[cgk]

So we see all sorts of claims about the potential of QNX but it seems pretty hard to break down the actual current revenue - there is an interesting conversation that starts here.

So leaving aside claims for growth - how much is it really contributing to the bottom-line at present?

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

All I see is talk about the Venice.... But I'm not a register user so I don't know what the discussion is.

I think their revenues were around $40 Million a year when BlackBerry bought them. Seen some "estimates" that it is now at $100 Million a year - maybe Chen even said it was.

It is really hard to figure out... as the SOFTWARE part of BlackBerry's revenues has really not grown to reflect QNX's successes. Software before they bought QNX was actually bringing in more revenues than reported Software revenues today. But that is most likely due to other BlackBerry software products being EOL or seeing reduced sales from those older products.

QNX is really all about the future and potential... but that doesn't pay today's bills.

[yhamaie]

I do not believe that QNX-specific revenue has been disclosed.



Posted via CB10

[cgk]

Its in 'Software and service' - which also includes BES revenue and last quarter included two big licenses deal - the total last quarter was $137 million - so can we estimate how much BES revenue is to remove from total?

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

Isn't BES Licensing part of Services? BES Software is free... right?


But yeah it's hard to know what is where and what is making money.

Where would Stickers go?
Where would BlackBerry World revenues go?
Where are all the software addons for BES? Services or Software
And then there are the companies BlackBerry has acquired..

• Slipstream Data Inc.
• Certicom
• Dash Navigation
• Torch Mobile
• DataViz
• Viigo
• QNX
• The Astonishing Tribe
• JayCut
• Tungle.me
• Newbay
• Scoreloop
• Gist
• Scroon
• Movirtu
• Secusmart
• WatchDox

Some are still independent division, which would have to be reported on BlackBerry's earnings... many just got folded into BlackBerry. Or like TAT just died.

[cgk]

Isn't BES Licensing part of Services? BES Software is free... right?

According to their filing:

"Software and technology licensing revenue, which includes fees from licensed BES software, client access licenses, technical support, maintenance and upgrades, software licensing revenues, and technology licensing revenues..."

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

According to their filing:

"Software and technology licensing revenue, which includes fees from licensed BES software, client access licenses, technical support, maintenance and upgrades, software licensing revenues, and technology licensing revenues..."

So what are Services.....?

I found where you quoted from Software and Licensing.

But under Services, all I found was

The decrease in service revenue is primarily attributable to a continued shift in the mix of the Company’s customers from
higher-tiered unlimited plans to prepaid and lower-tiered plans, as well as pricing reduction programs implemented by the
Company to maintain its customer base. The year-over-year decrease also resulted from a lower number of BlackBerry users
and lower revenue from those users compared to the first quarter of fiscal 2015.
In the fourth quarter of fiscal 2015, the Company stated its expectations that service revenue would decline by approximately
15% per quarter in fiscal 2016. Service revenues for the first quarter of fiscal 2016 decreased by approximately 16% compared
to the fourth quarter of fiscal 2015. The Company continues to expect service revenue to decline by approximately 15% per
quarter for the remainder of fiscal 2016.

Which sounds more like a statement you would see from a Carrier. So... sounds like Services are slowing fading away as they admit that it will decline by 15% each quarter. Maybe that is fees collected from Carriers for BIS and special BES plans.

Software and Licensing was $137 Million in revenues... and they are still on "target" for that to become $500 Million during this fiscal year.

I guess I have just always taught that BES was a bigger portion of their business.

[anon(8865116)]

As other have said, it's probably <= 100 million a year which I think makes sense since the price per license is probably really cheap (I've heard $2-5 but that's just guessing). I don't think they can charge that much without some competitor coming in and charging a lot less. QNX seems to have a big developer community but it's not the only RTOS. I think the big money will come from MDM in the future. Right now, it's mobile devices but think about when IOT really takes off and becomes more ubiquitous in enterprise/retail locations. I could see that easily fitting into the BES strategy and charging x per device/year. Still, I don't see QNX being a huge money maker but it allows them to have more control over the kernel in handsets and gives them exposure to IOT markets which is a win for their enterprise software

[thurask]

About tree fiddy?

[cgk]

So what are Services.....?

I found where you quoted from Software and Licensing.

But under Services, all I found was



Which sounds more like a statement you would see from a Carrier. So... sounds like Services are slowing fading away as they admit that it will decline by 15% each quarter. Maybe that is fees collected from Carriers for BIS and special BES plans.

Software and Licensing was $137 Million in revenues... and they are still on "target" for that to become $500 Million during this fiscal year.

I guess I have just always taught that BES was a bigger portion of their business.

What gets tricky is that they also throw one-off big licensing deals in that pot so the picture gets even more murky.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

What gets tricky is that they also throw one-off big licensing deals in that pot so the picture gets even more murky.

BES, QNX, all these software companies.... that is a pretty small pool. If QNX really is $25 Million a quarter, then BES revenues are much smaller than I had taught. It seems that BES revenues would be less than Mobile Irons..... that can't be right... can it?

What I really wonder is where do they expect the growth to come the later half of 2016 that will get them to $500 Million. Other licensing.. Products in IoT or Healthcare? Or will are they counting on selling BB Experience Apps?

[keithhackneysmullet]

Well I don't know the real revenue of QNX, but it obviously isn't much or BlackBerry wouldn't be hiding it in with a bunch of other revenue streams. It seems they would really be highlighting it in the earnings report if it was was something to be proud of.

Posted via CB10

[BanffMoose]

BES, QNX, all these software companies.... that is a pretty small pool. If QNX really is $25 Million a quarter, then BES revenues are much smaller than I had taught. It seems that BES revenues would be less than Mobile Irons..... that can't be right... can it?

What I really wonder is where do they expect the growth to come the later half of 2016 that will get them to $500 Million. Other licensing.. Products in IoT or Healthcare? Or will are they counting on selling BB Experience Apps?

From what I gathered, the QNX revenue is somehow backend loaded, so revenues should increase over time. How much, I have no clue. But also keep in mind that as more and more QNX cars hit the road (and we're talking a lot of cars), more revenues should be forthcoming. Didn't take too long to go from 50 million to 60 million cars.

BES5.x and prior revenues should be drying up just as fast as service revenues fall. They may have dried up long ago if the customer has perpetual licenses. Very few companies probably paid any licensing fee for BES10 because of the EZPass programs. BES12 has only started generating revenues since Feb 1 of this year. So, yeah, it is possible that BES revenue is less than MobileIron's. But that should be changing on an upward trajectory as we speak. If the slider is in fact pure or close to pure android, BlackBerry's sales teams may be able to slip in hardware sales instead of pushing only Samsung devices when responding to RFPs and Android.

I think you know the sources of revenue. Don't forget revenues from acquisitions. The Movirtu virtual-SIM product was supposed to be launching in India on several carriers and a few other countries by year end. That should become a new area of recurring service fees.

It's just taking time to get up to appreciable levels.

Posted via CB10

[BanffMoose]

Well I don't know the real revenue of QNX, but it obviously isn't much or BlackBerry wouldn't be hiding it in with a bunch of other revenue streams. It seems they would really be highlighting it in the earnings report if it was was something to be proud of.

Posted via CB10

Not really. Revenue streams are like corporate secrets. You disclose the lump total, not product by product if you don't have to, so your competitors and customers are left guessing. Price is obviously a competitive issue, and customers will probably fight back harder if they can.

Posted via CB10

[cgk]

Not really. Revenue streams are like corporate secrets. You disclose the lump total, not product by product if you don't have to, so your competitors and customers are left guessing. Price is obviously a competitive issue, and customers will probably fight back harder if they can.

Posted via CB10

The problem is this - we have a small number, that small number is boosted by one-off IP deals, that small numbers is made up of multiple services - you don't need to be a rocket scientist to work out that these fanciful claims about the growth of both BES and QNX are clearly not what they are appear to be.

Sent from my LG-D802 using Tapatalk

[BanffMoose]

The problem is this - we have a small number, that small number is boosted by one-off IP deals, that small numbers is made up of multiple services - you don't need to be a rocket scientist to work out that these fanciful claims about the growth of both BES and QNX are clearly not what they are appear to be.

I get what you're saying, but we have a bigger problem, and that is Wall Street wants BlackBerry dead and buried. They will use any number they are given to paint BlackBerry as a failing company.

* Grow 2,600 BES customers (30% of Mobile Iron's entire customer base) in one quarter? Hmm, but the revenues appear flat. BlackBerry must be a FAIL!
* Grow 10 million more autos in the market running QNX? Hmm, revenues aren't broken out so they must not be significant. BlackBerry is a FAIL! Nevermind Chen said a while back that QNX revenues are (for some reason) back end loaded and they come at some later date.

One last point on QNX. It's been said in these forums, that embedded systems don't command the huge licensing fees desktop OS's like Windows OS command. People have suggested something like $1-$3/car. Didn't computer OEMs pay MSFT something like $10/computer? There were what, hundreds of millions of computers sold world-wide versus, tens of millions of new cars sold world-wide? So revenue is of course going to be small for BlackBerry, but maybe significant to QNX. The Car2 platform, should theoretically command more revenue than whatever QNX shipped the auto industry even a few years ago based on pure capability alone. But this is just conjecture on my part. What isn't conjecture is that cars using the Car 2 platform started rolling out last year in select 2015 models by a few manufacturers. Car 2 is shipping in greater numbers of 2016 models by more manufacturers this year. Car2 should yield greater revenues and should yield more revenues as time goes on and it's used in more cars.

This shouldn't be considered "fanciful claims of growth." To me, it's logical growth using logic based on known facts. This is the auto industry we're dealing with this time around, and it shouldn't be subject to the manipulation BlackBerry faced in 2013 when they launched BB10 phones and everyone was trying to apply logic to "known facts" only to get it completely wrong.

[cgk]

I get what you're saying, but we have a bigger problem, and that is Wall Street wants BlackBerry dead and buried. They will use any number they are given to paint BlackBerry as a failing company.

The problem is that the numbers are the numbers - you can only hide behind "honest just one more quarter for so long" - especially as software seems to be actually *declining*.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

I get what you're saying, but we have a bigger problem, and that is Wall Street wants BlackBerry dead and buried. They will use any number they are given to paint BlackBerry as a failing company.

* Grow 2,600 BES customers (30% of Mobile Iron's entire customer base) in one quarter? Hmm, but the revenues appear flat. BlackBerry must be a FAIL!
* Grow 10 million more autos in the market running QNX? Hmm, revenues aren't broken out so they must not be significant. BlackBerry is a FAIL! Nevermind Chen said a while back that QNX revenues are (for some reason) back end loaded and they come at some later date.

One last point on QNX. It's been said in these forums, that embedded systems don't command the huge licensing fees desktop OS's like Windows OS command. People have suggested something like $1-$3/car. Didn't computer OEMs pay MSFT something like $10/computer? There were what, hundreds of millions of computers sold world-wide versus, tens of millions of new cars sold world-wide? So revenue is of course going to be small for BlackBerry, but maybe significant to QNX. The Car2 platform, should theoretically command more revenue than whatever QNX shipped the auto industry even a few years ago based on pure capability alone. But this is just conjecture on my part. What isn't conjecture is that cars using the Car 2 platform started rolling out last year in select 2015 models by a few manufacturers. Car 2 is shipping in greater numbers of 2016 models by more manufacturers this year. Car2 should yield greater revenues and should yield more revenues as time goes on and it's used in more cars.

This shouldn't be considered "fanciful claims of growth." To me, it's logical growth using logic based on known facts. This is the auto industry we're dealing with this time around, and it shouldn't be subject to the manipulation BlackBerry faced in 2013 when they launched BB10 phones and everyone was trying to apply logic to "known facts" only to get it completely wrong.

So where is all this new revenue going... as it doesn't show up in the Earnings Reports???

If QNX was an independent, company... yes they would most likely have a great report every quarter. The company with their revenues and potential growth might be worth $300 million Market Cap.... that is if their margins on that revenue covers all the R&D they seem to be involved in.

But QNX isn't independent... and sadly right now BlackBerry financials are what are killing them.

[BanffMoose]

The problem is that the numbers are the numbers - you can only hide behind "honest just one more quarter for so long" - especially as software seems to be actually *declining*.

Aside from Service Access Fees (SAF) associated with the old BIS/BES plans of the BBOS7 and prior phones (which we know are declining fast), are new software revenues really declining or just uneven? BlackBerry said they added 2,600 new customers. Who knows what kind of incentives they threw in to acquire them. That could be part of the apparent lack of growth in quarterly revenues.

Given that BES12 sales only really started this calendar year, I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt it's uneven. If they have potential sales holding out to see the final BlackBerry Android device, then that can even explain the "backend loaded to the end of the year" revenue comments Chen made.

Bottom line, if you're uncomfortable with the lack of clarity, dump or stay out of the stock and come back if the picture improves. There's been so much manipulation in the past two years, the "honestly, just one more quarter" was caused in part by the manipulation. Bear analysts and bloggers created a self fulfilling prophecy.

Posted via CB10

[BanffMoose]

So where is all this new revenue going... as it doesn't show up in the Earnings Reports???

It shows up on the software revenue line as quarterly revenue. It's just not meeting your expectations. Citron Research said it the best, (and I'm paraphrasing here), had BlackBerry been a startup their valuation would be multiple times what it is now.

Give the stock a rest and come back in a quarter or two or three. We aren't going to get the information you seek until BlackBerry deems it necessary to disclose.

Posted via CB10

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

It shows up on the software revenue line as quarterly revenue. It's just not meeting your expectations. Citron Research said it the best, (and I'm paraphrasing here), had BlackBerry been a startup their valuation would be multiple times what it is now.

Give the stock a rest and come back in a quarter or two or three. We aren't going to get the information you seek until BlackBerry deems it necessary to disclose.

Posted via CB10

Per Chen.... more like in about six more quarters.


I do agree if BlackBerry had been a startup without all the baggage a huge company like BlackBerry comes with.... they would be valued much more than they are now. And a startup wouldn't have the overhead in the executive offices that BlackBerry has.... wouldn't have over reached to world wide operations... wouldn't have their focus split by multiple products with dozens of internal divisions (acquisitions)... their focus would be on one product that they were confident would meet the needs and wants for a target market.

[BanffMoose]

Per Chen.... more like in about six more quarters.


I do agree if BlackBerry had been a startup without all the baggage a huge company like BlackBerry comes with.... they would be valued much more than they are now. And a startup wouldn't have the overhead in the executive offices that BlackBerry has.... wouldn't have over reached to world wide operations... wouldn't have their focus split by multiple products with dozens of internal divisions (acquisitions)... their focus would be on one product that they were confident would meet the needs and wants for a target market.

That's the rub. The carriers and Enterprises have always been BlackBerry's customers. Not the individual users. BlackBerry has never really strayed from their target market at all.

Even back in the BBOS7 days, BlackBerry would allow the carriers to dictate hardware options to the detriment of the actual device users. Remember the Tour on Verizon that didn't have wi-fi even though the AT&T version was released not only earlier, but also had wi-fi? Consumers were pissed. (I may have the actual device wrong.)

Why else would BlackBerry make BES policies that allow an administrator to deactivate virtually every consumer friendly option on their phone. Many admins locked phones down just because they could. BlackBerry Balance was a way of rectifying that on BB10. I don't think Android or iOS can be locked down anywhere near as well as a BlackBerry. The inability to lock down the phone as well as a BlackBerry makes Android or iOS a little more palatable in the case of BYOD (from the end user perspective).

We end users are the ones wishing BlackBerry would change. When they showed signs they were willing to change with BB10, the consumer influences (blogs and media) and BlackBerry's main customers, the carriers, turned their backs on BlackBerry. So, here we are today.

Posted via CB10

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

That's the rub. The carriers and Enterprises have always been BlackBerry's customers. Not the individual users. BlackBerry has never really strayed from their target market at all.

Even back in the BBOS7 days, BlackBerry would allow the carriers to dictate hardware options to the detriment of the actual device users. Remember the Tour on Verizon that didn't have wi-fi even though the AT&T version was released not only earlier, but also had wi-fi? Consumers were pissed. (I may have the actual device wrong.)

Why else would BlackBerry make BES policies that allow an administrator to deactivate virtually every consumer friendly option on their phone. Many admins locked phones down just because they could. BlackBerry Balance was a way of rectifying that on BB10. I don't think Android or iOS can be locked down anywhere near as well as a BlackBerry. The inability to lock down the phone as well as a BlackBerry makes Android or iOS a little more palatable in the case of BYOD (from the end user perspective).

We end users are the ones wishing BlackBerry would change. When they showed signs they were willing to change with BB10, the consumer influences (blogs and media) and BlackBerry's main customers, the carriers, turned their backs on BlackBerry. So, here we are today.

Posted via CB10

I do agree that BlackBerry got "stuck" doing things the old way, and allowed Carriers too much power over them. Just like Verizon force BlackBerry to build the Storm and to rush it.....

Also agree that BlackBerry's ability to allow Admins to turn a smartphone into a dumb phone with email was actually hurtful for the Brand.

But as much as BlackBerry might have been willing to change.... BB10 just didn't deliver as a modern platform. The OS need at least another year in development and if they couldn't secure developer support .... they should have never even tried to launch a new OS this late in the game.

So yes... here we are, just about where many were five years ago saying that BlackBerry should use Android instead of QNX.....

[world traveler and former ceo]

Per Chen.... more like in about six more quarters.


I do agree if BlackBerry had been a startup without all the baggage a huge company like BlackBerry comes with.... they would be valued much more than they are now. And a startup wouldn't have the overhead in the executive offices that BlackBerry has.... wouldn't have over reached to world wide operations... wouldn't have their focus split by multiple products with dozens of internal divisions (acquisitions)... their focus would be on one product that they were confident would meet the needs and wants for a target market.

Didn't know there were so many experienced multi-billion dollar tech CEO's on this thread..... (rolling eyes)

Posted via CB10

[BanffMoose]

But as much as BlackBerry might have been willing to change.... BB10 just didn't deliver as a modern platform. The OS need at least another year in development and if they couldn't secure developer support .... they should have never even tried to launch a new OS this late in the game.

So yes... here we are, just about where many were five years ago saying that BlackBerry should use Android instead of QNX.....

That's where we differ in opinion I guess. A bunch of other companies also think differently, namely Jolla, Mozilla. Ubuntu, Samsung, pre-Elop Nokia, Microsoft, etc.

Posted via CB10