Connect with us

Published

on

Dave Clark (L) and Ryan Petersen (R)

Getty Images

On Sept. 13, Flexport founder Ryan Petersen took the stage at North America’s premier supply chain conference in Phoenix. It was exactly a week after he’d forced out his hand-picked successor as CEO, ex-Amazon executive Dave Clark, so Petersen could once again run the show.

Sitting in the first few rows of attendees was Clark, the man he’d ousted just a year into the job. Petersen was surprised that he showed up, according to people with knowledge of the matter. Days earlier, Petersen had excoriated Clark, alleging he’d secretly expanded the company’s headcount and taken on unnecessary leases without Petersen or the board’s knowledge. On X, formerly known as Twitter, Petersen wrote, “Strategic Plan, Day 1: Make better decisions!”

With Clark sitting a few feet away, Petersen struck a different tone.

“I think we’re going to look back and go, ‘Wow I’d probably do that all over again because of the progress that we’ve made,'” Petersen said, in an interview on stage.

Doing it over again would seem to suggest hiring Clark wasn’t a bad decision. Petersen went even further, personally commending Clark for orchestrating the $1.3 billion purchase of Deliverr from Shopify, picking up supply chain technology for last-mile deliveries. That deal was announced in May.

“I’m very, very lucky because I wouldn’t have had the courage to go and do that acquisition, but I give all the credit in the world to Dave Clark,” Petersen said. “There’s no one probably in the world who would be better at running that last-mile e-com fulfillment network. Personally, I don’t have any experience and I would’ve been pretty intimidated to try and go pull that off.”

The mixed messaging from the 43-year-old Flexport founder underscores the dysfunction surrounding the sudden firing of Clark, who previously spent 23 years at Amazon and built its mammoth logistics network on the way to becoming one of Jeff Bezos‘ top deputies. It’s also indicative of a bigger challenge facing Flexport, whose software is designed to simplify the process of transporting goods. The company was valued at $8 billion by private investors in early 2022, just as the economy was turning and the 10-year tech bull market was coming to an end.

As a high-valued company backed by powerful VCs, Flexport has been trying to simultaneously operate in Silicon Valley startup growth mode while also restraining expenses to reflect the new economic realities and to cope with supply chain bottlenecks.

This account is based on conversations with people close to Clark and Petersen. They requested anonymity to discuss confidential interactions. Their perspectives have been corroborated by internal documents and communications reviewed by CNBC.

Petersen has publicly said Clark overspent, overhired and overpromised, something his allies echoed to CNBC. He burned through cash and kept Petersen in the dark about key financials and an ambitious expansion into providing end-to-end supply chain tools for small and medium-sized businesses. People close to Petersen pointed to a number of previously unreported incidents that eroded his confidence in Clark.

But documents viewed by CNBC and sources close to Clark undermine those claims. They show that Clark, who arrived when the company was struggling to bill customers and track containers, worked closely with the board and Petersen to implement decisions that Flexport now suggests were ill-advised.

Evidence to support Flexport’s claims of financial mismanagement is lacking, raising questions about whether that narrative was put forward to justify Clark’s exit. 

A Flexport spokesperson rejected that characterization.

“Ryan Petersen returned as CEO in order to restore Flexport’s culture of customer engagement, and drive the growth and cost discipline required to return the company to profitability,” the spokesperson said in a statement.

Get IPO ready

Clark arrived last year as the perfect hire for a tech startup trying to disrupt the age-old logistics industry. He’d built Amazon’s logistics unit into a juggernaut that rivaled carriers like UPS and FedEx.

Ryan Petersen, chief executive officer of Flexport, participates in a panel discussion during the Milken Institute Global Conference in Beverly Hills, California, U.S., on Wednesday, May 4, 2022.

Bloomberg | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Since 2021, Petersen had been seeking a successor for Flexport’s then-operating chief, Sanne Manders, in part to address what several ex-employees described as lingering issues with the company’s troubled billing processes. Fixing that was Clark’s job.

Petersen and Clark worked together as co-CEOs for the first six months. In March, Petersen transitioned to executive chairman.

The co-CEO arrangement would free Petersen up to do what he loved – “getting beers with customers,” in the words of two former Flexport employees. Clark, a self-described “builder at heart,” was at the wheel.

Among Clark’s goals was to help Petersen prepare Flexport for an IPO, something the company had discussed doing within a two- to three-year window, according to a person familiar with the matter and documents viewed by CNBC.

“There’s a perfect complement of skill sets,” Petersen told Forbes in June 2022. “Mine are much more creative, zero-to-one founder time, and Dave is the supreme executor and a legend in the supply chain world.”

Buying Deliverr was meant to be the first step in turning Flexport into a more full-scale logistics service for its customers.

Shopify had acquired Deliverr in May 2022 for $2.1 billion. But the e-commerce software company was getting hammered by Wall Street as its Covid pandemic pop faded. By January 2023, CEO Tobias Lutke knew he needed to get rid of Deliverr. Around that time, Lutke first approached Petersen to float the possibility of a deal, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Petersen told Clark he should engage with Shopify’s team, according to a person with direct knowledge of the negotiations. Initial talks fell apart, but resumed when Flexport executives learned that Shopify was about to execute deep cost cuts and was eager to sell Deliverr.

Clark and Petersen flew to Miami to meet with Shopify’s leadership. As a transaction was nearing, Clark, who had a reputation as a deft negotiator, got Shopify, which was already an investor in Flexport, to sweeten it with $40 million in cash and the framework for a $260 million convertible note that could help Flexport on its path to an IPO, according to an internal document analyzing the deal.

The sale would be announced alongside Shopify’s first-quarter earnings report on May 4.

“We did not change the terms of a deal or rush it just to have it line up with an earnings call,” Shopify said in a statement. With Flexport, “we are tightly mission-aligned to ensure the success of our merchants, which is why we chose to deepen our partnership with them earlier this year.”

The night before the announcement, Petersen appeared at a “Tech Talk” at Flexport’s Bellevue, Washington, office to pitch the “Flexport vision” to hundreds of people. An attendee asked Petersen whether Flexport would ever get into last-mile logistics.

Petersen paused, glanced at his watch, and said to keep an eye on the morning news, according to a Flexport employee who witnessed the exchange and by a person who was told independently.

The comment alarmed Clark and Flexport executives, who were concerned that Petersen had disclosed material nonpublic information about a publicly traded company, according to people familiar with the matter.

Petersen didn’t respond to calls or messages from CNBC, and the company declined to make him available for an interview. A Flexport spokesperson didn’t respond to CNBC’s question about whether Petersen was aware of concerns about his statement at the event.

The ‘whistleblower’

Bob Swan, then-interim chief executive officer and chief financial officer of Intel Corp., reacts during the inauguration of the company’s research and development facility in Bengaluru, India, on November 15, 2018.

Samyukta Lakshmi | Bloomberg | Getty Images

For much of the summer, Clark had pushed then-CFO Kenny Wagers and his financial planning and analysis team to realign Flexport’s year-end and 18-month forecasts, according to a person close to the situation.

The reasons were obvious. At the beginning of 2022, it cost around $14,500 to move a single container across the Pacific. By late 2022, prices of ocean freight from Asia to the U.S. West Coast were down 90% from a year earlier, due largely to weakening global demand. Because Flexport makes money by charging fees for the transportation of goods, the company’s business was getting hammered.

But Wagers and Stuart Leung, a Flexport finance executive and a close Petersen ally, were reluctant to pare back forecasts, frustrating Clark, who felt those projections were overly optimistic.

Wagers and Leung did not respond to CNBC’s interview requests.

Clark ultimately prevailed, but the revised forecasts distressed Petersen. Clark, Petersen and Wagers met in Texas in mid-August to fine-tune the forecasts.

A source close to Petersen told CNBC that the meeting went poorly for Clark because a so-called whistleblower — identified as a senior finance executive — stepped forward shortly before it began and told Petersen that the numbers being presented were “not real.”

The source referred to the senior finance executive as a whistleblower because of the information he disclosed to Petersen about Clark.

Documents seen by CNBC and conversations with people with direct knowledge of the board meeting make it clear that there were no substantiated whistleblower actions or allegations of financial impropriety.

Flexport’s spokesperson told CNBC in a statement: “There was no whistleblower nor was there any financial misconduct. Any allegations to the contrary are completely false.”

On Sept. 15, shortly after CNBC spoke with the Petersen source, legal counsel for Clark sent a cease-and-desist letter to Flexport. The letter, viewed by CNBC, instructed the company to preserve and retain all communications involving Clark’s departure. The letter disputes the existence of a whistleblower and lists specific allegations as false and defamatory, including Petersen’s claims that Clark was an unfit CEO because he overextended the company’s lease obligations.

Five hours after the letter was sent, the source close to Petersen contacted CNBC and asked to retract their statements and all details related to Clark’s firing or about the so-called whistleblower. CNBC declined to retract his statements.

Petersen has since deleted several of his posts criticizing Clark.

Dave Clark, Amazon’s former senior vice president of worldwide operations.

Lindsey Wasson | Reuters

The letter cited two documents that had been presented to the board. Both were viewed by CNBC. The first was a pre-acquisition financial analysis of the Deliverr deal, and the second was a review of Flexport’s first-quarter numbers. The Deliverr analysis was presented by the co-CEOs to the board for their approval and was shaped by multiple prior board meetings.

Clark’s camp suggested that other factors may have led to the abrupt firing.

For example, politics.

Days after Clark was ousted, Petersen sent him a message — seen by CNBC — blasting one of his key female executives for wasting her days at the company on “far left-wing political activism.” The executive is a registered Republican.

Stephens, the Founders Fund partner, also shared his contempt for that executive weeks before Clark’s departure, a person familiar with the board told CNBC. Stephens did not respond to CNBC’s request for comment.

Petersen is also a venture partner at Founders Fund, the firm started by Peter Thiel, who was a prominent supporter of President Trump’s 2016 campaign and more recently bankrolled Senate candidates in Ohio and Arizona. Many of Thiel’s closest confidantes at Founders Fund and elsewhere in the venture industry are outspoken conservatives.

Petersen’s sole public political contribution in 2023 was to a Democratic political action committee associated with Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia. He doesn’t talk much about politics on social media or in interviews.

Clark has donated to candidates on both sides of the aisle. Upon his departure, The Wall Street Journal reported that he was considering running for governor of Texas, but two people familiar with his thinking say it’s not happening anytime soon.

Flexport told CNBC that an employee’s politics are not relevant in personnel decisions.

“Ryan Petersen does not care at all about anyone’s political or personal affiliations. That is their business,” the spokesperson said. “It is inappropriate for any employee to spend an excessive amount of time during work hours on activities unrelated to their role.”

A person familiar with the female executive said her noncorporate endeavors were largely related to charitable organizations. 

Clark has largely remained silent since he was forced to resign on Sept. 5, though in private he’s expressed frustration at how his former team was being treated by Flexport, according to people close to him. Many of his allies at Amazon who joined him at Flexport were summarily fired by Petersen shortly after his departure.

On Sept. 13, Flexport’s chief legal counsel, Chris Ferro, contacted Clark. Ferro told him that his resignation a week prior had not been accepted, according to a person familiar with the conversation.

Instead, Ferro told Clark that Flexport’s board met the day after Clark resigned and voted to fire him for cause, the person familiar said. Ferro said the board minutes didn’t yet reflect why Clark had been fired, the person said.

Ferro allegedly told Clark that Flexport would be willing to give him a block of 2 million shares — worth millions of dollars — if he signed a separation agreement that included nondisclosure and nondisparagement clauses.

Clark declined, the person said. Shortly after Flexport reached out with the offer, Clark took the stage at the same supply chain conference in Phoenix that Petersen spoke at earlier in the day.

He didn’t hold back.

“The only thing I really regret from the past year was I sort of picked the wrong founder,” Clark said. “Basically, it was a place of extending my reputational halo to a group that, in my opinion, didn’t deserve it. Largely, because about half the team was let go last week on Friday, the most brutal nonseverance packages I’ve ever seen in my life. It was about as disrespectful a way as humanly possible.”

Amazon showdown

On top of the public relations fallout from the Clark saga and any legal wrangling that may follow, Flexport faces staffing turnover and a growing threat from Clark’s former employer.

Flexport recently ousted Wagers as CFO and lost its human resources chief. More layoffs are expected soon, sources said, after the company cut 20% of its staff in January.

On Sept. 12, almost a week after Clark was fired, Flexport executives convened in Seattle to launch an end-to-end supply chain service that would allow sellers to move their products from factories to customers’ doorsteps through integrations with major online marketplaces.

The project was spearheaded by Parisa Sadrzadeh, an executive vice president at Flexport who Clark had poached from Amazon’s logistics unit.

Earlier in the day, and just up the street from Flexport’s event, Amazon had unveiled a strikingly similar service in front of approximately 2,200 attendees at its annual Accelerate seller conference. Flexport had planned to have a booth onsite but was told it couldn’t be an exhibitor, which some staffers suspected was due to the competing supply chain products, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Flexport discussed securing exhibit space at Accelerate months earlier but didn’t meet all the requirements to participate, and its launch wasn’t mentioned in those conversations, Amazon said.

Flexport’s event was underwhelming. In a conference room, about 50 people looked on as Sadrzadeh debuted Flexport’s service and then introduced Petersen, who spoke for roughly 20 minutes, according to Burak Yolga, co-founder of a digital freight forwarding company who was in attendance.

“Flexport announced pretty much the same thing that Amazon announced,” Yolga said in an interview. He said he left after about a half-hour.

The company paid rapper Nelly $150,000 to perform at the event. But in the days leading up to the launch, Petersen opted to squash the performance because the optics were bad after his post about rescinding job offers, a person familiar with the matter said. Despite canceling the event, Flexport still paid the artist.

WATCH: Flexport CEO Ryan Petersen on reinvesting profits

Flexport CEO Ryan Petersen: We are looking to reinvest profits to compound capital

Continue Reading

Technology

Reddit challenges Australia’s under-16 social media ban in High Court filing, says law curbs political speech

Published

on

By

Reddit challenges Australia’s under-16 social media ban in High Court filing, says law curbs political speech

Sopa Images | Lightrocket | Getty Images

Reddit, the popular community-focused forum, has launched a legal challenge against Australia’s social media ban for teens under 16, arguing that the newly enacted law is ineffective and goes too far by restricting political discussion online.

In its application to Australia’s High Court, the social news and aggregation platform said the law is “invalid on the basis of the implied freedom of political communication”, saying that it burdens political communication.

Canberra’s ban came into effect on Wednesday and targeted 10 major services, including Alphabet‘s YouTube, Meta’s Instagram, ByteDance’s TikTok, RedditSnapchat and Elon Musk’s X. All targeted platforms had agreed to comply with the policy to varying degrees.

Australia’s Prime Minister’s office, Attorney-General’s Department and other social media platforms did not immediately reply to requests for comment.

Under the law, the targeted platforms will have to take “reasonable steps” to prevent underage access, using ageverification methods such as inference from online activity, facial estimation via selfies, uploaded IDs, or linked bank details.

Reddit’s application to the courts seeks to either declare the law invalid or exclude the platform from the provisions of the law.

In a statement to CNBC, Reddit said that while it agrees with the importance of protecting persons under 16, the law could isolate teens “from the ability to engage in age-appropriate community experiences (including political discussions).”

It also said in its application that the law “burdens political communication,” saying “the political views of children inform the electoral choices of many current electors, including their parents and their teachers, as well as others interested in the views of those soon to reach the age of maturity.”

The platform also argued that it should not be subject to the law, saying it operates more as a forum for adults facilitating “knowledge sharing” between users than as a traditional social network, saying that it does not import contact lists or address books.

“Reddit is significantly different from other sites that allow for users to become “friends” with one another, or to post photos about themselves, or to organise events,” the platform said in its application.

Reddit further said in its court filing that most content on its platform is accessible without an account, and pointed out a person under the age of 16 “can be more easily protected from online harm if they have an account, being the very thing that is prohibited.”

“That is because the account can be subject to settings that limit their access to particular kinds of content that may be harmful to them,” it adds.

Despite its objections, Reddit said that the challenge was not an attempt to avoid complying with the law, nor was it an effort to retain young users for business reasons.

“There are more targeted, privacy-preserving measures to protect young people online without resorting to blanket bans,” the platform said.

— CNBC’s Dylan Butts contributed to this story.

Continue Reading

Technology

Altman and Musk launched OpenAI as a nonprofit 10 years ago. Now they’re rivals in a trillion-dollar market

Published

on

By

Altman and Musk launched OpenAI as a nonprofit 10 years ago. Now they’re rivals in a trillion-dollar market

Open AI CEO Sam Altman speaks during a talk session with SoftBank Group CEO Masayoshi Son at an event titled “Transforming Business through AI” in Tokyo, Japan, on February 03, 2025.

Tomohiro Ohsumi | Getty Images

On Dec. 11, 2015, OpenAI launched as a nonprofit research lab after Elon Musk and a group of prominent techies, including Peter Thiel and Reid Hoffman, pledged $1 billion to develop artificial intelligence for the benefit of humanity. The idea was for the project to be be free of commercial pressures and the pursuit of money.

A decade later, that founding mission is all but forgotten.

Musk, now the world’s richest person, is long gone, having created rival startup xAI. And he’s been engaged in a heated legal and public relations fight with OpenAI CEO and co-founder Sam Altman.

Far from the nonprofit realm, OpenAI has emerged as one of the fastest-growing commercial entities on the planet, zooming to a $500 billion private market valuation, with almost all of that value accruing since the company’s launch of ChatGPT three years ago. More than 800 million people now use the chatbot every week.

Musk’s xAI, meanwhile, is expected to close a $15 billion round at a $230 billion pre-money valuation this month, sources familiar with the matter told CNBC’s David Faber in late November.

OpenAI and xAI are two of the main companies, along with Google, Anthropic and Meta, pouring money into AI models, as the market rapidly evolves from text-based chatbots to AI-generated videos and more advanced compute-intensive forms of content, as well as into agentic AI, with large enterprises customizing tools to enhance productivity.

For OpenAI, the price tag is almost incomprehensible: $1.4 trillion and growing. That’s primarily for the mammoth data centers and high-powered chips required to meet what the company sees as insatiable demand for its technology. For now, OpenAI is a cash-burning machine going up against tech’s megacaps and their chip suppliers, drawing comparisons to earlier waves of high-growth tech firms that spent heavily for years to challenge behemoth incumbents, but to mixed results.

“OpenAI has a very big role in the in the history of the development of artificial intelligence, and will forever have that role,” said Gil Luria, an equity analyst at D.A. Davidson, in an interview. “Now, will that role be Netscape, or will it be Google? We’ve yet to find out.”

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang speaks at an event ahead of the COMPUTEX forum, in Taipei, Taiwan, June 2, 2024.

Ann Wang | Reuters

It’s a position that would’ve been hard to imagine in 2016, when Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang hauled a black DGX-1 supercomputer up to OpenAI’s offices in San Francisco’s Mission District. The $300,000 machine had cost Nvidia “a few billion dollars” to develop, and there were no other buyers, Huang recalled recently on Joe Rogan’s podcast.

Musk, at OpenAI, was the only one who wanted it.

When Musk told him it was for “a nonprofit company,” Huang said all the blood drained from his face at the thought of parking such a costly box inside an organization that wasn’t meant to make money.

Behind the scenes, though, the nonprofit ideal was already under intense strain, and Musk didn’t like what he saw.

“Guys, I’ve had enough. This is the final straw,” Musk wrote in an email to his co-founders in 2017. He warned that he would “no longer fund OpenAI” if it turned into a tech startup instead of a nonprofit. Altman wrote back the next morning: “i remain enthusiastic about the non-profit structure!”

Altman vs. Musk

In February of the following year, Musk left the OpenAI board, and said at the time the move was to avoid a potential conflict of interest as his car company, Tesla, dove deeper into AI.

The story was more complicated.

Musk sued OpenAI and Altman in early 2024, alleging they abandoned the company’s founding mission to develop AI “for the benefit of humanity broadly,” and he’s regularly criticized OpenAI’s close ties to Microsoft, its principal backer. He also went to court to try and keep OpenAI from converting into a for-profit entity and, earlier this year, went so far as to try and acquire the AI lab for $97.4 billion.

In October, OpenAI announced it had completed a recapitalization, cementing its structure as a nonprofit with a controlling stake in its for-profit business, which is now a public benefit corporation called OpenAI Group PBC.

OpenAI signs $38B deal with Amazon: Here's what to know

Musk isn’t the only early OpenAI team member who’s turned into a bitter rival. Siblings Dario and Daniela Amodei left OpenAI in late 2020 to form Anthropic, which said last month that Microsoft and Nvidia would invest in the company. The valuation from the funding round could reach as high as $350 billion.

Anthropic’s Claude family of large language models is one of the biggest competitors to OpenAI’s GPT models.

Altman is wagering that he can win the race by outspending the competition. While his company has sketched out plans for a trillion-dollar-plus AI infrastructure outlay, Anthropic has made roughly $100 billion in recent compute commitments, spaced out at various intervals over the next few years.

It all amounts to a giant bet that demand for AI services will continue apace.

“We’ve got all the various AI vendors making these huge capital investments,” said David Menninger, executive director of software research at ISG. “There’s a question as to how long those capital investments continue and whether or not they all pan out.”

Luria says Anthropic and others are making reasonable commitments based on their current growth trajectory and the funding they’ve already secured. But he said OpenAI’s approach has been based on a “fantastical set of commitments” with a “faint belief that those numbers are even possible.”

‘Pretty extreme’

Altman told CNBC in an interview on Thursday that OpenAI is already seeing enough demand to justify its spending plans, which “makes us confident that we will be able to significantly ramp revenue.”

“It’s obviously unusual to be growing this fast at this kind of scale, but it is what we see in our current data,” Altman said, adding that “the demand in the market is pretty extreme.”

Altman said last month that he expects annualized revenue to hit $20 billion by the end of this year and to reach hundreds of billions by 2030. Its historic pace of growth has been a big boon for major tech companies.

Oracle signed a roughly $500 billion deal to sell infrastructure services to OpenAI over five years. Chipmakers Advanced Micro Devices and Broadcom have woven OpenAI-linked demand into multi-year forecasts.

But Oracle’s shares plunged 11% on Thursday after the software vendor reported weaker-than-expected revenue, a miss that dragged down Nvidia, CoreWeave and other AI-related stocks. Despite a surge in long-term contract commitments from companies like OpenAI, Meta, and Nvidia, investors are growing concerned about Oracle’s debt load that’s fueling its buildout.

Oracle plunges on weak revenue

Still, venture capitalist Matt Murphy of Menlo Ventures, said that in his 25 years in the venture business, “this is the mother of all waves.”

Murphy, an early investor in Anthropic, said the combination of AI models, custom chips and hyperscale data centers adds up to the potential for trillion-dollar outcomes. That explains the eye-popping level of capital expenditures and the astronomical valuations, he said.

Altman recently declared a “code red” inside his company, and shuffled resources to focus on making ChatGPT faster, more reliable and more personal, while delaying work on ads, health and shopping agents and a personal assistant called Pulse. His declaration came after Google released its Gemini 3 model last month, further accelerating the search giant’s ascent in the market.

On Thursday, OpenAI unveiled ChatGPT-5.2, a faster, more capable reasoning model that the company says is its best system yet for everyday professional use. It also struck a three-year, $1 billion content and equity deal with Disney around the Sora AI video generator.

Altman downplayed the threat from Google, telling CNBC that Gemini had less of an impact on the company’s metrics than OpenAI initially feared.

“I believe that when a competitive threat happens, you want to focus on it, deal with it quickly,” Altman said.

He said he expects the company to exit code red by January.

— CNBC’s Kif Leswing contributed to this report.

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman: Expect annualized revenue run rate to top $20B this year

Continue Reading

Technology

Broadcom stock reverses lower on a misinterpretation of what the CEO said on the earnings call

Published

on

By

Broadcom stock reverses lower on a misinterpretation of what the CEO said on the earnings call

Continue Reading

Trending