[Tien-Lin Chang]

I never said they should stick to BB10, I said they should continue with their handset division rather than licensing them off to lesser known brands who won't do any better than BlackBerry. Without phones BlackBerry is pretty much obsolete.

Posted via CB10

If they don't stick with BB10 then the only option is Android which in case you failed to notice - they are at best mediocre player there.

And being a mediocre in Android market means you lose money just stay in play which is Chen trying hard to avoid.

Blackberry really has little left to impact the market if not hiding behind BB10 yet BB10 itself was a poor presentation and hurting the basis of Blackberry by unhook (not capable to?) BB10 with BIS/BES (not a good reason to defence the poor develop of BES10 itself).

So yeah, there's no much can be done even you put other people on Chen's seat.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

I understand what Chen did. He did a good job of turning the company around. I just don't think he is the guy who can grow the company.

BB10 whilst waiting.....

Too be honest... I doubt they can afford him or and some of their other current management. Revenues are just too small for BlackBerry to be paying out millions a year in management salaries and benefits. When Chen took over their revenues were as much a quarter as they make in a whole year now... and sadly their revenues are still falling, Chen likes to talk about growth in software - headline was "BlackBerry Reports 89% Year over Year Growth in GAAP Software and Services Revenue ", that sounds great (and is) but their losses in hardware revenues and BIS Services fees are far outpacing those gains (key is now they are making money). Last year, GAAP was $490 million compared to $334 this year.... and I'm not so sure that 89% gain is all that great considering they bought GOOD who supposedly had $200 million in revenues....

Regardless, they company is still shrinking... those very profitable BIS fees will soon run out, and apparently very soon those unprofitable hardware revenues will too end. Leaving an even small software company...

I would not be surprised if now that he can say BlackBerry is OK... if he isn't already looking for a better paying job.

[khlover520]

If they don't stick with BB10 then the only option is Android which in case you failed to notice - they are at best mediocre player there.

And being a mediocre in Android market means you lose money just stay in play which is Chen trying hard to avoid.

Blackberry really has little left to impact the market if not hiding behind BB10 yet BB10 itself was a poor presentation and hurting the basis of Blackberry by unhook (not capable to?) BB10 with BIS/BES (not a good reason to defence the poor develop of BES10 itself).

So yeah, there's no much can be done even you put other people on Chen's seat.

It hasn't even been a year since the Priv launched and Chen is already calling quits? They expected a huge outcome like Samsung in one year without any marketing? Lol

Posted via CB10

[Nine54]

Actually I am kinda disappointed at Chen for taking this long to make the pivot back to BB's real roots - enterprise software solutions.

Which was BES and BIS.

Ironically, these solutions are not unique in the market without the hardware root of trust embedded in Blackberry-manufactured devices.

[Nine54]

The TRUTH can be very painful..... I have no idea when Chen decided that hardware was not a long term viable solution. But if he had been truthful about that decision, the company would not have lasted long enough to make the transition that he has been able to implement. Personally I think Hardware fate was sealed back in 2014.... they have simple been going through the motions from then to capture all the revenue they could in order to buy them time.

I know many "think" Chen could have done more.... Just look at Microsoft and what they have tried and how much they have spent... with NO return on that investment at all.

It is disappointing, but it's not Chen's fault... his job is not to make hardware fans happy, but to make shareholders happy (and not the we support BlackBerry type shareholders.. but real investors).

I suspect that Chen determined that hardware needed to go before he even took the job. It's no secret that, in general, software is a higher margin business than hardware--that's why many historically hardware-centric companies, such as Cisco, have increased their focus on software. Watsa wanted Blackberry to make this pivot and so he hand-picked a software guy to do it. Chen was probably shown some financial data under NDA in order to put his software-based turnaround plan together and convince the board to adopt this strategy. And they did. And here we are. Any lip service around hardware was just to prevent customer panic.

[Nine54]

Too be honest... I doubt they can afford him or and some of their other current management. Revenues are just too small for BlackBerry to be paying out millions a year in management salaries and benefits. When Chen took over their revenues were as much a quarter as they make in a whole year now... and sadly their revenues are still falling, Chen likes to talk about growth in software - headline was "BlackBerry Reports 89% Year over Year Growth in GAAP Software and Services Revenue ", that sounds great (and is) but their losses in hardware revenues and BIS Services fees are far outpacing those gains (key is now they are making money). Last year, GAAP was $490 million compared to $334 this year.... and I'm not so sure that 89% gain is all that great considering they bought GOOD who supposedly had $200 million in revenues....

Regardless, they company is still shrinking... those very profitable BIS fees will soon run out, and apparently very soon those unprofitable hardware revenues will too end. Leaving an even small software company...

I would not be surprised if now that he can say BlackBerry is OK... if he isn't already looking for a better paying job.

While I'm sure his base salary is certainly attractive, most of his compensation incentives likely are tied to stock performance. Much executive compensation is tied to stock performance, and in a turnaround scenario like this, the upside potential would be more appealing than the base salary.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

While I'm sure his base salary is certainly attractive, most of his compensation incentives likely are tied to stock performance. Much executive compensation is tied to stock performance, and in a turnaround scenario like this, the upside potential would be more appealing than the base salary.

I remember an article that said he was the highest paid CEO in Canadia.... even if most his pay is in stock, that stock has to come from somewhere and it has a value. Think once hardware is closed... they will be on track and his job of turning them around will be done.

[anon(2313227)]

I remember an article that said he was the highest paid CEO in Canadia.... even if most his pay is in stock, that stock has to come from somewhere and it has a value. Think once hardware is closed... they will be on track and his job of turning them around will be done.

Yes so depending on when it is valued(he can also not be highest)
Since he is in the US, why is he not compared to other CEO in the US. Not like he lives in Canada.

[Nine54]

Folks have made some valid points, but to be fair to the OP, I think it's important to challenge some of the inherent assumptions within comments like "Chen's obligation is to shareholders," and "Chen was brought in to turn the company around, not save hardware."

Yes, Chen was brought in to try and save the company and salvage the significant loss of capital suffered by long-term shareholders. But, what is good performance here? If the stock price doubles within 3 years? Triples? Even at that growth, the stock price would be far below the all-time highs, which were well over $100. Today, BBRY closed at about $8--right around the level it was for a good chunk of 2012.

Folks rightly will point out that this is a long-term strategy, and it will take time for the company to show significant growth while it sheds expenses and moves out of unprofitable markets. Fine, but what's the time-table for this? And what is the measure of success? Will the company be better off by focusing on security and enterprise mobility software? Perhaps, but will the company's market cap return to the highs of 2007? Unlikely. Blackberry, a bigger company, acquired Good, a smaller company, and is now working to shrink its overhead and focus only on what Good was doing. Think about that for a second.

And let's look at the enterprise mobility management market. Blackberry bought Good on the cheap as the company's valuation had tanked right after filing for a potential IPO. Zenprise was bought by Citrix. Airwatch was bought by VMware. How many standalone EMM vendors are thriving? MobileIron's stock price is under $3. So unless Blackberry is looking to be acquired, the prospects as a standalone EMM vendor don't look great. And regardless, Blackberry still will be a niche player as Samsung (in cooperation with Google) and Apple ultimately have more control over device security since they control the OS and--ding, ding, ding--manufacture the hardware. Device manufacturers inherently are in a better position to build a more secure product.

Another assumption is if the hardware division is losing money or seeing declining sales despite the release of new devices, it must mean that Blackberry can't make money in hardware. That is like an Italian restaurant saying that if business is bad then people must not like Italian food. No, maybe people just don't like your Italian food. Blackberry's poor device sales shouldn't be a surprise. The company's hardware releases were few and far between and, in many cases, uninspired. The more iconic devices like the Classic and Passport were hamstrung by dated specs and the lack of apps on BB10. And the company's Android offerings just didn't bring enough to the table compared to other OEMs. And let's be honest: Chen had one foot out the hardware door from Day 1. So, I don't think Blackberry really gave it their all in trying to make hardware viable.

The bottom line is that saying that Chen is doing a good job because Blackberry otherwise would have gone out of businesses is based on a false dichotomy. It's not like it was either go software-only or go out of business. Going software-only was one approach, but not necessarily the only one. I suspect Lazaridis had a strategy that included hardware. The board went with Chen, and he's executing on his strategy. Are financials improving? Yes, but the company's long-term viability as a standalone entity remains to be seen.

[dusanvn]

Chen can sell things, but can't make new things.

He knows what, when and how to sell. QNX is an example.

He does not know what to make to be sellable. Passport and Classic are good but imperfect products because development started long before him but supervised and prematurely ended under him. Priv and later phones are total c r a p because development was entirely under him.

So, if BBRY wants to just exist, keep him. If it wants to live, find a new, truly talented, CEO.

Posted via CB10/BB PP SE.

[Tien-Lin Chang]

It hasn't even been a year since the Priv launched and Chen is already calling quits? They expected a huge outcome like Samsung in one year without any marketing? Lol

Posted via CB10

I don't think marketing can do much if the phone itself is just at meh level. The only two selling points on priv are the keyboard (which is not even attracting much people in English speaking countries since touch-screen era) and the blackberry apps (to be honest I tried the cracked by XDA and later free-release version of blackberry hub/blackberry keyboard on my other Android phone and it just not feel that special nor more effective than other app).

That's why I call them a mediocre player. They don't have really attractive selling points to the public, they don't sitting on top of the list from the supplier, they even couldn't make huge stock and deliver to every country before release. All they have is a launcher and some apps - sounds just like those Chinese brands but in slower pace and much more expensive - the company name is not generating much value so how you expect marketing can make people buying it? (Making Hypnotism CM?)

[Orange UK]

Yes. He has admitted he knows little of BB.
As a CEO its the job to know.


Those going on about shares etc, blaming banks etc.....look the last year, are we 20% up or down on then ? Exactly.

[blackberrybrad]

Folks have made some valid points, but to be fair to the OP, I think it's important to challenge some of the inherent assumptions within comments like "Chen's obligation is to shareholders," and "Chen was brought in to turn the company around, not save hardware."

Yes, Chen was brought in to try and save the company and salvage the significant loss of capital suffered by long-term shareholders. But, what is good performance here? If the stock price doubles within 3 years? Triples? Even at that growth, the stock price would be far below the all-time highs, which were well over $100. Today, BBRY closed at about $8--right around the level it was for a good chunk of 2012.

Folks rightly will point out that this is a long-term strategy, and it will take time for the company to show significant growth while it sheds expenses and moves out of unprofitable markets. Fine, but what's the time-table for this? And what is the measure of success? Will the company be better off by focusing on security and enterprise mobility software? Perhaps, but will the company's market cap return to the highs of 2007? Unlikely. Blackberry, a bigger company, acquired Good, a smaller company, and is now working to shrink its overhead and focus only on what Good was doing. Think about that for a second.

And let's look at the enterprise mobility management market. Blackberry bought Good on the cheap as the company's valuation had tanked right after filing for a potential IPO. Zenprise was bought by Citrix. Airwatch was bought by VMware. How many standalone EMM vendors are thriving? MobileIron's stock price is under $3. So unless Blackberry is looking to be acquired, the prospects as a standalone EMM vendor don't look great. And regardless, Blackberry still will be a niche player as Samsung (in cooperation with Google) and Apple ultimately have more control over device security since they control the OS and--ding, ding, ding--manufacture the hardware. Device manufacturers inherently are in a better position to build a more secure product.

Another assumption is if the hardware division is losing money or seeing declining sales despite the release of new devices, it must mean that Blackberry can't make money in hardware. That is like an Italian restaurant saying that if business is bad then people must not like Italian food. No, maybe people just don't like your Italian food. Blackberry's poor device sales shouldn't be a surprise. The company's hardware releases were few and far between and, in many cases, uninspired. The more iconic devices like the Classic and Passport were hamstrung by dated specs and the lack of apps on BB10. And the company's Android offerings just didn't bring enough to the table compared to other OEMs. And let's be honest: Chen had one foot out the hardware door from Day 1. So, I don't think Blackberry really gave it their all in trying to make hardware viable.

The bottom line is that saying that Chen is doing a good job because Blackberry otherwise would have gone out of businesses is based on a false dichotomy. It's not like it was either go software-only or go out of business. Going software-only was one approach, but not necessarily the only one. I suspect Lazaridis had a strategy that included hardware. The board went with Chen, and he's executing on his strategy. Are financials improving? Yes, but the company's long-term viability as a standalone entity remains to be seen.

BlackBerry is not a standalone EMM vendor, they have more products than EMM. Mobileiron only sells EMM.

Posted via CB10

[khlover520]

Folks have made some valid points, but to be fair to the OP, I think it's important to challenge some of the inherent assumptions within comments like "Chen's obligation is to shareholders," and "Chen was brought in to turn the company around, not save hardware."

Yes, Chen was brought in to try and save the company and salvage the significant loss of capital suffered by long-term shareholders. But, what is good performance here? If the stock price doubles within 3 years? Triples? Even at that growth, the stock price would be far below the all-time highs, which were well over $100. Today, BBRY closed at about $8--right around the level it was for a good chunk of 2012.

Folks rightly will point out that this is a long-term strategy, and it will take time for the company to show significant growth while it sheds expenses and moves out of unprofitable markets. Fine, but what's the time-table for this? And what is the measure of success? Will the company be better off by focusing on security and enterprise mobility software? Perhaps, but will the company's market cap return to the highs of 2007? Unlikely. Blackberry, a bigger company, acquired Good, a smaller company, and is now working to shrink its overhead and focus only on what Good was doing. Think about that for a second.

And let's look at the enterprise mobility management market. Blackberry bought Good on the cheap as the company's valuation had tanked right after filing for a potential IPO. Zenprise was bought by Citrix. Airwatch was bought by VMware. How many standalone EMM vendors are thriving? MobileIron's stock price is under $3. So unless Blackberry is looking to be acquired, the prospects as a standalone EMM vendor don't look great. And regardless, Blackberry still will be a niche player as Samsung (in cooperation with Google) and Apple ultimately have more control over device security since they control the OS and--ding, ding, ding--manufacture the hardware. Device manufacturers inherently are in a better position to build a more secure product.

Another assumption is if the hardware division is losing money or seeing declining sales despite the release of new devices, it must mean that Blackberry can't make money in hardware. That is like an Italian restaurant saying that if business is bad then people must not like Italian food. No, maybe people just don't like your Italian food. Blackberry's poor device sales shouldn't be a surprise. The company's hardware releases were few and far between and, in many cases, uninspired. The more iconic devices like the Classic and Passport were hamstrung by dated specs and the lack of apps on BB10. And the company's Android offerings just didn't bring enough to the table compared to other OEMs. And let's be honest: Chen had one foot out the hardware door from Day 1. So, I don't think Blackberry really gave it their all in trying to make hardware viable.

The bottom line is that saying that Chen is doing a good job because Blackberry otherwise would have gone out of businesses is based on a false dichotomy. It's not like it was either go software-only or go out of business. Going software-only was one approach, but not necessarily the only one. I suspect Lazaridis had a strategy that included hardware. The board went with Chen, and he's executing on his strategy. Are financials improving? Yes, but the company's long-term viability as a standalone entity remains to be seen.

This, right here.

Posted via CB10

[crackberry_geek]

The TRUTH can be very painful..... I have no idea when Chen decided that hardware was not a long term viable solution. But if he had been truthful about that decision, the company would not have lasted long enough to make the transition that he has been able to implement. Personally I think Hardware fate was sealed back in 2014.... they have simple been going through the motions from then to capture all the revenue they could in order to buy them time.

I know many "think" Chen could have done more.... Just look at Microsoft and what they have tried and how much they have spent... with NO return on that investment at all.

It is disappointing, but it's not Chen's fault... his job is not to make hardware fans happy, but to make shareholders happy (and not the we support BlackBerry type shareholders.. but real investors).

So by your explanation... it is acceptable to lie to get ahead?

Wow! Sad state of things these days...

Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android

[Nine54]

BlackBerry is not a standalone EMM vendor, they have more products than EMM. Mobileiron only sells EMM.

Posted via CB10

Such as? And are these significant contributors to revenue? Of course the company has other products, but those were/are auxiliary to its primary business. Blackberry is trying to replace its main source of revenue for over a decade--hardware and carrier service subscriptions--with software licenses and subscriptions, primarily around enterprise device and application management. Compare this to players like Citrix, VMware, and IBM, all of which earn the bulk of their revenues in other markets.

[crackberry_geek]

It hasn't even been a year since the Priv launched and Chen is already calling quits? They expected a huge outcome like Samsung in one year without any marketing? Lol

Posted via CB10

Exactly! Very short sighted for a supposed leader!

Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android

[crackberry_geek]

Folks have made some valid points, but to be fair to the OP, I think it's important to challenge some of the inherent assumptions within comments like "Chen's obligation is to shareholders," and "Chen was brought in to turn the company around, not save hardware."

Yes, Chen was brought in to try and save the company and salvage the significant loss of capital suffered by long-term shareholders. But, what is good performance here? If the stock price doubles within 3 years? Triples? Even at that growth, the stock price would be far below the all-time highs, which were well over $100. Today, BBRY closed at about $8--right around the level it was for a good chunk of 2012.

Folks rightly will point out that this is a long-term strategy, and it will take time for the company to show significant growth while it sheds expenses and moves out of unprofitable markets. Fine, but what's the time-table for this? And what is the measure of success? Will the company be better off by focusing on security and enterprise mobility software? Perhaps, but will the company's market cap return to the highs of 2007? Unlikely. Blackberry, a bigger company, acquired Good, a smaller company, and is now working to shrink its overhead and focus only on what Good was doing. Think about that for a second.

And let's look at the enterprise mobility management market. Blackberry bought Good on the cheap as the company's valuation had tanked right after filing for a potential IPO. Zenprise was bought by Citrix. Airwatch was bought by VMware. How many standalone EMM vendors are thriving? MobileIron's stock price is under $3. So unless Blackberry is looking to be acquired, the prospects as a standalone EMM vendor don't look great. And regardless, Blackberry still will be a niche player as Samsung (in cooperation with Google) and Apple ultimately have more control over device security since they control the OS and--ding, ding, ding--manufacture the hardware. Device manufacturers inherently are in a better position to build a more secure product.

Another assumption is if the hardware division is losing money or seeing declining sales despite the release of new devices, it must mean that Blackberry can't make money in hardware. That is like an Italian restaurant saying that if business is bad then people must not like Italian food. No, maybe people just don't like your Italian food. Blackberry's poor device sales shouldn't be a surprise. The company's hardware releases were few and far between and, in many cases, uninspired. The more iconic devices like the Classic and Passport were hamstrung by dated specs and the lack of apps on BB10. And the company's Android offerings just didn't bring enough to the table compared to other OEMs. And let's be honest: Chen had one foot out the hardware door from Day 1. So, I don't think Blackberry really gave it their all in trying to make hardware viable.

The bottom line is that saying that Chen is doing a good job because Blackberry otherwise would have gone out of businesses is based on a false dichotomy. It's not like it was either go software-only or go out of business. Going software-only was one approach, but not necessarily the only one. I suspect Lazaridis had a strategy that included hardware. The board went with Chen, and he's executing on his strategy. Are financials improving? Yes, but the company's long-term viability as a standalone entity remains to be seen.

Spot-freaking-on!! And very well thought out.

Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android

[Nine54]

Spot-freaking-on!! And very well thought out.

Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android

Thank you, sir (or madame)!

[DaDaDogg]

I have no hate against Chen, but I think it's time we get a new CEO who doesn't deviate from hardware. BlackBerry is what it is today because of their unique smartphones and security. I feel like because of Chen the company wasn't able to fully show the capability of BB10 devices and the OS. Due to their lack of marketing, next to no one knows BlackBerry still makes phones. In software BlackBerry isn't going prosper so well. There has been few articles already predicting that. It's time we get a new CEO that will touch back the roots that made this company a smartphone titan.

Posted via CB10

Chen was the Captain that got hired after the Titanic hit the Iceberg, he was just nice enough to have the Band play tell the ship went under.

Posted via CB10

[DaDaDogg]

The Smartphone market will be consolidating in the next few years just like the PC/Laptop market did. The will be a small few that make small profits. Remember when Compaq and Packard Bell where Huge? Now there just Names owned by someone else, Chen keep BlackBerry from being just another Name in some Corporate catalog.

Posted via CB10

[blackberrybrad]

Such as? And are these significant contributors to revenue? Of course the company has other products, but those were/are auxiliary to its primary business. Blackberry is trying to replace its main source of revenue for over a decade--hardware and carrier service subscriptions--with software licenses and subscriptions, primarily around enterprise device and application management. Compare this to players like Citrix, VMware, and IBM, all of which earn the bulk of their revenues in other markets.

Have you ever been on their website...QNX, Athoc, and now BlackBerry radar. None of these products require an EMM solution.

Posted via CB10

[Nine54]

Have you ever been on their website...QNX, Athoc, and now BlackBerry radar. None of these products require an EMM solution.

Posted via CB10

Marginal products aside from QNX. And again, products from acquisitions--not Blackberry's bread-and-butter source of revenue.

From my vantage point, what Blackberry's done--or not done, rather--with QNX is disappointing. The company should have pushed this harder to other OEMs, including "frenemies" like Samsung. Would QNX not have been a good platform for Samsung's Gear wearables, smart TVs, etc.? Instead, Samsung adopted and continues to develop Tizen for these devices.

[app_Developer]

Chen was the Captain that got hired after the Titanic hit the Iceberg, he was just nice enough to have the Band play tell the ship went under.

And while the Titanic was sinking, he put together a new ship, brought it alongside, and successfully transferred Watsa and every other shareholder onto the new stable ship which will now sail on safely.

[JeepBB]

Have I mentioned that I really like Chen, and what he's done at BlackBerry?

And my belief that without him, BB would have folded the tent a couple of years ago?

Oh, OK, I wasn't sure if I'd mentioned it. Carry on...