Doordash, Inc. (DASH) 2024 Q2 法說會逐字稿

Thank you for standing by. My name is John, and I will be your conference operator for today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to the DoorDash second quarter 2024 earnings c.all. I would now like to introduce and welcome Mr. Andy Hargreaves, VP of Investor Relations to begin the call. Andy, the floor is yours.

感謝您耐心等候。我叫 John，今天將擔任本次電話會議的接線員。此刻，我想歡迎各位參加 DoorDash 2024 年第二季財報電話會議。接下來我想介紹並歡迎投資人關係副總裁 Andy Hargreaves 先生開始本次會議。Andy，時間交給你。

Thanks, John. Good afternoon, everyone, and thanks for joining us for our Q2 2024 earnings call. Very pleased to be joined today by Co-Founder, Chair and CEO, Tony Xu; and CFO, Ravi Inukonda.

謝謝你，John。各位下午好，感謝各位參加我們 2024 年第二季財報電話會議。今天很高興與我們的共同創辦人、董事長兼執行長 Tony Xu，以及財務長 Ravi Inukonda 一同出席。

We'll be making forward-looking statements during today's call, including our expectations for our business, financial position, operating performance, our guidance, strategies, capital allocation approach and the broader economic environment. Forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those described. Many of these uncertainties are described in our SEC filings, including our Form 10-Ks and 10-Qs.

在今天的電話會議中，我們將作出前瞻性陳述，包括我們對業務、財務狀況、營運表現、指引、策略、資本配置方式以及更廣泛經濟環境的預期。前瞻性陳述受到風險與不確定性影響，可能導致實際結果與所述內容出現重大差異。其中許多不確定性已在我們向 SEC 提交的文件中說明，包括 Form 10-K 與 10-Q。

You should not rely on our forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. We disclaim any obligation to update any forward-looking statements, except as required by law. During this call, we will also discuss certain non-GAAP financial measures. Information regarding our non-GAAP financial measures, including a reconciliation of the non-GAAP measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures, may be found in our earnings release, which is available on our Investor Relations website.

您不應將我們的前瞻性陳述視為對未來事件的預測。除法律要求外，我們不承擔更新任何前瞻性陳述的義務。在本次電話會議中，我們也將討論若干非 GAAP 財務衡量指標。有關我們非 GAAP 財務衡量指標的資訊（包括將非 GAAP 指標與最直接可比的 GAAP 指標進行調節），可在我們的財報新聞稿中找到；該新聞稿可於我們的投資人關係網站取得。

These non-GAAP measures should be considered in addition to our GAAP results and are not intended to be a substitute for our GAAP results. Finally, this call is being audio webcasted on our Investor Relations website, and an audio replay of the call will be available on the same website shortly after the call ends.

這些非 GAAP 指標應與我們的 GAAP 結果一併考量，並非用來取代我們的 GAAP 結果。最後，本次電話會議將於我們的投資人關係網站進行音訊網路直播，且在會議結束後不久，同一網站將提供音訊重播。

John, I'll pass it back to you, and we can take the first question.

John，我把時間交還給你，我們可以開始第一個問題。

(Operator Instructions) Nikhil Devnani, Bernstein.

(接線員指示) Nikhil Devnani，Bernstein。

I wanted to ask about what you're seeing from an overall demand perspective. There's a lot of talk right now about softening restaurant demand. Your outlook points to some deceleration, but still looks very healthy. So I guess to what degree are you seeing changes in behavior or softening on that front? And my follow-on to that is a bit more of the secular story here.

我想從整體需求的角度請教你們目前觀察到的情況。現在有很多討論提到餐廳需求正在轉弱。你們的展望指出會有一些放緩，但看起來仍然非常健康。所以我想問的是，你們在多大程度上看到行為改變或需求轉弱的跡象？另外，我的追問會更偏向這裡的長期結構性故事。

So I mean how would you characterize the new customer funnel for the US restaurant marketplace? I think there's a common perception that all customers should have been acquired during the pandemic. But what do you see on that front in terms of how new customers are still adopting this service today? And how does that make you -- how do you think about where we are on kind of the growth curve there?

也就是說，你們會如何描述美國餐廳外送市場的新客戶漏斗？我想有一種普遍看法是，疫情期間應該已經把所有客戶都獲取完了。但就你們所見，現在新客戶仍在如何採用這項服務？這又會如何影響你們對目前所處成長曲線位置的判斷？

Nikhil, it's Tony. I'll take both of those, and feel free to chime in, Ravi. We're seeing really strong demand on the consumer side. So we're not actually seeing some of the challenges that you may be hearing about or reading about in other headlines. I think there are a few reasons for this. I think, first, we're still in the earliest innings of the move towards digital and the overall omnichannel experiences that every restaurant and retailer is participating in.

Nikhil，我是 Tony。我會一起回答這兩個問題，Ravi 也歡迎隨時補充。我們在消費者端看到非常強勁的需求。因此，我們其實沒有看到你可能在其他新聞標題中聽到或讀到的那些挑戰。我認為原因有幾點。首先，我們仍處於向數位化轉移的非常早期階段，以及每一家餐廳與零售商都在參與的整體全通路體驗。

And we're lucky to play in the part that is growing. I mean if you looked at digital only, that's growing not just for us at DoorDash on our marketplace. It's also growing for us in our first-party platform as we power a lot of these restaurant and retailer websites for ordering as well as their delivery channels. And they see that, too, by the way.

而我們很幸運地參與在正在成長的那一部分。如果你只看數位端，這不僅在 DoorDash 的市集上對我們而言在成長。在我們的第一方平台上也同樣成長，因為我們為許多餐廳與零售商的網站提供下單功能，以及他們的外送通路。順帶一提，他們也看得到這一點。

While some restaurants, to your point, maybe seeing some headwinds in traffic, I mean, their digital channels are growing very robustly many multiples of, I think, their overall growth and we see that similarly. But at the same time, we're still just single-digit penetration in restaurants and outside our restaurants, we're even lower than that.

就像你提到的，雖然有些餐廳在來客數方面可能面臨一些逆風，但他們的數位通路成長非常強勁，成長倍數遠高於我認為的整體成長，而我們也看到類似的情況。但同時，我們在餐廳端的滲透率仍只有個位數；而在餐廳以外的領域，我們的滲透率甚至更低。

So we see a long runway for growth there. The second point I'd make is that our product continues to get better. I mean if you looked at our cohort behavior, whether it's retention or order frequency, I mean, all of these things are as good or better than even our pandemic cohorts for every cohort since the pandemic. And so I think that's a reflection and testament to the work that the team is doing.

因此，我們認為那裡仍有很長的成長跑道。第二點是，我們的產品持續變得更好。如果你看我們的同批客群（cohort）行為，不論是留存或下單頻率，這些表現對於疫情以來的每一個 cohort 而言，都與疫情期間的 cohort 一樣好，甚至更好。我認為這反映並證明了團隊所做的努力。

We already have category-leading selection, but we're continuing to extend that lead. We have the best quality as well as lowest-cost logistics network in the most places in the US not just for restaurants, but also for retail. That continues to get more accurate and faster. We continue to work on our affordability programs. I mean DashPass had an all-time high in terms of its subscriber base.

我們已經擁有業界領先的品類選擇，但我們仍在持續擴大這個領先優勢。我們在美國最多地區擁有最佳品質且成本最低的物流網路，不僅服務餐廳，也服務零售。這個網路持續變得更精準、更快速。我們也持續推進可負擔性方案。DashPass 的訂閱用戶數創下歷史新高。

So I think a lot of people are resonating across all of the dimensions in which we are judged from the consumer's view. The final point I'd make is that we are increasing the number of use cases on DoorDash. We continue to see just tremendous growth much faster than the industry. I mean many, many, many fold faster than anyone else both in the US as well as globally in restaurants, but also outside of restaurants. And increasingly, we're seeing customers coming to us for the first time actually for nonrestaurant use cases.

因此，我認為從消費者的角度來看，在評價我們的各個面向上，很多人都產生了共鳴。最後一點是，我們正在增加 DoorDash 上的使用情境。我們持續看到極為強勁的成長，速度遠快於產業。我的意思是，無論在美國或全球，在餐廳領域以及餐廳以外的領域，我們的成長都比任何其他人快很多很多倍。而且我們愈來愈常看到，客戶第一次使用我們，其實是為了非餐廳的使用情境。

And so -- and then in terms of your question on new customers, I mean, we actually see a couple of things. One, we still acquire more than anyone else. I mean more -- in restaurants, more than one out of every two new customers that come into the industry. Outside of restaurants, we're about one in every two. So in any category of local commerce, we acquire more new customers than anyone else.

至於你關於新客戶的問題，我們其實看到幾件事。第一，我們仍然比任何人都獲取更多新客戶。也就是說，在餐廳領域，進入這個產業的每兩位新客戶中，就有超過一位是我們獲取的。在餐廳以外的領域，我們大約也是每兩位就有一位。因此，在任何本地商務的品類中，我們獲取的新客戶都比任何其他人多。

And I think what you see about the point about like, hey, look, is the new customer point saturating? The way I think about this is for us at DoorDash, yes, we have tens of millions of customers every single month, but we have many multiples of that ordering with us every single year. So within even our own ecosystem, whether they're a new customer or a customer that's an occasional customer that's coming back now to the platform, within our own ecosystem, we have a long runway for growth.

至於你提到的那個點，例如：新客戶是否正在趨於飽和？我的看法是，對我們 DoorDash 而言，是的，我們每個月有數千萬名客戶，但每年向我們下單的客戶數是那個數字的好幾倍。因此，即使在我們自己的生態系內，不論是新客戶，或是偶爾下單、現在回到平台的客戶，在我們自己的生態系裡仍有很長的成長跑道。

And so yes, we're getting new customers, especially in restaurants and new categories. I mean I mentioned some of those stats, but we're also getting customers who are in our ecosystem. They don't participate yet with us every single month or every single day, but increasingly, they are getting there.

所以，是的，我們正在獲取新客戶，特別是在餐廳以及新類別上。我剛才提到了一些數據，但我們也在獲取那些已在我們生態系中的客戶。他們目前還不是每個月或每天都與我們互動，但他們愈來愈接近那個狀態。

Nikhil, just to add a couple of points to what Tony talked about, right, the demand on the platform continues to be very strong. When we look at the underlying cohorts, they're very strong. The recent quarter actually is as strong as any of the older cohorts that we've seen. Even for the core restaurant business, when I look at the growth rate in GOV on a year-over-year basis, the growth in Q2 is very consistent with what we saw in Q1.

Nikhil，我只是補充幾點 Tony 剛才談到的內容，對吧，我們平台上的需求持續非常強勁。當我們看底層的用戶分群（cohorts）時，它們非常強。最近一季實際上和我們看到的任何較早期分群一樣強勁。即使就核心餐廳業務而言，當我看 GOV 的年增率時，第二季的成長與第一季所見非常一致。

Even from a linearity perspective, the business actually grew faster in June compared to April. Tony talked about some of this, but DashPass had a really strong quarter, all-time high in terms of subscribers. Order frequency continues to be at an all-the-time high. So the underlying cohort strength is actually very strong and the demand continues to be very strong across the board for us.

即使從線性（linearity）的角度來看，6 月的業務成長其實比 4 月更快。Tony 談到其中一些，但 DashPass 這一季表現非常強勁，訂閱用戶數創下歷史新高。下單頻次持續維持在歷史新高。因此，底層分群的強度其實非常強，而我們整體各方面的需求也持續非常強勁。

Ross Sandler, Barclays.

Ross Sandler，Barclays。

First one on the take rate. It's up quarter-on-quarter, year-on-year, the revenue take rate. And in the letter, you talked about reducing consumer fees and you just mentioned DashPass growing a lot faster than overall. So could you talk about like what's driving that? Are you seeing efficiencies on cash or cost or something else like Drive causing that take rate to go up as much as it is?

第一個問題關於抽成率（take rate）。營收抽成率不論季增或年增都在上升。而在股東信中，你們談到降低消費者費用，你剛剛也提到 DashPass 的成長速度遠快於整體。所以能否談談是什麼在驅動這件事？你們是否在現金效率或成本效率上看到改善，或是像 Drive 之類的其他因素，導致抽成率上升到現在這個幅度？

And then the second one is you also mentioned that the majority of your largest international markets have better retention than US. Could you just give us a little bit more color on what's driving that? Is that kind of the breadth of offering or levels of competition or something else?

第二個問題是，你們也提到你們多數最大的國際市場，其留存率優於美國。能否再多提供一些背景，說明是什麼在驅動這件事？是供給/品類的廣度、競爭程度，或是其他因素？

Ross, I'll take the first one. Tony, feel free to jump in on the second one. On a take rate perspective, Ross, let me break out what's going on with revenue. If you think about the revenue, there's a few different components. You have the ads business, which is growing really fast. You have our platform business, which is also growing really fast. Both of those are driving the improvement you're seeing in both revenue growth as well as take rate.

Ross，我先回答第一個。Tony，你也可以隨時補充第二個。就抽成率而言，Ross，我先拆解一下營收端發生了什麼。如果你看營收，裡面有幾個不同的組成。你有廣告業務，成長非常快。你有我們的平台業務，也成長非常快。這兩者都在推動你所看到的營收成長以及抽成率的改善。

At the same time, you also have cost lines, whether it's Dashers or quality. The team has done a great job of improving that compared to last year. We're seeing improvements in efficiency. For us, the goal has always been continue to drive improvements from an efficiency perspective. But at the same time, we're also going to continue to find opportunities to reinvest that back in growth.

同時，你也有成本端的項目，不論是 Dashers（外送員）或是品質相關。團隊在相較去年方面做得非常好，持續改善。我們看到效率提升。對我們而言，目標一直都是從效率角度持續推動改善。但同時，我們也會持續尋找機會，把這些改善再投資回成長。

As I look ahead from a take rate perspective, I do expect us to improve and grow our ad business as well as our platform business. Even on the cost line, there's still a lot of opportunity for us to continue to drive improvements in efficiency. At the same time, we're going to try to find good opportunities where we could drive investments in retention, order frequency, while continuing to improve the overall take rate in the business.

展望未來，從抽成率角度來看，我確實預期我們會持續改善並擴大我們的廣告業務以及平台業務。即使在成本端，我們仍有很大的空間可以持續推動效率改善。同時，我們也會嘗試找到好的機會，在持續提升整體抽成率的同時，投資於留存、下單頻次等面向。

And Ross, on the second question about international markets and just the retention and frequency levels there. I mean it's really a story of TWO things. One is, well, we started with a very robust set of fundamentals and foundation, right? I mean this really was the key investment thesis behind teaming up with Wolt.

Ross，關於第二個問題：國際市場以及那裡的留存與頻次水準。我的意思是，這其實是兩件事的故事。第一是，我們一開始就有一套非常扎實的基本面與基礎，對吧？這其實就是我們與 Wolt 合作的關鍵投資論點。

I mean when we were looking internationally in terms of expansion opportunities, one of the things, perhaps the top thing that got us most excited about teaming with Wolt, was the fact that they had leading retention and frequency in every market that they competed in. And that's a combination of a few things, right?

當我們在國際上尋找擴張機會時，讓我們對與 Wolt 合作最興奮的其中一點——也許是最重要的一點——是他們在所競爭的每個市場都擁有領先的留存與頻次。而這是幾個因素的綜合，對吧？

But at the end of the day, it comes down to offering the best combination of inputs for customers, the best selection, the best quality of service in terms of delivery quality, the best affordability and the best support.

但歸根結底，關鍵在於為客戶提供最佳的要素組合：最好的選擇、在配送品質方面最好的服務品質、最好的可負擔性，以及最好的支援。

The second thing I would say is that since teaming up with Wolt, which closed in '21, it's been a couple of years now, we've added some of the lessons that we've learned at DoorDash, lessons in making improvements to each one of these inputs. And that combination, I think, is what you see that's driving the growth and virtually taking share gains in every market that we play in.

第二點我想說的是，自從與 Wolt 合作（於 2021 年完成）以來，現在也過了幾年，我們把在 DoorDash 學到的一些經驗帶了進去，也就是在這些要素的每一項上持續改進的經驗。我認為這樣的組合，就是你所看到的、驅動成長並且幾乎在我們參與的每個市場都取得市佔提升的原因。

Michael Morton, MoffettNathanson.

Michael Morton，MoffettNathanson。

If we could maybe do one on international following up on some of the comments Tony just made and then maybe a quick one on grocery. Tony, I love hearing more about the retention aspects for international. But like you talked about in the press release today, two full years with Wolt. I love to learn some more just beyond the retention aspects, some key takeaways after running this business for two full years on what it takes for the best performance in these international markets. Is it market structure, market share, consumer spending capabilities?

我們或許可以先問一個國際業務的問題，延續 Tony 剛才的一些評論，然後再快速問一個雜貨（grocery）的問題。Tony，我很想多聽一些關於國際市場留存面的內容。但就像你今天新聞稿提到的，與 Wolt 合作已滿兩整年。我也很想了解，除了留存之外，在經營這項業務兩整年後，你們對於如何在這些國際市場取得最佳表現，有哪些關鍵心得。是市場結構、市佔、消費者支出能力嗎？

And then how that might dictate your plans to grow in new countries and/or maybe exit certain markets where you don't like the industry structure. And then just a quick one on CPG advertising, some learnings and differences you've picked up compared to your restaurant advertising business would be great.

以及這可能如何影響你們在新國家的成長計畫，和/或在你們不喜歡其產業結構的市場退出。另外再快速問一個關於 CPG（民生消費品）廣告：相較於你們的餐廳廣告業務，你們學到的內容與差異是什麼？如果能分享會很棒。

Sure. Yes, I mean, on the first question regarding international and just lessons learned, I mean the first thing I would say is that there's no silver bullet in operating these kinds of businesses. But the story is really the same in virtually every market. Sure, every market, to your point, has different challenges and different dynamics in the market.

當然。是的，關於第一個國際業務與經驗教訓的問題，我首先想說的是，經營這類業務並沒有什麼萬靈丹。但幾乎在每個市場，故事其實都差不多。當然，每個市場如你所說，都有不同的挑戰與不同的市場動態。

But at the end of the day, it comes down to who can create the best service for customers, carriers and merchants. And I think remembering that, as simple as it sounds, is actually quite important because I think there's always a lot of competitive activities in our space. But I think that making sure that you can win on building the best product as measured by the highest retention and frequency levels, I mean that's kind of what we've always held ourselves to.

但歸根結底，關鍵在於誰能為客戶、運力夥伴（carriers）以及商家打造最好的服務。我認為記住這一點——雖然聽起來很簡單——其實非常重要，因為我覺得我們這個領域總是有很多競爭行為。但我認為，確保你能在打造最佳產品上勝出——以最高的留存與頻次水準來衡量——這一直是我們對自己的要求。

That's what the customer holds us to. And I think that we've been lucky in that we've been able to achieve that bar at least better than anyone else in all the markets that we play in. But at the same time, it's also not good enough if you look at just how underpenetrated so many of these markets are, especially outside of the United States.

這也是客戶對我們的要求。我認為我們很幸運，至少在我們參與的所有市場中，我們都能達到這個門檻，而且表現優於其他任何人。但同時，如果你看這麼多市場的滲透率仍然很低，尤其是在美國以外，那其實也還不夠好。

And that's true in the restaurants category, but that's true virtually in every category, which just means that we've got a long ways to go before we're satisfied with what we've done for customers in solving the local commerce opportunity. With respect to CPG, I think it's been just a really fast learning curve for us. I think we had a lot of attention and excitement from virtually every top CPG advertiser because they saw the largest local commerce platform offering ads for the first time three years ago that had the highest frequency, the highest membership base for local commerce and the highest cross-sell between categories.

這在餐廳品類是如此，但幾乎在每個品類也都是如此；這意味著，在解決本地商務（local commerce）機會、為客戶創造價值這件事上，我們距離真正滿意還有很長的路要走。至於 CPG，我認為對我們而言是一段非常快速的學習曲線。我認為我們從幾乎所有頂級 CPG 廣告主那裡都獲得了高度關注與興奮，因為他們看到三年前最大的一個本地商務平台首次提供廣告，而且擁有最高的頻次、最高的本地商務會員基礎，以及跨品類之間最高的交叉銷售（cross-sell）。

And so obviously, their question is like, hey, what are you waiting for? When are you guys going to actually open up the platform so that we can meet new customers? At the same time, we also have to balance the other side, which is an advertising business can only be built off the back of a healthy and robust marketplace business, and it doesn't really go the other way around.

所以很明顯，他們的問題是：嘿，你們還在等什麼？你們什麼時候才會真正開放平台，讓我們可以接觸到新客戶？同時，我們也必須在另一面取得平衡，也就是廣告業務只能建立在健康且強韌的市集（marketplace）業務之上，而不是反過來。

So you kind of need the marketplace business to grow in order for your advertising business to have a long runway for healthy growth. And so that's kind of what we've always looked for, but it's always two guiding principles: how do we offer the best-in-class consumer experience with no degradation in experience and how do we offer the best return for advertisers?

因此，你需要市集業務成長，才能讓你的廣告業務擁有更長的跑道、實現健康成長。這也是我們一直以來的看法；但始終有兩個指導原則：我們如何在不犧牲體驗的前提下，提供同級最佳的消費者體驗，以及我們如何為廣告主提供最佳回報？

And that's true for small restaurants. That's true for big restaurants. That's true for big CPGs. That's true for small, mid-market CPGs. I think that one thing that you see now that we're in the third year of doing this is we're starting to finally make great progress in just offering a very balanced portfolio. I think we started by offering and introducing ads to restaurants, where I think that was something that was very natural to some of the activities that we had done before then.

這對小型餐廳是如此。對大型餐廳也是如此。對大型民生消費品（CPG）公司也是如此。對小型與中型市場的 CPG 也是如此。我認為，現在我們進入第三年，你會看到的一件事是：我們終於開始在提供一個非常均衡的產品組合方面取得很大進展。我想我們一開始是先提供並把廣告引入餐廳端，因為那與我們之前做過的一些活動非常自然地銜接。

But now that's pretty much fully built out for CPGs. And I think, now, it's making sure that we grow that in a responsible way, achieving, again, the balance between consumer happiness and advertiser returns.

但現在，這套能力對 CPG 來說也幾乎已經完整建置。而我認為，接下來就是要確保我們以負責任的方式推動成長，再次在消費者滿意度與廣告主回報之間取得平衡。

Mike, it's Ravi. Just to add a couple of points Tony talked about on the international side. Again, the formula for us, like Tony mentioned, is largely similar. We're seeing strength in retention. We're seeing strength in order frequency as well as gross profit. Last call, I talked about the fact that the entire international portfolio is gross profit positive and it has continued to improve. For us, what's important is we want to drive scale. Scale drives efficiency in the business. We've done that in the US, and it's the same formula we are using in the international markets as well.

Mike，我是 Ravi。補充 Tony 在國際業務面提到的幾點。同樣地，如 Tony 所說，我們的公式大致相同。我們看到留存表現強勁。我們也看到下單頻率以及毛利都很強勁。在上一通電話會議中，我提到整個國際組合已經是毛利為正，而且持續改善。對我們而言，重要的是我們希望推動規模。規模能帶動業務效率。我們在美國已經做到這點，而在國際市場我們也採用同樣的公式。

Andrew Boone, JMP Securities.

Andrew Boone，JMP Securities。

You mentioned in the press release a better frequency from new verticals. Can you help us better understand that, the drivers, and then where are you seeing better frequency? And then a question really on ramping new merchants. We've noticed that incentives are kind of larger. As we think about you guys normalizing on selection, can you just help us understand the size of the investment it takes to bring new merchants onto the platform?

你們在新聞稿中提到新垂直品類帶來更好的下單頻率。你能否幫我們更好地理解這點、背後的驅動因素，以及你們在哪些地方看到更好的頻率？另外一個問題是關於新商家的導入（ramping）。我們注意到補貼/激勵似乎變大了。當我們思考你們在選品（selection）上走向常態化時，能否幫我們理解把新商家帶上平台所需的投資規模？

Sure. I can take the first part of the question. I mean Andrew, I guess, in general, I mean we see order frequency increases both within restaurants and incrementally on top of that from new verticals. It depends a lot on the geography and which new selection that has been onboarded or how strong the selection density is within a market.

當然。我可以先回答問題的第一部分。Andrew，我想一般來說，我們看到下單頻率在餐廳內部提升，同時也因新垂直品類而在此基礎上帶來增量提升。這很大程度取決於地理區域，以及在某個市場中導入了哪些新選品，或該市場的選品密度有多強。

For example, obviously, we've been very strong in grocery and in convenience. That's been a big focus for us for three years. And we're excited actually. Actually, just this morning, we announced an update to our partnership with Chase, which now makes us Chase's exclusive partner in both restaurant delivery and grocery delivery for all of their cardholders.

例如，很明顯地，我們在雜貨與便利商店品類表現非常強勁。這一直是我們三年來的重點。而我們也很興奮。其實就在今天早上，我們宣布更新與 Chase 的合作夥伴關係，現在我們成為 Chase 對所有持卡人於餐廳外送與雜貨外送的獨家合作夥伴。

And so I think you're seeing the appreciation of our performance not just by consumers, but also by other large companies out there that are trying to tap into a very valuable base of customers, a lot of whom are coming to us for grocery and for these new verticals. But there are examples where we just launched recently, for example, it's Ulta Beauty.

因此，我認為你看到的不只是消費者對我們表現的肯定，也包括其他大型公司；他們正試圖觸及一個非常有價值的客群，其中有很大一部分人是為了雜貨與這些新垂直品類而來到我們平台。但也有一些例子是我們最近才上線的，例如 Ulta Beauty。

So as we've launched health and beauty, some customers come to us for the first time, whether it's to Ulta, to Sephora, to other health and beauty merchants for the first time, or Lowe's in the home improvement category. So it's not coming from one area. As we add more categories, we see more order frequency growth.

所以，當我們推出健康與美妝品類時，有些客戶是第一次來到我們平台，不論是為了 Ulta、Sephora，或其他健康與美妝商家；或者像居家修繕類別的 Lowe's。因此，這不是來自單一領域。隨著我們增加更多品類，我們看到下單頻率成長更多。

Yes, I'll take the second one. Maybe just a couple of points on the first one that Tony mentioned, right? Our goal is to drive overall order frequency up. We're not trying to drive just the restaurant order frequency up or the new vertical product frequency app. In fact, looking at the order frequency on a blended basis is not how we think about the business. It's truly a cohorted business.

好的，我來回答第二個。也許先補充 Tony 提到的第一點，對吧？我們的目標是推升整體下單頻率。我們不是只想把餐廳下單頻率拉高，或只把新垂直產品的頻率拉高。事實上，以混合口徑（blended basis）來看下單頻率，並不是我們看待業務的方式。這本質上是一個以分群（cohort）為核心的業務。

When I look at the cohorts, even the age cohorts, they're engaging better with us, their order frequency is going up, partly because the product has gotten better, you have more categories, delivery times have gotten better. The entire base, the order frequency continues to go up. The newer cohorts are actually joining a better order frequency than many of the older cohorts.

當我看各個 cohort，甚至按年齡分群，他們與我們的互動更好、下單頻率在上升，部分原因是產品變得更好、品類更多、配送時間也改善了。整個用戶基礎的下單頻率持續上升。較新的 cohort 實際上加入時的下單頻率就高於許多較舊的 cohort。

And your second point on selection investments, I mean, look, I mean, our goal is to continue to drive selection higher. It's a core part of our strategy. We are adding selection in restaurants. We are definitely adding more selection on the grocery side as well as international. The way we think about it is as long as we are driving incremental GOV, as long as the conversion is continuing to increase, we're going to continue to drive selection higher. And you're seeing that strength being reflected in not just the demand, but the underlying cohorts of the business as well.

至於你第二點關於選品投資，我是這樣看：我們的目標是持續提高選品，這是我們策略的核心部分。我們正在增加餐廳端的選品。我們也確實在雜貨端以及國際市場增加更多選品。我們的思考方式是：只要我們能帶來增量 GOV（總訂單價值），只要轉換率持續提升，我們就會持續提高選品。而你也看到這種強勁反映在不只是需求端，還包括業務底層的各個 cohort。

Brad Erickson, RBC Capital Markets.

Brad Erickson，RBC Capital Markets。

I just have two here. One, on the incremental flow-through of EBITDA, so relative to GOV, it looks like it ticked up a bit quarter-over-quarter maybe a couple of hundred basis points. Can you call out just any drivers of the difference there, if you can? And then second, kind of bigger picture, Ravi just talked about the improving unit economics on the gross margin side across all parts of the business. So it kind of seems like that should roughly rhyme with EBITDA expansion over time. What are any other sort of considerations as to why that would not be the case, if you could?

我這裡有兩個問題。第一個是關於 EBITDA 相對於 GOV 的增量流轉率（incremental flow-through）；看起來它在季度環比上升了一點，可能是幾百個基點。如果可以的話，你能指出造成差異的任何驅動因素嗎？第二個是比較宏觀的：Ravi 剛剛談到整個業務各部分在毛利端的單位經濟正在改善。所以看起來這應該大致會隨時間推動 EBITDA 擴張。如果可以的話，有哪些其他考量會導致情況不一定如此？

Yes, Brad. Let me take the first one, and then I'll get into the second one. On the EBITDA side that we saw in Q2, I mean, there's two factors, right? One, you saw us continue to drive higher growth. GOV came in better than expectations. The overall business is gross profit positive. You're seeing that flow through to the bottom line.

好的，Brad。我先回答第一個，然後再談第二個。關於我們在第二季看到的 EBITDA 表現，我的意思是，有兩個因素，對吧？第一，你看到我們持續推動更高的成長。GOV 表現優於預期。整體業務的毛利為正。你也看到這些因素流轉到最終損益（bottom line）。

Two, you also have improvements in unit economics gross profit across most major lines of business, you're seeing that impact the overall business as well. From a philosophy perspective, Brad, I mean, I think I want to be clear, right? Like our goal is to grow as fast as we can by being inside of the range from an EBITDA perspective. I would expect that to be the case going forward in Q3 as well. But longer term, let me break the business apart, right?

第二，你也看到在大多數主要業務線上，單位經濟的毛利有所改善，而這也同樣影響到整體業務。從理念的角度來看，Brad，我的意思是，我想把話說清楚，對吧？我們的目標是在 EBITDA 的角度維持在某個區間內，並在此範圍內盡可能快地成長。我預期在接下來的 Q3 也會是如此。但從更長期來看，讓我把業務拆開來說，對吧？

On the restaurant side, we've done a great job of improving the contribution margin in H1 despite absorbing some of the regulatory costs. There's still a lot of opportunity for us to continue to drive margin higher there. It's not going to be at the same clip as we've done over the last couple of years. New verticals as well as international are still early. We're seeing good growth.

在餐廳業務方面，儘管我們吸收了一些法規成本，我們在上半年（H1）仍然把貢獻毛利率提升得很好。我們在那裡仍有很大的空間可以持續把毛利率推得更高。但提升的速度不會像過去幾年那樣快。新垂直業務以及國際市場也都還在早期階段。我們看到不錯的成長。

We're seeing good opportunities to continue to invest there. But these businesses are not truly optimized for efficiency. As we continue to drive efficiency higher across the P&L, I would expect margins to continue to improve.

我們也看到在那裡持續投資的良好機會。但這些業務在效率上還沒有真正最佳化。隨著我們持續在整個損益表（P&L）提升效率，我預期毛利率會持續改善。

More importantly for us, the formula has always been invested behind retention order frequency as well as continued improvement in gross profit. We have seen that in the business. If we find good areas to continue to drive investment, we're going to do that. Our goal is to drive GOV growth while being disciplined from an overall investment perspective.

對我們而言更重要的是，我們的公式一直都是：在留存、下單頻率，以及毛利的持續改善上加大投資。我們已經在業務中看到這些成果。如果我們找到好的領域可以繼續推動投資，我們就會這麼做。我們的目標是在整體投資紀律之下，推動 GOV 成長。

Bernie McTernan, Needham.

Bernie McTernan，Needham。

Great. Just wanted to stick on international. Tony, you mentioned the shareholder Lateral international ambitions remain well above what you'd be able to achieve so far. So just wanted to see, does that mean more countries, different categories or different products coming to your current? And Basically, do you have the right asset mix currently to achieve those ambitions?

很好。我想繼續追問國際業務。Tony，你提到股東對於 Lateral 的國際企圖心仍然遠高於你們目前為止能達成的程度。所以我想確認一下，這是否意味著會進入更多國家、不同類別，或是把不同產品帶到你們目前的市場？基本上，你們目前的資產組合是否足以實現那些企圖心？

Yes. Bernie, I mean I guess to add to some of the comments I made previously, we have a good foundation to build from in all of our markets. I mean that's kind of how we start. And if you don't have that, I think it's difficult to kind of solve every local commerce problem. For us, that obviously starts with the restaurants business, which whether it's internationally or here in the US, we have leading retention and frequency, which is a great place to build upon. And we've added quite a lot of categories into all of our markets actually, and those are growing really, really nicely.

是的。Bernie，我想補充我先前的一些評論：我們在所有市場都有一個很好的基礎可以往上建構。我們大概就是從這裡開始的。如果沒有這個基礎，我認為要解決每一個在地商務問題會很困難。對我們來說，這顯然從餐廳業務開始；不論是在國際市場或在美國，我們在留存與頻率上都處於領先地位，這是很好的起點。而且我們其實已經在所有市場加入了相當多的品類，而這些品類的成長都非常、非常好。

But when I look outside of the US, I would say that the vast majority, virtually every country outside the US. for us is still behind what we think the penetration level ought to be, if we actually brought all of the products that we have in market here in the US overseas. We're not there yet, right, where we have a great house in which that the structure is very, very good.

但當我看美國以外的市場時，我會說絕大多數、幾乎每一個美國以外的國家，對我們而言仍低於我們認為應有的滲透水準；如果我們把在美國市場擁有的所有產品都帶到海外，其實還沒有做到那一步。我們還沒到那個階段，對吧，也就是擁有一個非常完善、結構非常好的「房子」。

We're growing many folds faster than our peers. We're doing a nice job of launching new products that we've built from the DoorDash side to all of our markets. But on the flip side, I would say that the levels there are still not where we ought to be. We've got a long way to go on getting restaurant selection where it needs to be.

我們的成長速度是同業的好幾倍。我們也很成功地把從 DoorDash 端打造的新產品推向我們所有市場並上市。但反過來說，我會說那裡的水準仍未達到我們應該達到的程度。在把餐廳選擇擴充到應有水準這件事上，我們還有很長的路要走。

We were off to a fantastic start outside of restaurants, especially given that retail, I would say, is a little less developed on a comparative basis when you look outside of the US versus, say, the retail industry within the US. And then when I look at the five businesses that we have as well as other businesses that we're incubating, I think the potential to bring this globally to be the largest local commerce platform in any country, I think that remains just a very, very large opportunity for many years of growth.

我們在餐廳以外的業務有一個非常出色的開局，尤其考量到零售在相對比較下，當你看美國以外的市場，與美國境內的零售產業相比，我會說其發展程度稍微沒那麼成熟。此外，當我看我們現有的五個業務，以及其他正在孵化的業務，我認為把這套模式全球化、在任何國家成為最大的在地商務平台的潛力，仍然是一個非常、非常巨大的機會，足以支撐多年成長。

Michael McGovern, Bank of America.

Michael McGovern，美國銀行（Bank of America）。

I want to ask again a little bit about the restaurant menu inflation. Is there any dynamic underlying the AOV number that is basically suggesting that there is some level of food inflation and maybe have some offsetting things like Drive that are making AOV not increase? And then also just quickly, I want to see if you comment on regulatory with Prop 22 being upheld in California? And are you still seeing any impact in New York City and Seattle from regulatory changes there?

我想再問一下餐廳菜單通膨的問題。AOV 這個數字背後是否有任何動態，基本上顯示存在某種程度的食品通膨，但同時又有像 Drive 之類的抵消因素，使得 AOV 沒有上升？另外也很快地想請你評論一下法規面：加州的 Prop 22 被維持有效。以及你們是否仍在紐約市與西雅圖看到當地法規變更帶來的任何影響？

Mike, I'll take the first one. Tony will take the second one on regulatory. On the first one, I mean, look, I mean, inflation has not had a big impact on our business. If you think about it, right, like when inflation first peaked about a year ago, we saw fewer items per order. But overall, we've also driven consumer fees down. So when I look at overall, even the restaurant business from an AOV perspective, it's relatively flat year-on-year. So we're not seeing any impact on that. And pretty pleased with the progress we've made on overall affordability, which is continue to drive the growth that you're seeing in the business.

Mike，第一個我來回答。Tony 會回答第二個關於法規的問題。第一個問題，我的意思是，你看，通膨對我們的業務並沒有造成很大的影響。如果你回想一下，當通膨在大約一年前首次達到高峰時，我們看到每筆訂單的品項數變少。但整體而言，我們也把消費者費用降低了。所以當我看整體情況時，即使是餐廳業務在 AOV 的角度，也是年對年相對持平。因此我們沒有看到那方面的影響。而且我們對於在整體可負擔性上取得的進展相當滿意，這也持續推動你在業務中看到的成長。

Yes. On the second question with respect to regulatory, it's actually pretty much the same story that I think we've communicated ever since during the first earnings call, and really it reflects even what we thought 10 years ago when we started forecasting what might be true in regulatory, in particular, on the labor piece, across the world, which is I think in the majority of the world, the overwhelming majority, most jurisdictions wanted to actually support us in giving Dashers what they want, which is the flexibility of a work opportunity that's never existed before and also protections that we believe they deserve.

是的。第二個問題關於法規，其實幾乎就是我們自第一次財報電話會議以來一直在傳達的同一個故事；而且這也反映了我們在 10 年前開始預測法規可能走向時的看法，特別是在全球各地的勞動議題上：我認為在世界上大多數地方、絕大多數司法管轄區，都希望支持我們，讓 Dashers 得到他們想要的，也就是一種前所未有的工作彈性，同時也提供我們認為他們應得的保障。

I mean to your point, or the premise of the question, you're right, I mean it's good to see that lawmakers most recently have held Prop 22 here in California. We expect that. We expected that not just because we're right on the wall, but because we think it's the right thing to do. It's actually giving users, in this case, the Dasher or the driver, exactly what they're looking. I always have to remind people that over 90% of Dashers do fewer than 10 hours a week on the platform.

就你提到的觀點或問題前提而言，你說得對，看到立法者最近在加州維持 Prop 22 的效力是件好事。我們也預期會如此。我們之所以預期如此，不只是因為我們在法律上站得住腳，而是因為我們認為這是正確的做法。它其實是在讓使用者——在這個案例中是 Dasher 或司機——得到他們正在尋找的東西。我總是得提醒大家，超過 90% 的 Dashers 在平台上每週工作少於 10 小時。

The average Dasher does three to four hours a week. The overwhelming majority, over 80%, 85% of Dashers actually have full-time jobs. So they're specifically telling us we do not want to be told what hours to work or where to work them. And so we see that most governments, lawmakers around the world, certainly here in the US as well, actually want to do right by the Dasher and actually support us in what we want to do for workers.

平均每位 Dasher 每週工作 3 到 4 小時。絕大多數，超過 80%、85% 的 Dashers 其實都有全職工作。所以他們明確告訴我們，他們不希望被告知要在什麼時間工作，或要在哪裡工作。因此我們看到世界各地的大多數政府與立法者，當然也包括美國在內，確實希望為 Dasher 做對的事，並支持我們為勞工所想做的事情。

I also hope whether it's this election cycle or future election cycles, whether it's here in the US or around the world that things will moderate a bit in terms of temperature and that this can be something that we, as a company, as well as other companies in the space can work productively with any government to actually achieve what Dashers want.

我也希望，無論是在這個選舉週期或未來的選舉週期，無論是在美國這裡或世界各地，整體氛圍在「溫度」上能稍微緩和一些，讓這件事能成為我們作為一家公司，以及同業其他公司，都能與任何政府以更具建設性的方式合作，真正達成 Dashers 所想要的結果。

And I don't know, Ravi, did you want to comment on New York or Seattle or any of the economic activity?

我不確定，Ravi，你想針對紐約或西雅圖，或任何經濟活動做些評論嗎？

Yes, maybe on the New York and Seattle, I talked about the fact in the last call that we did take a meaningful amount of impact on EBITDA from the regulatory costs in Q1. That did come down in Q2, just like I said it would. A lot of that is being driven by the underlying improvements we've made in product to drive efficiency higher. I do expect those costs to continue to reduce as we go through the rest of the year.

是的，或許談談紐約和西雅圖。我在上一次電話會議中提到，我們在第一季因監管成本而對 EBITDA 承受了相當顯著的影響。第二季確實下降了，就如同我所說的那樣。這在很大程度上是由我們在產品面所做的底層改善所驅動，進而提升效率。我預期隨著今年剩餘時間推進，這些成本會持續下降。

Look, I mean, our goal and philosophy has always been any market that we operate in, we want to run with sustainable unit economy, and that's going to be true for these markets as well. It's not going to be a step function change. It's going to be a gradual change. We really like what we're seeing in the business from an overall efficiency improvement perspective for those markets.

你看，我們的目標與理念一直都是：在任何我們營運的市場，我們都希望以可持續的單位經濟模型來運作，這些市場也不例外。這不會是階躍式的變化。而會是逐步、漸進的改變。就整體效率改善的角度來看，我們非常喜歡目前在這些市場的業務表現。

Ron Josey, Citi.

Ron Josey，花旗。

Great. So maybe a follow-up on what we were talking about earlier and all the improvements on efficiencies. The letter to -- the press release talked about reducing order defect rates and merchant churn, also lowering fees. And I'm just wondering this lowering fees, is this passing along the savings and you're sort of seeing the benefits of, call it, lowering fees more efficiency, lower fees, higher order rates. It's all coming together. I wanted to get your thoughts on just are you passing along these savings to consumers and then, therefore, seeing improving top line growth? I'm curious on that dynamic.

很好。那我可能就我們先前談到的內容，以及各項效率改善再追問一下。股東信——新聞稿提到降低訂單缺陷率與商家流失率，同時也降低費用。我想了解的是，這個「降低費用」是否代表你們把節省下來的成本回饋出去，然後你們也因此看到好處——比如說，費用更低、效率更高、訂單率更高，整體形成正向循環。這些似乎都在一起發生。我想聽聽你們的看法：你們是否把這些節省回饋給消費者，並因此看到營收端（top line）成長改善？我對這個動態很感興趣。

Yes. Ron, it's Tony. I mean, look, we're always trying to do one thing, right, which is to move fees in one direction. I don't think I've ever spoken to a consumer who's asked us to raise prices. And so we are always trying to lower the fees and pass them on. And there's various ways in which you can do this. We're obviously trying to be more affordable. We're trying to increase and widen the selection lead that we have. We are trying to improve the quality of our logistics system. We believe we have the best one, but it doesn't mean that it's perfect.

是的。Ron，我是 Tony。你看，我們一直都在努力做一件事，對吧？就是讓費用朝同一個方向移動。我想我從來沒遇過有消費者要求我們漲價。所以我們一直都在嘗試降低費用並把它回饋出去。而做到這件事有很多方式。我們顯然在努力讓服務更可負擔。我們也在努力擴大並拉開我們在選品上的領先優勢。我們正在改善物流系統的品質。我們相信我們擁有最好的系統，但這不代表它是完美的。

And so we have to get more accurate. We have to get faster. We have to be better about finding every product in the physical world, especially now that a lot of what we do is outside of restaurants and inventory remains a challenge for every physical retailer. And so there's a lot of work to do. We're not yet satisfied with where we are on all of the dimensions.

因此我們必須更精準。我們必須更快。我們必須更擅長在實體世界中找到每一項商品，尤其是現在我們有很大一部分業務已不只是在餐廳，而庫存仍然是每一家實體零售商都面臨的挑戰。所以還有很多工作要做。在所有這些面向上，我們對目前的狀態還不滿意。

We appreciate and tremendously respect all of the efforts that our teams have done in terms of building the best product, in terms of having category-leading retention and frequency. We're not there yet. And in the eyes of the consumer, we can still be more affordable. We can still have better selection. We can still have better quality and better support. So we're working on all of those things.

我們非常感謝並高度尊重團隊在打造最佳產品方面所付出的所有努力，也包括在維持類別領先的留存率與使用頻率方面。但我們還沒到達目標。從消費者的角度來看，我們仍然可以更可負擔。我們仍然可以有更好的選擇。我們仍然可以有更好的品質與更好的支援。所以我們正在推進所有這些事情。

And just to add to that, all the way we think about investing is our goal is to grow as fast as we can while trying to be within the discipline parameters. What you're seeing in the business is restaurant growth has been very strong. We're continuing to drive margins there higher. You're seeing very similar dynamic in both new verticals as well as international. Not just the growth, but overall improvement in profitability has been higher.

再補充一點，我們思考投資的方式是：目標是在遵守紀律性參數的前提下，盡可能快地成長。你們在業務上看到的是餐廳端的成長非常強勁。我們也持續推動那部分的利潤率提高。在新垂直領域以及國際市場，你們也看到非常類似的動態。不只是成長，整體獲利能力的改善也更高。

For us, whenever we think about a dollar of efficiency, the next step we think about is (inaudible) back in the business because you want to drive order rates higher, we want to drive scale higher. The scale ultimately drives efficiency. And that's the consistent cycle that we've been on and nothing has changed in regards to how we operate the business.

對我們而言，每當我們想到一美元的效率提升，下一步就會想到把（聽不清）再投入到業務中，因為你想要把訂單率推得更高、把規模推得更大。規模最終會帶來效率。這就是我們一直在運行的穩定循環，而我們在經營業務的方式上沒有任何改變。

Lee Horowitz, Deutsche Bank.

Lee Horowitz，德意志銀行。

In the past, you've called out sort of fixed OpEx as a percentage of GOV for '24, that's expected to be stable. I guess is that still the operating assumption that we should be thinking about for this year? And then sort of looking beyond this year, how are you thinking about sort of your ability to drive leverage on a go-forward basis as you digest sort of an immediately small step in fixed OpEx?

過去你們曾提到，2024 年固定 OpEx 佔 GOV 的比例預期會保持穩定。我想確認一下，這是否仍是我們今年應該採用的營運假設？另外，若把視角放到今年之後，當你們消化固定 OpEx 立即出現的小幅變動時，你們如何看待未來持續推動營運槓桿（leverage）的能力？

And then maybe just on the advertising business. I guess looking out to next year, you guys will have stacked up some really nice growth within your grocery business, which I assume would open up the eyes of some of your CPG ad partners. Would you expect sort of CPG ad participation in the advertising product perhaps lag some of the volume growth, as we've heard from some of your competitors in the space?

再來可能談一下廣告業務。我想展望明年，你們的雜貨業務已累積了相當不錯的成長，我猜這會讓一些 CPG（民生消費品）廣告合作夥伴更關注你們。你們是否預期 CPG 廣告在廣告產品中的參與度，可能會像我們從一些同業聽到的那樣，相較於交易量成長會有些落後？

Lee, I'll take the first one on OpEx, Tony will take the second one. Look, I mean, our goal is not just to grow strongly in '24, but our goal is to continue to drive strong growth for many years to come. For us, the key there is continue to innovate on the product side. What we're seeing in the business is continuing to invest behind the product. You're seeing improvements in retention; you're seeing improvements in order frequency.

Lee，第一題關於 OpEx 我來回答，第二題 Tony 來回答。你看，我們的目標不只是 2024 年強勁成長，我們的目標是未來很多年都能持續推動強勁成長。對我們而言，關鍵在於持續在產品端創新。你們在業務上看到的是我們持續加大對產品的投資。你們看到留存改善；也看到下單頻率提升。

I mentioned earlier, the '23 and the '24 cohorts are as strong as any of the older cohorts we've seen. Our philosophy has always been to invest behind the strength that we're seeing in the business. We are investing, we're adding resources in select areas, mostly on the engineering and the product side. And I think the benefits of that from an overall growth as well as an efficiency perspective.

我先前提到，2023 年與 2024 年的用戶分群（cohorts）表現，和我們看過的任何較早期分群一樣強勁。我們的理念一直是：在看到業務的強勢之處時，就在其背後加碼投資。我們正在投資，也在特定領域增加資源，主要是在工程與產品端。我認為這些投入的效益，會同時體現在整體成長以及效率的角度上。

And I think about OpEx, I would expect OpEx roughly to be at the same level on a percentage GOV basis for the rest of the year. I mean looking forward, our goal is to continue to scale the business and our goal is to drive leverage in OpEx just like any other part of the P&L.

至於 OpEx，我預期今年剩餘時間，OpEx 以佔 GOV 百分比來看大致會維持在相同水準。展望未來，我們的目標是持續擴大業務規模，也希望像損益表（P&L）的其他部分一樣，在 OpEx 上推動槓桿效益。

Lee, on the second question about the pacing of CPG ad growth, I mean we really like what we see, right? I mean right now, the focus again, and it will always be this is to make sure that the principle that building a great marketplace comes before building a great ad business. And if your marketplace business isn't growing in a sustainable and healthy way that's not going to degrade the consumer experience, it almost doesn't matter everything that comes after that sentence.

Lee，關於第二題 CPG 廣告成長節奏的問題，我們其實很喜歡目前看到的狀況，對吧？我的意思是，現在的重點仍然是——而且永遠都會是——確保一個原則：打造一個很棒的市集（marketplace）要先於打造一個很棒的廣告業務。如果你的市集業務沒有以可持續且健康的方式成長、且不會劣化消費者體驗，那麼在那句話之後的所有事情幾乎都不重要。

And so for us, I mean, to your point, you're right. I mean our new verticals, whether it's grocery, convenience, alcohol, other retail categories business is growing really fast. Every CPG is a customer and the question is like how fast do we get into that spend. The way I think about this is there's no rush to doing it. And actually, you can actually make a pretty big mistake if you get into it too quickly.

所以對我們來說，我的意思是，就你提到的觀點，你說得對。我的意思是，我們新的垂直品類，不論是雜貨、便利、酒類、其他零售類別，業務都在非常快速地成長。每一家 CPG 都是客戶，問題在於我們能多快切入那部分支出。我看待這件事的方式是：沒有必要急著去做。而且其實，如果太快切入，你反而可能犯下相當大的錯誤。

I mean as long as we have the biggest audience with the greatest level of activity in terms of frequency, engagement, retention and frequency, we're always going to be available to the CPG advertiser, and I think they're always going to be interested and they're always looking for the best returns.

我的意思是，只要我們擁有最大的受眾，並且在頻次、互動、留存以及使用頻率等面向具備最高的活躍度，我們就永遠會是 CPG 廣告主可投放的平台；我也認為他們永遠會感興趣，並且一直在尋找最佳的投資報酬。

And I think it tends to come from the marketplaces that aren't the biggest -- just the biggest but also the ones with the highest activity and the highest growth rates. And so that's the balance for us. I mean our CPG ad business is going really, really fast. I'm very pleased with the performance by the team. But again, in terms of pacing, analysts think of it as sequencing, which is the marketplace -- the health of the marketplace should always come before the monetization of the marketplace.

而且我認為，這往往來自那些不是最大——不只是規模最大——而且同時具備最高活躍度與最高成長率的市集。所以這就是我們要拿捏的平衡。我的意思是，我們的 CPG 廣告業務真的、真的成長非常快。我對團隊的表現非常滿意。但再一次，就節奏而言，分析師會把它視為「排序」，也就是——市集的健康狀況應該永遠優先於市集的變現。

Shweta Khajuria, Wolfe Research.

Shweta Khajuria，Wolfe Research。

Let me try two, please. One is on advertising growth. So could you talk about your current adtech stack and where you are in terms of your product and where you think there is opportunity to continue to grow and gain greater share? That is whether you're talking about attribution or your targeting capabilities or telling that we can get you incremental customers that you can't find elsewhere, whatever that is, where are you today and where is the opportunity?

我想問兩個問題，麻煩了。第一個是關於廣告成長。你能談談你們目前的廣告技術（adtech）堆疊，以及你們在產品上的進展到哪裡，還有你們認為有哪些機會可以持續成長並取得更高的市占嗎？不論你談的是歸因、定向能力，或是說「我們能幫你帶來你在其他地方找不到的增量客戶」之類的主張——你們今天在哪裡、機會又在哪裡？

And second is on competitive dynamics there. Through the quarter, there was a lot of talk about perhaps you potentially losing share. Clearly, it doesn't sound like you are. Could you talk about whether you're seeing greater competitive intensity in suburban markets in the US and what you're seeing in international markets?

第二個是關於競爭態勢。在本季期間，市場上有很多討論說你們可能正在流失市占。但顯然聽起來並不是這樣。你能談談你們是否在美國郊區市場看到更高的競爭強度，以及你們在國際市場看到的情況嗎？

Sure. I can take both of those and feel free, Ravi, to add. Thanks, Shweta. On the first question on adtech stack and just where we are, I mean it's a 3-year old business. I mean it's growing lights out fast. I think of our stand-alone business, people would be very pleased with its performance. But again, to me, it's not about rushing even though it's growing really, really fast, and we're in no disadvantage relative to anyone else, it doesn't mean that we should just step on the gas all the way.

當然。這兩個我都可以回答，Ravi 也歡迎補充。謝謝你，Shweta。先談第一個關於 adtech 堆疊以及我們目前的位置——我的意思是，這是一個只有 3 年歷史的業務。它的成長速度非常、非常快。我認為如果把它當作一個獨立業務來看，大家會對它的表現非常滿意。但對我來說，再一次，重點不在於因為它成長很快就急著衝；而且我們相對於任何人都不處於劣勢，但這不代表我們就應該把油門一踩到底。

So there's a lot more room. I mean if you look at where we started with ads, most of the stack was built for restaurants, and that probably makes sense given our history. But DoorDash is no longer just a one category, one country company. We are five business lines, 30-plus countries. And so to your point, we have to evolve and build maturity in the stack for bigger restaurants, for CPG advertisers, for advertisers across all categories not just in food, but in all of retail.

所以還有很大的空間。我的意思是，如果你看我們一開始做廣告時，大部分的堆疊都是為餐廳打造的，考量到我們的歷史，這大概也合理。但 DoorDash 已不再只是單一品類、單一國家的公司。我們有五條業務線、30 多個國家。所以如你所說，我們必須演進，並在堆疊上建立更成熟的能力，去服務更大型的餐廳、CPG 廣告主，以及跨所有品類的廣告主——不只是在食品，而是在整個零售領域。

So I think there's a very long and straightforward road map. What I like is that the -- and certainly what they've told me and also what we see in terms of their investments with us is that they're ready to go. And they're always going to be there so long as we offer the best-in-class returns for them, which we believe derive from having the leading marketplace both in terms of users as well as usage. And I think the rest will take care of itself.

所以我認為這是一條非常長、而且很清楚的路線圖。我喜歡的是——而且他們也確實這樣告訴我，同時我們也從他們對我們的投資看得出來——他們已經準備好了。只要我們能為他們提供同級最佳的報酬，他們就會一直在；而我們相信這些報酬來自於我們擁有領先的市集，不論是在用戶規模或使用程度上。我認為其餘的就會水到渠成。

So we feel good about the growth there, but there's a lot more to come. On the second question, I mean, to be candid, we haven't really seen much change in the competitive landscape. I mean there might be a lot of activity, but there's not a lot of progress, if you know what I'm saying. I mean I think it's mostly noise that we've kind of heard and I think that whether you look at new customer acquisition, you look at existing behavior, you still see that, at least in the eyes of the consumer, they seem to really prefer DoorDash.

所以我們對那邊的成長感到樂觀，但後面還有很多可以做。第二個問題，坦白說，我們並沒有真的看到競爭版圖有太大變化。我的意思是，可能有很多動作，但沒有太多實質進展，如果你明白我的意思。我認為我們聽到的多半是雜音；而且我認為不論你看新客獲取，或看既有用戶行為，你仍然會看到——至少在消費者眼中——他們似乎真的更偏好 DoorDash。

And I think what it speaks to is that you're always going to have a lot of activity. I mean we've seen -- I've been doing this for over 11 years. I've seen periods of very high promotional activity, high partnership activity, high other forms of activity. But at the end of the day, the one thing that any marketplace or any consumer product is judged on is retention and frequency. And that's something you can't cheat; you can't just gain on a onetime basis.

而我認為這反映的是：市場上永遠會有很多動作。我的意思是——我做這件事超過 11 年了。我看過促銷活動非常高、合作活動非常高、以及其他形式活動非常高的時期。但到最後，任何市集或任何消費者產品被評價的唯一標準，就是留存與使用頻率。而這件事你沒辦法作弊；你不可能只靠一次性的手段就取得優勢。

And all roads always point back to the marketplace that offers the best combination of selection, quality, price and support. So far, we are in that marketplace as long as we can continue our extension of our lead in the product. I feel really strong about our position irrespective of activity. But I think it's always been competitive. I expect it to always be competitive. But in terms of like what's actually happening, whether it's in suburban markets, urban markets, nothing has really changed.

而所有道路最終都會回到那個能提供最佳組合——選擇、品質、價格與支援——的市集。到目前為止，只要我們能持續在產品上擴大領先，我們就在那個市集裡。不論外界有多少動作，我都對我們的定位非常有信心。但我認為競爭一直都存在。我也預期它永遠都會競爭激烈。但就實際正在發生的事情而言，不管是在郊區市場、都會市場，其實都沒有真正改變。

Just to add a point on ad, right? Like, I mean, we're still very early in our journey, like Tony talked about, right? Like you're seeing the impact of ads on both revenue as well as EBITDA. But majority of the ad revenue is in the US. It's mostly focused on restaurants at this point, still early from a CPG as well as in a national perspective. They are holding our teams with a constraint on conversion as well as merchant who has as long as those continue to be best-in-class, we're going to continue to improve the overall ad business.

我再補充一點關於廣告，對吧？就像 Tony 說的，我們在這段旅程中仍然非常早期，對吧？你正在看到廣告對營收以及 EBITDA 的影響。但大部分的廣告營收仍在美國。目前仍主要聚焦在餐廳；不論是 CPG 端或全國性（national）層面都還很早期。他們對我們團隊的要求是：在轉換以及商戶端都要維持約束與標準；只要這些持續保持同級最佳，我們就會持續改善整體廣告業務。

John Colantuoni, Jefferies.

John Colantuoni，Jefferies。

You added tens of thousands of new merchants to the US marketplace. I'm curious how that additional supply compare between the restaurant delivery business and new verticals. And I know that's just one of a number of investments that you're making to help drive improvements to the consumer offering. But I'm curious if you could help frame how much more room you have to continue expanding supply over time. And second question, just curious if you can quantify the impact of New York and Seattle and the changes that you made there on GOV and EBITDA in the second quarter?

你們在美國市集新增了數以萬計的新商戶。我想了解這些新增供給在餐廳外送業務與新垂直品類之間的分布比較如何。我也知道這只是你們為了提升消費者體驗所做的多項投資之一。但我想請你們協助框架一下：隨著時間推進，你們在持續擴大供給方面還有多少空間？第二個問題是，你們能否量化紐約與西雅圖，以及你們在那裡所做的調整，對第二季 GOV 與 EBITDA 的影響？

John, it's Tony. I'll take the first one on adding selection. And maybe, Ravi, you can take the second one. On adding selection, I mean it's really everywhere, John. I mean there is no like one category we're particularly targeting. I mean we are trying to represent every city in a digital way, which means unless we have every breathing merchant that is alive in the city, we don't have great selection.

John，我是 Tony。我先回答第一個關於增加選擇（selection）。第二個也許 Ravi 你可以回答。關於增加選擇，我的意思是，真的到處都是，John。我的意思是，沒有哪一個品類是我們特別鎖定的。我的意思是，我們想用數位方式呈現每一座城市，這代表除非我們把城市裡每一家仍在營運的商戶都納入，否則我們的選擇就不夠好。

And so that's really true. I mean if you even were to drive out from any city center, our selection probably wanes as you go further out. And so I think we've got a long ways to go. And don't forget also with restaurants. There's always new restaurants coming in. One interesting fact about the restaurant industry, and this is virtually true in every country, is that the total number of restaurants every year almost always exceed the previous year.

所以這確實是真的。我的意思是，即使你從任何市中心往外開，我們的選擇可能會隨著你越往外而減少。因此我認為我們還有很長的路要走。另外也別忘了餐廳這一塊。總是會有新的餐廳加入。關於餐飲業有一個有趣的事實，而且幾乎在每個國家都成立：每年的餐廳總數幾乎總是會超過前一年。

But it's not necessarily the same set of restaurants. And that's because restaurants come and go, and so there's always a ton of work to do there. So the room to run on restaurants is almost this perennial kind of body of work. And then with retail, I mean, we're just getting started. And so I think we have a long ways to go in terms of adding selection.

但不一定是同一批餐廳。那是因為餐廳來來去去，所以那裡總是有大量工作要做。因此，餐廳業務的成長空間幾乎是一種長期、持續性的工作量。至於零售，我的意思是，我們才剛剛開始。所以我認為在增加選擇方面，我們還有很長的路要走。

John, on New York and Seattle, from an overall GOV perspective, I mean the combination of both of those markets don't make up a large portion from an overall company perspective. So the impact from GOV volume from an overall company perspective has been small. Individual markets we are seeing from elasticity, but not to impact the overall total company growth rate.

John，關於紐約和西雅圖，從整體 GOV 的角度來看，我的意思是，這兩個市場加總起來，從整體公司角度並不占很大比重。因此，從整體公司角度來看，GOV 量的影響一直很小。在個別市場我們確實看到一些彈性影響，但不足以影響公司整體的總成長率。

From an EBITDA perspective, I mean, look, Q1, I mentioned that we did take a meaningful amount of impact on EBITDA from these costs. That cost did come down in Q2. A lot of that is being driven by improvements we made on the product on the efficiency side. As we go through the rest of the year, I do expect the cost to impact from an EBITDA perspective to go down.

從 EBITDA 的角度來看，我的意思是，你看，第一季我提到，這些成本確實對 EBITDA 造成了相當程度的影響。第二季這項成本確實下降了。其中很大一部分是由我們在產品端、效率面所做的改善所帶動。隨著我們走過今年剩餘時間，我確實預期從 EBITDA 角度來看，成本帶來的影響會下降。

This was part of the reasoning I mentioned pausing at EBITDA to be higher than H1, where we're seeing impact from regulatory costs continue to reduce as well as the volume continues to grow as well as the gross profit for the various lines of business continue to grow as we go through the rest of the year.

這也是我提到暫停（pause）的部分原因：我們預期 EBITDA 會高於上半年（H1），因為我們看到法規成本的影響持續降低，同時交易量也持續成長，而且各條業務線的毛利也會在今年剩餘時間持續成長。

Mark Zgutowicz, The Benchmark Company.

Mark Zgutowicz，Benchmark Company。

Maybe switching gears a little bit, talking about price parity. Obviously an important topic, doesn't seem to get much progression though. And I'm curious if you've -- are close to any initiatives that might incentivize grocers to get there, possibly like prioritize ad placement, maybe what some of the puts and takes are there? And then maybe flipping the ad expansion discussion on its head. I'm curious where you have seen, maybe in certain verticals or environments, degradation and app engagement or order frequency as a result of increased outload.

也許稍微換個話題，談談價格同價（price parity）。顯然這是個重要議題，但似乎進展不大。我很好奇你們是否——是否接近推出任何可能激勵雜貨商達成同價的措施，例如優先廣告版位之類的，可能有哪些取捨？然後也許把廣告擴張的討論反過來看。我想知道你們在哪些垂直領域或情境中看到，因為廣告負載（outload）增加而導致 App 互動或下單頻率出現劣化？

Mark, it's Tony. I'll take both of those and to add here, Ravi. Look, on price parity, I mean you're absolutely right that it's an important point in terms of affordability, right? I mean we're always trying to make our products and services more affordable. That's true in restaurants, that's true in grocery, that's true in convenience, that's true across the board. There's no simple or silver bullet answer to your question. I mean we're constantly working to make sure that we can align the business model and the incentives such that we can offer the most accessible and affordable service.

Mark，我是 Tony。我先回答這兩個問題，Ravi 也補充一下。你看，關於價格同價，你說得完全對，這在可負擔性方面確實是個重要點，對吧？我的意思是，我們一直在努力讓我們的產品與服務更可負擔。餐廳如此、雜貨如此、便利商店如此，全面都是如此。你的問題沒有簡單或一招致勝的答案。我們一直在努力確保能夠讓商業模式與激勵機制對齊，使我們能提供最容易取得、最可負擔的服務。

Now look, all of this comes in conjunction with other things, right? It's not hold -- you can't just hold one thing static. I mean there's a lot of other things that we have to do in terms of making sure that the inventory is actually there, making sure that if you didn't get what you were hoping to get that the substitution we made is perfect or acceptable to you.

再看，這一切都必須與其他事情一起配合，對吧？你不能把某一件事固定不變。我的意思是，我們還有很多其他事情要做，例如確保庫存確實到位，確保如果你沒有拿到你原本希望拿到的商品，我們做的替代品是完美的或至少是你可以接受的。

And so there's a lot of things that have to come together for what you're talking about. Price, obviously, is one component or one input in which we are judged. But there are so many other components too. And they sometimes interplay, right. As we find efficiencies in our logistics work, that's where -- or if we can rip out inefficiencies that shouldn't be in our system, those are costs that we can use to help fund other programs.

所以你所談的這些，需要很多事情一起到位。價格當然是我們被評價的一個面向或一個投入因素。但還有很多其他面向。而且它們有時會相互影響，對吧。當我們在物流作業中找到效率——或者如果我們能把系統中不該存在的低效率剔除——那些節省下來的成本就可以用來資助其他方案。

And so there's a lot going on. There's no simple answer to your question, but it's something that will be a perennial part of what we do. On the second question, I mean it's a great question, which is that you're absolutely right that ads do have an impact, a negative impact on the consumer experience, and that's why I kind of harp on this all the time, where you have to not be confused in terms of what drives what. And in this case, it's a healthy marketplace that enables the ads business and not the other way around.

所以有很多事情在進行。你的問題沒有簡單答案，但這會是我們工作中長期、持續的一部分。至於第二個問題，我的意思是，這是個很好的問題：你完全正確，廣告確實會對消費者體驗造成影響，而且是負面影響；這也是為什麼我一直強調，你必須搞清楚到底是什麼驅動什麼。在這個案例中，是健康的市場帶動廣告業務，而不是反過來。

And so this is one thing in which I think we've been more conservative on in making sure that we protect the consumer experience. And so in terms of seeing degradation, we haven't seen much of it partly because of how we're designing the systems.

因此，這是我認為我們在其中採取較保守作法的一件事，確保我們保護消費者體驗。所以就劣化而言，我們沒有看到太多，部分原因是我們設計系統的方式。

Again, we're super proud of, I think, our ads business. I think the size of the business would be impressive as a stand-alone company. But at the same time, we have to make sure the sequencing is right where we are always making sure that we have the most engaged, the largest audience when it comes to local commerce. That will make it easy for everything else from an ads perspective.

再說一次，我們對我們的廣告業務感到非常自豪。我認為就算把它當作一家獨立公司來看，這個業務的規模也會令人印象深刻。但同時，我們必須確保先後順序是正確的：我們永遠要先確保在本地商務方面擁有最高的參與度、最大的受眾。那會讓從廣告角度來看，其他一切都更容易推進。

Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today's Q&A session and today's conference call. You may now disconnect. Thank you for your participation.

各位女士、先生，今天的問答環節以及今天的電話會議到此結束。您現在可以掛線。感謝您的參與。