iRobot Faces Bankruptcy After Elizabeth Warren Helped Kill $1.65 Billion Amazon Merger
Amazon, with its deep pockets, could have helped turn things around. Instead, regulators consigned the company to die a slow and painful death.
A struggling American manufacturer may soon face bankruptcy. This was not just the result of low sales, but of government regulators butting in.
Online retail giant Amazon announced in August 2022 that it had agreed to purchase iRobot, makers of Roomba robot vacuums, for $1.65 billion. The acquisition would expand Amazon's footprint in the smart home market, after it previously purchased video doorbell company Ring.
The following month, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) opened an investigation into the merger. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) and several Democrats in the House of Representatives sent a letter to then-FTC Chair Lina Khan, saying "the FTC should use its authority to oppose the Amazon–iRobot transaction."
The letter alleged that rather than compete directly with iRobot—whose products accounted for 75 percent of the smart vacuum marketplace at the time—Amazon was simply trying to buy its way in. "Rather than compete in a fair marketplace on its own merits," the lawmakers warned, "Amazon is following a familiar anticompetitive playbook: leveraging its massive market share and access to capital to buy or suppress popular products."
The European Commission—the governing body of the European Union—soon launched its own investigation. Commissioners later signaled that, among their objections, a merger "may restrict competition in the market for robot vacuum cleaners."
"Amazon may have the ability to foreclose iRobot's rivals," the commission added, either by excluding them from its online marketplace or by "degrading their access to it."
In January 2024, Amazon and iRobot jointly announced the termination of the deal, seeing "no path to regulatory approval in the European Union." iRobot then announced it would cut 31 percent of its workforce; the company had hemorrhaged money while waiting for the deal to close, and it reported losing as much $285 million the previous year.
Since then, its outlook has not improved. "There is substantial doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a going concern for a period of at least 12 months," iRobot announced in March.
"Last week the last remaining counterparty to a potential sale transaction withdrew from the process following a lengthy period of exclusive negotiations, and we currently are not in advanced negotiations with any alternative counterparties to a potential sale or strategic transaction," it noted last week in a regulatory filing. If things don't improve, "we may be forced to significantly curtail or cease operations and would likely seek bankruptcy protection."
After this news broke, iRobot's stock price fell 33 percent. If the company went under, as ZDNet reported earlier this year, "existing Roomba models would continue to work, but they would be offline and function in a limited manner." Owners of its products—50 million sold worldwide, according to the company—would be unable to get product support, replacement parts, or software updates.
Of course, companies fail all the time, leaving customers in the lurch with any tech support or warranty issues. But this story is a bit different, in that iRobot had a path back from bankruptcy that government officials ruined.
While Amazon and iRobot blamed Europe for scuppering their deal, U.S. regulators played a part: Margrethe Vestager, European Commission executive vice president in charge of competition policy, said in a statement after the termination of the deal that the commission was in "close contact" with the FTC during the investigation. Nathan Soderstrom, FTC associate director for merger analysis, said the FTC was "pleased that Amazon and iRobot have abandoned their proposed transaction."
And Warren and the other lawmakers must have been pleased that, as they asked of the FTC, a regulatory body prevented the deal from going through. (Notably, iRobot is headquartered in Massachusetts, Warren's home state; if the company shuts down, a substantial portion of those who lose jobs could be her constituents.)
But who cares if Amazon did buy iRobot and put Roomba at the top of all search results? People are still free not to buy them, or to go somewhere else. Grocery stores routinely prioritize their own private label products, which carry higher profit margins. And while iRobot was certainly the innovator in the space, dozens of companies now make and sell their own robot vacuums.
Besides, Roomba is no longer the dominant force it once was. "While iRobot…maintains its leading position in the North America, its global shipments decreased by 6.7% in 2024, and its market share fell by 2.6%, resulting in an overall share of 13.7%," Paul Lamkin wrote at Forbes in March. "The company has struggled to keep pace with the rapidly evolving competitive landscape," and "there are concerns as to whether [its new product lineup] will be enough to reverse its current trajectory."
It's no secret why: Other companies simply make better products. On its list of the best robot vacuums, Wirecutter makes a point to explain "why we don't currently recommend vacuums from iRobot," citing poor functionality and "rampant" complaints about the company's customer service. (It recommends offerings by Roborock and Eufy, brands that have launched in the last decade or so.)
Perhaps an acquisition could have improved the product line, with Amazon—which recently reported free cash flow of $31 billion—able to invest heavily in R&D. Instead, iRobot was forced to die a slow and painful death because government regulators thought they knew better than consumers.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
So did they stop doing their PackBot military stuff and go all in for Roomba?
My first job was at iRobot (or at least the company that IS Robotics would later buy to acquire the name).
Boehm will pen an article blaming tariffs.
Boehm eats paste and poops his diapers too.
I suspect the Roomba would have worked better had it relied on an operator using a remote screen controlling it with a Joystick.
iBroke
Stop electing women into office.
The problem is when the women are Elizabeth Warren and not Margaret Thatcher.
She shot an arrow through iRobot's heart, scalped them, and then rode away into the sunset while a young boy keened "Liiiiiiiz! Come Baaaack!"
What other arrows are in her quiver?
I hear if you drive a wooden stake through the heart of a democrat politician that it destroys them.
Look, this is simple, right? Obviously, iRobot and Amazon failed to contribute enough funds to Liz's campaign at the last pow-wow ...
Based on a description I'll never forget about Roombas from a commenter here, could this company have ever succeeded? Or would the Amazon Merger merely turned it into the Roomba of Power?
iRobot is right in MA. If they start to fail, wait to hear the bullshit out of her arse-mouth than. Bailouts will then be a moral imperative.
Hmm, federal court decides it has the power to determine how funds are spent during a shutdown. Republicans have to fund a Democrat hissy fit.
Might be time to label federal judges as non-essential and turf as many as humanly possible.
It is definitely time for congress to pass a law clearly stating federal district rulings only apply in that district.
And eliminate all administrative judges.
Apparently, it was already overturned as well.
Wonder if Root will complain about courts passing such obviously faulty decisions.
I don't agree with heavy-handed regulation based on nebulous concepts like "fair trade". But I also think that there is more to the story. I'm sorry, but a company doesn't go from 75% market share in 2022 to bankruptcy today without some terrible horrible management decisions along the way. The nanny regulators deserve blame for not helping, but the management also deserves blame for their mismanagement.
Or maybe the product fell out of favor.
Apparently it sucks.
So did any Reason "journalist" check to see if Lizzie sold iRobot short or not?
I don't understand the fascination with these robot vacuum cleaners. You can buy uprights and cannisters on Amazon for under $100, and it doesn't take more than 5 or 10 minutes to open the closet, run it around the room, move a few chairs as you go, and put it back in the closet.
One Roomba was on sale for $169 or so a year ago, so I bought it. It confirms my opinion these are too special case for me. It can't handle chairs and tables without banging around and getting confused about where it is. I have two end tables with legs that curve out from a central column; the damn thing near knocked one over by trying to climb one of the legs, looked like a dog trying to hump someone's leg. It can't handle my rugs. Its only feature, of being able to clean while I'm out during the day, requires that I move rugs and tables and chairs out of the way.
And some of the damned things sell for thousands of dollars! Maybe some day they'll be better, but I am not impressed with their ability to navigate and clean a real house.
I've wondered but always figured it's easier to just vacuum crap up myself than to use an idiotic Roomba.
If you only have one room, sure.
I have a 1500 ft2 house with a couple pets.
My robot can vacuum and mop. Every day. Twice a day. It can run so much it's actually cleaning the air;) No, seriously, the furniture is less dusty now too because the floors are constantly cleaned.
Floors are vacuumed and mopped before I get up and before I get home from work. Robot empties itself and self-refills with water. I empty the waste water and refill the clean every couple of days, change out the bag once a month.
They also do not sell for 'thousands'. The most expensive models are 1800. Most mos range are just above 1k and you can get good basic ones for under 500.
That's bullshit. I have seen too many gushing reviews of $2000+ vacuums. And when I can get a decent upright for $80 from Amazon, even $500 is extravagant for something that takes more work.
It doesn't take more work.
I don't have to move furniture either. And I have never seen a 2k+ robot vacuum let alone multiple ones.
How well does it deal with chair and table legs, rugs, doormats, and other stuff that most people have scattered around the house? That's my big gripe, that I have to clear the room just as I do for my cheap old upright.
It's also too noisy to run around at night, even if it didn't bang into furniture and walls.
I've had a Roomba - with the low-res camera mapping - and now have a Roborock with Lidar.
In both cases I needed to clear things up initially to allow the bots to make a map of the house. The Lidar does it in one pass, the camera was . . . frustrating. Could take multiple mapping attempts and I eventually gave up because the map would fuck up every couple weeks.
The Roomba liked to slam itself under the middle of the front of my couches - the facade drops down there and the camera can't see it clearly (since its actually a *ceiling mapping camera*) but the Lidar one is perfect. It goes around, goes in under the side or the rear.
Kitchen chairs have enough clearance that it can get under the chair, in between the legs. cleans them up - it has a little aux arm that can catch stuff at the edges of legs and walls.
The only thing I've felt I needed to adjust in my furniture is I moved a reclining couch a little bit from the wall. Since the bot can't get under this I moved it far enough to leave a little path the bot can go down to clean behind it.
The mopping function is . . . ok. If your floor is clean it will keep it clean. I can go a month before needing to mop the kitchen/dining area manually.
Mine cost $1,600. The Roomba cost like 1200 - but it was actually two 600 dollar bots, one vacuum and one mop. That mop was actually way better than the Roomba one (which is a combo vacuum/mop) but the mapping on that one would fail every couple of days and it would get stuck not being able to return to the dock. The Roborock will also clean the mop pad which the other one you had to clean manually. Still simple - pull off, rinse, wring, put back on.
Now, my house it like 1500ft2, tile/veneer floors with low-pile rugs.
If you have deep pile rugs and/or a very small apartment then sure, it might not be worth it. But for a home, in a desert, with small animals, it saves a ton of time and labor.
Good. Now they can sell their patent on detecting a full bin and we can get that added to a robot with LIDAR.