation. In terms of the crisis Any solution that tackles all the underlying issues will be completely unacceptable to the cosseted and do nothing to lift those at the bottom (at best stick foundation and support under them) The country wants to wish away what's coming, Labour want to Toryblame it away and the Tories want it to just go somewhere else or put on a disguise so nobody notices it. Catastrophe incoming.
Far more worrying than the inevitable recession in the OECD countries, is the very real prospect of Famine in the “Global South”, and what generally comes with that - unrest, strife, war, you name it
Sri Lanka is already wobbling badly. If the Ukraine war grinds on, God help all of us, everywhere
The enormity hasn't quite entered western consciousness yet, it's a shadow on the edge of a restless dream. It stands a chance of reshaping everything. America is probably done and will sink into massive civil unrest and possible split, the fundamental differences there between the young and the radical democrats and the Bible belt and De Santis/Trump republicanism are irreconcilable currently being played out in the Roe vs Wade miasma
A possible split in the same way that the second coming or being visited on Tuesday morning by transexual fashionista stiletto-heeled aliens is possible.
Promoting the idea that the United States will split is PBism in its rawest form.
Yeah, in the current climate. But I'm not talking about the current climate. I'm quite prepared for you to chuckle at me in a few years when I'm wrong. I shall not be too unbearable if I'm right
It wouldn't be allowed.
It is arguable that Britain should have aided the Confederacy to make that split permanent. Slavery-wise it would have been unethical. Perhaps that could habe been dealt with in exchange for support. But there is no doubt that the USA being topped and tailed by two British-sponsored territories would have changed the future of the world.
It would have ensured British Hegemony and probably prevented later American influence worldwide for sure. But what that would have meant for the C20 who knows
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
When you look at the prevailing narrative about how the economy is going to affect the poor going forward, its a marvel labour are not 20 points ahead in the polls.
That may be the narrative. The fact is it's going to affect everyone apart from the already well-off. That's a very different scenario. I'm not convinced the not poor but not well-off have fully twigged yet. Most seem to think this is a War-driven blip.
The Tories are going to have to hammer the Brownian 'a bigger boy started it' narrative hard from now if they are to have any hope of weathering the storm
Where Lee Anderson is correct is that a shocking amount of people in this country cannot cook and have no discernible interest in food. But that is certainly not limited to the poor.
Take PB – we have fully grown professional men on here who earn £70k+++ who cannot even find their way around a saucepan, and luxuriate in eating ready meals and assorted other shite in service stations, after starting their day with coffee-flavoured dust and hot water (job done!).
We also have the quasi-hair-shirted PB Northerners who balk at spending even £40 a head in a restaurant, clearly having never done even the most rudimentary analysis of where £40 a head in a good restaurant goes.
Given such a large proportion of the English population continues to refuse to spend a reasonable proportion of its income on what it puts inside its own bodies, one can perhaps forgive (to some extent) the hackneyed stereotype held of us by our continental cousins that we are a nation of potato-faced barbarians.
Lee Anderson is just saying what a lot of people think, probably a majority, albeit a silent one. It is good to have people like him because his views are not abhorrent, there is some truth in what he is saying. The underlying problem, is that foodbanks are providing the type of welfare that the state should be providing. They are a symptom of state failure. The correct role of this type of welfare plus, like foodbanks, should be helping people the state cannot help due to their own lifestyle choices and poor decision making. I would challenge him on the 30p meal idea, because one of the major problems is that cheap food is actually disappearing from the supermarket, ie the 7p tins of beans, the 19p pasta, 30 p orange juice etc. The cost of living crisis is such that, even if you are earning ok, you can't necessarily afford food, largely because of housing and energy costs. I would say, that the change that needs to take place, is that the government need to have as an objective providing a basic income to cover very basic housing, food, heating. There can be a debate as to what this should amount to, but the reality is that for many people the 'free market' doesn't work.
You almost lost me at 'silent majority'
But, having read on, there's a lot to agree with in this.
Yes I think this is a very interesting story that tells a lot about British politics.
I don't think the two "sides" are actually that far apart on this subject but different language and the background of culture war makes it feel like they are.
Looking forward to the fluffers of the right demanding that this be put into context as they will inevitably do. There will always be a place for Mr Anderson in Douglas Ross's SCons if he feels he has to move on again.
I don't see the issue. Several public spaces have had to do the same.
Presumably that involves some legislative process rather than some dude with a pick up truck full of boulders going freelance?
Yes, it does, I suspect that's why he was suspended
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
The chippy we use when my sister and I visit Dad on a Friday for lunch has just put a quid on all fish due to Ukraine and inflation. In terms of the crisis Any solution that tackles all the underlying issues will be completely unacceptable to the cosseted and do nothing to lift those at the bottom (at best stick foundation and support under them) The country wants to wish away what's coming, Labour want to Toryblame it away and the Tories want it to just go somewhere else or put on a disguise so nobody notices it. Catastrophe incoming.
Far more worrying than the inevitable recession in the OECD countries, is the very real prospect of Famine in the “Global South”, and what generally comes with that - unrest, strife, war, you name it
Sri Lanka is already wobbling badly. If the Ukraine war grinds on, God help all of us, everywhere
The enormity hasn't quite entered western consciousness yet, it's a shadow on the edge of a restless dream. It stands a chance of reshaping everything. America is probably done and will sink into massive civil unrest and possible split, the fundamental differences there between the young and the radical democrats and the Bible belt and De Santis/Trump republicanism are irreconcilable currently being played out in the Roe vs Wade miasma
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
The chippy we use when my sister and I visit Dad on a Friday for lunch has just put a quid on all fish due to Ukraine and inflation. In terms of the crisis Any solution that tackles all the underlying issues will be completely unacceptable to the cosseted and do nothing to lift those at the bottom (at best stick foundation and support under them) The country wants to wish away what's coming, Labour want to Toryblame it away and the Tories want it to just go somewhere else or put on a disguise so nobody notices it. Catastrophe incoming.
Far more worrying than the inevitable recession in the OECD countries, is the very real prospect of Famine in the “Global South”, and what generally comes with that - unrest, strife, war, you name it
Sri Lanka is already wobbling badly. If the Ukraine war grinds on, God help all of us, everywhere
The enormity hasn't quite entered western consciousness yet, it's a shadow on the edge of a restless dream. It stands a chance of reshaping everything. America is probably done and will sink into massive civil unrest and possible split, the fundamental differences there between the young and the radical democrats and the Bible belt and De Santis/Trump republicanism are irreconcilable currently being played out in the Roe vs Wade miasma
A possible split in the same way that the second coming or being visited on Tuesday morning by transexual fashionista stiletto-heeled aliens is possible.
Promoting the idea that the United States will split is PBism in its rawest form.
Yeah, in the current climate. But I'm not talking about the current climate. I'm quite prepared for you to chuckle at me in a few years when I'm wrong. I shall not be too unbearable if I'm right
It wouldn't be allowed.
It is arguable that Britain should have aided the Confederacy to make that split permanent. Slavery-wise it would have been unethical. Perhaps that could habe been dealt with in exchange for support. But there is no doubt that the USA being topped and tailed by two British-sponsored territories would have changed the future of the world.
It would have ensured British Hegemony and probably prevented later American influence worldwide for sure. But what that would have meant for the C20 who knows
I would argue (and have) that Britain was never a hegemon, surrounded as it was by world powers with similar power. It was the leading power, bit that's different. It would probably have prevented American hegemony though.
On food banks. Those most in favour of them are, of course, those who are fortunate enough never to have to use them.
As for those who do use them. Well, they are of course very grateful that they exist. But many people who use them find it deeply humiliating to do so; using them is dehumanising, though not as much as begging.
I'm not persuaded that having world-beating food banks is something that we, as one of the richest countries in the world, should be particularly proud of. Rather, I see it as a badge of shame that poor people have to receive charity while so many of our citizens find that food constitutes a very small proportion of their outgoings. But I guess that's why I'm a leftie.
You must be livid that they started under Labour. Can you list the european countries from example which do not have food banks? In fact they are supported by the EU.
EU food banks good. UK food banks bad.
To you and Felix - I never mentioned the EU. Food banks are bad wherever they are in the 'rich' world - UK, EU and USA. I didn't make the distinction that is in your imagination. Not everything's to do with fucking Brexit, you know.
Looking forward to the fluffers of the right demanding that this be put into context as they will inevitably do. There will always be a place for Mr Anderson in Douglas Ross's SCons if he feels he has to move on again.
I don't see the issue. Several public spaces have had to do the same.
Presumably that involves some legislative process rather than some dude with a pick up truck full of boulders going freelance?
Yes, it does, I suspect that's why he was suspended
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
The chippy we use when my sister and I visit Dad on a Friday for lunch has just put a quid on all fish due to Ukraine and inflation. In terms of the crisis Any solution that tackles all the underlying issues will be completely unacceptable to the cosseted and do nothing to lift those at the bottom (at best stick foundation and support under them) The country wants to wish away what's coming, Labour want to Toryblame it away and the Tories want it to just go somewhere else or put on a disguise so nobody notices it. Catastrophe incoming.
Far more worrying than the inevitable recession in the OECD countries, is the very real prospect of Famine in the “Global South”, and what generally comes with that - unrest, strife, war, you name it
Sri Lanka is already wobbling badly. If the Ukraine war grinds on, God help all of us, everywhere
The enormity hasn't quite entered western consciousness yet, it's a shadow on the edge of a restless dream. It stands a chance of reshaping everything. America is probably done and will sink into massive civil unrest and possible split, the fundamental differences there between the young and the radical democrats and the Bible belt and De Santis/Trump republicanism are irreconcilable currently being played out in the Roe vs Wade miasma
Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford · 4h Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
The chippy we use when my sister and I visit Dad on a Friday for lunch has just put a quid on all fish due to Ukraine and inflation. In terms of the crisis Any solution that tackles all the underlying issues will be completely unacceptable to the cosseted and do nothing to lift those at the bottom (at best stick foundation and support under them) The country wants to wish away what's coming, Labour want to Toryblame it away and the Tories want it to just go somewhere else or put on a disguise so nobody notices it. Catastrophe incoming.
Far more worrying than the inevitable recession in the OECD countries, is the very real prospect of Famine in the “Global South”, and what generally comes with that - unrest, strife, war, you name it
Sri Lanka is already wobbling badly. If the Ukraine war grinds on, God help all of us, everywhere
The enormity hasn't quite entered western consciousness yet, it's a shadow on the edge of a restless dream. It stands a chance of reshaping everything. America is probably done and will sink into massive civil unrest and possible split, the fundamental differences there between the young and the radical democrats and the Bible belt and De Santis/Trump republicanism are irreconcilable currently being played out in the Roe vs Wade miasma
A possible split in the same way that the second coming or being visited on Tuesday morning by transexual fashionista stiletto-heeled aliens is possible.
Promoting the idea that the United States will split is PBism in its rawest form.
Yeah, in the current climate. But I'm not talking about the current climate. I'm quite prepared for you to chuckle at me in a few years when I'm wrong. I shall not be too unbearable if I'm right
It wouldn't be allowed.
It is arguable that Britain should have aided the Confederacy to make that split permanent. Slavery-wise it would have been unethical. Perhaps that could habe been dealt with in exchange for support. But there is no doubt that the USA being topped and tailed by two British-sponsored territories would have changed the future of the world.
It would have ensured British Hegemony and probably prevented later American influence worldwide for sure. But what that would have meant for the C20 who knows
I would argue (and have) that Britain was never a hegemon, surrounded as it was by world powers with similar power. It was the leading power, bit that's different. It would probably have prevented American hegemony though.
Yes, it would have ensured hegemony we never achieved. We would have been that much further ahead. That crucial 1865 to 1914 period saw Prussia/Germany catch up and France hang on to our heels. Dominance in North America politically and diplomatically would have been(I think) the ball game
Comments
As for those who do use them. Well, they are of course very grateful that they exist. But many people who use them find it deeply humiliating to do so; using them is dehumanising, though not as much as begging.
I'm not persuaded that having world-beating food banks is something that we, as one of the richest countries in the world, should be particularly proud of. Rather, I see it as a badge of shame that poor people have to receive charity while so many of our citizens find that food constitutes a very small proportion of their outgoings. But I guess that's why I'm a leftie.
In a world used to on demand everything and fast fashion we need to relearn the thrift and make do and mend of the pre 80s times and some creative, innovative and probably 'offensive' (to some idiotic melts looking to be offended) practical solutions found
The moral narcissism of left wingers. Lordy
“ Claim: There are more food banks in Germany than there are in the UK.
Verdict: We have not been able to find any evidence to support this claim. According to available statistics, Germany has about 2,000 food distribution centres - the same as the UK.”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/50324852.amp
(Edit - though I do find your stuff entertaining).
Wakefield constituency LE result.
Lab 11382
Con 6792
Yorks 1395 (5 candidates from the 6 wards).
Green 1213
LD 829 (4 candidates)
Others 340
No date yet for the poll. Lump on might be an idea looking at those.
NB. Yorkshire polling best the more Tory the ward. David Herdson, formerly of this parish, and soon to be of this by-election, being one.
https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1524687491336478720
A tory hold would be more catastrophic than Hartlepool for Labour
“Hugely expensive?” Nah. 90% of this trip is generously funded by others. The odd night in between I have to pay for. Hence my pleasure at finding this inexpensive flat in Samos. Cheers
Steven Swinford
@Steven_Swinford
·
4h
Sir Howard Davies, chairman of Natwest, says the poorest will need to reduce their discretionary spending by *20%* to cope with soaring inflation and energy prices
He says the Government should focus on increasing benefits rather than across the board tax cuts
https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1524648082742431745
"Former justice secretary Lord Charlie Falconer QC will chair the first ever London Drugs Commission."
Excellent stuff. A whole new opportunity to speculate over his potential resignation.
https://www.thenationalnews.com/uae/transport/2022/05/09/talabat-uae-says-riders-in-dubai-refusing-to-work-amid-calls-for-higher-pay/
Agency bike riders refusing to work for certain delivery apps, despite a formal labour strike being illegal.
(All of these workers are sponsored expatriates, with visas dependent on their employment).
(Maybe they think it's hilarious to have chosen "Charlie").
Her novels tended to involve a crafty suspect skilled in covering their tracks...
This coming recession is going to devastate our hospitality industry.
I was reading a thread on twitter from a guy who runs a chippie who has said his veg oil has gone (for a 20L drum) from £20 to £50 overnight from the wholesalers.
They will have to pass these costs on.
To people who have less and less discretionary spend.
The coming recession is going to be another disastrous Tory recession. They are good at them.
Yes the Tories are compassionate and yes they are trying to help (that doesn’t mean they are succeeding)
All countries are struggling with poverty and post pandemic inflation and the like. It’s not a British Tory thing
On the other hand, are some Tory MPs arrogant fools who really don’t understand poverty, and are some of them stupidly tone deaf? Yes, quite a few
We know the winner but second place is slightly more open to debate / betting...
What is the objective of this quango ?
You know it’s not a Tory recession. It’s a post-plague, Ukraine-war recession, which is why it will be experienced right across Europe and beyond
The Tories might get blamed, mind
In terms of the crisis
Any solution that tackles all the underlying issues will be completely unacceptable to the cosseted and do nothing to lift those at the bottom (at best stick foundation and support under them)
The country wants to wish away what's coming, Labour want to Toryblame it away and the Tories want it to just go somewhere else or put on a disguise so nobody notices it.
Catastrophe incoming.
Rooney had no choice given what a spud he is
Sri Lanka is already wobbling badly. If the Ukraine war grinds on, God help all of us, everywhere
Shows she must have summat about her.
That there was a much smaller use of food banks pre 2010 does not remotely negate this reality. Nor does foodbanks in other countries.
The question is what this government in this country in this year is doing. Is it trying to be compassionate and help people not have to shame themselves using them? Or treating them with sneering condescension?
What does for him in general is that he presents generally an abrasive, ungracious and unpleasant bloke. His blunt, gauche comments about Christian Wakeford on GB News gave the impression of a man who you'd probably do your best to avoid down the pub.
Just look at Boris's response to Susanna Reid with her Elsie who rode buses all day as her Fuel bill on her Band F home had gone from £17 a month to £81 a month.
It stands a chance of reshaping everything. America is probably done and will sink into massive civil unrest and possible split, the fundamental differences there between the young and the radical democrats and the Bible belt and De Santis/Trump republicanism are irreconcilable currently being played out in the Roe vs Wade miasma
He's an odd bloke.
The average person probably needs to cut their discretionary spending by more than 20% to cope.
Prior to 2014 people were still struggling but turning to payday lenders instead of food banks as the food bank infrastructure wasn't there. That it is there now and is available to people instead of loan sharks is a fantastic step forwards.
Promoting the idea that the United States will split is PBism in its rawest form.
The inability to do anything without the general public annoying you does have a high cost.
There is nothing wrong with this at all. Traveller incursions are a problem and need to be dealt with. Places by me have boulders to prevent incursions. Doesn't stop them of course
they just move them.
Simpletons like Sarkar just want to see travellers, the homeless and others groups as though they are completely flawless and perennial victims.
Apparently Putin has said there will be consequences.
It is good to have people like him because his views are not abhorrent, there is some truth in what he is saying.
The underlying problem, is that foodbanks are providing the type of welfare that the state should be providing. They are a symptom of state failure.
The correct role of this type of welfare plus, like foodbanks, should be helping people the state cannot help due to their own lifestyle choices and poor decision making.
I would challenge him on the 30p meal idea, because one of the major problems is that cheap food is actually disappearing from the supermarket, ie the 7p tins of beans, the 19p pasta, 30 p orange juice etc.
The cost of living crisis is such that, even if you are earning ok, you can't necessarily afford food, largely because of housing and energy costs.
I would say, that the change that needs to take place, is that the government need to have as an objective providing a basic income to cover very basic housing, food, heating.
There can be a debate as to what this should amount to, but the reality is that for many people the 'free market' doesn't work.
When you look at the prevailing narrative about how the economy is going to affect the poor going forward, its a marvel labour are not 20 points ahead in the polls.
I'm quite prepared for you to chuckle at me in a few years when I'm wrong. I shall not be too unbearable if I'm right
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-61422305
38 per cent Firsts, up from a mere 16 per cent under Labour.
But, having read on, there's a lot to agree with in this.
The fact is it's going to affect everyone apart from the already well-off.
That's a very different scenario. I'm not convinced the not poor but not well-off have fully twigged yet.
Most seem to think this is a War-driven blip.
It is arguable that Britain should have aided the Confederacy to make that split permanent. Slavery-wise it would have been unethical. Perhaps that could habe been dealt with in exchange for support. But there is no doubt that the USA being topped and tailed by two British-sponsored territories would have changed the future of the world.
Since then, the fencing off has been beefed up to try and stop it recurring.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tory-mp-lee-anderson-suggests-food-bank-users-cant-cook-properly-or-budget-lw07kvgwv
Take PB – we have fully grown professional men on here who earn £70k+++ who cannot even find their way around a saucepan, and luxuriate in eating ready meals and assorted other shite in service stations, after starting their day with coffee-flavoured dust and hot water (job done!).
We also have the quasi-hair-shirted PB Northerners who balk at spending even £40 a head in a restaurant, clearly having never done even the most rudimentary analysis of where £40 a head in a good restaurant goes.
Given such a large proportion of the English population continues to refuse to spend a reasonable proportion of its income on what it puts inside its own bodies, one can perhaps forgive (to some extent) the hackneyed stereotype held of us by our continental cousins that we are a nation of potato-faced barbarians.
I don't think the two "sides" are actually that far apart on this subject but different language and the background of culture war makes it feel like they are.