Singapore markets closed

Grubhub Inc. (GRUB)

NYSE - NYSE Delayed Price. Currency in USD
Add to watchlist
72.30+0.36 (+0.50%)
At close: 4:00PM EDT
Sign in to post a message.
  • P
    Peter
    Maybe JET is getting cold feet re merger? i will require huge stock dilution to acquire huge money-losing operation in the USA on top of losing tons of money in their European and int'l markets. Look what happened to Tiffany (TIF) with French LVMH.
    09-05-2020 GrubHub ($GRUB) said Friday the acquisition by Netherlands-based Just Eat Takeaway is proceeded as expected, BUT disclosed an amendment to the merger agreement with the END DATE EXTENDED to Dec. 31, 2021 from June 10, 2021.
  • P
    Peter
    $UBER conversation
    08-18-2020 === Online ordering and food-delivery company Grubhub ($GRUB) reported its second-quarter 2020 results on July 30, highlighting SPECTACULAR GROSS FOOD SALES for partner restaurants, EXPLOSIVE GROWTH IN DINERS and "Daily Average Grubs," and other positive, coronavirus-driven metrics. But ITS BALLOONING REVENUES LED IN THE END TO EIGHT-FIGURE QUARTERLY NET LOSSES. If Grubhub CAN'T ACHIEVE A NET PROFIT EVEN WITH COVID-19'S TREMENDOUS DELIVERY SALES BOOST, can it turn profitable once it merges with Just Eat Takeaway ($TKAYY)?

    ON THE SURFACE, some of Grubhub's most recent quarterly results look outstanding, as people dined at home to avoid coronavirus infection. According to its Q2 2020 release, the delivery company's gross food sales metric blazed upward 59% year over year, reaching $2.3 billion and leaving Q2 2019's gross food sales of $1.5 billion in the rearview mirror. REVENUE WAS UP 41% TO $459.3 MILLION, ACTIVE DINERS ROSE 35% TO 27.5 MILLION PEOPLE.

    After totaling up the costs, however, it becomes apparent that MAKING A RECORD NUMBER OF DELIVERIES APPEARS TO BE A LOSING PROPOSITION under Grubhub's current model. Total COSTS AND EXPENSES rose 60% year over year, STRONGLY OUTPACING REVENUE GROWTH. Rather than earning net income of $0.03 on each order placed through its platform as in Q2 2019, the company lost $0.77 per order.

    Similar to Grubhub's situation, the COVID-19 pandemic added rocket fuel to Just Eat Takeaway's sales and revenue. According to its Aug. 12 press release on half-year 2020 results, the respiratory virus propelled Just Eat's ORDERS FOR THE PERIOD UPWARD BY 32% YEAR OVER YEAR, reaching 257 million orders.

    REVENUES PREDICTABLY TRACKED HIGHER IN SYNC WITH MORE ORDERS, JUMPING 44% YEAR OVER YEAR for the period ending June 30, reaching 1.03 billion euros ($1.2 billion) compared to 2019's 715 million euros ($849 million). The COST OF SALES ROSE FASTER, INCREASING 64%; GROWTH IN STAFF COSTS AND OPERATING EXPENSES, among others, led to a 156 million euros ($185 million) total comprehensive loss in 2020, compared to a 28 million euro ($33.2 million) loss during 2019's first half.

    A PERIOD OF LIGHTNING-FAST DELIVERY GROWTH LED TO A 464% INCREASE IN LOSSES FOR JUST EAT. In its notes to the tabulated revenues and expenses, JUST EAT CONFIRMS REPEATEDLY THAT ITS DELIVERY SUCCESS DROVE ITS PROFITABILITY FAR INTO NEGATIVE TERRITORY. It says its runaway COST OF SALES "was primarily driven by continued expansion of our delivery service offering" and notes the 31% JUMP IN STAFF COSTS, a separate expense category from cost of sales.

    Both companies appear to OPERATE IN A SIMILAR WAY: THE MORE DELIVERIES THEY MAKE AND THE BIGGER THEIR UP-FRONT REVENUES, THE MORE THEY END UP LOSING DURING THE QUARTER BECAUSE OF DELIVERY EXPENSES OUTSTRIPPING THOSE SAME REVENUES. A situation of explosive growth in restaurant deliveries, which seems as though it would create a paradise of profit for big delivery companies, instead DEEPENS THEIR LOSSES. The food delivery industry is also notorious for aggressive promotional activity.

    Simply tossing Just Eat Takeaway and Grubhub into the same mixing bowl via a merger seems unlikely to cook up significantly different results at this point. Both continue pursuing the SAME BUSINESS MODEL, and merely joining forces as one business entity won't change the basic recipe.

    While some ANALYSTS or commentators SPECULATE on ways the pair could boost their bottom line into positive territory... neither company has hinted at taking such measures, which remain SPECULATIVE AND UNPROVEN ANYWAY.

    [Investors] may want to avoid both based on their loss-generating strategies. ===

    Exactly the same goes for Uber Eats and its merger partner Postmates, and we'll soon find out the same about Doordash ($DOORD) - it's a race to the bottom, not to the green bottom line. The more they sell the more money they lose. Of course, the more money they lose, the higher Price Targets the "analysts" give them.

    Notice how many MONEY-LOSING COMPANIES are filing for IPO or SPAC (Special Purpose Acquision Company) and/or gobbling piles of "cheap" debt while the financial system is choking on "free" liquidity just waiting to be put to use somewhere?

    $UBER $GRUB $DOORD $SHAK $TSLA
  • d
    don
    just sold all my stock with Grubhub, so their employees will learn the lessons of not playing with there drivers again. management should stop that practice of using there time to deliver there food to there own family with the help of the poor drivers for a cheap $3.50 driving 15 miles from south to north and east to west. good luck employees/ drivers
  • P
    Peter
    @Westin_Bonaventure ... <->Shurtdown the app for California and fire the 120k contract drivers.<->
    Correction - they don't need to "fire" contract drivers... shutting down apps will leave them without rides, unless they decide to take matters in their own hands and try work with "flagging" by negotiating fees on their own - I don't know if it's legal in CA, without license / medallions or other such nonsense.

    Now, since the State of CA declared these gig workers "employees" they can all apply for unemployment insurance, which is going to hit CA double hard - less income from "gig taxes" and more expenses for higher unemployment.

    See how long that stupid AB5 (?) will last intact. Stupid laws should be punished by "complying" with them to their logical conclusion.

    Now, even if AB5 is rescinded or amended in a week or two, that really doesn't say much about long-term future of $UBER or $LYFT, the model is not really workable to make them profitable any time soon, and they will lose any advantage when autonomous vehicles come into our lives - they will be an unnecessary middleman - so certainly will be either out of "mover" business or modified at much lower valuations.

    But that's an argument for another day. The contractor / "gig" jobs are the way of the future, way of today really, and CA can't do anything about it.

    There are ways states may need to protect SOME workers, this is not the industry or the way to do this - when most gig workers have not asked for it - this is just a sop to the unions, who get the money without any real contributions to workers' well-being.
  • P
    Peter
    $SHAK conversation
    07-23-2020 WS sell-side analysts' game of "expectations" - lower them enough before earnings, which is done routinely... and 65% - 85% will "beat" the "consensus estimates" and then stock usually goes up regardless of sane valuations because the "expected" earnings and revenues were "priced in" (another meaningless but ubiquitous WS phrase.)

    CMG earnings has shown that margins on "digital + pick-up" orders were down by about 50% (despite complaints that the orders themselves were smaller in size than buying in-store). "Digital + delivery" added about 25% to average orders so that can't last long, especially with many now being semi-permanently laid-off / unemployed or WFH with cut in pay and additional work-related expenses - and that's with very generous unemployment benefits that are about to expire or be cut substantially while gov't keep borrowing and printing $Trillion$ of green stuff.

    === 07-22-2020 One thing Tesla does have going for it is a constellation of COMMENTATORS WILLING TO SING ITS PRAISES TO INFINITY AND BEYOND, though their convictions can appear shallow. Cathie Wood, chief executive of Ark Invest, regularly appears on CNBC to tell viewers Tesla stock will be worth $6,000 in five years. But MEANTIME, ARK REGULARLY SELLS BIG CHUNKS OF TESLA SHARES. IT SOLD NEARLY 140,000 TESLA SHARES THE FIRST TWO WEEKS OF JULY ALONE EVEN AS WOOD TOUTED THE COMPANY.

    The question of Tesla's proper valuation divides analysts, but THOSE WHOSE FIRMS TEND TO UNDERWRITE TESLA'S STOCK ISSUES AND BOND OFFERINGS ARE THE MOST SUPPORTIVE.

    Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas puts out investor notes with titles such as "Tesla and the POWER OF HOPE." He thinks at the current price the stock is overvalued but also puts a "bull case" price on the stock over $2,000.

    "I DON'T THINK OF SELL-SIDE ANALYSTS AS INDEPENDENT," said Francine McKenna, a writer trained in finance who writes the accounting and audit online newsletter. "Jonas is always making POSITIVE CALLS BEFORE MORGAN STANLEY HELPS TESLA RAISE MONEY."

    When faced with FACTS THAT DON'T ADD UP, in a market in which the laws of economic physics no longer apply, the best you can do — as Musk has shown — is TELL A COMPELLING STORY. ===

    $SHAK $GRUB $UBER $CMG $TSLA
  • P
    Peter
    $SHAK conversation
    === 07-20-2020 Third of NYC small businesses may never reopen. Accommodation, food service and retail jobs are particularly vulnerable, the 67-page study found.

    A third of the city's 230,000 small business may never reopen, according to a grim new report by The Partnership for New York City.

    Most small businesses have less than three months worth of cash reserves. "That means that funds to restart, PAY BACK RENT and buy inventory are exhausted, leaving tens of thousands of entrepreneurs at risk. Business owners face HIGH RENTS, REGULATORY BURDENS and TAXES."

    "COVID-19 has changed the value proposition, since PREVIOUS ADVANTAGES SUCH AS FOOT TRAFFIC AND EASY ACCESS TO THE OFFICES OF CLIENTS AND POTENTIAL CUSTOMERS HAVE DIMINISHED. On the contrary, over the past decade, political forces have created a much more expensive and litigious environment for business that is no longer sustainable for those whose margins were narrow before the pandemic," report said.

    City has 18 percent unemployment rate, although there's a shortage of skilled workers in areas like accounting and business development. 54 percent of city jobs CAN BE DONE REMOTELY with some NYC companies no longer requiring new hires to live in state. Raising taxes for the wealthy could push the city's highest earners — who account for 40 percent of the state's tax revenue — to move elsewhere. ===
    ---

    === 07-20-2020 Mortgage payments may be a challenge as $600 unemployment bump nears expiration. More than half of mortgage borrowers experienced INCOME LOSS DUE TO THE PANDEMIC. Forty percent of mortgage borrowers said either themselves or someone in their household has been receiving unemployment benefits. The $600 unemployment bump has helped buoy many households' financial situations throughout the pandemic. In fact, studies have shown BENEFITS FOR 68 PERCENT OF WORKERS WOULD EXCEED EARNINGS.

    However, facing income loss, Americans said they would be most willing to default on their mortgage payments as a means to make ends meet than other debt payments. Meanwhile, millions of Americans continue to file NEW UNEMPLOYMENT CLAIMS each week. "To avoid a SIGNIFICANT DECLINE IN CONSUMER SPENDING once the $600 bonus expires, either the economy will have to create a lot of jobs very quickly or we need more fiscal support."

    Unless the government intends to spend several hundred billion dollars to further support personal income, the ability for people out of work to support themselves has disappeared for millions of workers. There is an illusion that an 11% unemployment rate is a victory after the 14.7% one in April. The fact is that 10% unemployment was the worst monthly level of the Great Recession. The economy was in horrible shape even when the number was 8%. So, if the current level remains over 8%, the economy is in a shambles.

    The END OF GOVERNMENT SUPPORT IS NOT THE WORST PROBLEM. If confirmed COVID-19 cases continue to rise by as much as 70,000 a day, the crisis will shutter much of the economy for a second time. Some epidemiologists believe another wave of cases will start in October. It will be, by many accounts, worse than the first one, given a widespread and often undetected COVID-19 infected population throughout the country.

    The stock markets cannot rise much more under these levels of pressure. The pullback in the early part of this year took the Dow Jones industrial average from 28,000 to 19,000 in a matter of weeks. If Apple, Amazon, Alphabet / Google, Facebook and Microsoft had not held their ground, compared to the market as a whole, the drop would have been much worse. ===

    $SHAK $GRUB $UBER
  • K
    Kylander
    With earnings this has been on our watchlist for potential day trades. Good luck to everyone out there. See what else is on our watchlist. https://daytrading.group/DayTradingAlerts
  • P
    Peter
    $SHAK conversation
    === 07-16-2020 Americans Tear Up Old Eating Habits. Almost a THIRD OF ADULTS PLAN TO COOK AT HOME MORE post-Covid. RESTAURANT PULLBACK could rebalance the food supply chain.

    Americans have rapidly changed the ways they buy, cook and eat food in just four months, leaving everyone from farmers to restaurants unable to match their pivot.

    U.S. consumers, whose previous food preferences were stable enough that farmers could often make reliable planting decisions years in advance, have shifted their habits at fast pace during the coronavirus pandemic. That includes COOKING MORE AT HOME, purchasing in bulk, FORGOING BRAND-NAME TREATS and eating SMALLER MEALS due to FEWER TRIPS TO RESTAURANTS with their often oversized portions.

    Even one of those changes by itself could throw a wrench in the global food supply chain. ADD ALL FIVE TOGETHER, and some suppliers are finding they can't adapt fast enough to keep pace with all the changing consumer demands. Farmers, like a lettuce grower in California, have been forced to destroy crops after restaurant demand dried up.

    The ways Americans are changing their food habits are not only MULTIPLE AND SIGNIFICANT — they're also POTENTIALLY PERMANENT.

    Almost a THIRD OF U.S. ADULTS SAY THEY PLAN TO COOK AT HOME EVEN MORE THAN THEY DO NOW, ONCE STAY-AT-HOME RECOMMENDATIONS HAVE LIFTED. Home-kitchen purchases back that up: In the early weeks of the pandemic, U.S. sales of electric pasta makers grew more than five times what they were a year prior. Breadmaker sales more than quadrupled. More than a quarter of adults purchased items in bulk more often. BRANDS have also fallen out of favor, as 23% of respondents said they purchased GENERIC or store brands more often. In fact, 16% of Americans plan to buy private-label or bulk items even more frequently once the pandemic ends.

    As consumers cook more at home, driving up grocery store sales, they're STEERING CLEAR OF RESTAURANTS. ===

    $SHAK $GRUB $UBER
  • J
    Jason
    Delta Air Lines, Inc.
    $GRUB $UBER Strong sell!!!
  • K
    KRAZ
    big short grub takes to big of a bite out of the restaurants margins they can't afford to work with grub hub
  • b
    blatter
    Are you guys still in GRUB? They just got featured on the watchlist at (http://tradenow.xyz)
  • R
    Robert
    Just bought DADA as well. On demand food delivery in China. Walmart owns 10 percent !!!
  • Y
    Yahoo Finance Insights
    GrubHub reached a 52 Week high at 75.47
  • L
    Long_Investor
    Assuming most hear are already in on WTRH (Waitr/Bite Squad), but if not, take a look. Peers are being acquired at 7x's+ sales yet WTRH trades at less that 3x's sales. And the kicker is that they are profitable with their new management. Quickly expanding these last 5 months. Based in the Southeast US, which is the same region Walmart is based. Walmart Plus will need drivers to deliver for their new programs - should find out who they partner with over the next week or so.
  • P
    Peter
    $UBER conversation
    One of the problems is that the few large markets that don't already have cheaper and more efficient local delivery options (like most pizzerias and Asian food businesses do) are already SATURATED with end-users who are considering or now using delivery, so more partners / restaurants don't really give you more of the market - i.e., "market" is not restaurants, it's a finite percentage of population that accepts "delivery at a cost" - some might try "delivery for free" but otherwise delivery is just an app of dining options people may look through to choose from, given generally unsatisfying experience with the food delivered via Big Four / Big Three - "cold" / "takes too long" / "order mistakes" / "expensive" etc.

    IOW all the partnership pronouncements are great, but the number / percentage of end-users is not going to grow much from here, and might even start shrinking soon. So it's one of those UNSCALABLE business models where the more you sell the more money you lose... unless of course, nobody (WS "influencers" / boosters in the finmedia / sell-side analysts) cares about profitability, i.e. it's a "hope trade" like WeWork and bunch of other "growth" companies that EVENTUALLY went bankrupt but enriched insiders and WS investment banks in the process.

    === 07-06-2020 There is a cartoon version of certain gig-economy startup industries that goes like this. SEVERAL COMPANIES GET INTO THE MARKET FOR, SAY, CAR SERVICES OR FOOD DELIVERY OR WHATEVER. They compete for MARKET SHARE BY LOSING A LOT OF MONEY: You pay drivers $20 per trip, which is more than they could get elsewhere; you charge riders $5 per trip, which is less than they'd pay elsewhere; you MAKE UP THE DIFFERENCE BY RAISING MONEY FROM VENTURE CAPITALISTS OR SOFTBANK. YOUR COMPETITORS DO THE SAME THING, AND YOU COLLECTIVELY SPEND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF VENTURE MONEY DELIVERING PEOPLE CHEAP BURRITOS. You promise your investors "don't worry, after a few more cheap burritos we will drive our competitors out of business and we'll be able to jack up the burrito prices to cover our expenses," but YOUR COMPETITORS ARE PROMISING THEIR INVESTORS THE SAME THING — SOMETIMES IT'S THE SAME INVESTORS! — so they all keep hanging around.

    EVENTUALLY everyone does get tired of this, but RATHER THAN GOING OUT OF BUSINESS with nothing to show for it, the LESS VIABLE COMPETITORS GET ACQUIRED by the more viable ones. If you are a leading player in this sort of viciously competitive business, it can be worth a few billion dollars to you to get rid of a competitor: With less competition, maybe you can charge a bit more to deliver burritos and can REDUCE THE PAIN A LITTLE BIT.

    If you believe this model ... then 1 + 1 = 3, water flows uphill, you can be your own grandfather, anything is possible. It is a PERPETUAL-MOTION MACHINE OF IMPLAUSIBLE CONSEQUENCES.

    You can LOSE MONEY EVERY STEP OF THE WAY, AND NEVER CONVINCE ANYONE THAT YOU'LL EVER MAKE MONEY, AND STILL EXIT WITH MORE MONEY THAN YOU STARTED WITH. PRESENT PROFITABILITY DOESN'T MATTER, FUTURE PROFITABILITY DOESN'T MATTER, all that matters is harming the profitability of an even more lavishly funded money-losing competitor.

    That is: In the short term, it might be in your interest to acquire competitors and reduce the pain. But in the LONG TERM, WHEN YOU DO THAT, YOU ARE DEMONSTRATING THAT "LOSE MONEY UNTIL WE GET ACQUIRED AT A PREMIUM" IS A VIABLE BUSINESS MODEL, SO YOU'LL BE ENCOURAGING OTHER PEOPLE TO JUMP INTO THE SECTOR WITHOUT A PLAN TO MAKE MONEY, AND YOU'LL HAVE TO KEEP BUYING THEM.

    You CAN'T REALLY BELIEVE THE MODEL. Venture capitalists MIGHT SUBSIDIZE LOSSES for 10 years, but not for 100; EVENTUALLY there has to be some sort of endgame.

    Possibly the endgame is "people come to their senses, the INDUSTRY CONSOLIDATES, and the REMAINING PLAYERS FIND A WAY TO MAKE MONEY." Possibly the endgame is "people come to their senses, ALL THESE COMPANIES SHUT DOWN, AND WE GO BACK TO PICKING UP OUR OWN BURRITOS." Obviously if you're invested in the space you are telling the former story, not the latter.

    Uber Technologies is acquiring Postmates for about $2.65 billion in stock, combining two U.S. FOOD-DELIVERY services. Pretty much everyone takes the view, well, Uber Eats loses money, and Postmates loses money, but IF THEY COMBINE THEY'LL LOSE A LITTLE BIT LESS MONEY.

    This view is so much the CONSENSUS that I half-expected Uber's announcement to be like "this acquisition will LESSEN COMPETITION IN THE SECTOR SO WE CAN STOP LOSING SO MUCH MONEY." Obviously you can't SAY "WE ARE DOING THIS DEAL TO REDUCE COMPETITION BECAUSE OUR BUSINESS IS NOT REALLY VIABLE," even if it's what everyone thinks.

    This made me want to get into the food delivery business. Postmates has raised about $900 million of venture capital and DOESN'T SEEM TO BE PROFITABLE, BUT A LOT OF PEOPLE MADE A LOT OF MONEY OFF OF IT ANYWAY. Maybe there's room for more of that. ===

    The big word and big question of course is, when is EVENTUALLY?

    $UBER $GRUB
  • S
    Stocktargetadvisor
    $GRUB
    Target Raised by D.A. Davidson Neutral USD 63 » USD 79
  • J
    Johnny
    "Competition among the last food-delivery companies standing will remain intense."
    Book Value: 16.08 EPS (TTM): -0.64 Profit Margin: -4.36%, P/E Ratio: N/A, And expecting GRUB to be able to maintain?
    Moody's says. An uncertain regulatory environment and customers' ease of switching from one provider to another also contribute to the sector's dynamic business conditions
    Restaurants Bankruptcies are coming.
  • J
    Jerry
    (Notice how a few analyst are waiting to downgrade until they sell out) $20's soon
    Here’s what analysts are saying about the results:
    Oppenheimer, Jason Helfstein
    GrubHub usage is “eroding,” and this trend is “expected to worsen” in the fourth quarter.
    In order to compete, GrubHub “will now focus on lower margin features.” There is “limited investor demand with slowing growth and declining Ebitda.”
    Downgrades to underperform from outperform; price target cut to $34 from $91.
    BofA, Nat Schindler
    Downgrades by two notches, to underperform from buy. Price target slashed to a Street-low view of $30 from $98.
    “The food delivery market is increasingly irrational as competitors flood the market,” making customers less loyal to any particular company. The company’s “answer to this irrationality, however, seems confusing: its management letter seems to suggest that it will double down on its competitors’ poor economic decisions,” including free delivery for quick service restaurants.
    These strategies “should attract customers with lower order frequency and less lifetime value, reducing [long-term] profitability while providing little real growth.”
    Craig-Hallum Capital Group, Alex Fuhrman
    The outlook “creates a bleaker picture in the short-term.”
    Decelerating revenue growth, along with Ebitda pressures, “creates a challenged environment for the stock, with investors now likely needing to see a stabilization in revenue growth coupled with improved profitability.”
    Downgrades to hold from buy, price target cut to $40 from $100.
    Jefferies, Brent Thill
    The weaker-than-expected third-quarter results are “the least of the issues,” given the “drastically reduced” outlook and the “aggressive spending” to reinvigorate growth. The spending plan “makes sense given the circumstance,” but “there is no guarantee that it will change the overall narrative.”
    The company “has turned into a revenue deceleration story with compressing margins all in the face of increased competition, not a great recipe for success.” Expects increased consolidation in the food-delivery sector, but this is “a challenging industry to truly differentiate (especially against two deep-pocketed competitors).”
    Hold rating, price target cut to $45 from $78.
    Stephens, Will Slabaugh
    There is a business case to be made for increasing investments in order to protect market share, but “this significantly pushes out the earnings story and again sets up GRUB as a ‘show me’ stock for 2020.”
    Currently has an overweight rating and $110 price target, but the view is under review.
    Cowen, Thomas Champion
    “The growth and profitability picture looks much worse than we previously thought,” with “multiple headwinds” cited as cause for concern.
    Management’s commentary “suggests tempered expectations make sense, with future growth coming from areas like take-out and driving lower diner-facing fees.”
    Outperform, $86 price target.
    BTIG, Peter Saleh
    “We struggle to find any silver lining in these developments,” and the slowdown “has caught us by surprise.”
    “We are unclear as to the path forward from here,” although industry consolidation is likely.
    Affirms buy rating, and $95 price target, but adds that estimates are under review until the conference call.
    Wedbush, Ygal Arounian
    The outlook represents “a full-on kitchen sink moment as GrubHub finally gives in to competitive dynamics.”
    While investors had been bracing for a weak outlook, “it certainly was not at this order of magnitude.” This is “clearly a full reset of expectations,” and GrubHub management “will face a steep climb in an effort to regain Street credibility.”
    Despite the “decidedly negative” report, affirms outperform rating and $90 price target pending the conference call.
  • P
    Peter
    There was a a very large Jun 05 $60 call Open Interest that's was about to expire worthless by the end of today which is now well in the money... convenient?

    Are Delivery Hero and/or Just Eat talking to GRUB... or is GRUB talking to them, trying to prod UBER to make an offer?

    CNBC, Bllom have been saying "according to people familiar with the matter" - so if it's the same people that were talking about UBER deal, they could only be "familiar" with the matter from GRUB's side and point of view.

    There is absolutely no synergy between the Dutch or German / European food delivery companies that have near-monopoly on delivery in Europe and money-losing, marketshare-losing GRUB, so what would be the point of them "breaking" into "bloody competitive" US market to begin with, and especially paying a princely sum for an app?

    Amazon has "investment" in UK's Deliveroo, but AMZN is selling them AWS, services and analytics and AMZN also benefits from both data and investment.

    Just Eat has just completed merger with Takeaway few months ago and its market cap is about US$6B, so it's not very likely to be a large acquirer again so soon at anywhere $6B price.
    Delivery Hero has a cap of US$17B so probably could finance, but the question is why... and why at anywhere this price - which went up sharply only on rumors of UBER acquisition and higher demand due to lockdowns?
  • J
    Johnny
    How profitable s the delivery for Fast Food?
    "Uber Eats cuts fees for NYC restaurants as Grubhub rivalry heats up"
    "Grubhub Investors Should Take the Money and Run" "The party's over"
    "Grubhub will crumble"
    Just a few headlines prior to Uber getting stronger