Modern MBA

Case study — Technology · 11 min read · 5 questions

What happened to GoPro

The thesis

GoPro is the rare company that satisfied both religions at once. Silicon Valley says create the market and be first, and GoPro created the action camera outright — it became the name of the product, the company and the category. Wall Street says show margins and profit, and GoPro did that too, IPOing in 2014 on over a billion dollars of sales with none of the subsidised losses its peers carried. It even had a genuine flywheel: users shot footage so extraordinary it went viral, and the viral footage sold the next camera for free.

What it never acquired was an understanding of its own market. When the $399 HERO4 Session sold nothing until it was cut to $199, the founder read that as evidence the addressable market could be expanded by lowering price. But price changes who can afford a product, not how many people want one. What the market was actually saying is that its buyers had already matured into feature-driven comparison shoppers — and a company that had run no consumer research could not hear it. Six SKUs then confused customers into buying nothing, and the entry-level line was killed at a $60 million loss.

So the decline was spent on markets it had not checked. Two hundred entertainment staff and executives from HBO, MTV and Hulu, for content nobody would pay for. A $1,000 drone slower, shorter-range and shorter-flying than a same-priced DJI, which lost power mid-air and was recalled two weeks in; the whole aerial business lasted ten months. It took nine years to try specialising the camera it invented. The founder had already been paid at IPO.

How do you think about this? 5 strategy questions this case raises and does not answer.
Read the comments, or add yours

The statistics

95%Fall in GoPro's share price from its peak
10 monthsThe entire life of GoPro's drone business
9 yearsBefore GoPro tried specialising the camera it invented

By the numbers — swipe or use arrows

01Five years from $65M to $1.6BRevenue and operating income through the golden age. The tell is 2015: record revenue, and operating income back down to $54M.
Five years from $65M to $1.6B — What happened to GoPro$0M$500M$1,000M$1,500M$2,000M$65M$12M2010$234M$38M2011$526M$54M2012$986M$99M2013$1,394M$187M2014$1,620M$54M2015REVENUEOPERATING INCOMEModern MBA
View data
Revenue and operating income through the golden age
RevenueOperating income
2010$65M$12M
2011$234M$38M
2012$526M$54M
2013$986M$99M
2014$1,394M$187M
2015$1,620M$54M

Source: Modern MBA, “What happened to GoPro”, published . Cite this chart · Sources

02The whole company in one lineCameras shipped worldwide across all three eras. 2015 is the peak at 6.58 million; 2022 is 2.81 million, below where the golden age had got to by 2012.
The whole company in one line — What happened to GoPro0.00M2.50M5.00M7.50M1.15M20112.32M20123.85M20135.18M20146.58M20154.76M20164.30M20174.33M20184.26M20192.82M20203.15M20212.81M2022Modern MBA
View data
Cameras shipped worldwide across all three eras
Counts
20111.15M
20122.32M
20133.85M
20145.18M
20156.58M
20164.76M
20174.30M
20184.33M
20194.26M
20202.82M
20213.15M
20222.81M

Source: Modern MBA, “What happened to GoPro”, published . Cite this chart · Sources

03Revenue held flat and the profit vanished anywayRevenue against net income. From 2016 the top line barely moves, while the entertainment and drone bets take it $419M into the red.
Revenue held flat and the profit vanished anyway — What happened to GoPro−$1,000M$0M$1,000M$2,000M$1,349M$128M2014$1,620M$36M2015$1,185M−$419M2016$1,179M−$183M2017$1,148M−$109M2018$1,194M−$15M2019REVENUENET INCOME / LOSSModern MBA
View data
Revenue against net income
RevenueNet income / loss
2014$1,349M$128M
2015$1,620M$36M
2016$1,185M−$419M
2017$1,179M−$183M
2018$1,148M−$109M
2019$1,194M−$15M

Source: Modern MBA, “What happened to GoPro”, published . Cite this chart · Sources

04It sells half as many cameras at twice the priceAverage price of a single GoPro across all three eras. $137 in 2013 against $389 in 2022 — the volume is gone and the price is doing the work.
It sells half as many cameras at twice the price — What happened to GoPro$0$100$200$300$400$500$2052011$2272012$1372013$1902014$2122015$3402016$2762017$2722018$2802019$3162020$3692021$3892022Modern MBA
View data
Average price of a single GoPro across all three eras
US dollars
2011$205
2012$227
2013$137
2014$190
2015$212
2016$340
2017$276
2018$272
2019$280
2020$316
2021$369
2022$389

Source: Modern MBA, “What happened to GoPro”, published . Cite this chart · Sources

05Fleeing the retailers that built itSales by channel. GoPro.com went from $141M to $410M while retail fell from $1,048M to $683M — the opposite of the direct-to-consumer path Casper took.
Fleeing the retailers that built it — What happened to GoPro$0M$200M$400M$600M$800M$1,000M$1,200M$141M$1,048M2019$283M$609M2020$392M$769M2021$410M$683M2022GOPRO.COMRETAILERSModern MBA
View data
Sales by channel
GoPro.comRetailers
2019$141M$1,048M
2020$283M$609M
2021$392M$769M
2022$410M$683M

Source: Modern MBA, “What happened to GoPro”, published . Cite this chart · Sources

06The subscription the company calls its engineSubscription revenue against camera sales. It has doubled to $82M and is still under 8% of the business it is supposed to be replacing.
The subscription the company calls its engine — What happened to GoPro$0M$200M$400M$600M$800M$1,000M$1,200M$40M$852M2020$53M$1,108M2021$82M$1,011M2022SUBSCRIPTION REVENUECAMERA SALESModern MBA
View data
Subscription revenue against camera sales
Subscription revenueCamera sales
2020$40M$852M
2021$53M$1,108M
2022$82M$1,011M

Source: Modern MBA, “What happened to GoPro”, published . Cite this chart · Sources

01 / 06

Revenue, units shipped, segment losses, headcount reductions, severance and net income from GoPro Inc. annual reports and 10-K filings, 2010 through 2022; product launch pricing and discount timing as announced by the company; Karma flight time, range and speed against DJI Phantom and Mavic specifications as published; executive commentary from GoPro earnings calls and public interviews

Key takeaways

01

GoPro revived a market everyone had written off. Smartphones had reduced the digital camera war between Sony, Nikon, Canon and Fuji to scraps by the late 2000s. GoPro came back at it from an angle phones could not follow — compact, rugged, waterproof, mountable — and made cameras that survived space, ocean, volcanoes and Everest.

02

It owned the category so completely it became the noun. GoPro was the name of the product, the company, and the generic label for any small action camera on the market. Its footage was identifiable on sight from the fish-eye point-of-view alone.

03

And the marketing was free. Early users were paid in internet fame; their viral videos recruited the next buyers, who shot more footage, which reached more people. GoPro described it as a flywheel where adoption drove awareness drove sales — and it saved the company millions, because it never had to argue that GoPro was cool.

04

The flywheel even worked in the aisle. GoPro built point-of-purchase displays up to 12 feet wide with screens playing an endless reel of user footage, so a shopper who had never seen it got shown it. Other brands wanted the same effect: Marriott lent GoPros to resort guests, LG ran GoPro clips on its 4K TVs in stores, and channels appeared on Xbox, Roku, Pinterest, Twitter and Virgin America.

05

Which convinced the company it was a media business. GoPro built an entertainment division of 200 people and hired the former CEO of Skype, an 11-time Emmy-winning HBO VP, an MTV SVP and Hulu's Head of Original Content, to license user footage and build narrative series. This was 2014, when Netflix had just shipped House of Cards and original content was the hottest idea in entertainment.

06

The IPO was genuinely earned. Revenue went from $65M in 2010 to $1.62B in 2015 and units shipped quintupled, in a category where every legacy camera brand was shrinking. Unlike its 2014 IPO peers, GoPro was profitable.

07

Then growth halved in a single year — from 41% in 2014 to 16% in 2015 — while shipping a record number of cameras. Entertainment overhead and a six-camera lineup selling below expectations took profitability with it.

08

The HERO4 Session was the tell and the company misread it. Nobody would pay $399 for a display-less, lower-resolution camera when the HERO4 Silver cost the same with a touchscreen and better video. Sales only moved when the price was cut to $199, four months after launch.

09

The founder's conclusion was that a lower price grows the market, which is not how markets work. Price changes accessibility, not size — Apple raising the iPhone price does not shrink the smartphone market. What the Session actually revealed is that GoPro's buyers had moved from early majority to late: feature-driven, price-aware, and no longer buying whatever shipped.

10

Six SKUs then paralysed everyone. The Hero4 Black at $499, Silver at $399, Session at $399, Hero+ LCD at $299 and HERO at $129 overwhelmed shoppers and retailers alike. GoPro killed three of them within a year and left the entry-level market at a $60 million loss, conceding that too much choice makes customers buy nothing.

11

Karma was the worst kind of late. GoPro's $1,000 drone arrived against a DJI that had done to drones what GoPro did to action cameras — and arrived worse: 18 minutes of flight against the Phantom's 27 and Mavic's 28, 3km of range against 5-7km, and 5-10 mph slower. Being late is unwise; arriving inferior at the same price is reckless.

12

Then it fell out of the sky. Two weeks after launch, Karmas began losing power mid-flight and crashing, users filmed it, and GoPro recalled every unit — unable to explain the fault. By the relaunch three months later the drone market itself was collapsing under regulation and consolidation. The entire aerial business lasted 10 months.

13

2016 is where it all landed at once. Revenue fell from $1.62B to $1.19B, the company lost $419 million, the entertainment division was gutted with all 200 laid off and over $30 million paid in severance, and another $200M of annual operating expense was cut by outsourcing software and accounting to Romania and the Philippines.

14

The answer it kept reaching for was easier editing, and that was the wrong stage. The workflow is capture, transfer, edit, upload, share. Editing is the most laborious step, but capture is the hardest — it needs a premeditated activity, known timing, known lighting and someone to film. Most people fail there and never reach editing, so QuikStories, a straight lift of Instagram and Snapchat, changed nothing.

15

When it finally listened to power users, the product got better immediately. HyperSmooth stabilisation removed the need for a gimbal, microphones improved underwater and in wind, the rear touchscreen was redesigned, and built-in fingers removed the mounting frame. The HERO7 and HERO8 sold better than anything in years — after a decade of chasing a mainstream that was never coming.

16

The present business is smaller than the one it IPO'd with. GoPro grossed $1.09B in 2022, less than in 2014 in nominal terms and far less in real ones, on under 3 million units — a 35% fall in five years. The 2021 net income of $370M was mostly a $280M tax benefit; operations produced $55M. The company has announced a $100 million buyback, which at that price would buy roughly a quarter of itself.

Common questions

What happened to GoPro?

It created the action camera market, saturated it, and then spent the decline betting on markets it had not researched. Revenue peaked at $1.6 billion in 2015 and was $1.09 billion in 2022, units have fallen to under three million a year, and the stock is down about 95% from its peak. The proximate causes were a confusing six-camera lineup, a $1,000 drone that was inferior to a same-priced DJI and got recalled, and a 200-person entertainment division building content nobody would pay for. The underlying cause is that the company never understood its own market.

Why did GoPro fail?

Not because it made mistakes — every hardware company misprices products and ships flops — but because it made the same ones for years before recognising them. It read the failure of the $399 HERO4 Session as proof that cutting price grows the addressable market, when price changes accessibility rather than market size. It launched six SKUs that confused customers into buying nothing. And it took nine years to try the textbook response to a shrinking market: specialising its camera for adjacent uses.

What happened to the GoPro Karma drone?

It lasted about ten months. Launched in 2016 at $1,000 against DJI, it was inferior on every specification that mattered — 18 minutes of flight time against the Phantom's 27 and Mavic's 28, three kilometres of range against five to seven, and 5-10 mph slower — at the same price. Two weeks after launch units began losing power mid-flight and crashing, and GoPro recalled every one without being able to explain the fault. By the relaunch three months later the drone market was consolidating around DJI, and GoPro discontinued Karma and laid off the entire aerial division.

Is GoPro still profitable?

Barely, and less than the headline suggests. GoPro reported net income of $370 million in 2021, but $280 million of that was a one-off tax benefit — operations produced about $55 million. Revenue in 2022 was $1.09 billion, lower than in 2014 in nominal terms and much lower adjusted for inflation. The business is now smaller and more expensive per unit: shipments are under three million a year, down 35% in five years, offset by higher prices to power users.

Why did GoPro start a media division?

Because its user footage was so viral the company believed it could sell the content as well as the cameras. It built an entertainment division of 200 people and hired the former CEO of Skype, an 11-time Emmy-winning HBO vice president, an MTV senior vice president and Hulu's head of original content, intending to license user clips and produce narrative series. It was launched in the era when Netflix had just released House of Cards. The problem was that viewers who happily watched free GoPro clips would not pay for GoPro content in any form, and the entire division was cut in 2016 with over $30 million in severance.

What is GoPro's strategy now?

Three things. It moved sales away from retailers toward GoPro.com so it keeps the full price, using COVID as the moment to consolidate its store presence. It built a $50-a-year subscription bundling accessory and launch discounts, auto-upload, unlimited storage and camera insurance, which it describes as its most profitable line. And it now treats the HERO as a platform rather than a product, in the way car makers reuse a chassis — shipping Bones, a stripped variant for drone use, and a Creator Edition bundling the flagship with a tripod, grip, remote and lights for vlogging.

Who is GoPro's biggest competitor?

DJI in drones, which GoPro lost outright, and increasingly smartphones and specialist rivals in cameras. The more revealing answer is the founder's own: GoPro complained that unlike AT&T with Verizon or Ford with Chevy, it had no direct competitor to benchmark against and had to learn its market alone. Having created a category with no peer sounds like a moat, and it removed the feedback that would have surfaced its pricing and product mistakes years earlier.

Discussion

  1. GoPro read a pricing failure as proof it could expand its market by discounting. What is the correct reading of a product nobody buys until it is half price?

  2. The company spent nine years before trying to specialise the camera for adjacent uses. What in a founder-led culture makes an obvious move take that long?

  3. GoPro's flywheel gave it free marketing and, arguably, a false signal about demand for its content. When is virality evidence of a business?

  4. Nick Woodman was paid at IPO and his wealth no longer depends on the outcome. How much should a board weigh a founder's remaining skin in the game?

  5. A $100 million buyback would buy a quarter of the company. Is that a use of capital or an admission there is nothing left to build?

Related case studies