Anthony Wood, founder and chief executive officer of Roku Inc.
David Paul Morris | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Roku co-founder and CEO Anthony Wood worked at Netflix in 2007, but he says his company’s cultural similarities to the streaming giant are mostly coincidental.
“The culture at Roku was the same before I worked at Netflix,” Wood said in an interview. “Just similar philosophies.”
“Working at Roku is like being part of a professional sports team,” Wood wrote in a 2015 document that every employee receives. “We put extreme care into recruiting the best people; we pay well in a competitive market; encourage excellent teamwork, and expect everyone to perform at a high level.”
One former executive said every job at Roku is like being a “field goal kicker,” where employees are expected to accomplish specific, detailed goals. Some employees thrive under the pressure. If they can’t, they won’t be there long.
“We expect you to do a good job,” Wood said. “If you don’t do a good job, you’re going to get fired eventually.”
Wood and Netflix CEO Reed Hastings point to their cultures as a reason for their companies’ success. But both cultures can also lead to an environment of fear and confusion — though for different reasons.
At Netflix, as The Wall Street Journal explained in a 2018 story, employees formally review each other, giving blunt feedback to bosses and underlings alike. Workers “sunshine” errors, offering up public apologies and acknowledgments of failures.
“We expect you to do a good job. If you don’t do a good job, you’re going to get fired eventually.”
Anthony Wood
CEO, Roku
In contrast, Roku doesn’t give any performance reviews at all. Wood has also made the unusual decision of paying employees based on a market rate rather than giving raises tied to internal performance. That’s irritated some younger employees who have expected a perfunctory raise every year at performance review time, said Wood.
“We have a lot of younger employees now, and they are very focused on getting raises,” Wood said. “You know, I’ve been here a year, I should get a raise. And, you might not get a raise. Or you might. It just depends on what we think the rate is for you. Sometimes they understand and adapt, sometimes they don’t understand, and they quit and then they post on Glassdoor. So, it’s a bit of a cultural mismatch.”
Anthony Wood
David Orrell | CNBC
It can be difficult to figure out market rate, Wood acknowledged, especially because California and New York state laws prohibit asking employees how much they’re getting paid. But Roku can glean competitive salaries because it knows what it needs to pay to poach employees from other companies, Wood said.
Read the published culture documents from Roku and Netflix
Click here for more on how Roku has defied skepticism to build a $45 billion company
Click here for an extended Q&A with Roku CEO Anthony Wood.
Excelling in ambiguity
Annual reviews aren’t necessary because employees should be getting real-time feedback, Wood said.
“The work is hard, but it is also rewarding, and I am given a lot of autonomy,” said Taylor Yanez, a Roku engineer.“We don’t do annual reviews, which are a huge time suck.”
But while Yanez said he was given instant feedback by peers, seven former Roku employees who left in the last 18 months said they felt confused by Roku’s culture. They spoke with CNBC on condition of anonymity, either because they feared potential backlash or because contractual language in their severance packages forbids speaking about their firings.
“I literally don’t know why I was fired,” said one recently departed manager. “It’s the strangest place I’ve ever worked.”
Former employees said while they were assigned specific tasks, bosses evaluated them on different metrics because goals frequently changed as Roku grew. In addition to no performance reviews, Roku has very little hierarchy— almost all Roku engineers are called “senior software engineers,” regardless of tenure or role. Mix in a recent surge of new employees — Roku has increased headcount almost threefold, to more than 1,900 employees, since its 2017 IPO — and the result can be confusing.
Several ex-Roku employees said their bosses told them that working in ambiguous settings was part of the job. That runs counter to the Roku culture document, which claims, “Roku teams communicate clearly, in real time with each other and with other teams across the company. Plans, milestones, and strategic context are broadly known.”
“There’s no formal training,” said one mid-level executive, “At Roku, finding information is on you.”
Roku is trying to improve some of its organizational infrastructure as it grows, including formalizing an internship orientation for the first time this year, two of the people said.
“We compete to attract and retain the best talent anywhere and treat people like adults,” a Roku spokesperson said. “We provide onboarding and training for new and existing employees and seek those who are particularly resourceful, innovative, and self-sufficient. And we have a culture of real-time feedback, which has been remarkably successful.”
Netflix with a twist
Netflix and Roku offer unlimited vacation time, giving employees the right to dictate their own schedules as long as they can get their work done. Both have purposefully flat organizational structures, deemphasizing titles and hierarchy.
But unlike Netflix and other large technology companies, Roku offers few external employee perks, such as on-site day care, daily free catered lunches, inexpensive health plans or extensive personal wellness benefits. Roku doesn’t even match 401(k) contributions.
Instead, Wood has chosen to funnel that money into workers’ salaries, believing employees should be in charge of how they spend their money. Every past and present Roku employee who spoke with CNBC said the company compensated at or beyond their expectations. It pays a base salary and grants restricted stock units, though it doesn’t give bonuses.
Given the stock’s performance, it’s easy to see why employees have been eager to stick with the company. Roku shares have gained about 2,000% since the company’s IPO.
Roku’s senior leadership website page also illustrates a lack of diversity — including no women. That will change soon. Wood said Roku just announced a new head of human resources, Kamilah Mitchell-Thomas,previously Dow Jones’ chief people officer, who will replace current HR leader Troy Fenner. Roku’s board does have three women of nine members.
But Wood said diversity for diversity’s sake won’t dictate whom he hires.
“My focus is hiring the best people I can find,” Wood said.
Wood said he meets weekly with an executive coach, Dave Krall, who was Roku’s president and chief operating officer in 2010 and, before that, CEO of Avid Technology. He defines his leadership as hiring the right people and allowing them the freedom to do their job.
“The leadership a company needs changes as it grows,” Wood said. “When you’re 15 or 20 people, I’m the product leader at that point. As it gets bigger and you hire more senior people, you don’t have to do that anymore and they don’t want you to do that, because that’s their job. I used to do our product road map. I don’t do that anymore. These days, we have new initiatives. Pushing us into new business areas and expanding our businesses are where I’m hands-on today.”
Alphabet shares slid 6% Thursday, following news that the Department of Justice is calling for Google to divest its Chrome browser to put an end to its search monopoly.
The proposed break-up would, according to the DOJ in its Wednesday filing, “permanently stop Google’s control of this critical search access point and allow rival search engines the ability to access the browser that for many users is a gateway to the internet.”
This development is the latest in a years-long, bipartisan antitrust case that found in an August ruling that the search giant held an illegal monopoly in both search and text advertising, violating Section 2 of the Sherman Act.
The potential break-up would include preventing Google from entering into exclusionary agreements with competitors like Apple and Samsung, part of a set of remedies that would last 10 years.
POLAND – 2024/11/13: In this photo illustration, the NVIDIA company logo is seen displayed on a smartphone screen. (Photo Illustration by Piotr Swat/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)
Sopa Images | Lightrocket | Getty Images
Nvidia shares dropped in U.S. premarket trading Thursday after the tech giant’s third-quarter earnings failed to impress investors.
Shares of the chipmaker slumped 3.21% at around 5:03 a.m. ET, following the Wednesday release of Nvidia’s quarterly results, which beat on both the top and bottom lines.
Revenue came in at $35.08 billion, up 94% year-on-year and exceeding the $33.16 billion forecast by LSEG analysts. Earnings per share was 81 cents adjusted, also above analyst expectations.
Other chipmakers fell on the back of the market reaction to Nvidia’s third-quarter results. Shares of Intel, Qualcomm and Micron Technology all lost 1% or more in value, while AMD declined 0.6%.
The slump in Nvidia also had a knock-on effect on European semiconductor firms. ASML, a key chip equipment supplier, dropped 0.9%, while compatriot Dutch chip firm ASMI fell 0.5%. Chipmakers BE Semiconductor, STMicroelectronics and Infineon slipped 0.8%, 0.7 and 0.6%, respectively.
Several notable chip names were also in negative territory in Asia. TSMC, which makes Nvidia’s high-performance graphics processing units, eased as much as 1.5%. Contract electronics manufacturer Foxconn dropped 1.9%.
Why are Nvidia shares falling?
Nvidia has largely cornered the market for the high-powered chips powering the world’s most advanced artificial intelligence models, such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT.
Despite nearly doubling sales year-on-year, Nvidia’s third-quarter results showed a slowdown from previous quarters. Nvidia previously reported growth of 122% in the second quarter, 262% in the first quarter, and 265% in the fourth quarter of 2023.
Derren Nathan, head of equity research at Hargreaves Lansdown, said in emailed comments Wednesday that the dip in Nvidia’s share price “suggests even outstanding isn’t enough for some investors,” adding that he expects the stock to bounce back once markets open.
“NVIDIA’s generated stellar gains for shareholders over many years now, and right now it’s pretty hard to see any major holes in the investment case,” Nathan added.
Analysts are looking ahead to the much-anticipated launch of Nvidia’s next-generation chip called Blackwell. On the firm’s earnings call, CEO Jensen Huang said that demand for the chip is exceeding supply.
Ofcom said it received evidence showing Microsoft makes it less attractive for customers to run its Office productivity apps on cloud infrastructure other than Microsoft Azure.
Igor Golovniov | Sopa Images | Lightrocket via Getty Images
LONDON — Britain’s competition regulator is preparing remedies aimed at solving competition issues in the multibillion-pound cloud computing industry.
The Competition and Markets Authority is set to unveil its provisional decision detailing “behavioral” remedies addressing anti-competitive practices in the sector following a months-long investigation into the market, two sources familiar with the matter told CNBC.
The sources, who preferred to remain anonymous given the investigation’s sensitive nature, said that the cloud market remedies could be announced within the next two weeks. The regulator previously set itself a deadline of November to December 2024 to publish its provisional decision.
A CMA spokesperson declined to comment on the timing of its provisional decision when asked by CNBC.
Cloud infrastructure services is a market that’s dominated by U.S. technology giants Amazon and Microsoft. Amazon is the largest player in the market, offering cloud services via its Amazon Web Services (AWS) arm. Microsoft is the second-largest provider, selling cloud products under its Microsoft Azure unit.
The CMA probe traces its history back to 2022, when U.K. telecoms regulator Ofcom kicked off a market study examining the dominance of cloud giants Amazon, Microsoft and Google. Ofcom subsequently referred its cloud review to the CMA to address competition issues in the market.
Why is the CMA concerned?
Among the key issues the CMA is expected to address with recommended behavioral remedies, are so-called “egress” fees charging companies for transferring data from one cloud to another, licensing fees viewed as unfair, volume discounts, and interoperability issues that make it harder to switch vendor.
According to one of the sources, there’s a chance Google may be excluded from the scope of the competition remedies given it is smaller in size compared to market leaders AWS and Microsoft Azure.
Amazon and Microsoft declined to comment on this story when contacted by CNBC. Google did not immediately return a request for comment.
What could the remedies look like?
The CMA has said previously in June that it was more minded toward considering behavioral remedies to resolve its concerns as opposed to “structural” remedies, such as ordering divestments or operational separations.
The watchdog said in a working paper in June that it was “at an early stage” of considering potential remedies.
Solutions floated at the time included imposing price controls restricting the level of egress fees, lowering technical barriers to switching cloud providers, and banning agreements encouraging firms to commit more spend in return for discounts.
One contentious measure the regulator said it was considering was requiring Microsoft to apply the same pricing for its productivity software products regardless of which cloud they’re hosted on — a move that would have a significant impact on Microsoft’s pricing structures.
CMA Chief Executive Sarah Cardell is set to hold a speech on Thursday at Chatham House, a U.K. policy institute. In an interview with the Financial Times, she defended the regulator’s track record on competition enforcement amid criticisms from Prime Minister Keir Starmer that the agency was holding back growth.
She is expected to outline plans for a review in 2025 into whether the CMA should more frequently use behavioral remedies when approving deals, the FT reported.