ML Interview Q Series: Suppose a major food delivery platform is expanding into an unfamiliar city. How would you determine the fee structure for deliveries in this new market?

📚 Browse the full ML Interview series here.

Comprehensive Explanation

When approaching the pricing of delivery fees in a brand-new market, there are different considerations that must be analyzed. These include estimating operational costs, projecting consumer demand, researching competitor practices, and understanding willingness to pay. Since the city is new to the service, each of these elements might have unknown variables, but there are systematic ways of exploring and modeling them.

In general, delivery fees should be high enough to cover operational costs (courier compensation, logistical overhead, platform service expenses) while remaining low enough to encourage adoption, especially in a competitive landscape. From a machine learning perspective, one might use historical data from comparable markets and build predictive models that incorporate various demand factors. In practice, analysts often assess direct operational costs and test the elasticity of consumer demand through structured experiments.

One important concept in determining how users respond to prices is the price elasticity of demand, which captures how changes in the delivery fee alter user order volume. A frequently used formula to represent price elasticity of demand is shown below.

Where P represents the price (in this context, the delivery fee), Q denotes the quantity demanded (number of orders), and partial Q by partial P indicates how changes in price affect the demand. If E_{p} in absolute value is greater than 1, it implies demand is elastic, meaning users are quite sensitive to price changes. If it is less than 1, demand is inelastic, and moderate changes in price will not drastically affect order volume.

Once the elasticity is understood, setting delivery fees can be approached by balancing projected revenues (delivery fee * expected orders) with overall costs. This cost typically includes courier compensation for each order, operating expenses for the platform, and possible marketing costs. The platform must also incorporate predicted growth and user churn if fees are too high.

A possible data-driven strategy could involve A/B testing different fee levels in sample areas of the new city. By collecting data on how consumers respond to slight increments or decrements in fees, it becomes easier to train models that can predict the response in demand. This might involve a regression-based approach where fee is the independent variable, and the order volume is the dependent variable. A simplified Python example of such a test is shown below. This snippet illustrates how one might fit a basic linear model to approximate the relationship between fee and average daily orders.

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
from sklearn.linear_model import LinearRegression

# Suppose we have a dataset with columns:
# 'fee_level' (the tested delivery fee) and
# 'avg_daily_orders' (the average orders at that fee level)

# Example data (fee in dollars, orders in thousands)
data = {
    'fee_level': [2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0],
    'avg_daily_orders': [3.1, 2.8, 2.2, 1.8, 1.2]
}

df = pd.DataFrame(data)

X = df[['fee_level']]
y = df['avg_daily_orders']

model = LinearRegression()
model.fit(X, y)

# Predict average daily orders for a new fee
new_fee = 3.2
predicted_orders = model.predict([[new_fee]])
print(f"For a fee of ${new_fee}, predicted daily orders (in thousands) = {predicted_orders[0]:.2f}")

In real-world practice, more sophisticated approaches can be used. For instance, multi-variable regression or neural networks might incorporate extra attributes such as time of day, neighborhood characteristics, local competitor fees, and the presence of promotional codes. One can also apply more advanced algorithms for dynamic pricing, where the fee is adjusted in real time based on current supply of couriers, expected surge in demand, or special events.

Another consideration is segmenting different zones within the city by factors like distance, traffic conditions, and restaurant density. This segmentation can lead to a tiered fee system where base fees are balanced with distance or time-based surcharges. Additionally, user segmentation might be used to analyze different willingness to pay among various user segments. A highly price-sensitive user segment might get promotional discounts to attract and retain them, while premium users who value convenience could accept higher fees.

To ensure a successful launch, one must also factor in marketing. Sometimes, initial low or subsidized fees are set to encourage trial and build a user base. Over time, incremental increases are introduced, supported by user loyalty programs or bundled subscriptions (like membership options that waive fees under certain conditions). The final fee structure emerges from thorough data analysis, cost modeling, competitor assessments, and user feedback loops.

How might you apply surge or dynamic pricing during peak times?

Dynamic pricing is a practice of raising or lowering fees in real time based on fluctuations in supply and demand. If many orders are placed simultaneously, the platform can increase fees to match limited courier availability, encouraging more couriers to come online and handle deliveries. Conversely, if courier supply is abundant relative to demand, fees might remain stable or even lower slightly to attract additional orders.

The critical point is ensuring that the algorithm controlling surge pricing has robust real-time data, such as how many orders are being requested, how many couriers are available, historical wait times at similar demand levels, and current traffic patterns. Machine learning models that incorporate short-term forecasting of rider availability and user demand often prove useful here.

How do you test and refine the chosen fee structure?

Testing involves iterating on small but statistically significant groups within the new city. Some neighborhoods might receive a lower initial delivery fee, while others might test a higher fee, all while monitoring the churn rate, order volume, and user satisfaction. Gathering these metrics, you can retrain or adjust the pricing models periodically, removing biases or anomalies. In addition, real-time feedback from couriers and restaurants should be included, as a too-low fee might degrade service quality if couriers are disincentivized from accepting orders.

A robust approach is a multi-armed bandit framework where different pricing strategies are tested in parallel and updated according to performance metrics. Such a method helps converge to an optimal fee more quickly than naive sequential A/B tests.

How do you account for variability in operational costs?

Operational costs, including base pay for couriers, fuel reimbursement, and platform overhead, can differ based on location. Seasonal fluctuations might also drive changes in fuel prices or courier supply (for instance, certain areas might have fewer couriers in extreme weather conditions). Continuous monitoring of these cost factors allows dynamic models to recalculate a profitable fee band on an ongoing basis. If the model detects a steady rise in costs, it can gradually increase delivery fees or introduce a minor service fee to maintain profitability.

Tracking these operational variables is achieved through real-time analytics pipelines collecting data such as average travel time, average courier pay, and order-handling overhead. Machine learning or time series forecasting helps predict how these metrics will shift, ensuring fee levels keep pace with cost changes while still appealing to customers.

What if new competitors enter the market?

When fresh entrants come in, the user base might become more price-sensitive, and lowering fees could help maintain market share. At the same time, indefinite undercutting on price is not sustainable if it undermines profitability. A prudent strategy is a combination of loyalty incentives, new customer promotions, and cost-splitting with partner restaurants or stores to keep fees stable yet competitive. Tracking competitor moves requires setting up external data-collection strategies, which can feed into dynamic pricing models. By comparing competitor fee data and order volume correlations, the platform can refine its own fee structure to remain competitive but not erode margins indefinitely.

How can you handle user backlash if fees become too high?

If customers feel delivery fees are excessive, orders may drop sharply, and negative reviews or social media complaints could escalate. One way to handle this is by staggering fee increases and thoroughly communicating why they are needed. For instance, the platform might note that an extra fee corresponds to fair wages for couriers or better reliability. Another tactic is to provide transparent breakdowns so users see how their fees cover courier tips or expand coverage areas.

In terms of machine learning, detecting early signs of user dissatisfaction can be aided by sentiment analysis on support tickets or social media. If negative sentiments regarding fees spike, proactive adjustments, targeted discounts, or loyalty program expansions can mitigate churn.

How do you ensure fairness for drivers, restaurants, and users?

Fairness is multifaceted. Drivers expect to earn a certain wage, restaurants aim for consistent order volumes, and users want affordable delivery fees. One approach is building a model that balances these perspectives by applying constraints or multi-objective optimization. A portion of the fee might be allocated directly to driver payments, ensuring minimum guaranteed pay per delivery. Another portion could be allocated to covering the platform’s overhead and marketing costs. Furthermore, dynamic pricing can be capped or reduced during low demand periods to keep fees at a fair level for users, preventing excessive fluctuations.

Engaging stakeholders in planning fosters a transparent environment, which helps minimize conflicts. Mechanisms that reward repeated use or compensate drivers for peak-time reliability are often built into the pricing logic, ensuring every party sees tangible benefits from well-structured fees.

Could you explain how you might implement a machine learning model to predict the optimal fee?

An implementation might follow these steps. Historical data from comparable cities, including price points, order volumes, courier availability, average incomes, and competitor fees, is collected. A predictive model (like a regression or gradient-boosted trees) learns how the number of orders changes with different price levels while controlling for other socioeconomic and competitive variables. This model can be periodically updated with real data from the new city to refine predictions.

In production, you might combine the demand prediction model with a profit model that factors in operating costs. By scanning possible price levels, you can pick the one maximizing predicted profit while maintaining user satisfaction and aligning with strategic goals for market penetration. Over time, you track how actual numbers compare to predictions, adjusting the model or the system’s parameters accordingly.

This ensures your fee structure is not static but evolves in a data-driven fashion, responding to new competition, changing user preferences, cost fluctuations, and city-wide events.

How do you handle edge cases or unexpected surges?

Edge cases include extreme weather causing courier shortages, special local events driving massive short-term demand, or abrupt changes in fuel costs. A well-designed dynamic pricing model uses real-time data streams on courier availability and demand spikes, adjusting the fee on the fly or temporarily imposing a surge fee with built-in upper limits to prevent user outrage. Once the anomalous conditions subside, the fee levels revert to a stable baseline.

Real-time anomaly detection can help detect unusual patterns. If the system sees an unanticipated spike in orders beyond typical bounds for that time and location, it could temporarily apply a surge multiplier to ensure coverage, keep courier earnings fair, and maintain decent delivery times.

Such contingencies must be planned and continuously tested so the system remains robust. Failing to plan for these edge cases risks severely degraded user experience or driver dissatisfaction if the fee is too low for them to accept orders in difficult conditions.

Follow-up question: How would you adapt this strategy if new legislation or city regulations capped delivery fees?

New regulations might place a ceiling on the portion of fees that platforms can charge customers or restaurants. If the fee is capped, the platform would have to explore other revenue channels, such as additional service charges or increased subscription benefits. The overall approach is still data-driven, but the optimization must obey the legislative constraints. One might also negotiate with restaurants or city officials to refine the fee structure, or invest more in cost-reduction strategies (like optimizing courier routing) to keep the business sustainable under the cap.

In this situation, advanced predictive models still help in forecasting demand, but the cost structure must operate within fixed price limits. Tools like constrained optimization or integer programming might come into play here, ensuring that solutions meet legal requirements while maximizing coverage, availability, and profitability.

This integrated view—covering dynamic modeling, rigorous testing, cost analyses, demand elasticity, and stakeholder considerations—helps guide how to price delivery services effectively in a new city. By anticipating challenges and continuously refining the fee structure, the delivery platform can launch successfully, satisfy customers, keep drivers paid fairly, and remain competitive in a rapidly evolving environment.

Below are additional follow-up questions

How would you measure the success of your chosen pricing strategy in the first few months?

One way to gauge success early on is to track several key performance indicators simultaneously. These include average order volume, revenue per order, customer satisfaction ratings, and driver retention. For a more holistic view, you might measure:

• Retention Rate and Cohort Analysis Compare repeat purchase rates among users exposed to different fee levels. If one fee structure drives higher retention without hurting margins, that suggests a more sustainable model. Potential Pitfall: Interpreting short-term spikes in usage as permanent growth. For example, a temporary promotional discount might boost sign-ups but fail to generate long-term retention if fees later increase sharply.

• Customer Lifetime Value (CLV) Calculate the average revenue generated by a customer over their entire relationship with the platform. A slightly higher fee might yield immediate revenue gains, but if it reduces the overall lifetime usage of the service, it could lower total profits. Potential Pitfall: Relying on incomplete data. In a new market, you might not have enough historical data to accurately compute long-term metrics, so it is critical to update estimates with new usage data over time.

• Operational Efficiency and Delivery Times If the fee levels allow you to pay couriers well, leading to better coverage and reduced wait times, it often translates into higher satisfaction and improved user reviews. Potential Pitfall: Focusing solely on cost without considering service quality. If underpaid couriers lead to fewer available drivers, delivery times might increase, hurting user satisfaction.

Collecting these data points, you can set thresholds or goals, such as a target Net Promoter Score (NPS) or a specific ratio of repeat orders to new orders. By constantly comparing these metrics to internal projections and costs, you’ll see if you are on track.

How do you manage situations where demand surges in specific neighborhoods while demand in other areas remains low?

Surge pricing or zone-based pricing may need to be deployed so the fee structure dynamically updates based on local supply and demand. Many platforms segment a city into zones or subregions, each with its own real-time conditions:

• Zone-Based Fee Adjustment If a particular district experiences a surge in orders and not enough couriers, a local “surge multiplier” can be applied to nudge more drivers to that area. Meanwhile, areas with stable demand remain at a regular fee. Potential Pitfall: Zones too large or too small. If a zone is defined too broadly, you might overcharge customers who are not truly experiencing the surge. If the zone is too small, the system may appear confusing, constantly changing fees for small moves in location.

• Real-Time Courier Reallocation Advanced dispatch systems can direct drivers from low-demand zones to high-demand zones preemptively, mitigating the need for extreme surge fees. Potential Pitfall: Overestimating courier availability or ignoring traffic bottlenecks. Shifting couriers might increase wait times across multiple zones if the platform fails to account for real-world travel delays.

• Communication and Transparency Users should be made aware of fluctuating fees. Providing real-time notifications or in-app explanations can reduce confusion. Potential Pitfall: Customer pushback if surge fees are poorly explained. Users may feel they are being “punished” for living in or ordering from a high-demand area, so clarity is vital.

Balancing these elements ensures localized demand spikes do not cripple service in some regions while drivers sit idle in others.

How would you integrate queueing theory or similar concepts to predict wait times and optimize delivery fees?

When orders arrive faster than couriers can fulfill them, customers face long waits. Incorporating queueing theory can help model and predict these situations. One classical model is the M/M/1 queue, where arrivals follow a Poisson process, service times are exponentially distributed, and there is a single server (or aggregated “server capacity” representing available couriers). The average waiting time in the system, W, can be expressed by the formula:

Here, lambda is the arrival rate (orders per unit time), and mu is the service rate (orders a courier can complete per unit time). When lambda is close to mu, waiting time skyrockets. By monitoring changes in arrival and service rates, you can adjust fees to discourage excessive demand or encourage more driver participation:

• Adjusting Fees to Manage Lambda (Demand) If incoming orders approach or surpass service capacity, a higher fee can modulate demand. This helps avoid a backlog of unfulfilled orders. Potential Pitfall: Overly aggressive fee hikes might alienate users and push them to competitors, so calibrating the rate carefully is key.

• Incentives to Increase Mu (Supply) Boosting pay for couriers can raise their willingness to come online during busy periods, thus increasing the system’s service rate. Potential Pitfall: Overspending on incentives or failing to track diminishing returns. Past a certain point, raising driver pay might not significantly improve coverage.

In practice, the M/M/1 model is an oversimplification for real-world logistics (multiple couriers, non-exponential service times, and varying traffic). Nonetheless, queueing-based approaches are a good starting point for conceptualizing capacity constraints and guiding dynamic pricing strategies.

What strategies can you employ to manage restaurants’ concerns that delivery fees might reduce their order volume?

Even if the platform sets competitive fees, restaurants could worry that high delivery costs drive away potential customers. Possible strategies include:

• Negotiated Rate-Sharing Agreements Offer to absorb part of the delivery fee with the restaurant for a promotional period, effectively lowering the price to the end consumer. Over time, usage data can show if increased sales volume justifies the split cost. Potential Pitfall: Unsustainable cost-sharing arrangements. If you subsidize fees for too long without seeing proportional gains in demand, it can eat into margins or create unrealistic expectations from restaurants.

• Joint Marketing Campaigns Collaborate with restaurants to fund promotions or bundle deals. Lower perceived fees for the customer might be offset by slightly higher menu prices or discount vouchers. Potential Pitfall: Confusing cost breakdown. If the user sees multiple line items (e.g., “delivery fee,” “small order fee,” “restaurant service fee,” etc.), the checkout process could become complex, reducing conversion.

• Fee Caps or Tiered Fees for Preferred Partners Provide a tiered system where restaurants that commit to certain volume thresholds or exclusive partnerships get lower delivery fees for their customers. Potential Pitfall: Alienating smaller restaurants that can’t meet those thresholds. It’s crucial to maintain an inclusive ecosystem, especially in early stages in a new market.

Transparently sharing data on how fees affect order volumes can help restaurants see the bigger picture. When they see data correlating moderately higher fees with sustained customer demand and an improved bottom line, they may be more willing to adapt.

How would you handle user complaints about perceived hidden or extra charges, such as small order fees or distance surcharges?

Maintaining clarity around all charges and ensuring the user sees the direct value each fee provides is crucial:

• Transparent Fee Breakdown In the checkout flow, show exactly how the total cost is split: base delivery fee, small order fee (if applicable), distance-related surcharge, and any taxes or service charges. Potential Pitfall: Overwhelming the user with too much detail. Too many line items might cause frustration, so it is a balance between transparency and simplicity.

• Smart Messaging and In-App Education Provide contextual pop-ups or tooltips explaining why a small order fee exists. For instance, if the user’s cart size doesn’t cover the courier’s basic cost, a small order fee prevents platform losses. Potential Pitfall: Failing to update these messages when policies change. If you change the threshold for small orders but don’t update your in-app information, confusion and complaints will spike.

• Data-Driven Optimization By analyzing transaction data, you can see which fees trigger the highest cart abandonment rates. Adjust thresholds or offer creative alternatives like bundling with nearby stores. Potential Pitfall: Over-optimizing for short-term conversions. Eliminating a small order fee might boost immediate purchases but hurt profitability and driver compensation in the long run.

This approach helps build trust, ensuring that any additional fee is understandable and tied to a genuine cost or benefit.

How do you prevent fraud or abuse of promotional discounts when experimenting with different fee levels?

When experimenting with various promotional discounts for new or existing users, there is a risk some customers might create multiple accounts to exploit sign-up promotions or manipulate referral bonuses:

• Verification and Identity Checks Implement identity verification steps such as phone-based or email-based checks that detect duplicates. For higher-value promotions, additional verification may be necessary, like linking a payment method or verifying an address. Potential Pitfall: Turning away legitimate users with overly strict checks. Balancing fraud mitigation with a smooth user experience is important so as not to deter genuine customers.

• Anomaly Detection Models Machine learning models can detect unusual activity (e.g., an abnormal number of new sign-ups from the same device, or a pattern of repeated discount usage). Potential Pitfall: False positives leading to unhappy users. Automated systems might mistakenly flag legitimate customers as fraudsters, causing negative publicity.

• Rate Limits or Gradual Promo Rollouts Limiting the speed and frequency at which discounts can be redeemed helps curb abuse. Rolling out new promo codes gradually can allow you to catch suspicious trends before they become widespread. Potential Pitfall: Slower adoption. Imposing rate limits might slow the viral spread of a promotion, meaning it takes longer to gather meaningful experimental data.

These measures work best when combined. The goal is to maintain a fair promotional environment without stifling user growth.

How would you handle external economic shocks, such as a sudden recession, that affect consumer spending power?

In challenging economic times, users become more price-sensitive and might order delivery less frequently. Adaptive strategies include:

• Adaptive Pricing Floors Maintain enough margin to cover baseline operational costs, but stay competitive by reducing certain surcharges or offering loyalty discounts to keep volume high. Potential Pitfall: Persistently operating below cost in hopes of “weathering the storm.” If the economy does not recover quickly, continuous subsidizing can lead to unsustainable losses.

• Tiered Subscription Models Offer packages where frequent users can pay a monthly fee for reduced or waived delivery charges. This approach can stabilize revenue when individual transaction volume dips. Potential Pitfall: Low adoption if users feel uncertain about their future earnings. During a recession, even modest subscriptions might feel risky to some users.

• Data-Driven Demand Forecasting Refine your short-term prediction models with macroeconomic indicators. For instance, you can factor in unemployment rates or consumer confidence indexes to predict changes in order frequency. Potential Pitfall: Overreliance on historical patterns. A major recession may produce unprecedented shifts in consumer behavior that deviate substantially from your historical data.

Remaining agile with pricing and offering targeted promotions to customers most impacted by economic downturns can help maintain brand loyalty, even in trying conditions.

How do you iterate on this entire strategy once the market is no longer “new” and transitions into a more mature phase?

After the initial phase, you typically have a stable user base, more data, and new competitors. Evolving the strategy involves:

• Regular Pricing Audits Evaluate whether your cost structure and fee levels still reflect actual operational expenses and consumer willingness to pay. Over time, the demand elasticity you observed initially may shift as customer habits become ingrained or as competitors adjust their fees. Potential Pitfall: Complacency leading to stagnant models. Even if your initial strategy was successful, ignoring signs of changing market conditions can result in declining market share.

• Advanced Personalization With richer user data, you might offer personalized fee structures based on loyalty tiers or ordering frequency. Some advanced algorithms can dynamically set fees that target individual usage patterns. Potential Pitfall: Perceptions of unfair pricing. If customers discover they are paying more than others for the same service, negative backlash can follow quickly.

• Further Integration of Local Partnerships Forming deeper partnerships with local restaurants, grocery chains, or local courier unions might unlock new cost-sharing models or unique subscription offerings. Potential Pitfall: Complex contract negotiations. More parties involved means it can be harder to reach agreements that serve every stakeholder’s interests.

Monitoring performance with more robust metrics and continuing experimentation helps ensure your once-new market remains profitable and competitive over the long term.