Connect with us

Published

on

In this article

Anthony Wood of Roku and Reed Hastings of Netflix
CNBC; Ernesto S. Ruscio | Getty Images

When Netflix founder Reed Hastings spun off the streaming video box he was developing to a little-known start-up called Roku in 2008, he thought it would probably fail.

“There was Xbox and PlayStation and Samsung and Apple TV,” Hastings said in an interview. “Frankly, we didn’t think Roku had much of a chance.”

After first meeting at a conference, Roku CEO and founder Anthony Wood pestered Hastings for months to let his company make a streaming video box for Netflix. Hastings at the time wanted to build the box in-house at Netflix. So the two struck a deal — Wood took a part-time job at Netflix to make the device while remaining CEO of Roku, which had about 15 employees.

That experiment lasted nine months. Hastings wanted Netflix to be available on all sorts of streaming devices, such as Microsoft’s Xbox, Sony‘s PlayStation, and Apple TV. Those companies felt Netflix’s hardware posed a threat to their own businesses. Moreover, people surveyed in focus groups said they wanted a box that could stream more than just Netflix.

So Hastings decided to spin out the division to Roku. Wood received an unfinished device, patents, 20 to 30 Netflix employees (more than doubling the size of Roku) and some cash. In return, Netflix received about 15% of Roku’s equity.

Netflix would later sell its Roku shares to venture capital firm Menlo Ventures to avoid the perception of being conflicted by favoring one streaming distribution manufacturer over another. When Netflix sold its stock in 2009, it claimed a $1.7 million gain on a $6 million investment.

If Netflix had held, its stake would be worth nearly $7 billion today. Roku has been one of the pandemic’s big winners. Shares have have gained more than 480% from March 17, 2020, as the media world shifted to focus on streaming video. Today, Roku’s market capitalization is more than $45 billion.

Wood, who owned more than 28% of Roku at its initial public offering but now owns less than 15% of shares outstanding after various sales through the years, has an estimated net worth of about $7 billion.

“Obviously in hindsight, we missed a fortune,” said Hastings.

To call Roku the offspring of Netflix is literally and figuratively true. While it’s not a carbon copy of its parent, Roku took more than just hardware from Netflix — it took a strand of its corporate DNA.

Wood downplays the comparison. “My relationship to Netflix was obviously very important to Roku,” he said in an interview. “But I only worked there nine months.”

But Roku and Netflix have become market-leading companies worth tens of billions of dollars by out-competing media and technology giants. Both companies could have been acquired in their early days for a fraction of what they’re worth today. Both pivoted their businesses to adapt for streaming video. And both have unusual corporate cultures that can alienate employees who say they live in fear of being fired.

In fact, until recently, Roku’s headquarters were literally next door to Netflix in Los Gatos, California.

Just as Netflix defied the odds to dominate entertainment, Roku overcame widespread industry confusion and doubt to become the U.S. market leader in streaming video distribution. As the media industry has reorganized en masse for a direct-to-consumer world, Roku has become an indispensable intermediary that can guarantee distribution to more than 50 million households.

For its next act, Roku could misdirect the media and technology world again to build its content business — the same kind of move that propelled Netflix to world-beating success.

Pivot, pivot, pivot

Just as Netflix began as a DVD rental company, Roku’s first attempts at business bear little relationship to how it makes money today.

Wood, who graduated from Texas A&M with a degree in electrical engineering, founded Roku in 2002 as a maker of high definition video players. Wood initially funded Roku himself with money he had earned from selling other businesses, including DVR maker ReplayTV, which digital audio device maker SonicBlue bought for $120 million. (SonicBlue has since gone out of business.)

Wood then added streaming audio devices to compete against Apple iPods. Unfortunately, Spotify didn’t exist yet.

“I was a little early on that one,” Wood acknowledged.

Next, he added digital signs — common in sporting event concession areas and even used by CNBC for background monitors. Wood eventually spun that unit out to a separate company called BrightSign.

Then came the Netflix deal.

Wood saw a future where Roku would be a centralized distribution platform for digital television. Although Roku seemed like a hardware company, Wood actually envisioned Roku as a services company, making its revenue from channel store fees and a share of advertising from every TV app carried by the platform.

Roku XD/S
Mattnad | Wikipedia

Netflix was Roku’s first customer, followed by Amazon Video on Demand and MLB TV. More recently, Roku added HBO Max, NBCUniversal’s Peacock, Disney+ and many other subscription streaming services — including Roku’s own The Roku Channel. Roku has become the operating system for more than 15 brands of smart TVs, baking its software directly in consumer’s TV sets — just as Wood predicted more than a decade ago.

The pandemic has accelerated Roku’s foothold in American households. With more than 53 million active accounts, Roku has consistently been the leader among all streaming platforms in the U.S., although Amazon is catching up, based on data from Parks Associates. Roku has taken a 33% to 39% market share every year since 2015. In the first quarter of 2021, Amazon Fire TV tied Roku for No. 1 at 36%. Apple TV was third with 12%, followed by Google Chromecast at 8%.

Wood credits some of Roku’s success to Clayton Christensen’s famous business concept of “The Innovator’s Dilemma” — where incumbent companies couldn’t focus on streaming video because they were too busy protecting their older, linear cable TV models. Christensen’s book just happens to be one of Hastings’ favorites, too.

Wood also noted that Roku’s relatively unchanging user interface and simple remote control have appealed to customers because users want simplicity.

“Many companies just don’t really understand the attitude people have when they’re watching TV,” said Wood. “People want to sit there, drink their beer, and watch TV.”

As Wood envisioned, Roku now makes the majority of its money from services — much of which comes from taking a share of every media company’s total streaming advertising time and selling it. When Roku agreed to distribute Peacock, NBCUniversal‘s streaming service, it took about 10% of what would have been Peacock’s ad inventory to sell for itself, according to people familiar with the matter who spoke on condition of anonymity because details of the deal are private.

Using its viewership data, Roku is developing its own advertising technology to better target commercials than what’s possible on linear television. In March, Roku acquired Nielsen’s advanced video advertising business to begin dynamically inserting linear TV advertising, which increases the number of ads that can be showed on a given show or movie and can be used to better target ads to users.

More recently, Roku has invented two content arms of its own. The Roku Channel licenses content from other media companies and has acquired some original programming, including the content that used to be Quibi, the short-lived streaming service founded by Jeffrey Katzenberg and Meg Whitman. Roku sells advertisements against the programming. Roku is also launching an advertising brand studio to help companies make their own original content.

Last year, Roku made about $510 million from its hardware and branded smart TVs. It made $1.3 billion from platform services.

“We focused on the idea that all TV was going to be streaming,” Wood said. “It was obvious. I’m not sure why there were skeptics.”

A world of skepticism

For years, Wood struggled to find outside financing. Venture capitalists consistently told Roku it was a hardware maker, and hardware wasn’t a good business. Some potential early investors were taken aback by Roku’s modest headquarters in Saratoga Office Center, in Saratoga, California — an uncommon starting spot for Silicon Valley darlings.

The only person who seemed to believe was Menlo Ventures partner Shawn Carolan.

“Silicon Valley does not like to invest in hardware companies,” Carolan told CNBC. That’s because hardware can often be easily replicated and frequently costs nearly as much to manufacture and market as it does to sell. Roku’s hardware, even today, is a zero-profit margin business, according to a person familiar with the matter.

But Carolan saw a clear go-forward strategy based around services.

“I remember this PowerPoint deck I presented around 2009, 2010 where I kind of laid it all out,” Carolan said in an interview. “We called it our popcorn strategy, because movie theaters don’t make money off movies, they make money off the popcorn. How are we going to continue to incrementally add services revenue?”

Wood financed Roku’s Series A round himself. Netflix pitched in $6 million for the Series B as part of the 2008 box transaction. Roku’s Series C, split in two parts in 2008 and 2009, featured one venture capital firm — Menlo Ventures. Carolan and his partners would reinvest again in 2011’s Series D, 2012’s Series E and finally 2015’s Series H — the last round needed before Roku’s IPO.

By 2017, including the Netflix shares it bought, Menlo owned about 35% of all Roku shares. Carolan stayed on Roku’s board from 2008 to 2018.

Shawn Carolan, Menlo Ventures partner
Courtesy: Menlo Ventures

As the company gained scale, it proved it could make money from its channel store, through revenue shares with media companies, and advertising. Wood expected to hear from other companies interested in acquiring Roku, but few came calling.

Roku held talks with Intel when it toyed with developing OnCue, an Internet-based TV platform, in 2012, according to people familiar with the matter. Intel was eventually willing to pay about $450 million for Roku, but Wood asked for $1.5 billion, according to one of the people. Wood, who several co-workers acknowledged had a quirky personality, told an Intel executive he asked for $1.5 billion because he wanted to open a university in Texas, and that price would cover the expense, according to a person familiar with the talks. The large gap in value doomed the transaction.

About a year later, Amazon approached with an initial offer of about $300 million for the company. Those talks progressed in seriousness, leading Roku to drop its ask all the way to about $690 million, one of the people said. Still, the gap proved too large to cement a transaction.

After that, the offers basically stopped.

“We’ve had less acquisition offers than is normal for a company as successful as Roku,” said Wood, who said he didn’t remember details about the Amazon and Intel offers. “I think it’s because people don’t understand the company. For a long time, they didn’t.”

Waverley Capital managing partner Daniel Leff, who sat on Roku’s board from 2011 to 2018, said the lack of takeover interest from big technology and media companies was stunning.

“Lots of CEOs of big media companies came to spend time with Roku to figure out what it is, what’s streaming, how is it going to disrupt my business?” Leff said. “And I will say, unequivocally, there wasn’t one media executive — and they’re all very smart in their own right — there wasn’t one who believed Roku would be successful, even when it was generating hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue. Even when it went public.”

Roku first attempted to go public in 2014, but bankers told Wood there wouldn’t be appetite for investment until services revenue was 50% of total sales.

“They told us we couldn’t get out, or not at a good price, until we could prove that platform revenue was real,” Carolan said.

So Roku got serious about its platform business. When Roku released its S-1 filing — the document all companies must publish before going public — player revenue in the first half of 2017 represented 59% of total revenue and declined 2% year over year, while platform revenue represented 41% of total revenue and grew 91% from a year earlier.

The Roku IPO at the Nasdaq, September 28, 2017.
Source: Nasdaq

When Roku went public on Sept. 28, 2017, Carolan broke down in tears.

“I thought, wow, the world finally sees what my partners and I have seen for the last ten years,” Carolan said. “It was just super emotional. And for the past few years, obviously more and more people are finally getting it.”

What’s next: Content

Wood said he’s spending much of his time now on charting out a strategy for The Roku Channel.

Most of the content on Roku’s channel is licensed from other media companies and studios — and it’s not necessarily their best stuff. The 40,000 free movies and TV shows are largely back-end library content that media companies have deemed unimportant for own streaming endeavors. When Roku can get its hands on more popular content, it tends to be limited — for instance, it only has one season of “The Bachelorette” (Season 13, starring Rachel Lindsay).

In addition to licensed content, Roku has begun dabbling in original programming. Earlier this year, Roku bought more than 75 shows that Quibi created for its short-lived service. It also acquired “This Old House,” which is still making new episodes in its 42nd season. Roku has programming for both kids and adults, building offerings for anyone in the family.

There’s some evidence the original programming is finding an audience. The top ten most-watched programs on The Roku Channel from May 20 to June 3 were all Roku originals. Since adding the Quibi library last month, according to Roku’s own data, more Roku users have seen that programming in two weeks than Quibi users in its six-month lifetime.

The strategy at this point looks a lot look like — surprise — Netflix. In Netflix’s early days, it was happy to license whatever content media companies would give it. Former Time Warner Chief Executive Officer Jeff Bewkes famously called it “The Albanian Army,” emphasizing its small stature at the time.

Now, Netflix spends $17 billion on content a year.

Roku plans to spend more than $1 billion on content next year, according to a person familiar with the matter. Wood declined to comment on the exact total, but did admit the budget will grow next year and in years to come.

Wood also said The Roku Channel creates a virtuous cycle. Roku sells advertising against every ad-supported application on its platform. With its own channel, Roku can offer advertisers another way to market brands. That’s more money, which can be used for more content, making the channel a bigger draw for consumers — and more appealing to advertisers.

There’s real money to be made in free ad-supported video. ViacomCBS’s Pluto TV will top $1 billion in ad revenue next year, CEO Bob Bakish said at a recent investor conference.

Roku announced in March it was raising $1 billion — money that ex-board member Leff expects will go largely toward content. With a market capitalization above that of media companies like Discovery, which is merging with WarnerMedia, and ViacomCBS, Roku is a theoretical buyer for Lionsgate and AMC Networks, said MoffettNathanson media analyst Michael Nathanson.

For the time being, Wood is talking like a CEO who wants to stay under the radar. Wood emphasized Roku was a distribution platform first and a content company second. But if content producers don’t watch out, Roku may “eat their lunch” — just like Netflix did, predicted Nathanson.

“This reminds me so much of Netflix in its early days,” Nathanson said. “I used to interview [Netflix Co-CEO] Ted Sarandos at conferences ten years ago, and he’d say, ‘oh, we’re happy with just one or two original shows.’ Meanwhile, they’d be laddering up into better content. I’d argue companies giving Roku content are digging their own grave.”

Co-founder and director of Netflix Reed Hastings delivers a speech as he inaugurates the new offices of Netflix France, in Paris on January 17, 2020.
Christophe Archambault | AFP | Getty Images

Hastings told CNBC he isn’t worried about Roku as a competitor because its goals as an advertising-supported service will be different than Netflix, which is subscription based and has no commercials.

“They’re not a big threat for us,” Hastings said.

Wood agreed with Hastings that The Roku Channel isn’t in competition with Netflix. Roku is looking to capture a person’s attention so it can sell advertising — but it doesn’t need to spend so much on content to keep a person paying $5, $10 or $15 each month. The Roku Channel is available on Amazon Fire TV, Apple iOS and Google’s Android, though the company prefers users watch on Roku’s platform, where it can better monetize viewership data.

“We have less expensive content than a subscription service because it’s not required for us to be successful,” Wood said. “For us, it’s about helping users discover content that appeals to them.”

Testing its leverage

Still, Roku may be able to increase the quality of licensed content over time. Direct-to-consumer streaming apps need global distribution, and Roku has a roadmap to enter countries around the world. So far, Roku is also in about one-third of all smart TVs in Canada and is the second-largest operating system for smart TVs in Mexico. Europe is its next likely expansion opportunity, said Nathanson, where Google’s Android TV is the dominant incumbent.

As Roku signs new carriage agreements, it could start demanding that each company give it better content for the Roku Channel. Roku asked for quality titles in its negotiations with WarnerMedia and NBCUniversal, according to people familiar with the matter, but it was rebuffed. It settled on paying for a few older, relatively unpopular series, such as NBCUniversal’s “Coach” — for now.

The Roku 3 television streaming player menu is shown on a television in Los Angeles, California, U.S., on Thursday, Sept. 12, 2013.
Patrick T. Fallon | Bloomberg via Getty Images

In recent years, Roku has become more aggressive with its carriage agreement demands, including asking for more advertising inventory, higher app store fees, and better content for The Roku Channel. That’s led to delays in reaching agreements with both HBO Max and Peacock. In April, Roku dropped the YouTube TV app from its platform for new customers in a dispute over manipulating search results and hardware requirements. The main YouTube app remains for everyone, but that deal is up later this year — and could test Roku’s leverage.

“They have to be careful,” said Leff. “Netflix is still one of their biggest partners. They don’t want to compete too hard against all of their content partners.”

Then again, if media companies don’t work with Roku, who can they turn to for distribution? Apple, Google and Amazon are still bigger long-term threats, rich with both data and cash, with the power to outspend legacy media for content if they desire. Roku has used its “we’re just the little guy” approach to its benefit throughout its existence.

For now, Roku’s media partners aren’t worried.

“I don’t think they’re challenging to do business with given their market scale,” said Steve MacDonald, president of global content licensing for A+E Networks. “They’re very collaborative and open about information about how we can better monetize our relationship together. They promote our content. They’re good partners.”

That’s what the media industry used to say about Netflix.

Disclosure: Comcast-owned NBCUniversal is the parent company of CNBC.

Continue Reading

Technology

How a war-torn Myanmar plays a critical role in China’s rare earth dominance

Published

on

By

How a war-torn Myanmar plays a critical role in China's rare earth dominance

Illustration of the national flag of the People’s Republic of China and a mining site.

Craig Hastings | Moment | Getty Images

Beijing has been stepping up controls on rare earth exports, triggering global shortages and exposing industries’ dependence on Chinese supply chains. 

However, over recent years, China itself has become reliant on rare earth supplies from an unexpected source: the relatively small and war-torn economy of Myanmar. 

While China is the world’s top producer of rare earths, it still imports raw materials containing the coveted metals from abroad.

Myanmar accounted for about 57% of China’s total rare earth imports last year, Gracelin Baskaran, director of the Critical Minerals Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told CNBC.

According to Chinese Customs data, Myanmar’s rare earth exports to China significantly picked up in 2018 and reached a peak of nearly 42,000 metric tons by 2023.

Baskaran added that the imports from Myanmar are also particularly high in heavy rare earth element contents, which are generally less abundant in the earth’s crust, elevating their value and scarcity. 

“Myanmar’s production has significantly strengthened China’s dominant position, effectively giving Beijing a de facto monopoly over the global heavy rare earths supply chain — and much of the leverage it wields today.” 

The country has become a key source of two highly sought-after heavy rare earths, dysprosium and terbium, that play crucial roles in high-tech manufacturing, including in defense and military, aerospace and renewables sector.

“This dynamic has given rise to a supply chain in which extraction is concentrated in Myanmar, while downstream processing and value addition are predominantly carried out in China,” said Baskaran.

Why Myanmar? 

Myanmar is home to deposits that tend to have higher heavy rare earth content, David Merriman, research director at Project Blue, told CNBC. 

These “ionic adsorption clay” or IAC deposits are exploited through leaching methods that apply chemical reagents to the clay — and that comes with high environmental costs. 

According to Merriman, the vast majority of the world’s IAC operations were in Southern China in the early to mid-2010s. But, as Beijing began implementing new environmental controls and standards in the rare earths industry, a lot of these projects began to close down.

“Myanmar, particularly the North of the country, was seen as a key region which had similar geology to many of the IAC deposit areas within China,” Merriman said. 

“You started to see quite a rapid build out of new IAC type mines within Myanmar, essentially replacing the domestic Chinese production. There was a lot of Chinese business involvement in the development of these new IAC projects.”

The rare earths extracted by these IAC miners in Myanmar are then shipped to China mostly in the form of “rare earth oxides” for further processing and refining, Yue Wang, a senior consultant of rare earths at Wood Mackenzie, told CNBC.

In 2024, a report from Global Witness, a nonprofit focused on environmental and human rights abuses, said that China had effectively outsourced much of its rare earth extraction to Myanmar “at a terrible cost to the environment and local communities.”

China’s rare earth risks

China’s reliance on Myanmar for rare earths has also opened it up to supply chain risks, experts said. 

According to Global Witness’s research, most of the heavy rare earths from Myanmar originate from the Northern Kachin State, which borders China. However, following Myanmar’s violent military coup in 2021, the military junta has struggled to maintain control of the territory amid opposition from the public and armed groups.

“Myanmar is a risky jurisdiction to rely on, given the ongoing Civil War. In 2024, the Kachin Independence Army (KIA), a group of armed rebels, seized sites responsible for half the world’s heavy rare earths production,” said CSIS’ Baskaran. 

Since the seizure, there have been reports of supply disruptions causing spikes in the prices of some heavy rare earths. According a Reuters report, the KIA was seeking to use the resources as leverage against Beijing. 

Chinese customs data shows, imports of rare earth oxides from Myanmar fell by over a third in the first five months of the year compared to the same period last year.

“If Myanmar were to cease all exports of rare earth feed stocks to China, China would struggle to meet its demand for heavy rare earths in the short term,” said Project Blue’s Merriman. 

Not surprisingly, Beijing has been looking to diversify its sources of heavy rare earths.  

According to Merriman, there are IAC deposits in nearby countries, including Malaysia and Laos, where some projects have been set up with Chinese involvement.

Still, he notes that environmental standards are expected to be higher in those countries, which will present challenges for rare earth miners. 

China’s decision to cut back on its own extraction of heavy rare earth elements may serve as a warning to other countries about the costs of developing such projects. A report by Chinese media group Caixin in 2022 documented how former IAC operation sites in Southern China had left behind toxic water and contaminated soil, hurting local farmers’ livelihoods.

Continue Reading

Technology

Tesla robotaxi incidents caught on camera in Austin draw regulators’ attention

Published

on

By

Tesla robotaxi incidents caught on camera in Austin draw regulators' attention

A Tesla robotaxi drives on the street along South Congress Avenue in Austin, Texas, on June 22, 2025

Joel Angel Juarez | Reuters

Tesla was contacted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration on Monday after videos posted on social media showed the company’s robotaxis driving in a chaotic manner on public roads in Austin, Texas.

Elon Musk’s electric vehicle maker debuted autonomous trips in Austin on Sunday, opening the service to a limited number of riders by invitation only.

In the videos shared widely online, one Tesla robotaxi was spotted traveling the wrong way down a road, and another was shown braking hard in the middle of traffic, responding to “stationary police vehicles outside its driving path,” among several other examples.

A spokesperson for NHTSA said in an e-mail that the agency “is aware of the referenced incidents and is in contact with the manufacturer to gather additional information.”

Tesla Vice President of Vehicle Engineering Lars Moravy, and regulatory counsel Casey Blaine didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

The federal safety regulator says it doesn’t “pre-approve new technologies or vehicle systems.” Instead, automakers certify that each vehicle model they make meets federal motor vehicle safety standards. The agency says it will investigate “incidents involving potential safety defects,” and take “necessary actions to protect road safety,” after assessing a wide array of reports and information.

NHTSA previously initiated an investigation into possible safety defects with Tesla’s FSD-Supervised technology, or FSD Beta systems, following injurious and fatal accidents. That probe is ongoing.

The Tesla robotaxis in Austin are Model Y SUVs equipped with the company’s latest FSD Unsupervised software and hardware. The pilot robotaxi service, involving fewer than two-dozen vehicles, operates during daylight hours and only in good weather, with a human safety supervisor in the front passenger seat.

The service is now limited to invited users, who agree to the terms of Tesla’s “early access program.” Those who have received invites are mostly promoters of Tesla’s products, stock and CEO.

While the rollout sent Tesla shares up 8% on Monday, the launch fell shy of fulfilling Musk’s many driverless promises over the past decade.

In 2015, Musk told shareholders Tesla cars would achieve “full autonomy” within three years. In 2016, he said a Tesla EV would be able to make a cross-country drive without needing any human intervention before the end of 2017. And in 2019, on a call with institutional investors that helped him raise more than $2 billion, Musk said Tesla would have 1 million robotaxi-ready vehicles on the road in 2020, able to complete 100 hours of driving work per week each, making money for their owners.

None of that has happened.

Meanwhile, Alphabet-owned Waymo says it has surpassed 10 million paid trips last month. Competitors in China, including Baidu’s Apollo Go, WeRide and Pony.ai, are also operating commercial robotaxi fleets.

WATCH: Tesla launches robotaxis in Austin as robotaxi race heats up

Tesla launches robotaxis in Austin as robotaxi race heats up

Continue Reading

Technology

Meta approached AI startup Runway about a takeover bid before Scale deal

Published

on

By

Meta approached AI startup Runway about a takeover bid before Scale deal

Mustafa Hatipoglu | Anadolu | Getty Images

Meta spoke with artificial intelligence startup Runway about a potential takeover ahead of its multibillion-dollar investment in Scale AI, CNBC confirmed Monday.

Runway is best known for its AI video-generation tools and earned a spot on CNBC’s Disruptor 50 list earlier this month.

The deal talks between Meta and Runway did not progress far and dissolved, according to a person familiar with the matter who asked not to be named due to the confidential nature of the discussions.

Bloomberg earlier reported the talks. Meta declined to comment.

Read more CNBC tech news

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has been aggressively pushing to bolster his company’s AI efforts in recent months. The social media giant invested $14.3 billion into Scale AI in June, and it has also approached the startups Safe Superintelligence and Perplexity AI about potential acquisitions this year.

Meta agreed to a 49% stake in Scale AI and hired away founder Alexandr Wang along with a few other employees from the company.

While Meta was unsuccessful in its efforts to buy Superintelligence outright, Daniel Gross, the company’s CEO, and former GitHub CEO Nat Friedman are joining Meta’s AI efforts, where they will work on products under Wang.

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO

Meta approached Perplexity before massive Scale AI deal

Continue Reading

Trending