[smithm565]

Something to ponder:

- BB is one of Fairfax's largest holdings and they have had a long battle with short sellers & naked short selling. WS can hit them by targeting one of their core holdings. More than 10 years after filing their suit against several hedge funds, they are still fighting.

https://www.institutionalinvestor.co...-Morgan-Keegan

[smithm565]

Something to ponder:

- BB is one of Fairfax's largest holdings and they have had a long battle with short sellers & naked short selling. WS can hit them by targeting one of their core holdings. More than 10 years after filing their suit against several hedge funds, they are still fighting.

https://www.institutionalinvestor.co...-Morgan-Keegan

"Meanwhile, the company will be subjected to unbridled “naked” short selling – hedge funds illegally selling stock that they do not actually possess (phantom stock) to manipulate down the share price. (By way of example: when the above email was written, SEC data showed that millions of phantom Fairfax shares had been “failing to deliver” on a daily basis.

What usually happens is that legitimate lenders see the plummeting stock price. They see a supposed “financial partner” yanking credit. They see the negative media. They see the debt trading at disturbing prices. They have short sellers feeding them horrible news about the company.

The legitimate lenders know the news is false. They know the company is credit worthy. But the negativity itself becomes a liability. The falling stock price is a liability. The legitimate lenders get worried. They raise their cost of capital, or cut if off altogether.

And so the “baby” goes “down for the count.”

* * * * * * * *

Fairfax survived this onslaught. Other companies were not so lucky.

Last year, Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, and dozens of other companies all went bust in a similar pattern — waves of naked short selling slightly preceding false stories planted in the media and then, suddenly, a financial “partner” cutting off a source of capital."

http://www.marketrap.com/article/vie...rfax-Financial

[Corbu]

RBC Dominion Securities Inc.
Paul Treiber, CFA

July 16, 2019

BlackBerry Limited

Price Target USD 9.00

Management refutes concerns, exhibits confidence

Our view: We hosted investor meetings with BlackBerry’s management.

The company is frustrated with the stock, as management views Q1 results as healthy and the price does not reflect long-term opportunities. Management remains confident in its strategy and anticipates stronger growth in coming quarters. The risk-reward on the stock now looks more attractive, though catalysts are needed for a re-rating, in our view. Maintain Sector Perform.

Key points:

• ESS is not a dying business. The pullback in BlackBerry’s stock after reporting Q1 results largely stems from ESS revenue below expectations. While the low-end of the UEM market has commoditized, BlackBerry’s position in its core government and regulated customer base remains solid and the company is aiming to increase its wallet share through add-on sales (Secusmart, AtHoc, Bridge) and in time Cylance. Management anticipates ESS revenue growth to strengthen through the remainder of the year to meet FY20e guidance for “towards 12%”. Growth catalysts include improved sales execution, close of slipped term license deals, and new product launches.

• Cylance off to a solid start. Cylance’s Q1 revenue above Street estimates validates the sustainability of Cylance’s growth. Positively, management did not call out any disruption in growth due to the close of the acquisition or changes at the Dell channel. BlackBerry does not see nextgen endpoint protection as a zero-sum game and anticipates continuing to gain share against incumbents. Cylance growth catalysts include new products (Cocoon, Guard, Persona) and long-term integration with BlackBerry (UEM, mobile, automotive and IoT).

• BTS growth may accelerate from here. In regards to BTS, BlackBerry downplayed potential competitors and sees QNX having a strong position as the “foundational” OS for next-generation vehicles (includes connected, software-enabled, and autonomous). In the next few years, BTS revenue growth may accelerate from the high teens currently as digital cockpits trickle down to mass market vehicles and greater software penetration.

• Risk-reward looks more attractive, waiting for catalysts to emerge. BlackBerry is trading at 3.1x FTM EV/S, below enterprise security peers at 4.2x and towards the low-end of its 2-year historical range (3.0-6.5x). BlackBerry’s stock values Cylance at 3.8x FTM EV/S, below peer CrowdStrike at 40x FTM EV/S. In our view, stronger organic growth in several of BlackBerry’s core businesses (ESS, BTS, Cylance) is needed to justify higher valuation multiples.

• Maintain Sector Perform, $9.00 target. Our $9.00 price target equates to 3.6x CY20e EV/S on software revenue. In our sum of the parts, we value BlackBerry’s Enterprise Software business at 3.0x CY20e EV/S, BTS (QNX/ Radar) at 4.5x, IP licensing at 2.0x, and Cylance at 5.3x CY20e EV/ S, plus $603MM net cash.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

Something to ponder:

- BB is one of Fairfax's largest holdings and they have had a long battle with short sellers & naked short selling. WS can hit them by targeting one of their core holdings. More than 10 years after filing their suit against several hedge funds, they are still fighting.

https://www.institutionalinvestor.co...-Morgan-Keegan

Prem Watsa worte "On a fully converted basis we own 95 million shares at a net cost of $12.30 per share." There is little wonder they are battling short sellers.... BlackBerry was one of the worst decisions that Watsa has made. Even if in a few years the BB stock manages to hit $20 a share, that's not really going to be a great profit for something they have been invested in for 10 years (by the time we see $20).

Has the BlackBerry stock battled a hostel market place... sure. But the bottom line for a company like BlackBerry isn't the stock price, but the business growth and revenues. Again I think BlackBerry might have a few more quarters of growing pains as Cylance integration may require more spending up front. And you still have some legacy business being phased out. But once that is accomplished and they are pumping out 25% annual growth ever year (at a clear profit), then there will be nothing short-seller can do about it.

[Seadog83]

RBC Dominion Securities Inc.
Paul Treiber, CFA

July 16, 2019

BlackBerry Limited

Price Target USD 9.00

Management refutes concerns, exhibits confidence

Our view: We hosted investor meetings with BlackBerry’s management.

The company is frustrated with the stock, as management views Q1 results as healthy and the price does not reflect long-term opportunities. Management remains confident in its strategy and anticipates stronger growth in coming quarters. The risk-reward on the stock now looks more attractive, though catalysts are needed for a re-rating, in our view. Maintain Sector Perform.

Key points:

• ESS is not a dying business. The pullback in BlackBerry’s stock after reporting Q1 results largely stems from ESS revenue below expectations. While the low-end of the UEM market has commoditized, BlackBerry’s position in its core government and regulated customer base remains solid and the company is aiming to increase its wallet share through add-on sales (Secusmart, AtHoc, Bridge) and in time Cylance. Management anticipates ESS revenue growth to strengthen through the remainder of the year to meet FY20e guidance for “towards 12%”. Growth catalysts include improved sales execution, close of slipped term license deals, and new product launches.

• Cylance off to a solid start. Cylance’s Q1 revenue above Street estimates validates the sustainability of Cylance’s growth. Positively, management did not call out any disruption in growth due to the close of the acquisition or changes at the Dell channel. BlackBerry does not see nextgen endpoint protection as a zero-sum game and anticipates continuing to gain share against incumbents. Cylance growth catalysts include new products (Cocoon, Guard, Persona) and long-term integration with BlackBerry (UEM, mobile, automotive and IoT).

• BTS growth may accelerate from here. In regards to BTS, BlackBerry downplayed potential competitors and sees QNX having a strong position as the “foundational” OS for next-generation vehicles (includes connected, software-enabled, and autonomous). In the next few years, BTS revenue growth may accelerate from the high teens currently as digital cockpits trickle down to mass market vehicles and greater software penetration.

• Risk-reward looks more attractive, waiting for catalysts to emerge. BlackBerry is trading at 3.1x FTM EV/S, below enterprise security peers at 4.2x and towards the low-end of its 2-year historical range (3.0-6.5x). BlackBerry’s stock values Cylance at 3.8x FTM EV/S, below peer CrowdStrike at 40x FTM EV/S. In our view, stronger organic growth in several of BlackBerry’s core businesses (ESS, BTS, Cylance) is needed to justify higher valuation multiples.

• Maintain Sector Perform, $9.00 target. Our $9.00 price target equates to 3.6x CY20e EV/S on software revenue. In our sum of the parts, we value BlackBerry’s Enterprise Software business at 3.0x CY20e EV/S, BTS (QNX/ Radar) at 4.5x, IP licensing at 2.0x, and Cylance at 5.3x CY20e EV/ S, plus $603MM net cash.

BBRY seems like it's the solid guy with a decent job, and CRWD seems like the ******* unemployed guy who beats his gf, but who the girl clings to anyways and refuses to leave

RBC sits there and points out all the things BB has going for it "decent growth in ESS, Cylance off to a solid start, QNX to grow speedily from here, confidence from Chen, and we left confident as well. Everything set to meet or exceed plans set out several months ago for F2020"

".... despite all these good things in the pipeline, we are still going to value the sum of the components at less than any of their competitors, to arrive at our pre-determined $9 target. Maybe if BB was a little more exciting and unpredictable I'd give him a chance, but right now it's just too boring"

Meanwhile compare this with CRWD, who they started covering on July 8th.

https://sundanceherald.com/2019/07/1...of-canada.html

Funny, it's also a sector performs. Seems P/S of 5 is good for Cylance inside BB, But 40 is also good for CRWD. Break even good for BB, quarter billions in losses good for CRWD.

Then you have MOBL competing with the ESS segment. Couldn't find anything recent, but here's an article where their target in 2015 was $13.

https://www.markets.co/mobileiron-in...y-rbc-capital/

Mind you yahoo says MOBL finished that year with about 150m in rev, so with ~110m shares, that implies a P/S of almost 10. Again, 10 is good for them, 3 is good for BB. I suppose the only consolation is that that 4 yo article also stated all targets were from 9-15 within the year, and it's done nothing but languish struggling to break 6. So the one saving grace (which we probably knew already) is that most analysts' reasoning about stock picking is as good as a monkey with a dart board.

No, no. The problem with BB isn't lack or growth, lack of profit, lack of useful ideas, but rather, it's lack of sexiness. Much like our theoretical gf laments being beaten and says she wishes she had a bf with a job, when she really means is "she wishes that all else was equal, plus he had a job, and that 'all else' is secondary to someone with a job. People make decisions on an emotional basis, and no matter how much clever, logical points you point out, you can always find a negative. Right now BB is the overweight nerd with an unremarkable job banging on her door saying "Hey! See! I have a bit of money, and I won't beat you!"

Until that nerd becomes a billionaire and starts hosting parties on his yacht, he'll have to quietly acquiesce to his position in life.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

Until that nerd becomes a billionaire and starts hosting parties on his yacht, he'll have to quietly acquiesce to his position in life.

BlackBerry is a 65 year old nerd with no personality...

CRWD is a 20 year old nerd with a lot of enthusiasm and energy...

For now CRWD has the advantage of youth and an air of positivity. But in the end the one with the money gets the girl... let's see how that goes.

[app_Developer]

BBRY seems like it's the solid guy with a decent job, and CRWD seems like the ******* unemployed guy who beats his gf, but who the girl clings to anyways and refuses to leave.

I see it differently. BB is the guy who for the past 10 years has changed careers a couple times, has a couple of side gigs going which still dont' make much money, and has spent almost all of his savings. He has a track record of hubris, talking a big game, but then lacking urgency and often failing to deliver.

But he has finally found a way to start making money on a big idea, but given that he's failed to deliver for so long, most people dismiss this as more talk... for now.

CRWD is the young person who has done all the right things so far in her short career and has a lot of potential but hasn't shown the world that much yet (good or bad), so she gets the benefit of the doubt. She's building her career, this is her focus and passion. She's not in it because her other ideas didn't work out.

[smithm565]

https://www.cantechletter.com/2019/0...-manager-says/

[Seadog83]

https://www.cantechletter.com/2019/0...-manager-says/

I would certainly agree he's done a standout job. Unfortunately most people judge a CEO on results so Cook has done great, and Chen has done horrible. In reality the true measure of a CEO needs to be the *change* in results, because almost as bad as government, the most powerful force in any huge organization is inertia. Put a cat in charge of Apple after Jobs died and it still would have printed money for a good long time.

I was least comfortable with my (much smaller at the time) investment in summer '13 after it was clear BB10 was a dud. I just kept playing things out in my head "Ok, if this is it now, and this is the trend. Next Q looks like this:... do a few dozen iterations of this, and at that point it was hard to come to a conclusion other than bankruptcy.

Contrast this with 3-4 years ago when I went in heavy a couple years after Chen took over. Despite still shrinking revenues, they had lots of growth avenues, and within a couple years the increases there would eclipse the decreases in HW/SAF. On top of that they had the warchest to see them through the transition. Play the same game now "and then....? and then...? and then...?" Where do you end up a few years down the line? I honestly believe Chen is doing the same thing, but everyone else is pricing it at 50% of the value when Bankruptcy was an actual and likely possibility.

[curves2000]

I have shared my frustration with a lot of the growth aspects of the mainline business and hopefully that improves quickly with growing revenues.

I've always wondered how a security company that has some of the wealthiest governments and clients cant generate some meaningful revenue growth. There has been a lot of talk about all the products and services and innovation that has happened at BlackBerry, but little growth in pure dollars.

I've said it before and I will say it again, it doesn't take too many $1 million dollar deals to show some revenue growth. When you look at the amount of security issues and all the hacks that have happened in the last 3-4 years, BlackBerry doesn't appear to have gained much in terms of sizeable deals, this coming from the suppose market leader.

Hopefully fiscal 2020 ends up being a year of serious execution combined with growth and integration of Cylance. I have my fingers crossed that the following year we see some serious growth and some meaningful movement in the stock price. My patience is running a little on the low side since 2011.

Cheers to all

Posted via CB10

[Corbu]

I have shared my frustration with a lot of the growth aspects of the mainline business and hopefully that improves quickly with growing revenues.

I've always wondered how a security company that has some of the wealthiest governments and clients cant generate some meaningful revenue growth. There has been a lot of talk about all the products and services and innovation that has happened at BlackBerry, but little growth in pure dollars.

I've said it before and I will say it again, it doesn't take too many $1 million dollar deals to show some revenue growth. When you look at the amount of security issues and all the hacks that have happened in the last 3-4 years, BlackBerry doesn't appear to have gained much in terms of sizeable deals, this coming from the suppose market leader.

Hopefully fiscal 2020 ends up being a year of serious execution combined with growth and integration of Cylance. I have my fingers crossed that the following year we see some serious growth and some meaningful movement in the stock price. My patience is running a little on the low side since 2011.

Cheers to all

A few thoughts after reading your excellent comments, curves2000.

I posted this link yesterday:
https://thriveglobal.com/stories/rea...h-some-of-the/

It starts with this:

"Thank you so much for joining us Rear Admiral Day! Can you tell us a story about what brought you to this specific career path?

I was an Advisory Board Member and retained consultant of an exceptionally innovative small California company named Athoc that created an emergency notification and alerting system used by a large percentage of the Federal Government. BlackBerry acquired the company and I was fairly certain that this engagement had run its course. I had been a BlackBerry customer during my Coast Guard CIO time but had not looked at the company in years — I decided to check out this reborn entity, that from media reports was in the midst of a complete pivot from their legacy handset days. One thing that I recognized was BlackBerry was falling behind in the Federal Government movement to FedRAMP cloud solutions, which was what I was assisting Athoc complete. I drafted a two-page white paper detailing why BlackBerry should consider getting their products into the FedRAMP process and create a U.S. based and U.S. citizen staffed CSOC to monitor the system. Three weeks later I was pitching the concept to CEO John Chen and his senior leadership team. Three weeks after that I was a BlackBerry employee charged with implementing exactly what I had written in the white paper."

Reading it over in light of your own comments got me thinking. On the face of it, Rear Admiral Day's story is interesting and positive. He identified some failings, did something about it and got to set up BlackBerry's CSOC. Fine.

On second thought, one could also interpret this story differently. How is it that, after all these years of being present in the US, after all of these sales executives and COO's, BlackBerry had to wait for the Rear Admiral to identify that it (perhaps) "was falling behind in the Federal Government movement to FedRAMP cloud solutions" and put him in charge of turning that ship (!) around? Surely, a US federal government strategic plan would have been put into place a long time ago, would it not? Should this CSOC initiative not have rather come from BlackBerry itself, rather than from an outsider?

"I've always wondered how a security company that has some of the wealthiest governments and clients cant generate some meaningful revenue growth. There has been a lot of talk about all the products and services and innovation that has happened at BlackBerry, but little growth in pure dollars.

I've said it before and I will say it again, it doesn't take too many $1 million dollar deals to show some revenue growth. When you look at the amount of security issues and all the hacks that have happened in the last 3-4 years, BlackBerry doesn't appear to have gained much in terms of sizeable deals, this coming from the suppose market leader."

I share your view and your concerns. This is such a mystery. How is it that BlackBerry still appears to be - let's face it - inept at sales? Not to mention marketing and communications. It seems to me this is still a company run by engineers. They have some good products, they are certainly technically capable but they are still severely limited in terms of sales.

John Chen recognized, after the last EC, that they were present in the world's leading banks but that they should have a presence in the next 3,000 banks. Indeed. But why is that still not so??

The turnaround may have been completed in terms of what BlackBerry is all about and its future. One could reasonably doubt that its own mentality has yet morphed. Maybe that is part of the reason the market "undervalues" the company. It is not generating excitement. Not seen as dynamic. Good boys doing solid work, perhaps. But BlackBerry still has not shed its image from the past. And the results leave us wanting/hoping for more.

[BanffMoose]

On second thought, one could also interpret this story differently. How is it that, after all these years of being present in the US, after all of these sales executives and COO's, BlackBerry had to wait for the Rear Admiral to identify that it (perhaps) "was falling behind in the Federal Government movement to FedRAMP cloud solutions" and put him in charge of turning that ship (!) around? Surely, a US federal government strategic plan would have been put into place a long time ago, would it not? Should this CSOC initiative not have rather come from BlackBerry itself, rather than from an outsider?

"I've always wondered how a security company that has some of the wealthiest governments and clients cant generate some meaningful revenue growth. There has been a lot of talk about all the products and services and innovation that has happened at BlackBerry, but little growth in pure dollars.

I've said it before and I will say it again, it doesn't take too many $1 million dollar deals to show some revenue growth. When you look at the amount of security issues and all the hacks that have happened in the last 3-4 years, BlackBerry doesn't appear to have gained much in terms of sizeable deals, this coming from the suppose market leader."

I share your view and your concerns. This is such a mystery. How is it that BlackBerry still appears to be - let's face it - inept at sales? Not to mention marketing and communications. It seems to me this is still a company run by engineers. They have some good products, they are certainly technically capable but they are still severely limited in terms of sales.

John Chen recognized, after the last EC, that they were present in the world's leading banks but that they should have a presence in the next 3,000 banks. Indeed. But why is that still not so??

The turnaround may have been completed in terms of what BlackBerry is all about and its future. One could reasonably doubt that its own mentality has yet morphed. Maybe that is part of the reason the market "undervalues" the company. It is not generating excitement. Not seen as dynamic. Good boys doing solid work, perhaps. But BlackBerry still has not shed its image from the past. And the results leave us wanting/hoping for more.

^^^
THIS!!! This is exactly my frustration with BlackBerry all these years! I don't get this at all!!

If anyone wants to bash BlackBerry management THIS (in my humble opinion) is the reason to bash them. Not mindlessly repeating "destroying shareholder value" citing the end of BBOS/transition to BB10 days. To me, THIS was and IS destroying shareholder value.

It goes back to the Jim/Mike/Thorsten days, when RIM had 5,000+ employees and yet couldn't allocate man power to try and make BBM the SMS 2.0 of the telecom industry, or any of the other "ways to save RIM" at the time, while also developing BB10 and BES10?!

[rarsen]

BlackBerry has a huge opportunity in the auto sector, CEO says
https://www.cantechletter.com/2019/0...ctor-ceo-says/
CEO John Chen is more than optimistic about BB’s prospects, especially when it comes to the connected car. “I think the shift in the auto space is really between gasoline-powered car and the EV car, and there are two trends that are actually helping us,” he said. “First of all, we work on both —it doesn’t matter if you’re powered by gasoline or electric. The second thing is that there are more and more lines of code going into a car and you see now that they are consolidating and as they consolidate, they need to use some of our technology to protect the safety. We have a leading technology called QNX Hypervisor that allows that to happen. “Because of that, we actually see our business growing. Asia is now 30-some per cent of our total car royalty and business side,” says Chen.

[drobbie]

BlackBerry has a huge opportunity in the auto sector, CEO says
https://www.cantechletter.com/2019/0...ctor-ceo-says/
CEO John Chen is more than optimistic about BB’s prospects, especially when it comes to the connected car. “I think the shift in the auto space is really between gasoline-powered car and the EV car, and there are two trends that are actually helping us,” he said. “First of all, we work on both —it doesn’t matter if you’re powered by gasoline or electric. The second thing is that there are more and more lines of code going into a car and you see now that they are consolidating and as they consolidate, they need to use some of our technology to protect the safety. We have a leading technology called QNX Hypervisor that allows that to happen. “Because of that, we actually see our business growing. Asia is now 30-some per cent of our total car royalty and business side,” says Chen.

Chen talks a good talk. Can he execute on this?

[Corbu]

https://www.prweb.com/releases/genet...eb16445688.htm

[rarsen]

Going over a past article, everyone responsible to make their own interpretation on this type of info:

Trade War: Why Buffett Is Wary of What Trump Sees as an Easy Win
https://marketrealist.com/2019/04/tr...s-an-easy-win/
In an interview with CNBC, Buffett said, “It does look like the pace of increase in the economy has slowed down.” In his 2018 annual letter, Buffett wrote, “Americans will be both more prosperous and safer if all nations thrive.” However, just last year, Alibaba Group (BABA) cofounder Jack Ma predicted that the trade war could last decades.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

Going over a past article, everyone responsible to make their own interpretation on this type of info:

Trade War: Why Buffett Is Wary of What Trump Sees as an Easy Win
https://marketrealist.com/2019/04/tr...s-an-easy-win/
In an interview with CNBC, Buffett said, “It does look like the pace of increase in the economy has slowed down.” In his 2018 annual letter, Buffett wrote, “Americans will be both more prosperous and safer if all nations thrive.” However, just last year, Alibaba Group (BABA) cofounder Jack Ma predicted that the trade war could last decades.

Yeah I'm still not sure what BBMo is doing in the US. Is that just a result of poor sales, or tariffs and the unknown of this market?

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

Also one negative that might affect IP revenues...

https://www.optiemus.com/images/OIL_Q4_REVISED.PDF

The Company had entered into agreement with Blackberry Limited for providing licensing and software services w.e.f. July 1, 2017. Under the said agreement, the Company is required to pay a minimum guarantee royalty fee against which the company has received a demand of USD 4.29 million till 31st March 2019 out of which only USD 1.5 million paid. However, the management has disputed the payment of royalty on account of delay in launch of Blackberry handsets due to the fault on part of Blackberry and out of USD 4.29 million, USD 0.72 million has recognized royalty expense till 31st March 2019. The balance amount is under dispute and has not been recognized as expense during the period.

Not sure if BlackBerry, like with Emtek had already counted on this Optiemus revenue or not. Might see a shortfall with TCL as well... as I doubt they have hit their goals. BB Merah Putih is history, and I assume they wrote off anything related to them a while back.

This could have been combined discount they made in that quarter that we taught was all Emtek? Unles it's being disputed by both parties... then it could drag out.

Bottom line is this legacy stuff should mostly be gone by the end of the year....

[Seadog83]

I'm very eager to see CRWD's earnings tomorrow. Something tells me that like Cylance, growth will have slowed significantly, simply due to the law of small numbers. This could potentially hurt the share price if investors were banking on 100%+ growth forever taking it to the moon.

My fear is that if CRWD tanks, then instead of assigning a value of 0 to Cylance which the market seems to be doing now (vs 1.4b for the $1.4b in cash), it will instead also cause BB to crash, reasoning that if CRWD sheds $3B in value, Cylance having 2/3rds the revenues and all that, then Cylance/BB should also shed $2b in value. Only said half in jest.... The one way valve that is Blackberry. Equal to the market and comparables only on the way down.

[W Hoa]

My fear is that if CRWD tanks, then instead of assigning a value of 0 to Cylance which the market seems to be doing now (vs 1.4b for the $1.4b in cash), it will instead also cause BB to crash

Trying to make sense of this market is a futile exercise at the best of times. Investing in the stock market should come with a disclaimer 'For Entertainment Purposes Only'.

So on that note; if CRWD reports slower revenue growth it is bad for BB because 'the industry leader' is experiencing revenue challenges and this is bad for the entire sector. Especially for BB we can assume.

CRWD reports modest revenue growth (or better) and this is bad for BB because CRWD is taking market share from BB and has, in the process, become the de facto market leader.

And also CRWD is a 'pure' AI play unencumbered by such things as QNX or Radar etc so it is much easier to give CRWD a higher value due to the clarity of the investment.

You can play this game all day long. Cheers

[rarsen]

OT regarding Privacy:

Woz wants you to get off Facebook right now
https://www.zdnet.com/article/woz-wa...24037827013043
The Apple co-founder believes the privacy tradeoff just isn't worth it.

[abwan11]

With all the crwd hype leading up to their IPO and the subsequent successful launch, you would think Chen, or at least a competent ceo, would have Stuart present at the last conference call or the earlier one or both. Without getting into the nitty gritty as to why, it would be an obvious decision to draw attention to your supposed latest, greatest idea. Considering your contender is eating your mind share and you have nothing to put forward other then some mediocre earnings (according to the markets reaction) a little bolstering, from your lead guy could have gone a long way.
But once again, a half hearted attempt and 1.5 billion spent.
This is just another example of Chens delicate dealings at work, turning gold to dust.

Posted via CB10

[abwan11]

Pay the lender Chen, the rest can wait an eternity.

Posted via CB10

[Seadog83]

Pay the lender Chen, the rest can wait an eternity.

Posted via CB10

Prem Watsa worte "On a fully converted basis we own 95 million shares at a net cost of $12.30 per share." There is little wonder they are battling short sellers.... BlackBerry was one of the worst decisions that Watsa has made. Even if in a few years the BB stock manages to hit $20 a share, that's not really going to be a great profit for something they have been invested in for 10 years (by the time we see $20).

Exactly. Chen is laughing all the way to the bank. The above is from his frigging own reports. That means if he were to convert, he's down over $500m. Obviously he won't convert if it's below $10, so add back in the 50m shares * $3 differential now to represent the $500m he'll get repaid, and he's only down a paltry $350m. I knew that crafty bugger was up to something. You played everyone Prem.

I'm all for reasonable discussion, and I'm hardly the greatest cheerleader of Chen and certainly not the stock performance, but to prattle on over and over and over again about how there's some giant conspiracy to make Prem rich at the expense of everyone else, when in truth he's likely the *single biggest losing shareholder on a dollar basis* in this company makes you sound foolish.

[app_Developer]

I'm all for reasonable discussion, and I'm hardly the greatest cheerleader of Chen and certainly not the stock performance, but to prattle on over and over and over again about how there's some giant conspiracy to make Prem rich at the expense of everyone else, when in truth he's likely the *single biggest losing shareholder on a dollar basis* in this company makes you sound foolish.

I think people forget that successful people do make mistakes. Sometimes many, many mistakes.

Fairfax/Watsa had some downside protection, but obviously given how long this money has been tied up now, this can’t be the outcome they were hoping for.

Conspiracy theories stem in part from a fallacy that there are super connected, super coordinated, virtually omniscient people. There aren’t.