RIM death watch

[silverpig]

What are they going to do then? They could be just saying that just to get Canadian approval.

One thing they could try would be doing Android phones+tablets, but I think that would be a futile effort. Not sure if a keyboard Android device would sell now.

Android will be a fail. BB's strength is software and services. Their weakness is hardware. Why abandon what you're good at to compete against Samsung in what they're awesome at?

 

[jpiniero]

Android will be a fail. BB's strength is software and services. Their weakness is hardware. Why abandon what you're good at to compete against Samsung in what they're awesome at?

Because BB10 is a failure.

 

[silverpig]

Because BB10 is a failure.

It's been out 9 months...

It doesn't have to get 35% marketshare to be a success, and it can take a while to build that up.

Granted it hasn't done nearly as well as hoped, and if they don't change it and improve it, it just won't sell well, but there is still an opportunity to turn it into a solid little platform.

 

[sdifox]

fuckers buy a bigger jet 2 months before laying off 40% of workforce and write down 1B. I say lynch the board.

http://business.financialpost.com/2...ping-its-financial-bombshell/?__lsa=7196-27f0

 

[Doppel]

It's been out 9 months...

It doesn't have to get 35% marketshare to be a success, and it can take a while to build that up.

Granted it hasn't done nearly as well as hoped, and if they don't change it and improve it, it just won't sell well, but there is still an opportunity to turn it into a solid little platform.

This all reminds me of the guy in Monty python who had no limbs left but was still insisting that he could fight.

Blackberry is done. "Take a while to build it up"? In the last year BB market share in the UK, for example, dropped from 11% to 3.5%.

Too late. BB is dead, as dead as a man taking his final walk to the electric chair.mthis has been clear for a long while. It is surprising to see people still deny the inevitable.

 

[silverpig]

fuckers buy a bigger jet 2 months before laying off 40% of workforce and write down 1B. I say lynch the board.

http://business.financialpost.com/2...ping-its-financial-bombshell/?__lsa=7196-27f0

Yup, this management team seems to have some egg on their face.

I wonder if things will come out similar to the Nokia CEO's conflict of interest. Thorsten stands to gain $55M personally with a sale of BB.

 

[silverpig]

This all reminds me of the guy in Monty python who had no limbs left but was still insisting that he could fight.

Blackberry is done. "Take a while to build it up"? In the last year BB market share in the UK, for example, dropped from 11% to 3.5%.

Too late. BB is dead, as dead as a man taking his final walk to the electric chair.mthis has been clear for a long while. It is surprising to see people still deny the inevitable.

'tis a flesh wound!

They're not dead. They won't have 80% marketshare anytime soon, that's for sure, but they can turn it around and slowly chip away just as MS has done. Remember the Zune? WP7? Epic fails, they were dead, etc right?

Look, I'm not imagining a miraculous comeback from the ashes. I don't own any BB stock, and I gain nothing from them coming back. My wife has an iPhone, I've got a Z10.

I like the phone, and I honestly think BB has the ability to do some things that the other players don't right now. They've just been shit at executing since the Playbook. Fix the execution problems (big job), and they can leverage BES, QNX, their security, and their initial foray into consumer to come up with some new stuff.

Will they? With current management, nuh uh. With Prem at the helm? Maybe, and that's a big maybe.

 

[sdifox]

'tis a flesh wound!

They're not dead. They won't have 80% marketshare anytime soon, that's for sure, but they can turn it around and slowly chip away just as MS has done. Remember the Zune? WP7? Epic fails, they were dead, etc right?

Look, I'm not imagining a miraculous comeback from the ashes. I don't own any BB stock, and I gain nothing from them coming back. My wife has an iPhone, I've got a Z10.

I like the phone, and I honestly think BB has the ability to do some things that the other players don't right now. They've just been shit at executing since the Playbook. Fix the execution problems (big job), and they can leverage BES, QNX, their security, and their initial foray into consumer to come up with some new stuff.

Will they? With current management, nuh uh. With Prem at the helm? Maybe, and that's a big maybe.

BB is a one trick pony and the trick is old and tired. Not the same as MS that owns several cash cows.

 

[Imp]

Not sure if serious...Compare the annual compounded annual book value/share of Berkshire Hathaway to Fairfax Financial and get back to me.

It doesn't matter what Prem's actual stats are. People, mainly the media, are using his and Warren's name in the same sentence for effect. When they do that, they don't expect anyone to know what Watsa's trading stats are.

The whole idea seems to be to imply that Watsa is as good as Buffett with a track record and eye for success as good as Buffett. If Buffett buys a stock, people think that he's found value, and the stock usually pops (e.g. Suncor, BAC). Why? Because he's one of the richest people on the planet (top 5?) and has an incredible investment record that's 20 years longer than Watsa's. Regular Joes who have never invested know his name across the world.

Try the same with Prem Watsa on regular Joes.

 

[Doppel]

MS is a beast and can shit out worthless hardware because it has the money to do so.

Many users have found bb10 to be quite good. The problem is twofold: two late, and it had the blackberry name, a hated brand frankly. Its brand loyalty has taken a precipitous nosedive and even if the z10 was objectively on par with an iPhone it would fail due to its brand.

 

[Ns1]

BB's strength is software and services.

Like that impressive rollout of BBM for iOS/android?

I think the ship has sailed for software and services too

 

[silverpig]

Like that impressive rollout of BBM for iOS/android?

I think the ship has sailed for software and services too

BBM is still great. The software is quite good.

The execution of the launch was shit.

BBM worked just great for me all through the launch.

 

[silverpig]

It doesn't matter what Prem's actual stats are. People, mainly the media, are using his and Warren's name in the same sentence for effect. When they do that, they don't expect anyone to know what Watsa's trading stats are.

The whole idea seems to be to imply that Watsa is as good as Buffett with a track record and eye for success as good as Buffett. If Buffett buys a stock, people think that he's found value, and the stock usually pops (e.g. Suncor, BAC). Why? Because he's one of the richest people on the planet (top 5?) and has an incredible investment record that's 20 years longer than Watsa's. Regular Joes who have never invested know his name across the world.

Try the same with Prem Watsa on regular Joes.

What's your point? lothar is saying that Watsa has as good a track record as Buffett. His returns are better than Buffett's.

And your point is that he isn't as well known? What am I missing? How does Watsa not being as well known as Buffett have any bearing on BB? His track record of investing success and his backing of BB says something to me.

 

[Imp]

What's your point? lothar is saying that Watsa has as good a track record as Buffett. His returns are better than Buffett's.

And your point is that he isn't as well known? What am I missing? How does Watsa not being as well known as Buffett have any bearing on BB? His track record of investing success and his backing of BB says something to me.

To you and lothar -- particularly him since he's a Fairfax investor and has done his research -- it does, but you guys, including others and those in the media, seem to be using it as some incredible defense in support of RIM/BB: "Prem Watsa's, buying, so BB must be a great company."

Also, Warren's actual trading stats don't matter either. It's his perceived reputation that is being used when Prem Watsa's called the "Canadian Warren Buffett". His perceived reputation as a flawless, perfect investor who sees value where others don't.

Maybe I'm wrong and RIM/BB will be the next Apple... Until then, keep citing Prem Watsa like he's the best thing since sliced bread. Like he can do no wrong -- this was my original point until lothar brought up Prem's stats.

Edit: The original point in response to your invocation of the "Canadian Warren Buffett" was that it was getting old and overused. No, I didn't, and still don't, think Prem's as good as Warren Buffett, but even if he is, even Warren's made mistakes -- having said that, his net worth is $2-$3 billion, more than I'll ever make.

Then lothar said Prem and at least 5 other companies have better stats than Warren -- they probably do, okay, he's a "better investor" based on returns. I said it wasn't about returns, the reason Warren's name is being invoked is because of his reputation: the myth of his perfection and infallibility, his status as one of the world's richest people, one of the best investors to ever live, and a lifetime of experience (he has 2 decades on Prem).

When you call Prem the "Canadian Warren Buffet", I infer that Prem shares Warren's mythical traits: his "perfection", "infallibility", "great investment ability", and "great track record". Otherwise, why not say he is "Canada's <insert: eucaida National, Fairfax Financial, Markel Corp, Brookfield Asset Management, Loews Corp>", or plain "Prem Watsa"? They're all better than Warren, apparently. Not being well known may be a symptom of just not being that good in a general sense. You two think otherwise. Fine. But even I can concede that Warren's not perfect.

 

[compman25]

It's funny how finding a buyer all of a sudden makes you a viable company again in the eyes of some...

 

[Imp]

Here... in case you think Prem Watsa's the second coming:
http://business.financialpost.com/2...ckberry-bid-be-a-hit-or-miss/?__lsa=d4d6-7fba

"As spot-on as that strategy was, his subsequent gambles on the out-of-favour media stocks did not reap rewards.

Mr. Watsa invested in CanWest Global Communications Corp., a broadcaster, publisher and former owner of the National Post. He also purchased, and then kept purchasing, shares in Torstar Corp., owner of the Toronto Star newspaper and the publisher of Harlequin romance novels. Overwhelmed by debt, CanWest sought protection from creditors and its assets were subsequently sold off in pieces. The investment in Torstar also led to a significant write-down for Fairfax."

No one's perfect:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/moneybu...atsas-blackberry-nightmare-what-can-we-learn/

 

[rockyct]

'tis a flesh wound!

They're not dead. They won't have 80% marketshare anytime soon, that's for sure, but they can turn it around and slowly chip away just as MS has done. Remember the Zune? WP7? Epic fails, they were dead, etc right?

Look, I'm not imagining a miraculous comeback from the ashes. I don't own any BB stock, and I gain nothing from them coming back. My wife has an iPhone, I've got a Z10.

I like the phone, and I honestly think BB has the ability to do some things that the other players don't right now. They've just been shit at executing since the Playbook. Fix the execution problems (big job), and they can leverage BES, QNX, their security, and their initial foray into consumer to come up with some new stuff.

Will they? With current management, nuh uh. With Prem at the helm? Maybe, and that's a big maybe.

Microsoft is a beast of a company. They were never dead, or even seriously wounded. The closest thing is when they almost got broken up a decade ago. The consumer devices never make them any money and it's just used as a cool, public side to the company. http://www.microsoft.com/investor/reports/ar12/financial-highlights/index.html They brought in $73 billion in revenue last year and made $17 billion on that. Last quarter, the same quarter where they took a $900 million write down of Surface, they had a net income of $5 billion on $20 billion of revenue. (http://windowsitpro.com/paul-thurro...-announces-quarterly-annual-financial-results)

They could have bought BBM with the income they made last quarter even after they took a $900 million loss with Surface. That's how big of a company they are and how much money they can literally dump into a product until it succeeds.

 

[theevilsharpie]

Android will be a fail. BB's strength is software and services. Their weakness is hardware. Why abandon what you're good at to compete against Samsung in what they're awesome at?

Earlier in this thread, I raised the point that BlackBerry should have gone with Android when it was clear that the BB OS wasn't competitive anymore, and I received the same curious response that you just posted.

I totally agree that BlackBerry's services and market penetration is (...well, was) their strength, and if they'd combined their apps and services with the Android base, they'd have a platform that would've been competitive with iOS, Windows Phone, and other Android manufacturers, they'd have been able to release a competitive smartphone much earlier, and they likely would have retained their corporate customers. Instead, they focused on building an OS that nobody wanted or needed, at the expense of investment in their software and services.

We all see where their strategy got them.

Android would have been a perfect choice for a next-generation BlackBerry OS. Android was free, open source, widely supported by application developers, and perfectly functional as a base OS for BlackBerry's needs. BlackBerry also had the value-added services that other Android vendors couldn't offer, and a captive audience to sell to. Had BlackBerry hopped on the Android bandwagon when they had the opportunity, they could've easily been the top Android vendor.

But they didn't, and now they're destined to be a case study in business school textbooks about how not to manage a company during times of change.

 

[Bateluer]

Android would have been a perfect choice for a next-generation BlackBerry OS. Android was free, open source, widely supported by application developers, and perfectly functional as a base OS for BlackBerry's needs. BlackBerry also had the value-added services that other Android vendors couldn't offer, and a captive audience to sell to. Had BlackBerry hopped on the Android bandwagon when they had the opportunity, they could've easily been the top Android vendor.

But they didn't, and now they're destined to be a case study in business school textbooks about how not to manage a company during times of change.

I agree completely. Applies to Nokia too, though Nokia tried to do more than BB did but it was still too little too late.

BB today is done. Their brand is too damaged, their OS arrived years late and failed to match where their competitors were at 18 months previously. Making BBM multiplatform was something needed in 2009-2010, in 2013, everyone's already moved on to Android and iOS.

BB is a zombie waiting for the merciful 12ga to the head.

 

[lothar]

To you and lothar -- particularly him since he's a Fairfax investor and has done his research -- it does, but you guys, including others and those in the media, seem to be using it as some incredible defense in support of RIM/BB: "Prem Watsa's, buying, so BB must be a great company."

Also, Warren's actual trading stats don't matter either. It's his perceived reputation that is being used when Prem Watsa's called the "Canadian Warren Buffett". His perceived reputation as a flawless, perfect investor who sees value where others don't.

Maybe I'm wrong and RIM/BB will be the next Apple... Until then, keep citing Prem Watsa like he's the best thing since sliced bread. Like he can do no wrong -- this was my original point until lothar brought up Prem's stats.

Edit: The original point in response to your invocation of the "Canadian Warren Buffett" was that it was getting old and overused. No, I didn't, and still don't, think Prem's as good as Warren Buffett, but even if he is, even Warren's made mistakes -- having said that, his net worth is $2-$3 billion, more than I'll ever make.

Then lothar said Prem and at least 5 other companies have better stats than Warren -- they probably do, okay, he's a "better investor" based on returns. I said it wasn't about returns, the reason Warren's name is being invoked is because of his reputation: the myth of his perfection and infallibility, his status as one of the world's richest people, one of the best investors to ever live, and a lifetime of experience (he has 2 decades on Prem).

When you call Prem the "Canadian Warren Buffet", I infer that Prem shares Warren's mythical traits: his "perfection", "infallibility", "great investment ability", and "great track record". Otherwise, why not say he is "Canada's <insert: Leucaida National, Fairfax Financial, Markel Corp, Brookfield Asset Management, Loews Corp>", or plain "Prem Watsa"? They're all better than Warren, apparently. Not being well known may be a symptom of just not being that good in a general sense. You two think otherwise. Fine. But even I can concede that Warren's not perfect.

Do you know how to read?
How the heck can one interpret my posts as defense/support "for" BlackBerry?
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=35529706&postcount=1271
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=35529725&postcount=1272
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=35529741&postcount=1273
On what planet do you live on where Prem Watsa underpaying to take BlackBerry private for much less than the company's tangible book is automatically translated to "BlackBerry is a great company because Prem Watsa bought their stock"? If Warren Buffett comes out and says he wants to take Apple private for $1/share, I'm assuming you'll have a hard-on and think "Apple is a great company because Warren bought their stock for $1/share instead of paying the current $480-500/share current market price for it too?

Prem Watsa's $9/share bid is nothing but a stalking horse bid. If no one comes in to outbid him, he gets to walk away with the prize while current BlackBerry shareholders(like IHateMyJob) get burned. I would hope that IHateMyJob would have enough sense to vote against that such a proposal...But as a FFH shareholder, I do want this cheap deal to go through, and let him spin off the different companies rather than them trying to revive the company from the dead.

And who told you Warren Buffett is a flawless, perfect investor who sees value where others don't?

Now I understand where your problem is...
You see "Warren Buffett" as this mythical creature of perfection, infallibility, investment ability, and great track record that you can't imagine anyone being better than him despite it being proven otherwise.
Never mind the fact that Warren Buffett has mentioned that the biggest mistake he made was buying Berkshire Hathaway in the first place...He could have skipped that money losing textile mill blunder in the first place and just bought GEICO and his company would be worth half a trillion today.

"Not being well known is a symptom of not being that good"? You can't possibly be serious...
What next, you're going to tell me that because Bill Miller or Bill Ackman are "well known" and "popular" that they're just that good?

Carlos Slim is richer than Warren Buffett. How many people know who Carlos Slim is compared to Warren Buffett? I guess that since Carlos Slim is not really well known that means he's not that good an investor to you then...

 

[Joe1987]

TMobile has pulled BB phones from it's stores, citing poor demand, while still selling them through it's website.

 

[mammador]

I don't feel for them. They frankly have a shitty marketing function and got too complacent and rested their laurels too much.

 

[Imp]

Do you know how to read?
How the heck can one interpret my posts as defense/support "for" BlackBerry?
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=35529706&postcount=1271
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=35529725&postcount=1272
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=35529741&postcount=1273
On what planet do you live on where Prem Watsa underpaying to take BlackBerry private for much less than the company's tangible book is automatically translated to "BlackBerry is a great company because Prem Watsa bought their stock"? If Warren Buffett comes out and says he wants to take Apple private for $1/share, I'm assuming you'll have a hard-on and think "Apple is a great company because Warren bought their stock for $1/share instead of paying the current $480-500/share current market price for it too?

Prem Watsa's $9/share bid is nothing but a stalking horse bid. If no one comes in to outbid him, he gets to walk away with the prize while current BlackBerry shareholders(like IHateMyJob) get burned. I would hope that IHateMyJob would have enough sense to vote against that such a proposal...But as a FFH shareholder, I do want this cheap deal to go through, and let him spin off the different companies rather than them trying to revive the company from the dead.

And who told you Warren Buffett is a flawless, perfect investor who sees value where others don't?

Now I understand where your problem is...
You see "Warren Buffett" as this mythical creature of perfection, infallibility, investment ability, and great track record that you can't imagine anyone being better than him despite it being proven otherwise.
Never mind the fact that Warren Buffett has mentioned that the biggest mistake he made was buying Berkshire Hathaway in the first place...He could have skipped that money losing textile mill blunder in the first place and just bought GEICO and his company would be worth half a trillion today.

"Not being well known is a symptom of not being that good"? You can't possibly be serious...
What next, you're going to tell me that because Bill Miller or Bill Ackman are "well known" and "popular" that they're just that good?

Carlos Slim is richer than Warren Buffett. How many people know who Carlos Slim is compared to Warren Buffett? I guess that since Carlos Slim is not really well known that means he's not that good an investor to you then...

Not sure if serious...WOW.

Dude, you are hilarious. Thanks for reminding me why the stock market thread is dead because of people like you who have to be know-it-alls and shove their self-righteous opinions down people's throats.

Let me clarify: my initial post was NEVER in response to you in the first place. It was to Silverpig and in regards to Prem being regularly compared to Warren Buffett. Since you can't read between the lines, let me be explicit about my original point:

I don't think Prem's at the same level as Warren, but even if he is, even Warren has been wrong before. Subsequently, Prem can be wrong too.

YOU took that as an opportunity to spew a few paragraphs about how Prem Watsa's trading stats are better than Warren's, and oh, how you had some success trading. Seriously??? You took something NOT directed at you and so SIMPLE to go show off about how much smarter and better you are.

And more seriously, you took a RHETORICAL QUESTION (the "value investor" thing) to spew those few paragraphs about your hero Prem.

My response to YOU was a clarification of why I think that the use of Warren Buffet's name to support Prem isn't about his trading stats, but about telling people that Prem is as good as Warren, and Warren is generally regarded as the "Oracle of Omaha" who rarely screws up.

Then I went on to explain what I meant in detail... and, not sure if serious, you got BUTT-HURT and made it personal. Wow.... Thank goodness for ATOT. I forgot what children a bunch of 30+ year old adults can be. Some are even married and have children too.

Dude. Get out of the house some more.

You managed to take a two or three sentence observation and turn it into a multi-paragraph bullshit spewing fest about how smart you are. Congratulations. ATOT, everyone. ATOT. Actually, the internet, in general.

And I have nothing against Prem. He's a successful billionaire and sounds like a nice guy. I just think Warren's on a different level. But omy, I have a different opinion, I hope you don't get butt-hurt, lothar.

 

[Imp]

They are NOT well and truly finished.

Fairfax is headed by Prem Watsa. He is known as the Canadian Warren Buffett and is not a dumb investor.

I hate this being repeated over and over again, "Prem Watsa is the Canadian Warren Buffett", in support of RIM/BB. All because he's a value investor?

Warren's got 20 years on Prem and 20-30 times the net worth. But I'm sure even Warren's got a few duds in his portfolio.

Most from his cigar Butt investing days, a few.

And most forget that Berkshire Hathaway itself was a "dud".

Oh, and even IHateMyJob2004 who is pretty zealous about defending BB and investment in general didn't read much into the blurb I wrote in under 30 seconds. Somehow, you did, lothar. Way to go and overreact.

Silverpig: whatever, I just don't agree that Prem Watsa's approval of BB is a strong argument in support of BB. Simple as that. Nothing personal.

Edit: I forgot. Not sure if serious........................ You got pissed and worked up over something as stupid as "who's the better investor"????

I do apologize for naming you in the last post I quoted. I assumed that you were in support of Silverpig's position because you seemed to respond on his behalf with a multi-paragraph defense. But that's why I also kept mentioning "the media" because I mostly hear the Prem/Warren thing in, hold onto your butts, the media.

And you do realize what a "myth" is right? And Why I used quotation marks about his "perfection"? These are both rhetorical questions -- you seem to read these things literally, so I'll be explicit. I was trying to illustrate what other simpletons, not on your level (you have a very condescending way of posting... serious), might (you get what "may be" and "might" means too?) think when you say someone is like Warren.

It wasn't personal man. Chill out.

 

[silverpig]

Earlier in this thread, I raised the point that BlackBerry should have gone with Android when it was clear that the BB OS wasn't competitive anymore, and I received the same curious response that you just posted.

I totally agree that BlackBerry's services and market penetration is (...well, was) their strength, and if they'd combined their apps and services with the Android base, they'd have a platform that would've been competitive with iOS, Windows Phone, and other Android manufacturers, they'd have been able to release a competitive smartphone much earlier, and they likely would have retained their corporate customers. Instead, they focused on building an OS that nobody wanted or needed, at the expense of investment in their software and services.

We all see where their strategy got them.

Android would have been a perfect choice for a next-generation BlackBerry OS. Android was free, open source, widely supported by application developers, and perfectly functional as a base OS for BlackBerry's needs. BlackBerry also had the value-added services that other Android vendors couldn't offer, and a captive audience to sell to. Had BlackBerry hopped on the Android bandwagon when they had the opportunity, they could've easily been the top Android vendor.

But they didn't, and now they're destined to be a case study in business school textbooks about how not to manage a company during times of change.

Android's basic premise: Give everything away for free so Google can access, collect, and aggregate private demographic information, then, segment, market, and display ads.

BB's basic premise: Keep all information private and secure.

They just won't work together.

Then there's the fact that BB10 supports android apps. You can take an android .apk and convert it to a BB10 .bar, sideload it and run it. Developers can convert their android apps in about 20 minutes.

It's not currently perfect, but BB 10.2 will include an update to the android runtime which will make everything much easier and support more android features.

So with that being said, what else from android would you want?