[jaylysf]

Wouldn't it be more profitable to focus on service while letting other companies advertise and profit from hardware?

I mean what company can manage both Android and iPhone and be approved by the DOD? Who wouldn't want a company that has the security of the US government and manages BYOD policy?

Seems like a cash cow to me.

And BBM And BBM Channel can be a hit and grow too.

JayZ10

[diegonei]

Yeah. And still they have been trying to sell the idea of licensing BB10 for at least an year now.

It's all so very complicated. If they tag it too high, manufacturers don't make enouch money (android is for free). If they tag it too low, they lose money on the long run.

And if security was such a big deal, we wouldn't see BlackBerry in such a struggle.

I know, it IS a win win scenario. A strong enough hardware partner could even help get some apps. Problem is none of the potential partners are biting.

Or are they? And we didn't hear of it yet?

[fanisk]

For sure is not that simple but I am sure that this is right direction for BlackBerry!

Posted via CB10

[Troy Tiscareno]

Why would another company want to adopt an OS that BB couldn't make successful? Why would they pay to license an OS with a huge app/ecosystem gap, when they could, for example, license Android? Hardware-only companies cannot afford to have a large number of returns, which is an issue that has plagued BB for years.

Just because an idea might be good for BB doesn't mean it's going to be good for the other company. That's why, despite looking for a partner or a buyer for the last two years, they've had no bids worth considering.

[JTG81]

They should license it free. Just make the license about adhering to certain guidelines ie 2 gb of ram screen size and pixel density

Posted via CB10

[monil11]

Why would another company want to adopt an OS that BB couldn't make successful? Why would they pay to license an OS with a huge app/ecosystem gap, when they could, for example, license Android? Hardware-only companies cannot afford to have a large number of returns, which is an issue that has plagued BB for years.

Just because an idea might be good for BB doesn't mean it's going to be good for the other company. That's why, despite looking for a partner or a buyer for the last two years, they've had no bids worth considering.

Why did companies licence Windows Phone when they were already licencing Android? Why is Samsung developing Tizen when they already make a boat load of money on Android. The answer is simple, diversification!! It's taught is most business classes.

Anyway another thing to consider is that not every company looks at things like 'why should be adopt 'x' when 'x' isn't the top dog'. Some take the approach of 'why is 'x' not doing well and how could we leverage our strengths to make sure 'x' is profitable for us in the long run. ' Besides BlackBerry themselves would know well what limits BB10s success and could approach companies that can cross those limitations ensuring mutual benefit.

Posted via CB10

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

Had a better chance before the launch to try and license BB10. They now have proof of concept... with out apps a OS is unless.

As for giving it away...?



Posted via CB10

[offyoutoddle]

hard to compete with free. With android out there, why would anyone bother using an OS even Blackberry are having trouble pushing? Wrong solution wrong time is my opinion. Cost inevitably is a race to the bottom particularly with Android on the block.

[Troy Tiscareno]

Why did companies licence Windows Phone when they were already licencing Android? Why is Samsung developing Tizen when they already make a boat load of money on Android. The answer is simple, diversification!! It's taught is most business classes.

HTC and Samsung licensed WP back when Android was a small percentage of the market, back when Apple and BB owned most of the (far, far smaller) smartphone market. I doubt they would license WP today. Both companies are lucky to contain their losses with WP.

Anyway another thing to consider is that not every company looks at things like 'why should be adopt 'x' when 'x' isn't the top dog'. Some take the approach of 'why is 'x' not doing well and how could we leverage our strengths to make sure 'x' is profitable for us in the long run. ' Besides BlackBerry themselves would know well what limits BB10s success and could approach companies that can cross those limitations ensuring mutual benefit.

I'm still curious to know how licensing BB10 to hardware vendors is going to solve any of BB's issues. Any ideas?

[greg erst]

There's no room for a 4th platform. Three is all the market needs and for that we have Android, iOS and Windows Phone. It's not just about the OS. If it was, Blackberry would be doing fine. It's about the whole ecosystem. Apps, connected devices, accessories. A thriving ecosystem that attracts developers to write apps, 3rd party manufactures to build add-on products and accessories. It's going to be virtually impossible for any other company to just jump in and make all that happen at this point. Lets face it Blackberry just took too long to shift from being primarily an Email device to an Application device. A lot of us could see this coming a long time ago.

[itsnotaboutart]

Licensing or a joint venture could work where BlackBerry on its own has not because of volume. It is hard for BlackBerry to keep handset prices as low as some of its competitors when BlackBerry manufactures the numbers it does.

On the one hand, the choice between Android, which Google does not charge for, and BB10, which BlackBerry would charge for (or get a share of profits if a joint venture). On the other hand, Android has so many IP issues that manufacturers either have to enter licensing agreements with the likes of Microsoft or risk a lawsuit. So even though, Google does not charge for Android, it is not free. Those licensing fees are admittedly less than I would think BlackBerry would demand. The bigger reason is to differentiate their products. There a ton of Android manufacturers, most of whom make relative peanuts because, unless you are Samsung, you can only really compete on price so margins suffer.

I think a joint venture with Lenovo could be win-win for both. The catch is that Lenovo is looking to expand beyond China, so the potential competition between them could be too much of an impediment to a deal.

Posted via CB10

[Troy Tiscareno]

BB's biggest hurdle is NOT its hardware, and it's certainly not the only hurdle. If it was, then a JV might make sense. BB's biggest problem IMO is a lack of a quality ecosystem, which includes apps, but also includes media (e-books, TV shows, movies, music) and cloud services. BB is extremely weak on all of those fronts, AND CUSTOMERS KNOW IT. That's why pouring a ton of money into advertising isn't going to work: people will just dismiss that advertising because "there's no Intagram/Vine/SnapChat/Netflix/Banking Apps/Specialty Apps For My Career/etc."

It's not 2008, when the idea of Apps was new, and people were understanding if there wasn't an app on a platform. In mid 2013, customers DEMAND that the apps they want be available on their ecosystem, or they simply won't buy into it.

BB10 phones aren't bad. They aren't particularly remarkable, but the phones themselves are competitive. But in 2013, a cell phone isn't just a cell phone, it is a window into an ecosystem, and MOST of the value comes from that ecosystem. Unfortunately for BB, it doesn't have much of an ecosystem, and the market has responded to that fact. A bigger phone screen, a faster processor, a different phone OEM, or a better ad campaign isn't going to change that most important issue.

[diegonei]

They should license it free. Just make the license about adhering to certain guidelines ie 2 gb of ram screen size and pixel density

Posted via CB10

Yeah, right. Let's give away the one thing that can still save us.

I am a contractor. I build houses for money. But when I'm done, I decide not to charge. I make no money and eventually I am out of business.

Riiiight.

[BerryWizard]

Yeah, right. Let's give away the one thing that can still save us.

I am a contractor. I build houses for money. But when I'm done, I decide not to charge. I make no money and eventually I am out of business.

Riiiight.

Ok...I respect your argument.
Their is my counter argument :
Ask Google how they survived with a free licenced OS. Are nexus devices selling ? I think yes. Once you've got everyone running your os, you can keep some exclusive content and feature for yourself and make your devices more appealing than the others. That allow you to save on marketing of the os itself as the oem which uses your os will do just that for you.

Makes sense ?

Posted via CB10

[Troy Tiscareno]

Ok...I respect your argument.
Their is my counter argument :
Ask Google how they survived with a free licenced OS.

1. Google was a software/cloud-services company from Day 1. That's their corporate DNA. Not so with BB.

2. Google has always, and continues to make nearly all its money from ADVERTISING, and this has also been true from Day 1. Google's advertising is available on every OS/platform there is, and they own the vast majority of online advertising. Even Facebook's share is tiny compared to Google's, because Google has proven it can deliver sales.

3. Google doesn't NEED to make a dime from Android itself or from hardware sales; it makes money from all of those users accessing the Internet and generating page views for Google's ads. And, of course, Google also makes a nice cut from every app or media sale that happens on their ecosystem.

None of that is true of BB. BB makes most of its money from handset sales, and most of the remainder on service fees for OS6/7. Compared to that, BES and QNX revenues are very small (QNX revenues are about $40-50M a year, which is a drop in the bucket).

BB is not a diversified company like Apple, Samsung, Sony, or LG, and doesn't have other departments besides cell phones that can carry the load for the company. It's closer to HTC, which is another phone-only company, and HTC isn't exactly doing well, despite making perhaps the best phone hardware in the industry.

[ronniell]

Yeah. And still they have been trying to sell the idea of licensing BB10 for at least an year now.

It's all so very complicated. If they tag it too high, manufacturers don't make enouch money (android is for free). If they tag it too low, they lose money on the long run.

And if security was such a big deal, we wouldn't see BlackBerry in such a struggle.

I know, it IS a win win scenario. A strong enough hardware partner could even help get some apps. Problem is none of the potential partners are biting.

Or are they? And we didn't hear of it yet?

By the way android is not free as you put it.

Posted via CB10

[anon(6035609)]

Good arguments about BB's weaknesses, although you did leave out the benefit of their private network, which is global, scalable, and extremely secure, and their MDM (also secure), both of which should have potential to slow mass abandonment by corporate clients. The MDM gives them a chance to earn revenue on each iOS and Android phone being used at companies. So it's possible the OS may fade out, but the company can exist as a different company. I'm curious as to whether you then feel Tizen is dead before it starts given it would be launching without an ecosystem to speak of?

[Troy Tiscareno]

The MDM gives them a chance to earn revenue on each iOS and Android phone being used at companies. So it's possible the OS may fade out, but the company can exist as a different company.

There are a number of MDM options for enterprises, and most cost less. BES10's main differentiator was the ability to manage BB10 phones, but if a company isn't buying BB10, then they don't need to pay extra for BES10. This is why BB recently slashed the price of BES10 cals, but their other bundled costs are still too high to compete for companies that only need Android and/or iOS.

I'm curious as to whether you then feel Tizen is dead before it starts given it would be launching without an ecosystem to speak of?

There are still lots of question about Tizen, but one thing that is known is that Tizen will be able to run standard, unmodified Android apps. Tizen phones won't have access to the Play Store, but a Tizen App Store could be set up, and devs could simply upload their APKs to that, unmodified. Tizen is following Android design, so there won't be odd-ball things like square screens that cause fragmentation in app design. But again, there's absolutely no guarantee that Tizen will survive, much less thrive. From recent demos, it's still no where near ready for release. It may still BE released, but it lacks a lot of polish right now.

[xandermac]

Who'd buy it when Android is free?

[Geeoff]

I'm reading an article in the New York Times by Krugmann comparing Apple and Microsoft. I think that this quote is very relevant for Blackberry:

"Back in the 80s, Microsoft and Apple both had operating systems to sell; Apple’s was clearly better. But Apple misunderstood the nature of the market: it said, “We have a better system, so we’re going to make it available only on our own beautiful machines, and charge premium prices.” Meanwhile Microsoft licensed its system to lots of people making cheap machines — and established a commanding position through network externalities. People used Windows because other people used Windows — there was more software available, corporate tech departments were prepared to provide support, etc.. "

This is exactly Blackberry's problem right now! They are pulling an Apple move right out of the 80s!

Blackberry has the best OS (it still needs to mature a bit more), so the focus should be on getting it out there cheaply rather than selling it at a premium. If they gave it away for free then the apps would come and they could make money off advertising, BBM money, selling content, and enterprises. Heins strategy of only "aspirational" devices is just like Apple in the 80s. Yes Blackberry is the best, but they need to move units and gain popularity.

I think that Microsoft is firming up third place by getting cheap devices out there. Blackberry needs to give away the OS (or a version of it) so that other manufacturers can make cheap phones (unlike the Q5) and get people onto BB10!