![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.streamingmediablog.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/1781707699349.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n
Here\u2019s a bulleted list of what the media and some in the industry are getting wrong about Fox\u2019s announcement to acquire Roku, including some making up numbers. Stick to the facts.<\/p>\n
- \n
- Those using Fox\u2019s purchase of MySpace as evidence as to why Fox will mess up the Roku acquisition are delusional. That deal is neither comparable nor relevant. The MySpace acquisition took place 21 years ago, before social media existed, two years before Netflix started streaming, five years before Instagram launched, and even two years before the iPhone was announced.<\/li>\n
- Based on its current licensing deal with the NFL, Fox can\u2019t make NFL games \u201cfree\u201d on Tubi or The Roku Channel. That\u2019s not how NFL deals are structured, and the price paid is based on the type of service it will be on (free\/vMVPD\/SVOD) and the number of users. If Fox wanted to make games free, it would have to renegotiate its terms with the NFL, if the NFL allowed it.<\/li>\n
- I see many posts calling Roku a hardware company, or that Fox is paying for a dongle. Read the balance sheet. In Q1 2026, Roku\u2019s revenue from device sales was less than 10% of total revenue, at $118M, down 16% YoY.<\/li>\n
- Roku does not have 100 million \u201cRoku devices\u201d in the market. Roku reported it has more than \u201c100 million streaming households,\u201d and many of those households are accessing Roku\u2019s platform via third-party hardware from TV manufacturers.<\/li>\n
- Roku\u2019s definition of a household is \u201cthe number of distinct user accounts streaming on the Roku platform in a given 30-day period.\u201d That doesn\u2019t mean \u201c100 million people,\u201d as some are reporting.<\/li>\n
- A report said Netflix \u201cbid\u201d on Roku, which is not accurate. Netflix never put in a binding bid for Roku. (Netflix has since confirmed this) Being interested in acquiring a company and having discussions with them is not the same as \u201closing out\u201d to Fox. For those saying Netflix needs a FAST service, they don\u2019t need to acquire Roku to get one.<\/li>\n
- Why can\u2019t CNBC quote the actual number? Fox \u201cacquired Tubi in 2020 for less than $1 billion.\u201d The price was \u201capproximately $440 million in net cash.\u201d It\u2019s a public number.<\/li>\n
- Many are incorrectly citing numbers from Roku\u2019s balance sheet and even implying that Fox will \u201ctake on Roku\u2019s debt.\u201d Wrong! Roku has zero long-term debt and had $2.38 billion in cash and cash equivalents at the end of Q1. Fox says the deal is expected to be accretive to free cash flow per share by the second full year after closing. This means it adds more cash to the company than it costs.<\/li>\n
- \u2013 Fox did not take on $12 billion in debt. FOX obtained $12 billion of fully committed bridge financing from Morgan Stanley Senior Funding. They didn\u2019t borrow $12 billion; they are simply approved for $12 billion in financing. The debt impact on the balance sheet is expected to be approximately $8.3 billion.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
My post, which gives a quick overview of the deal with factual numbers, can be found here<\/a>.<\/p>\n
Related<\/em><\/h3>\n<\/p><\/div>\n