One restaurant, 15 names: the ghost kitchens confusing Aussie diners
The restaurant Burgur, based in Melbourne's Berwick, appears to be one of the more extreme cases of the 'ghost kitchen' phenomenon, where businesses operate primarily through delivery apps rather than public shopfronts.
Listings on Uber Eats show the address — 44 High St — is linked to at least 15 restaurants, offering everything from Mexican and burgers to chicken and ice cream.
On Google Maps, the location appears to be home to a single restaurant called Burgur.
But on delivery apps, it hosts a long list of names: Mad Mexican, MAD TACO, BurgerFI, IN OUT BUNS, GOLD BUNS, Milky Bun, CHICKEN, WING WING, MELT SHOP, Milky Scoop, Ronys, Wrap'd, Mr. Chips Man and American Fri.
Many of the menus are nearly identical, often using the same photos but with different prices for the same items. At least 15 food brands share the same address on Uber Eats in Berwick, Victoria. Credit: Uber Eats The food items are similar, but prices and delivery fees vary. Credit: Uber Eats
Some locals hoping to try something new have been frustrated, and the phenomenon has sparked heated discussion online more generally about ghost kitchens.
'Ghost kitchens have gone too far,' one Reddit user posted.
'Ghost kitchens have existed for a long time on all food delivery platforms,' a comment replied.
Ghost kitchens have grown in number over the past few years, especially during the COVID-19 lockdowns.
One person shared that they were caught out three times at another restaurant, before realising they'd been ordering from the same place each time.
'Ordered one of the worst burgers of my life. 'Won't buy from them again' I thought. Ordered from what I thought was a different burger joint a week or so later. Then watched as the driver collects from the same damn place (fool me once),' they said.
'Later had some terrible, tasteless, watery Indian food. Next time I ordered from what I thought was a different joint. Watched in dismay as the driver picks up at the same place, which was as terrible as the first (fool me twice).
'Once again ordered from what I thought was yet a different Indian place. The cry of pain when I see the driver stopping out the front of the first one (fool me thrice).'
They said they've since stopped using Uber Eats altogether.
Another person joked: 'We should all buy frozen meals from ALDI and open ghost kitchens.'
Some Reddit users reported submitting complaints about the practice, but said they saw no changes. Uber Eats said the 14 virtual brands are legitimate and compliant businesses. Credit: Getty Images
Uber Eats told 7NEWS.com.au the 14 virtual brands operating from 44 High St are legitimate and compliant businesses.
'A virtual restaurant allows chefs and business owners to utilise the space they already have in their kitchens, to try cooking new cuisines and reach new customers with online-only brands,' a spokesperson said.
'Uber Eats gives restaurants across Australia the flexibility to choose how they partner with us, while continuing to meet our standard requirements and community guidelines.'
University of Sydney corporate law and insolvency professor Jason Harris said the practice does not breach Australian Consumer Law.
'A company can operate multiple businesses with multiple brands,' he told 7NEWS.com.au.
'All the different toothpaste brands are owned by the same company.'
7NEWS.com.au has reached out to Burgur for comment.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
2 hours ago
- The Age
Allan's working-from-home push is an affront and a furphy
Premier Jacinta Allan can paint her latest foray into workplace relations any colour she chooses, but there is an overarching image that emerges. That is, this is at best good politics, not good policy. At last weekend's Victorian Labor state conference, Allan unveiled the government's new policy of seeking to enshrine in law a right for workers in the public or the private sector to work from home two days a week where reasonable. It would be the first such policy by a state. Self-evidently, that right could not extend to jobs that need to be performed on-site, such as emergency services. Consultation will be led by the Department of Premier and Cabinet. In spruiking the policy, Allan said it was good for families and the economy. 'If you can do your job from home, we'll make it your right – because we're on your side,' she said. There is no doubt there has been a revolution in working arrangements wrought by COVID-19. The workplace is a much more flexible environment than pre-pandemic, a development that has created opportunities for many people, especially those with caring responsibilities and disabilities. Loading The Australian Bureau of Statistics says about a third of the nation's employees work from home for part of the week. The premier could be seen to be merely acknowledging this trend and seeking to cement it into law. She could also be seen to be grasping at a distraction that will avert critical eyes from the performance of her government amid some controversial cuts as its strained budget position bites. If the plan puts pressure on the Liberals to declare their position with an election due next year, that could only be seen as a bonus. Federal Labor at this year's election was the beneficiary of Peter Dutton's ill-thought-out plan to force public servants back to the office. As The Age reports today, Labor considered new federal laws in this space – as it is entitled to do. The intervention of the Victorian government into the relationship between employer and employee seems more like Dutton's intervention but in the opposite direction. Businesses are not the same, and to bring into law a right to work from home two days a week without regard to the particular circumstances of a business is wrong. As an aside, how was two days arrived at? Allan hasn't said. How the policy would become a reality is not clear either. Victoria referred its powers to regulate private sector workplaces to the federal jurisdiction decades ago. The Age has reported warnings, as has The Australian Financial Review, from legal experts that the proposal would almost certainly fall foul of Section 109 of the Constitution, that is, if state and federal law cover the same area, federal law prevails. If the Victorian parliament enacts work-from-home legislation, this would be ripe for a High Court challenge.
Sydney Morning Herald
7 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Australia is trying to build 1.2 million homes, but they're getting stuck
Some 30,000 potential homes have been approved but have not yet started construction, analysis has found, as construction times blow out and building costs remain high. There were a further 219,000 homes under construction in the March quarter, Cotality analysis of ABS figures shows, similar to the levels during the building boom of the 2010s – except that, this time, homes are taking longer to finish. Cotality head of research Eliza Owen warned that homes were being approved and then getting stuck. Building costs surged after the COVID-19 lockdowns and have not returned to pre-pandemic levels, while the average number of quarters taken to complete a new unit has risen from about six a decade ago to more than nine. Owen highlighted the federal government's target of delivering 1.2 million new homes over five years. The closest Australia came to delivering this many homes in a five-year period was in the five years to December 2019, when just over a million homes were completed. Owen noted that this was in a different context: the cash rate then was lower, units made up a larger share of approvals and investors – including foreign investors – were a larger share of demand. She added that this did not necessarily lead to good housing outcomes. Despite the supply, home ownership rates fell from 67.2 per cent in June 2014 to 66.2 per cent in June 2020. Some of these were new apartments in which defects were so rife that some new dwellings could not be lived in.
The Age
7 hours ago
- The Age
Australia is trying to build 1.2 million homes, but they're getting stuck
Some 30,000 potential homes have been approved but have not yet started construction, analysis has found, as construction times blow out and building costs remain high. There were a further 219,000 homes under construction in the March quarter, Cotality analysis of ABS figures shows, similar to the levels during the building boom of the 2010s – except that, this time, homes are taking longer to finish. Cotality head of research Eliza Owen warned that homes were being approved and then getting stuck. Building costs surged after the COVID-19 lockdowns and have not returned to pre-pandemic levels, while the average number of quarters taken to complete a new unit has risen from about six a decade ago to more than nine. Owen highlighted the federal government's target of delivering 1.2 million new homes over five years. The closest Australia came to delivering this many homes in a five-year period was in the five years to December 2019, when just over a million homes were completed. Owen noted that this was in a different context: the cash rate then was lower, units made up a larger share of approvals and investors – including foreign investors – were a larger share of demand. She added that this did not necessarily lead to good housing outcomes. Despite the supply, home ownership rates fell from 67.2 per cent in June 2014 to 66.2 per cent in June 2020. Some of these were new apartments in which defects were so rife that some new dwellings could not be lived in.
