30 ms·

Roku to cut 200 jobs in second round of layoffs

124 points by mska 4y ago

Thaxll 4y ago
6% is the new 10%, in a few years we're going to get layoffs with no layoffs.
damsta 4y ago
And I thought March would be a bit more kinder to IT sector than February and we still have Friday left for a few more layoffs.
- 01100011 4y ago
  Cost of capital is still high. Risk free return rate is still high. It's amazing tech has lasted as well as it has. That said, there was a brief "flight to safety" to tech in '08 as well. I think Q3 is going to be painful.
philipov 4y ago
it's a streaming pile of company, alright.
merrywhether 4y ago
What they really need to do is layoff BrightScript. They are certainly big in the streaming device space, but not enough to justify having a proprietary language. The rest of the industry is coalescing around portable apps based on web tech while Roku is derided and only begrudgingly supported due to their current market share. But Roku’s market share has been relatively flat while FireTV has grown to equal them, and Roku should be terrified of the cliff BrightScript puts them on. Every company would love to kill their oddball BrightScript app as soon as possible and that’s a dangerous position for a company without a defensible moat. See their lost battle with YouTube to see how much clout they actually have.
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  To be fair, not being webshit is part of why their UI is usable (if not great) on low-end hardware. BrightScript does suck, though—but it also already exists, and I doubt maintaining it's all that hard. Used to work on a dual-platform mobile app engine that was probably on par, difficulty-wise, with maintaining & developing BrightScript—that only needed like 3.5 devs, and not at coastal US wages. Meanwhile, the Big Boys get a C++(?) API, as I understand it. I assume that's why some of them behave weird or are glitchy, but do look a lot like the same apps on other platforms. [EDIT] However, they could probably do a good job making a comparably-snappy UI with JavaScript, as long as they didn't drag HTML and CSS along for the ride. Kinda like the JavaScript API on tvOS.
  - marcellus23 4y ago
    > their UI is usable (if not great) on low-end hardware. This is not at all my experience using Roku.
    - yamtaddle 4y ago
      Devices so bad that even Roku runs poorly on them do exist. Zero of them would do better if Roku switched to webtech for its applications.
  - nvrspyx 4y ago
    > To be fair, not being webshit is part of why their UI is usable (if not great) on low-end hardware. I have a TV with Roku built-in. It ran great when I got it in 2020, but it has gotten slower and slower to the point of being unusable. I'm not even talking about apps, but the Roku home screen itself. Apps are even slower and crash all the time, sometimes crashing the TV itself. On the other hand, I have a Chromecast from 2016 that still runs just as well as it did when I bought it. I'd rather use my phone as a remote and have a movie playing in seconds with the Chromecast than wait 1+ minutes for Hulu or Netflix to even get to their respective home screens with the Roku. I also don't get ads with the Chromecast.
    - 4y ago
908B64B197 4y ago
I wonder if these are tech (engineers) or "Tech adjacent" positions. This year's layoffs mostly affected the later.
bastardoperator 4y ago
So forcing huge ads on everyone isn't paying the bills. Take note Google.
- happythebob 4y ago
  Their market cap increased like 10-20X due to covid and zero interest rates, now they have just contracted. I wouldn't read too much into this. I agree that Google of all big tech has the most to lose in the future regarding their internet search ad business, but Roku having ads and giving advertisers data makes a lot of sense for them.
  - SV_BubbleTime 4y ago
    Agreed. This isn’t a dire times warning. It’s that the era of free money is over (and fucking hopefully for a long time), there will be some settling in to actually needing a business that makes money to stay around.
- twblalock 4y ago
  I'm not sure how else Roku can make money. Pretty much every TV is a "smart TV" now with built-in streaming apps. Why would anyone buy a Roku? These additional devices only make sense if they are really cheap (and therefore subsidized by ads, just like the smart TVs are) or offer a premium experience (which would make them cost a lot up front.)
  - jaypeg25 4y ago
    I would happily pay for a dumb TV, if they existed. They don't seem to anymore. I have a Samsung Q-series TV now and tried using the smart TV apps for a while, but many were buggy and often had audio/video desync issues. I might blame part of that on the soundbar, but I gave up and got an Apple TV 4K and haven't had any issues at all.
    - modriano 4y ago
      A recent Jeff Geerling video dug into this subject. [0]. Sharp NEC [1] makes and sells TVs without any "smart" junk (they're mainly aimed at being 24/7 monitors/displays in businesses). They're significantly more expensive than consumer TVs, but part of that is likely to accommodate 24/7 usage. [0] https://youtu.be/-epPf7D8oMk https://youtu.be/-epPf7D8oMk [1] https://www.sharpnecdisplays.us/ https://www.sharpnecdisplays.us/
moneywoes 4y ago
Wonder if SVB impacted this
mathteacher1729 4y ago
"Roku soars past revenue expectations as it bets on streaming devices to boost growth" - Feb 2023[1] [1] https://techcrunch.com/2023/02/15/roku-q4-2023-earnings/ https://techcrunch.com/2023/02/15/roku-q4-2023-earnings/
boringuser2 4y ago
It is interesting to me that all of these labor cuts are from companies vastly outperforming the stock market.
pseudosavant 4y ago
That sucks for all of these people. I can only hope all of them were related to the parts of the business intent on spamming their home screen. Die Harter Two has no business being the second most prominent thing when I turn on my TV.
AH4oFVbPT4f8 4y ago
They have 2 billion in cash, this is absurd. 200 employees x $250k = $50,000,000 Using only cash on hand they could employ these people for another 40 years. Shame on you Roku.
- s1artibartfast 4y ago
  Why employ them for 40 more years if you don't even want them today?
  - AH4oFVbPT4f8 4y ago
    Why not reduce hours for others and improve their quality of life since these workers did so much for the company that the company has so much cash. Or put those people on special projects or help in other areas like ibm used to do. My point is the company has so much money and doing so well, why are they laying off people.
    - s1artibartfast 4y ago
      I think the answer is clear. The company operates for the benefit of the owner and not for the benefit of the employees. The owners would rather keep the cash themselves then give it in charity to employees for improve employee quality of life.
- missedthecue 4y ago
  To do what? Play angry birds? If their labor ins't needed, why buy it even if you can afford it? Do you buy things you don't want or need simply because you can afford to?
pipeline_peak 4y ago
Makes sense, how long can a company survive making solely stream boxes past 2008… I can’t find a tv that doesn’t have smart capabilities. Not a lot of them seem to be using Roku under the hood.
Olumde 4y ago
I interviewed with Roku a few weeks ago. Mercifully, I failed.

124 points by mska 4y ago

6% is the new 10%, in a few years we're going to get layoffs with no layoffs.

And I thought March would be a bit more kinder to IT sector than February and we still have Friday left for a few more layoffs.

01100011 4y ago
Cost of capital is still high. Risk free return rate is still high. It's amazing tech has lasted as well as it has. That said, there was a brief "flight to safety" to tech in '08 as well. I think Q3 is going to be painful.

philipov 4y ago

it's a streaming pile of company, alright.

merrywhether 4y ago

What they really need to do is layoff BrightScript. They are certainly big in the streaming device space, but not enough to justify having a proprietary language. The rest of the industry is coalescing around portable apps based on web tech while Roku is derided and only begrudgingly supported due to their current market share. But Roku’s market share has been relatively flat while FireTV has grown to equal them, and Roku should be terrified of the cliff BrightScript puts them on. Every company would love to kill their oddball BrightScript app as soon as possible and that’s a dangerous position for a company without a defensible moat. See their lost battle with YouTube to see how much clout they actually have.

yamtaddle 4y ago
To be fair, not being webshit is part of why their UI is usable (if not great) on low-end hardware. BrightScript does suck, though—but it also already exists, and I doubt maintaining it's all that hard. Used to work on a dual-platform mobile app engine that was probably on par, difficulty-wise, with maintaining & developing BrightScript—that only needed like 3.5 devs, and not at coastal US wages. Meanwhile, the Big Boys get a C++(?) API, as I understand it. I assume that's why some of them behave weird or are glitchy, but do look a lot like the same apps on other platforms. [EDIT] However, they could probably do a good job making a comparably-snappy UI with JavaScript, as long as they didn't drag HTML and CSS along for the ride. Kinda like the JavaScript API on tvOS.
- marcellus23 4y ago
  > their UI is usable (if not great) on low-end hardware. This is not at all my experience using Roku.
  - yamtaddle 4y ago
    Devices so bad that even Roku runs poorly on them do exist. Zero of them would do better if Roku switched to webtech for its applications.
- nvrspyx 4y ago
  > To be fair, not being webshit is part of why their UI is usable (if not great) on low-end hardware. I have a TV with Roku built-in. It ran great when I got it in 2020, but it has gotten slower and slower to the point of being unusable. I'm not even talking about apps, but the Roku home screen itself. Apps are even slower and crash all the time, sometimes crashing the TV itself. On the other hand, I have a Chromecast from 2016 that still runs just as well as it did when I bought it. I'd rather use my phone as a remote and have a movie playing in seconds with the Chromecast than wait 1+ minutes for Hulu or Netflix to even get to their respective home screens with the Roku. I also don't get ads with the Chromecast.
  - 4y ago

908B64B197 4y ago

I wonder if these are tech (engineers) or "Tech adjacent" positions. This year's layoffs mostly affected the later.

bastardoperator 4y ago

So forcing huge ads on everyone isn't paying the bills. Take note Google.

happythebob 4y ago
Their market cap increased like 10-20X due to covid and zero interest rates, now they have just contracted. I wouldn't read too much into this. I agree that Google of all big tech has the most to lose in the future regarding their internet search ad business, but Roku having ads and giving advertisers data makes a lot of sense for them.
- SV_BubbleTime 4y ago
  Agreed. This isn’t a dire times warning. It’s that the era of free money is over (and fucking hopefully for a long time), there will be some settling in to actually needing a business that makes money to stay around.
twblalock 4y ago
I'm not sure how else Roku can make money. Pretty much every TV is a "smart TV" now with built-in streaming apps. Why would anyone buy a Roku? These additional devices only make sense if they are really cheap (and therefore subsidized by ads, just like the smart TVs are) or offer a premium experience (which would make them cost a lot up front.)
- jaypeg25 4y ago
  I would happily pay for a dumb TV, if they existed. They don't seem to anymore. I have a Samsung Q-series TV now and tried using the smart TV apps for a while, but many were buggy and often had audio/video desync issues. I might blame part of that on the soundbar, but I gave up and got an Apple TV 4K and haven't had any issues at all.
  - modriano 4y ago
    A recent Jeff Geerling video dug into this subject. [0]. Sharp NEC [1] makes and sells TVs without any "smart" junk (they're mainly aimed at being 24/7 monitors/displays in businesses). They're significantly more expensive than consumer TVs, but part of that is likely to accommodate 24/7 usage. [0] https://youtu.be/-epPf7D8oMk https://youtu.be/-epPf7D8oMk [1] https://www.sharpnecdisplays.us/ https://www.sharpnecdisplays.us/

moneywoes 4y ago

Wonder if SVB impacted this

mathteacher1729 4y ago

"Roku soars past revenue expectations as it bets on streaming devices to boost growth" - Feb 2023[1] [1] https://techcrunch.com/2023/02/15/roku-q4-2023-earnings/ https://techcrunch.com/2023/02/15/roku-q4-2023-earnings/

boringuser2 4y ago

It is interesting to me that all of these labor cuts are from companies vastly outperforming the stock market.

pseudosavant 4y ago

That sucks for all of these people. I can only hope all of them were related to the parts of the business intent on spamming their home screen. Die Harter Two has no business being the second most prominent thing when I turn on my TV.

AH4oFVbPT4f8 4y ago

They have 2 billion in cash, this is absurd. 200 employees x $250k = $50,000,000 Using only cash on hand they could employ these people for another 40 years. Shame on you Roku.

s1artibartfast 4y ago
Why employ them for 40 more years if you don't even want them today?
- AH4oFVbPT4f8 4y ago
  Why not reduce hours for others and improve their quality of life since these workers did so much for the company that the company has so much cash. Or put those people on special projects or help in other areas like ibm used to do. My point is the company has so much money and doing so well, why are they laying off people.
  - s1artibartfast 4y ago
    I think the answer is clear. The company operates for the benefit of the owner and not for the benefit of the employees. The owners would rather keep the cash themselves then give it in charity to employees for improve employee quality of life.
missedthecue 4y ago
To do what? Play angry birds? If their labor ins't needed, why buy it even if you can afford it? Do you buy things you don't want or need simply because you can afford to?

pipeline_peak 4y ago

Makes sense, how long can a company survive making solely stream boxes past 2008… I can’t find a tv that doesn’t have smart capabilities. Not a lot of them seem to be using Roku under the hood.

Olumde 4y ago

I interviewed with Roku a few weeks ago. Mercifully, I failed.