[Omnitech]

Business is business, don't bring any political bias to the discussion.

Re: "political bias" - it's an unreasonable demand, because what you call "political bias" in this case is directly relevant to the questions you ask, which are clearly not simpy "business", especially when a company relies heavily on government intervention and support to succeed. (Neither am I saying this is unique to China, but the point is, when you are discussing multi-national corporations, you can NOT neatly segment such discussions from political aspects which are heavily entwined in those businesses.)

Lenovo is Chinese government supported company who own thinkpad now, I never heard that thinkpad stole user data, and never heard that thinkpad will block you from Facebook and Twitter. What I heard about is thinkpad development center is still keep as it was, and all Chinese governments(local and central) and government related corporations put huge amount order to buy thinkpad and almost everyone carries a thinkpad now.

Lenovo has done a much better job of remaining independent than Huawei or ZTE, for example. Regarding the PC business, they maintained much of their US-based development, design and marketing departments, they maintained a research/production center in Japan, as just a couple of examples. Neither do they have the kind of history with the CCP that Huawei had, etc.

Chinese consumers care their face, people with enough money won't carry a fake Iphone in street, it is too shameful.

I honestly cannot see how anyone would worry about that because there is no way that a casual passerby on the street could tell the difference between a fake iPhone and a real one, especially with a case around it.

I haven't yet heard of a company making fake Mercedes.

[Omnitech]

Avoid Huawei like the plaque. They are a company that was built by the Chinese government and who repackaged Cisco's gear under their own name, coping the manuals and code along with all its bugs. Cisco did sue the crap out of them but the Chinese government picked up the tab.

I'm glad you are posting this because that history doesn't get much publicity here for some reason. Cisco eventually dropped their claims against Huawei but I never understood that - it was a slam dunk case. Perhaps someone got paid-off with big bux or something.

[Dave Bourque]

Canadian government will NEVER approve Huawei to buy BlackBerry. Never in a million years! Huawei is pure chinese gov garbage.

Sent from my BB10 smartphone.

[Dave Bourque]

Political bias? Rofl you might want to learn more about your government...

Note: but then you can't because the chinese government blocks every single negative piece of information related to them so that their people never know the truth.

Sent from my BB10 smartphone.

[smoothrunnings]

I'm glad you are posting this because that history doesn't get much publicity here for some reason. Cisco eventually dropped their claims against Huawei but I never understood that - it was a slam dunk case. Perhaps someone got paid-off with big bux or something.

Here's a good break down of the final answer and why Cisco backed out. It's clear that Huawei did copy Cisco's code but had actually replaced it with their own. The fact of the matter is they should have consulted Cisco first before attempting to sell or license their own products with Cisco's code, which just makes Huawei look bad.

Can people in general trust a communication & network company who has previously copied code from another big vendor without getting their permission and then license it out to other companies? That answer in North America is NO!

Huawei and Cisco’s Source Code: Correcting the Record

[Omnitech]

Here's a good break down of the final answer and why Cisco backed out. It's clear that Huawei did copy Cisco's code but had actually replaced it with their own. The fact of the matter is they should have consulted Cisco first before attempting to sell or license their own products with Cisco's code, which just makes Huawei look bad.

Can people in general trust a communication & network company who has previously copied code from another big vendor without getting their permission and then license it out to other companies? That answer in North America is NO!

Huawei and Cisco’s Source Code: Correcting the Record

That's an interesting article, though I must admit that I am confounded, like one of the commenters on the original article pointed-out, why "STRCMP" was some sort of critical IOS function. Perhaps they are simply using it as a sort of "smoking gun" regarding the wholesale copying of other aspects of the code, which Huawei was more careful to obfuscate.

In regards to the "North America" point - I must admit that due to being admitted to the WTO and now being bound by various international IP treaties, China is finally (if very slowly) starting to move towards better IP protections. They certainly are not there yet though. (It seems that they will finally start to put teeth in their IP enforcement efforts, now that they are getting to where they have a significant local industry to protect. When that was not the case, they could not have cared less.)

[Pardon]

Avoid Huawei like the plaque. They are a company that was built by the Chinese government and who repackaged Cisco's gear under their own name, coping the manuals and code along with all its bugs. Cisco did sue the crap out of them but the Chinese government picked up the tab. Secondly in the US every time they have attempted to do a big infrastructure project with anyone the US government has stepped in and told the other party NO for security reasons. The Canadian government in the best of interest of our trading partner, the USA, have had to do the same thing for security reasons.

So you can see they aren't welcomed or respected because of their origin, not where their from or who they are from but who has put you on the face on this planet. (The Chinese Government)

I am not sure about Lenova, but generally any large IT company that was built by the Chinese government isn't really accepted in North America as they pose a security threat to our nations.

Why worry about the Chinese Government , when your the US government is spying on every one ,

[savingblackberry]

There is no reason for this stock to trade below 40, should be trading in the 40-60 range and then if things get better, move higher... except for the fact that BBRY management who have done an excellent job with technology is completely clueless and dont have any idea how to play the street game. The PR has been one of the worst I have seen, the IR is non-creative,,, these people have no idea how to shape perceptions. Very smart and highly intelligent nerds who are very street-unsavvy

[Supa_Fly1]

The market cap is only 7.3 billions? And I haven't count the largest private global physical network and its infrastructure, more than 20 buildings and real estate they own in Waterloo region plus 12700 highly intelligent labor force. If blackberry is so unwelcome and unappreciated in united state, why bother list it under NASDAQ? If Canadian government approved, Lenova or Huawei would like to pay 30 to 40 billions to buy blackberry

I have no love for Huawei and their practices. They already want a piece more of Wind Mobile.

Lenovo, not Lenova ... never had any talks officially with BlackBerry and what would they do? take the NOC expertise and patents and sell the rest.

$3 billion in cash now? Seriously?

[Supa_Fly1]

There is no reason for this stock to trade below 40, should be trading in the 40-60 range and then if things get better, move higher... except for the fact that BBRY management who have done an excellent job with technology is completely clueless and dont have any idea how to play the street game. The PR has been one of the worst I have seen, the IR is non-creative,,, these people have no idea how to shape perceptions. Very smart and highly intelligent nerds who are very street-unsavvy

Every thread in the past week I see you state this.

Please state the facts, market assessment and reason they should be trading at $40/share (common stock) ? I'm with you on this ... but I cannot qualify this analytically as many others could so I'm VERY curious to here what you have to qualify this?