[Bilaal]

Shame it's the end of the week. It's been great for BBRY!

I'm treating my diet and health regime like John Chen has treated BlackBerry in the last 12 months: trimming the fat any place possible. Portions, exercise, water. It's working so far.

[Bilaal]

Well, well, what is this?

BlackBerry Ltd Sees Declining Short Interest

Anyone got the numbers?

[bspence87]

Shame it's the end of the week. It's been great for BBRY!

I'm treating my diet and health regime like John Chen has treated BlackBerry in the last 12 months: trimming the fat any place possible. Portions, exercise, water. It's working so far.

Haha, me too. Except I'm all about growth right now. Can't be skin and bones forever! Keep it up!

Posted via CB10

[app_Developer]

Sometime during the summer of 2013, CB user App_Developer mentioned that his employer (a bank I believe) was thinking of blacklisting BB10 devices if their Android app was ported by BlackBerry and made available on BlackBerry World. He cited "security" reasons. He might've meant security holes could be introduced during the automatic porting process, but his wording implied BB10 devices were less secure than Android. I don't know who his employer was at the time, but it sure sounded like they were more than big enough to warrant being compelled to support more platforms than just iOS and Android.

What I said was that if someone (BlackBerry or anyone else) distributed our Android app (altered/ported or not) without our permission or cooperation we would of course have to use our tools to prevent customers from using that hijacked app.

We are responsible for the security of our apps and the money that our customers access through our apps. We test that on the platforms that we support. For that simple reason, we can't allow the app to be used on OS versions we don't test as part of our normal continuous testing and monitoring.

So we expect our customers to download our apps from the stores that we support and run these on devices that we support. For everyone else, we have an HTML site that is always available.


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk

[Superfly_FR]

Superfly !!!

So I see we are starting OT a little earlier today! Nice collection of tunes from the past!!

I want my infraction!
I feel so kidish with my counter stuck to zero !!!
Hahahahaha...

Posted via CB10

[Superfly_FR]

So we expect our customers to download our apps from the stores that we support and run these on devices that we support. For everyone else, we have an HTML site that is always available.

I for one would NEVER use an app that has to be 100% trusted outside the official distribution channels.
I believe it's a fair way to offer a 'failover' with a web site.

[DaSchwantz]

Well, well, what is this?

BlackBerry Ltd Sees Declining Short Interest

Anyone got the numbers?

"...because the stock price has stabilized...". lol. What a crock of crrrap.

Posted via CB10

[jake simmons3]

"...because the stock price has stabilized...". lol. What a crock of crrrap.

Posted via CB10

Ye its has the stability of an ex girlfriend

Posted via CB10

[smart548]

I would love to be as classy as SF!

Posted via CB10

[rarsen]

OT for weekend after-hours from the Related Technologies files, a sign of the times where car manufacturers are installing research facilities in Silicon Valley::

http://cleantechnica.com/2015/01/12/...as-and-smarts/
Ford Throws Down Autonomous Vehicle Glove
Ford launched the new Research and Innovation Center Palo Alto, deep in the heart of dot com territory, with the aim of developing an autonomous vehicle among other cutting edge mobility projects.

[early2bed]

So we expect our customers to download our apps from the stores that we support and run these on devices that we support. For everyone else, we have an HTML site that is always available.

According to John Chen your bank's app isn't neutral enough. Every smartphone platform should have the same access and same functionality. You shouldn't offer fingerprint authentication, check depositing, NFC payments, etc. until all platforms can be supported.

[bungaboy]

I would love to be as classy as SF!

Posted via CB10

[lcjr]

Good morning gang! Good to see the info on QNX and the auto manufacturers choosing it. Let's keep an eye out for new ones and eventually the feedback from consumers. I'm really excited about BlackBerry software entering the shipping industry. Simply brilliance. I tell ya, we won't be having these conversations about the share price at these values next year. Whether you have to work or have the weekend free, I hope everyone enjoys it as they can.

Posted via CB10

[DaSchwantz]

According to John Chen your bank's app isn't neutral enough. Every smartphone platform should have the same access and same functionality. You shouldn't offer fingerprint authentication, check depositing, NFC payments, etc. until all platforms can be supported.

Where did he say that?

Posted via CB10

[CDM76]

According to John Chen your bank's app isn't neutral enough. Every smartphone platform should have the same access and same functionality. You shouldn't offer fingerprint authentication, check depositing, NFC payments, etc. until all platforms can be supported.

Really? That's not what I read at all. But that's OK, you keep spreading half truths.

Posted via CB10

[bungaboy]

OT: My niece sent me this. She thought it was funny and suggested I share it with my friends..

[W Hoa]

OT: My niece sent me this. She thought it was funny and suggested I share it with my friends..

Clever.

[bungaboy]

Clever.

She really is for a girl in grade 5. They always impress me with their knowledge and thoughtfulness.

[Corbu]

BlackBerry Ltd stock volatility too much for some investors to stomach | Financial Post

Owning BlackBerry Ltd. shares requires a strong stomach and over the last few months many investors have decided to say goodbye to the stock’s dips and peaks.

Since June of 2014, 47 BlackBerry shareholders have divested their entire holdings in the company, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Barry Schwartz, vice-president and chief investment officer with Baskin Wealth Management, said the stock just doesn’t make sense for anyone who’s not a highly sophisticated investor willing to obsessively monitor every tidbit of news.

“We put this into the fad, fashion or fantasy group — the Three Fs,” said Mr. Schwartz, who said he has never bought shares in BlackBerry. “It’s a maybe tomorrow company — maybe things will work out tomorrow, maybe it will get taken over, maybe they’ll sell their patents. Those are not the type of stocks that you want to buy for the average portfolio.”

The combination of speculation about potential takeovers and a substantial amount of activity by short-sellers has made the company’s shares extremely volatile. On Thursday, the day after the Financial Post reported Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. continues to be interested in acquiring BlackBerry or buying a large stake in it, the company’s shares jumped more than 7% in New York and Toronto.

That was the second time in a week that news of a potential Samsung takeover sent the markets abuzz. On Jan. 14, a Reuters story reporting Samsung and BlackBerry were in talks regarding a US$7.5 billion takeover offer sent BlackBerry’s shares 30% higher to close at US$12.60 on the NASDAQ, their highest level since 2012.

Later that day, BlackBerry denied the report, saying in a statement: “BlackBerry has not engaged in discussions with Samsung with respect to any possible offer to purchase BlackBerry.” That sent the company’s stock back 18% to US$10.30 the following morning.

Adam Seessel, chief executive of New York-based Gravity Capital Management, is hanging in there with his BlackBerry shares. He said he can see a reasonable argument against the average investor holding the stock, but doesn’t agree that it’s only a good buy for people who are prepared to brave the rollercoaster.

Mr. Seessel said he’s confident that even if BlackBerry’s turnaround strategy fails and it has to liquidate its assets, those assets are worth US$8 to US$10 per share, meaning he won’t lose his money. On the other hand, if chief executive John Chen’s turnaround strategy is successful or another company acquires BlackBerry for a per share price in the mid-teens, shareholders stand to profit handsomely.

“I own it at real liquidation value, so what I do is just sit there and watch it,” he said. “In some ways, as a long term investor, I’m hoping it will go back down into the single digits so I can buy more.”

Martin Pelletier, portfolio manager of TriVest Wealth Counsel in Calgary, said he owned BlackBerry shares four or five years ago, but sold them when it became clear the company was losing market share. BlackBerry handsets accounted for less than 1% of all smartphones sold globally in the third quarter of 2014, according to data compiled by technology research firm Gartner Inc.

Mr. Pelletier said he has no plans to get back in, partly because of the volatility and short seller interest in the stock. More than one-quarter of BlackBerry’s shares trading in the U.S. are currently being sold short, with a short interest ratio – a measure of how many days it would take short sellers to cover their positions if the price of the stock starts rising – of 8.15, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

“If you’re a regular investor, you really shouldn’t be speculating. You should rather be looking at the investment merits and the valuation versus fundamentals,” he said. “Looking at all that considered, there are a lot of opportunities out there that offer better predictability and stability with their outlook.”

[W Hoa]

BlackBerry Ltd stock volatility too much for some investors to stomach | Financial Post

Barry Schwartz, vice-president and chief investment officer with Baskin Wealth Management, said the stock just doesn’t make sense for anyone who’s not a highly sophisticated investor willing to obsessively monitor every tidbit of news.

Well that must be us. The highly sophisticated obsessives.

[BanffMoose]

Originally Posted by app_Developer
So we expect our customers to download our apps from the stores that we support and run these on devices that we support. For everyone else, we have an HTML site that is always available.

I for one would NEVER use an app that has to be 100% trusted outside the official distribution channels.
I believe it's a fair way to offer a 'failover' with a web site.

I feel the same. But my comment that app_Developer was kind enough to reply to was in regards to Chen's recent app neutrality comment. While most people took Chen's comments to mean every single app developer had to support every single platform out there, I thought Chen's comments were really targeting companies like app_Developer's company.

Chen's argument is basically saying that by picking and choosing to only support iOS and Android with an app, the app developer (not app_Developer the person) is acting discriminatory. Chen is saying the general public should be entitled to an app neutral means of using a company's services. In app_Developer's case, we're talking about a bank. Forcing all users (desktop/tablet/mobile) to use the bank's website treats all users the same, it's app neutral. If one platform can't support the bank's website, then the onus is on the OS developer to up their offering so users of that OS can use the website. But by making apps, the bank is now sending the message that it is giving certain users/customers preferential access. That can be considered discriminatory because in the world of mobile devices/OS's the "app gap" is not only an important issue, it's a deciding issue.

App_Developer's comments about needing to maintain the integrity of their app's security model is entirely valid. No company, BlackBerry included, should be allowed to do an unofficial port and potentially compromise an app's security model. I don't know if his bank's Android app worked on BlackBerry 10 (or any other OS), but let's assume it did. If the ported app worked, the cost of developing a new app would largely be gone. Now the argument is whether it can be made secure enough or not. I believe Chen would argue that the bank is probably large enough (or large enough to have access to resources) to take the effort to review BlackBerry 10's security and if it passes, the app should be ported and BlackBerry 10 should become a supported platform. If BB10 didn't pass the security then it's up to BlackBerry to get the OS to pass the security, and get the app officially ported and supported by the bank. Now, in the event the bank's Android app didn't work on BB10's runtime, should the bank be compelled to make an app for BB10? If the bank is one of the largest in the banking sector (Citibank, BofA, JPM Chase, Wells Fargo, etc.), then why not? They can easily get the resources to support the platform. If the bank is a local Credit Union, also, why not, but its more reasonable to accept that the CU may not have the resources to support BB10.

Chen also mentioned NetFlix....the company who's service is on virtually every electronic gadget out there. Why is BB10 specifically denied, when BlackBerry supposedly went on record and said they'd have engineers on NetFlix's doorstep within 24 hours of them saying ok? Same for Hulu, when at the time, their service worked on the PlayBook's browser, until Hulu blocked access. Those are clear examples of discrimination. You can argue DRM, but it's never been argued that BlackBerry refused to add support for any necessary DRM.

I'm just trying to say, John Chen has a point about app neutrality.

[Corbu]

BBC - Capital - What?s your app ? Davos edition

The chief executive of a large multinational bank gave the most surprising answer for this gathering, which you would assume would attract technologically engaged people: “I have a BlackBerry — I don’t use apps!”

@W Hoa : "The highly sophisticated obsessives."...

[KenFletch]

BBC - Capital - What?s your app ? Davos edition



@W Hoa : "The highly sophisticated obsessives."...

Yah! baby!

Posted with my flash Passport

[HSB1996]

‎Samsung must be taking a minority interest into BlackBerry. ‎*

Sherlock Holmes said when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth. All the evidence points to that direction. I can't think of anything that contradicts that statement.*

‎For example BlackBerry reported they would have a joint presentation with Samsung at CES where they would go into more detail regarding their partnership. They never ended up having one. There is only a few reasons why they wouldn't follow through, as we can all agree Chen has a reputation of doing what he says. ‎*

One reason would be Samsung no longer wants to partner with BlackBerry. However they just came out and said they want to further their partnership with BlackBerry. There is no reason to believe otherwise. ‎*

Second reason could be they haven't made progress with their partnership and there was nothing to present. That is un Chen like. If he says he is doing a presentation, he already knows there is something to present.*

Third reason is Samsung is in talks to acquire all or part of BlackBerry. Well fact is it would be very difficult, nearly impossible for Samsung to acquire all of blackberry, for or multiple reasons. Probably the most important reason the Canadian government would never allow a sale of company. Only way they would allow it is if they thought BlackBerry was going to die anyway. They would strip them of all their national security information before even entertaining the idea of a sale.*

Secondly if they were going to allow a sale, even if it were to a US company, why would they just renew a loan to Vodafone to buy BlackBerry products for $700 Million. Doesn't sound like the government would even consider a foreign sale at this point. Especially now that they have stablized cash burn, why wouldnt the Canadian government want to wait to see what happens before just giving up on them.*

If that's not reason enough, Watsa would never sell his convertible debt for something like $15. Estentally he owns the stock plus 5 more years of 6% interest payments. That's a price of around $15 anyway without even considering ‎a conservative discounted future value of the stock. He would need a significant premium over $15 to even consider a sale of his convertible debt. ‎ ‎*

This leaves open only the possibility Samsung is taking a minority stake in the company. ‎This would be significant enough for Chen to blow off the CES joint presentation. The time period of all this makes sense as well. The Financial Post indicated in Q4 Evercore prepared an analysis for Samsung. At the time Chen didn't know this at the time.*

Then later in January at CES they discussed the minority investment which is what Reuters reported.‎ ‎ BlackBerry later issued the statement ‎�has not engaged in discussions with Samsung with respect to any possible offer to purchase BlackBerry.� ‎If Samsung was going to buy a minority stake through the open market, the discussions would be about board seats. Not about an offer to purchase BlackBerry, BlackBerry didn't lie with their statement. ‎*

Later the Prime Minister made a statement that Chen told him directly that no acquisition is being discussed. Would the Prime Minister come out and lie about this? Likely not. A minority stake in the company does not contradict this as they would remain a Canadian entity. ‎ ‎*
‎
The credible reporters tweet statements that they stand by their stories. Could they be lying directly? Likely not. Logically we can assume two different reporters at two different credible firms are not in cahoots together to purposely mislead the public. Could they have been lied to? Yes it's possible. ‎Someone very familiar with the matter could be lying to them. That would likely lead to an SEC investigation. Would the reporters give up their sources if they felt lied to and manipulated? They might. ‎ ‎*

There have been rumors in the past about acquisition discussions over BlackBerry but never has there been a rumor tied to an investment bank and the writing of a very specific report on the advantages and disadvantages of different methods of acquiring control of BlackBerry, which Evercore never denied writing. They pretty much implied they did produce an analysis, by not refuting it. We have enough evidence to assume that this document exists. ‎ ‎

A statement was given by Samsung I found very interesting, that they weren't "craving access to BlackBerry's patent portfolio." ‎Let's analyze the situation a little. Under one scenario let's assume Samsung only wants to partner with BlackBerry and not acquire any minority or majority interest. For starters would the company really even comment on rumors or speculation? If any statement at all they would simply deny the talks. Why would there be a need to sort of put down the value of BlackBerry's patents.‎ If no interest existed in having access to their patents they could of simply said something complimentary like while BlackBerry has many great patents we prefer partnering to gain access to their technology not by acquiring them. As a partner why would they not want to speak highly of BlackBerry's intellectual property?*

The only logical possibility I can think of is because they really do want to acquire a minority stake in the company. They do not want to draw attention to their war chest of patents raising the costs Samsung would have to pay for BlackBerry stock in the open market. ‎*

It makes perfect sense for Samsung to want a minority stake with so many different advantages. The main reason is it allows for a back door for Samsung to gain presence into the enterprise market where they currently have none. With the many different advantages to taking a minority stake in the company I can really only think of one disadvantage.*

The only disadvantage I see is helping another competitor in the device business which could end up biting them in the *** later. However BlackBerry's market share has fallen so low, that I doubt Samsung views them as a real threat to their hardware business. ‎So I guess the question becomes, why wouldn't they want a minority interest, and a couple of seats on the board? ‎‎‎

[Shanerredflag]

According to John Chen your bank's app isn't neutral enough. Every smartphone platform should have the same access and same functionality. You shouldn't offer fingerprint authentication, check depositing, NFC payments, etc. until all platforms can be supported.

Oh please.

Classically Posted.