[LordDraco]

I'm a blackberry user more than 10 years. And i have 4 blackberry device in my house. I want to see blackberry survive and rise again.

I just want to express my concern. For me the weakest link since z10 initial launching is their pricing strategy.

Too expensive with half done OS.

Blackberry management wanted a quick turn over for the company.
Blackberry put all the bet on the table, and now perhaps they lost it all.

They using initial apple strategy. High price and half baked ios. And fix it along the way.... But back then, apple didn't have any competitor.

Lets do a little price comparison:

Q10 vs S4 vs HTC one
Q5 vs Nexus 4 vs iPhone4

Do you think q10 and q5 have a chance?

I think blackberry should win back user base and building community around bb10. Instead quick win strategy.

Much like samsung android strategy. They launching android galaxy spica with cheap price. And now look at Galaxy Brand Now.

Nevertheless, i may understand Heinz dillema. The shareholder may not have the patient, and want their investment back up quickly.

Wish you well blackberry....

Posted via CB10

[Pilchard]

I'm a blackberry user more than 10 years. And i have 4 blackberry device in my house. I want to see blackberry survive and rise again.

I just want to express my concern. For me the weakest link since z10 initial launching is their pricing strategy.

Too expensive with half done OS.

Blackberry management wanted a quick turn over for the company.
Blackberry put all the bet on the table, and now perhaps they lost it all.

They using initial apple strategy. High price and half baked ios. And fix it along the way.... But back then, apple didn't have any competitor.

Lets do a little price comparison:

Q10 vs S4 vs HTC one
Q5 vs Nexus 4 vs iPhone4

Do you think q10 and q5 have a chance?

I think blackberry should win back user base and building community around bb10. Instead quick win strategy.

Much like samsung android strategy. They launching android galaxy spica with cheap price. And now look at Galaxy Brand Now.

Nevertheless, i may understand Heinz dillema. The shareholder may not have the patient, and want their investment back up quickly.

Wish you well blackberry....

Posted via CB10

UK prices for Z10 have been slashed and it now represents fantastic value for money. Tech companies always stiff early adopters.

[Djlatino]

The day will come where someone will explain to me why people quote the OP when they're the first ones to respond.

[Sith_Apprentice]

The day will come where someone will explain to me why people quote the OP when they're the first ones to respond.

Way to stay on topic

Thread has been moves to armchair CEO

Sent from my Nexus 7 using CB Forums mobile app

[badiyee]

I'm a blackberry user more than 10 years. And i have 4 blackberry device in my house. I want to see blackberry survive and rise again.

I just want to express my concern. For me the weakest link since z10 initial launching is their pricing strategy.

Too expensive with half done OS.

Blackberry management wanted a quick turn over for the company.
Blackberry put all the bet on the table, and now perhaps they lost it all.

They using initial apple strategy. High price and half baked ios. And fix it along the way.... But back then, apple didn't have any competitor.

Lets do a little price comparison:

Q10 vs S4 vs HTC one
Q5 vs Nexus 4 vs iPhone4

Do you think q10 and q5 have a chance?

I think blackberry should win back user base and building community around bb10. Instead quick win strategy.

Much like samsung android strategy. They launching android galaxy spica with cheap price. And now look at Galaxy Brand Now.

Nevertheless, i may understand Heinz dillema. The shareholder may not have the patient, and want their investment back up quickly.

Wish you well blackberry....

Posted via CB10

I don't think to say it is that much of a fair assessment on your end to claim BB10 as a half baked OS.

I think a better way of looking at the value proposition (which I feel that I arrived at the same conclusion at yours, which is the pricing strategy is downright... "yucks!" is to look at what kind of similar specs each phone holds to, and what the phones can do, then at the price point.

If I am to follow that train of thought, the real dilemma would end up being trying to justify IF the extra few hundred bucks is worth spending on a BlackBerry device, or a competitor advice.

At where I live, the Q5 is about USD350-390, though it can go lower, no contract. (i'm not living in the USA, mind you).
For that specs as a comparison,

Asus Transformer Pad Infinity (3G/4G version),
BlackBerry Z10
HTC Droid Incredible 4G LTE,
HTC Evo 4G LTE
HTC One X (North America),
HTC One XL,
HTC Windows Phone 8X,
LG Mach,
Motorola Atrix HD,
Motorola Droid Razr M,
Motorola Droid Razr HD,
Motorola Razr HD,
Motorola Droid Razr Maxx HD,
Nokia Lumia 820,
Nokia Lumia 920,
Nokia Lumia 925,
Nokia Lumia 1020,
Panasonic Eluga Power,


if you compare the relative specs (Q5 has 2GB RAM) and the price against the models stated above (not sure if i should put in the snapdragon 4 plus in this case, even when they're in the MSM8960 family. then on paper it wins some, and loses some.

But with the Z10 price of I think USD660 (our price here), going against the likes of HTC One X which is priced at about USD450, the near USD200 extra worth of deficit is more than enough to put away users.

Then again, its not like BlackBerry's offering is THAT BAD if one is well versed enough, but the value proposition at face value is stiffened because of the price point where it is sold at, against the phones that are of similar specs (creating the impression that old tech, bloatedly high price, the management learns nothing!) that hurts the BlackBerry brand more than ever.

[Chicago777Guy]

I agree clearly they have no idea about it...just like they said " they were going to sell 10s and millions of Q's"...i am really doubting thier common sense.

Posted via CB10

[Whyareallthegoodnamestaken]

I'm a blackberry user more than 10 years. And i have 4 blackberry device in my house. I want to see blackberry survive and rise again.

I just want to express my concern. For me the weakest link since z10 initial launching is their pricing strategy.

Too expensive with half done OS.

Blackberry management wanted a quick turn over for the company.
Blackberry put all the bet on the table, and now perhaps they lost it all.

They using initial apple strategy. High price and half baked ios. And fix it along the way.... But back then, apple didn't have any competitor.

Lets do a little price comparison:

Q10 vs S4 vs HTC one
Q5 vs Nexus 4 vs iPhone4

Do you think q10 and q5 have a chance?

I think blackberry should win back user base and building community around bb10. Instead quick win strategy.

Much like samsung android strategy. They launching android galaxy spica with cheap price. And now look at Galaxy Brand Now.

Nevertheless, i may understand Heinz dillema. The shareholder may not have the patient, and want their investment back up quickly.

Wish you well blackberry....

Posted via CB10

+1000 agree.

They might be able to break even at least by just pricing for volume instead of margin. It would make more sense to do it that way to better grow a market for apps.

Posted via CB10

[badiyee]

I agree clearly they have no idea about it...just like they said " they were going to sell 10s and millions of Q's"...i am really doubting thier common sense.

Posted via CB10

Its not that bad really... Let's say their devices really have 40% margin, that means we know we're paying a really big sum for the Q5.

Let's see if I got the math right.

Assuming 40% of USD 400 would roughly mean USD160, and let's say BBRY decides to cut into really slim margins, say 10% max,

then we'll be seeing Q5s sold at USD400-120= USD280 (in which they'll still get USD40 profit), then placing a Q5 that is priced at USD280 somehow becomes a real gamechanger, because there are a lot of phones that are priced around that, but would not beat the value proposition brought by a Q5 at USD280.

Assuming the calculations above are correct, that is.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

A weak link, yes... weakest link, no.


BlackBerry has ALWAY priced their devices a little high. But they could get away with it back when they had features that no other device came close to... like push email. But today, even though BB10 is in many ways a superior OS... it doesn't really offer a feature or experience that overshadows it's many shortcomings.

Personally I would have like for BlackBerry to launch the Z10 like Nokia/Microsoft did their new devices - with some pretty hefty subsidies. A big push to build the uses base and get devices into customers hands is what they needed for the first 6 - 12 months. Of course once consumers got devices that didn't last more than 4-6hrs on a single charge and randomly reboot every day or so, and didn't have most of the Big Apps that people use every day.... well as you see pricing wasn't the weakest link. Pretty much EVERYTHING that BlackBery has done to "launch" the new Platform has turned out to be wrong.

3 Billion and not debt aside, BlackBerry is in the same spot the Palm was in. They have a new OS and new Hardware that got pretty good initial reviews, but consumers just don't care. Unlike Palm, BlackBerry does have the Enterprise/Gov markets that should support a much smaller BlackBerry company with much more expensive (due to lower production numbers) devices.

[iN8ter]

I don't think to say it is that much of a fair assessment on your end to claim BB10 as a half baked OS.

I think a better way of looking at the value proposition (which I feel that I arrived at the same conclusion at yours, which is the pricing strategy is downright... "yucks!" is to look at what kind of similar specs each phone holds to, and what the phones can do, then at the price point.

If I am to follow that train of thought, the real dilemma would end up being trying to justify IF the extra few hundred bucks is worth spending on a BlackBerry device, or a competitor advice.

At where I live, the Q5 is about USD350-390, though it can go lower, no contract. (i'm not living in the USA, mind you).
For that specs as a comparison,

Asus Transformer Pad Infinity (3G/4G version),
BlackBerry Z10
HTC Droid Incredible 4G LTE,
HTC Evo 4G LTE
HTC One X (North America),
HTC One XL,
HTC Windows Phone 8X,
LG Mach,
Motorola Atrix HD,
Motorola Droid Razr M,
Motorola Droid Razr HD,
Motorola Razr HD,
Motorola Droid Razr Maxx HD,
Nokia Lumia 820,
Nokia Lumia 920,
Nokia Lumia 925,
Nokia Lumia 1020,
Panasonic Eluga Power,


if you compare the relative specs (Q5 has 2GB RAM) and the price against the models stated above (not sure if i should put in the snapdragon 4 plus in this case, even when they're in the MSM8960 family. then on paper it wins some, and loses some.

But with the Z10 price of I think USD660 (our price here), going against the likes of HTC One X which is priced at about USD450, the near USD200 extra worth of deficit is more than enough to put away users.

Then again, its not like BlackBerry's offering is THAT BAD if one is well versed enough, but the value proposition at face value is stiffened because of the price point where it is sold at, against the phones that are of similar specs (creating the impression that old tech, bloatedly high price, the management learns nothing!) that hurts the BlackBerry brand more than ever.

Compare all the specs. The Q5 loses to practically all of those phones (though I know nothing about Panasonic devices or an LG Mach).

Almost all of those devices have a faster SoC, Better Camera, and in most cases bigger internal storage capacity than the Q5. RAM almost doesn't matter the Q5 has 2GB RAM because the OS will not run decently than one. That is different than i.e. Samsung putting 2GB in the S3 just so it can have a spec advantage in the US market (where they were forced to use an S4 in lieu of their own Exynos chip for LTE compatibility) over the One X. Almost all of those also have a better screen than the Q5 as well, as well as a better build quality.

The Q5 is a high-mid-range device with a price almost on par with a Lumia 92x series device, but much worse hardware and build quality if you view it objectively. That simply isn't going to sell well. They can't even put it on pre-paid carriers because the device wouldn't even be able to compete with Galaxy S II and III devices that are already there on price point, nevermind specs in the case of the S III.

When the price/value/bang-for-buck differential is that big, OS ceases to matter. Money talks.

[iN8ter]

Personally I would have like for BlackBerry to launch the Z10 like Nokia/Microsoft did their new devices - with some pretty hefty subsidies. A big push to build the uses base and get devices into customers hands is what they needed for the first 6 - 12 months. Of course once consumers got devices that didn't last more than 4-6hrs on a single charge and randomly reboot every day or so, and didn't have most of the Big Apps that people use every day.... well as you see pricing wasn't the weakest link. Pretty much EVERYTHING that BlackBery has done to "launch" the new Platform has turned out to be wrong.

Sony and Motorola did the same thing with their devices, and they sold decently well. The Xperia ion and TL launched for $99 on contract and about $449 off-contract. The Atrix HD was similar. And of course the Lumia 92x series is about $449 off-contract and $99 on contract when launched.

This is the game you have to play if you wish to break in the US smartphone market. You cannot try to bull doze into the premium market with premium prices when competitors like Apple and Samsung have such good traction and retention rates for their users. You have to give users a material reason to reconsider. Like I said, Money talks. Hype and decent reviews just won't do it.

Also, timing the launch correctly also helps. They were late with BB7 and BB10 devices, releasing after a number of flagships had already released and soaked up a lot of potential purchases/upgrades. This is also an issue Microsoft had with Windows Phone 7 back in 2010 when they didn't release until very late in the year (after the Galaxy S, iPhone 4, Evo 4G, etc.). Those other flagships left were so hyped and such good sellers that it left them with very little for themselves by the time the WP7 devices launched.

[Pilchard]

The day will come where someone will explain to me why people quote the OP when they're the first ones to respond.

I do it because if the OP is using a Crackberry App they get a notification immediately that someone has responded. This is the day ;-)

[Djlatino]

I do it because if the OP is using a Crackberry App they get a notification immediately that someone has responded. This is the day ;-)

Wait actually? How? I'm pretty sure there's no quote notification

[serahjessa]

I love it how every tech analyst and armchair ceo forgets basic marketing principles. This practice of BlackBerry is simply called first adopter pricing.

BlackBerry knows that loyal customers will buy the phone no matter what. They will buy it within 1-3 months of launch. This is called maximizing initial margins.

Once the initial wave of adopters have their phones BlackBerry slashes prices to accommodate the not so fanatic users and rake in more profit albeit at a lower margin. This can go on between 3 - 9 months or more depending on market situation. It's also accompanied by some price based promotions with no country wide advertisements but only point of sale banners.

After that they price the unit for barely above breakeven and by volume in order to minimize units unsold.

As far as I can tell in my country they are now in stage 2 because the swap phone / trade in program they have in every mall (Philippines) is very tempting. Heck I'm tempted to trade in my z for a Q.

Everyone needs to chill the f out.

Posted via CB10

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

I love it how every tech analyst and armchair ceo forgets basic marketing principles. This practice of BlackBerry is simply called first adopter pricing.

BlackBerry knows that loyal customers will buy the phone no matter what. They will buy it within 1-3 months of launch. This is called maximizing initial margins.

Once the initial wave of adopters have their phones BlackBerry slashes prices to accommodate the not so fanatic users and rake in more profit albeit at a lower margin. This can go on between 3 - 9 months or more depending on market situation. It's also accompanied by some price based promotions with no country wide advertisements but only point of sale banners.

After that they price the unit for barely above breakeven and by volume in order to minimize units unsold.

As far as I can tell in my country they are now in stage 2 because the swap phone / trade in program they have in every mall (Philippines) is very tempting. Heck I'm tempted to trade in my z for a Q.

Everyone needs to chill the f out.

Posted via CB10

Maybe they need to go to a different marketing school? Your "basic marketing principles" only applies if you are already in the market, and are considered one of the front runners, and have products that are in high demand.

When you release a product into a market where 6 months is the average shelf life (unless you put an "i" in front of it), you can't expect to use half of that time to maximize you profits - at the expense of getting you product into consumers hands. ESPECIALLY when you are building a brand new Platform that relies VERY heavily on 3rd party developers that are interested in see a large user base. Based on the NEED to attract developers, the first few devices should have been priced high to keep up the appears of being "premium" product. But BlackBerry should have given out rebates - trade in an existing BB device and get a Z10 or Q10 free, or even trade in an existing active Android or iPhone and get a Z10 or BB10 for $49... No they wouldn't have made money initially, but they might have give the "platform" enough of a boost to allow it to start growing.

Based on 1Q reports of SHIPMENTS and the subsequent two production cuts... I bet over the life of the Z10 it doesn't SELL more than five or six million devices in all... I'm sure it will make BB a lot of profit.

[Pilchard]

Wait actually? How? I'm pretty sure there's no quote notification

There is on my iPad Crackberry app.

[davinci4real]

Can someone explain to me why blackberry triple their prices when releasing a device and then cut it to normal after 4 or 5 months. When everyone who was waiting for the price to come down would have lost interest. Aaaarrrrrrggghhh!!!!

[Pilchard]

Can someone explain to me why blackberry triple their prices when releasing a device and then cut it to normal after 4 or 5 months. When everyone who was waiting for the price to come down would have lost interest. Aaaarrrrrrggghhh!!!!

The one thing we learn from history is we don't learn from history (Warren Buffett).

[davinci4real]

The one thing we learn from history is we don't learn from history (Warren Buffett).

God bless you and warren buffet *storms off* sick and tired of this company

[Djlatino]

There is on my iPad Crackberry app.

The irony that the iOS app has more functionality than the BB10 one.

[badiyee]

Compare all the specs. The Q5 loses to practically all of those phones (though I know nothing about Panasonic devices or an LG Mach).

Almost all of those devices have a faster SoC, Better Camera, and in most cases bigger internal storage capacity than the Q5. RAM almost doesn't matter the Q5 has 2GB RAM because the OS will not run decently than one. That is different than i.e. Samsung putting 2GB in the S3 just so it can have a spec advantage in the US market (where they were forced to use an S4 in lieu of their own Exynos chip for LTE compatibility) over the One X. Almost all of those also have a better screen than the Q5 as well, as well as a better build quality.

The Q5 is a high-mid-range device with a price almost on par with a Lumia 92x series device, but much worse hardware and build quality if you view it objectively. That simply isn't going to sell well. They can't even put it on pre-paid carriers because the device wouldn't even be able to compete with Galaxy S II and III devices that are already there on price point, nevermind specs in the case of the S III.

When the price/value/bang-for-buck differential is that big, OS ceases to matter. Money talks.

If my understanding is right, from what I deduced from my sources', the SOCs for most of the phones are clocked the same, for the MSM8960 family (excluding the Snapdragon S4 + family).

Competitor devices have better camera > Check. Tick.
Competitor devices have bigger space > Questionable. With a micro SD slot, this one is questionable.
Competitor devices have better SOC > I think this may be wrong. Its the same SoC. Software tweaks? Yes. Hardware base? Should be the same reference design from Qualcomm.
Competitor devices have a better build quality > you mean they used a different plastic than the one used in Q5 right? Unless you're privy to some sort of stress test that you'll like to share?
Competitor devices have a better screen > Please define better? Because Q5 has IPS? And IPS is bad for phones?Therefore any devices with IPS screen = bad screen? You can see the phone, even on extreme angles, except unpractical ones, (unless you're saying that other phones have screens that can be viewed at unpractical angles and the Q5 doesn't have any, and I don't understand how that is better. Furthermore, the Q5 can still be used under direct sunlight, its bright enough. So what is the better part? Its not like the phone can't be used under sunlight?


How is objectively looking at it that Q5 is that bad in terms of hardware when it has a similar SOC used in other phones? True that the phone, price point fails to deliver, as I think we all can agree here, but on paper wise it isn't that bad. You're making out as if RAM is irrelevant, but I'm pretty sure that RAM is quite relevant for Android devices, or else Google would not have released a 2GB RAM powered Nexus 4 (when the trend was 1gb or 1.5gb when it was released, together with the operating system that came along bundled with it.

When it comes to BB10 OS in Q5, I don't find it crippled against the Z10 and Q10 siblings.

I don't think i'm defending the Q5, but I think it deserves some merits for the device that it is, irregardless whether one chooses to compare it against a competitor device or not.

[serahjessa]

Maybe they need to go to a different marketing school? Your "basic marketing principles" only applies if you are already in the market, and are considered one of the front runners, and have products that are in high demand.

When you release a product into a market where 6 months is the average shelf life (unless you put an "i" in front of it), you can't expect to use half of that time to maximize you profits - at the expense of getting you product into consumers hands. ESPECIALLY when you are building a brand new Platform that relies VERY heavily on 3rd party developers that are interested in see a large user base. Based on the NEED to attract developers, the first few devices should have been priced high to keep up the appears of being "premium" product. But BlackBerry should have given out rebates - trade in an existing BB device and get a Z10 or Q10 free, or even trade in an existing active Android or iPhone and get a Z10 or BB10 for $49... No they wouldn't have made money initially, but they might have give the "platform" enough of a boost to allow it to start growing.

Based on 1Q reports of SHIPMENTS and the subsequent two production cuts... I bet over the life of the Z10 it doesn't SELL more than five or six million devices in all... I'm sure it will make BB a lot of profit.

Maybe it's true that the particular marketing strategy they used / I detailed is for an already established market product. But thing is every region is different. Every country is different. Maybe in the Philippine they do have some hold on the market?

Lastly this is the strategy I think they chose. If it is ultimately wrong then time and consumer demand will tell.

Posted via CB10

[iN8ter]

I love it how every tech analyst and armchair ceo forgets basic marketing principles. This practice of BlackBerry is simply called first adopter pricing.

BlackBerry knows that loyal customers will buy the phone no matter what. They will buy it within 1-3 months of launch. This is called maximizing initial margins.

Once the initial wave of adopters have their phones BlackBerry slashes prices to accommodate the not so fanatic users and rake in more profit albeit at a lower margin. This can go on between 3 - 9 months or more depending on market situation. It's also accompanied by some price based promotions with no country wide advertisements but only point of sale banners.

After that they price the unit for barely above breakeven and by volume in order to minimize units unsold.

As far as I can tell in my country they are now in stage 2 because the swap phone / trade in program they have in every mall (Philippines) is very tempting. Heck I'm tempted to trade in my z for a Q.

Everyone needs to chill the f out.

Posted via CB10

You're not making much sense. The Bold 9900 was over $200 on contract for like a year, as were other Bolds, and the off-contract pricing was absolutely ridiculous.

This isn't about first adopter pricing. They simply believe their products are worth the premium prices that others are despite the hardware being worse and the software not being as finished as those competing products. They still think they can charge a premium simply because "it's a Blackberry."

That Z10 was $199 on contract for too long, give how sales were going, but then when you aren't releasing phones like Samsung and Nokia I guess you have to keep prices as high as possible as long as possible to maximize them...

BB has almost always overpriced all their devices, even the Curves are relatively overpriced.

[iN8ter]

If my understanding is right, from what I deduced from my sources', the SOCs for most of the phones are clocked the same, for the MSM8960 family (excluding the Snapdragon S4 + family).

Competitor devices have better camera > Check. Tick.
Competitor devices have bigger space > Questionable. With a micro SD slot, this one is questionable.
Competitor devices have better SOC > I think this may be wrong. Its the same SoC. Software tweaks? Yes. Hardware base? Should be the same reference design from Qualcomm.
Competitor devices have a better build quality > you mean they used a different plastic than the one used in Q5 right? Unless you're privy to some sort of stress test that you'll like to share?
Competitor devices have a better screen > Please define better? Because Q5 has IPS? And IPS is bad for phones?Therefore any devices with IPS screen = bad screen? You can see the phone, even on extreme angles, except unpractical ones, (unless you're saying that other phones have screens that can be viewed at unpractical angles and the Q5 doesn't have any, and I don't understand how that is better. Furthermore, the Q5 can still be used under direct sunlight, its bright enough. So what is the better part? Its not like the phone can't be used under sunlight?


How is objectively looking at it that Q5 is that bad in terms of hardware when it has a similar SOC used in other phones? True that the phone, price point fails to deliver, as I think we all can agree here, but on paper wise it isn't that bad. You're making out as if RAM is irrelevant, but I'm pretty sure that RAM is quite relevant for Android devices, or else Google would not have released a 2GB RAM powered Nexus 4 (when the trend was 1gb or 1.5gb when it was released, together with the operating system that came along bundled with it.

When it comes to BB10 OS in Q5, I don't find it crippled against the Z10 and Q10 siblings.

I don't think i'm defending the Q5, but I think it deserves some merits for the device that it is, irregardless whether one chooses to compare it against a competitor device or not.

Really?

They added 2GB RAM because it made sense, from a long-term support and future proofing perspective. Nexus devices tend to get over 2 years of support, so it's nice to have headroom. The Q5 does not have 2GB RAM for headroom. If BB could run the OS on 512 MB like OS 7.1, they'd have 512 MB RAM in the damn thing, Lol.

Additionally, other phones have different specs that add value to the phone.

All the 2012 Flagships except the US Galaxy S3 variants had 1GB RAM, so the OS certainly didn't need it. It doesn't even need the better hardware to run well, since Motorola has put JB on devices as old as the Droid Bionic and it runs fine. How well did Playbook OS run on a similar SoC, and how well do you think the Z10 would perform with those older OMAP 1/1.2Ghz Dual Cores with only 1GB RAM (~750 available to the system due to GPU getting some) - nevermind battery life with those SoCs?

Also, SoC isn't the only hardware in the phone. The AMOLED screens look better (to me, at least) and are more battery efficient (you can gain over an hour of screen on time just by putting a pure black background on an AMOLED screen in many cases, and using a True Black theme in apps like Tapatalk 2, etc.). Higher end devices have things like Wolfson DACs for Audio. The SoC in the Q5 isn't the same as the SoC in the GS3 or the Z10. There are different tiers of S4 SoCs, it's clocked lower, and the GPU isn't as good as some other phones with S4s. Internal storage does matter, as apps cannot be installed to SD Cards and many apps install their data to the internal storage - and those other phones most of them support SD Cards up to 64 GB anyways.

The phone isn't bad, by any means (except maybe the build quality and looks), but the for that price it's comparatively bad given what you can get for similar pricetags on other platforms. This is why I stated it in terms of value for the money you're paying. It's a bad value proposition, IMO.

However, if you want something cheaper than the Q10 that has a keyboard, I guess it's a top tier choice. Definitely.

[BroncoVAL]

That was my concern from day one, and even earlier when i saw mockups of what could be the next BB with physical keyboard.
Back then i wished a taller screen and said i'd definitely go for it as long as it wouldn't cost 600 euro.
Imagine my reaction when i saw the 699 euro price tag in Italy (980$ !!!).
I finally bought it second hand on ebay for 360? and i think Blackberry shouldn't price its devices over 450euro top (600$) and even a 350-400euro would be a smarter price. A lot more customers would be intrigued and that may be enough for them to try the OS, and once you tried BB10 you eventually ditch button centered iOS or messy UI Android (only my opinion of course )

Posted via CB10