⚖️ Legal Titans Collide
For the first time, Uber Eats sued DoorDash last week. The lawsuit alleges DoorDash pressured restaurants to stay exclusive. Uber Eats says this blocked its growth in first-party delivery. Antitrust expert Barry Barnett calls it a battle for supremacy. The lawsuit focuses on "tortious interference," not direct antitrust claims. Uber Eats may face challenges proving DoorDash acted illegally.
📉 Food Delivery’s Shrinking Field
The food delivery industry has consolidated over the last decade. Once, many regional players existed, but now, Uber Eats and DoorDash dominate. Grubhub lost market share and was acquired by Wonder in 2024. ASAP, formerly Waitr, shut down last year. DoorDash now works with 94 of the top 100 restaurant chains. Uber Eats is racing to gain ground through partnerships.
🍽️ The Battle for Big Chains
Enterprise clients are the new battleground. Uber Eats partnered with Toast Delivery, P.F. Chang’s, and Olive Garden. However, it claims DoorDash retaliated by threatening higher fees for chains working with Uber Eats. Some restaurant deals reportedly collapsed due to this pressure. The lawsuit argues DoorDash is limiting competition in first-party delivery.
🔮 The Future of First-Party Delivery
Uber Eats isn't focused on damages—it wants market change. It argues exclusivity deals hurt competition and restaurant choice. To win, Uber Eats must prove DoorDash’s tactics violate California law. If successful, the case could reshape food delivery contracts. The outcome may impact restaurant partnerships for years to come.
Should food delivery platforms be allowed exclusive contracts?
