[Corbu]

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...301127929.html
BlackBerry to Announce Second Quarter Fiscal Year 2021 Results on September 24, 2020

[Chuck Finley69]

Oh I don't know. Maybe some amount that would give BlackBerry the funds to actually build the tools AppDeveloper says QNX lacks? Or to actually do R&D to enhance QNX to stay ahead of AGL?

Good vendor/customer relationships should be a win-win for both parties. Here, it sounds like one party is clearly taking advantage the other, especially when the customer is working towards replacing the vendor with "free."

Not to duplicate other answers but....

Why not just choose some other random amount that could generate sick profits on top of everything your want list contains?!? What party is taking advantage of BlackBerry or is the whole industry just accepting a better offer?

Whatever price that BlackBerry gets is a negotiated price that BlackBerry chooses to accept or lose the business. Again, this appears to be another example of Apple, Google, Microsoft, the divisions and companies they’ve either formed or backed just like the mobile business. It’s simply the competition that exists in business.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

Not to duplicate other answers but....

Why not just choose some other random amount that could generate sick profits on top of everything your want list contains?!? What party is taking advantage of BlackBerry or is the whole industry just accepting a better offer?

Whatever price that BlackBerry gets is a negotiated price that BlackBerry chooses to accept or lose the business. Again, this appears to be another example of Apple, Google, Microsoft, the divisions and companies they’ve either formed or backed just like the mobile business. It’s simply the competition that exists in business.

Just as with smartphones... the competition is coming from better supported sources. Right now it's just an industry supported Linux distribution. But if Google, Apple or Microsoft move into this industry? Tesla has shown that you don't have to be an automotive company... to sell cars - and that you don't need dozens of systems running different OS.

[EchoTango]

Oh my......

Lots of stock holders and non-stock holders giving advice and opinions. Either you understand what the company's plans are and buy into the strategy or you don't and sell out and/or have no stock position. I have often said your perspective is very different when you have some skin in the game and are significantly more vigilant on the company's moves which produces a far more educated perspective.

I suggest determining this differentiation when reading any commentary on this thread.

[Chuck Finley69]

Oh my......

Lots of stock holders and non-stock holders giving advice and opinions. Either you understand what the company's plans are and buy into the strategy or you don't and sell out and/or have no stock position. I have often said your perspective is very different when you have some skin in the game and are significantly more vigilant on the company's moves which produces a far more educated perspective.

I suggest determining this differentiation when reading any commentary on this thread.

I’m not sure it would really matter. The only effect that “skin in the game” has is to increase emotional bias towards irrational decisions.

[Seadog83]

I’m not sure it would really matter. The only effect that “skin in the game” has is to increase emotional bias towards irrational decisions.

I'm always hesitant to take people who speak in absolutes seriously. I think arguments can be made for both sides of that coin, which really doesn't get anyone further ahead. There are people who use skin in the game to rationalize bad behavior, and there are those who use it to realize they better have their ducks in a row.

Look at an online poker game, and compare how people play with fake money, vs low penny stakes, vs moderate stakes. It's night and day. You still get both camps at the moderate stakes, but fortunately the feedback time on poker is pretty short (weeks/months), so usually they don't last long, compared to say stocks which can be 5-10 years. Look at the big short with options plays. AMD, or a host of others. I'll use AMD as a perfect example. For 10 years it languished at like $3-10. Now it sits at $75. Even had you bought 12 years ago, despite being "wrong" and "losing" for 10, you've now enjoyed outsized returns, and hindsight shows it to have been the right play.

Housing booms are the other side of the coin. Their cycles are even longer than stocks, but would also say people are far more emotional about it, and use that to justify bad choices when the fundamentals make absolutely no sense. Canadian market is perfect example. From a financial viewpoint, particularly in the big cities, prices detached from the financials (incomes, rents earned, population growth) like 10 years ago, yet it's enjoyed a bull run like no other.

[Corbu]

PR:
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...301129726.html
Saudi Financial Company Chooses BlackBerry UEM and BlackBerry Workspaces for Secure Communications

[Corbu]

https://www.iam-media.com/frandseps/...g-has-lot-work

Sep 11, 2020

Portfolio analysis shows BlackBerry’s new director of licensing has a lot to work with

BlackBerry has hired a new director of licensing - and this is big news. Monetisation specialist Bryan Yearwood, a former Rovi and McKool Smith dealmaker, is stepping into a team that has largely gone without a specific head of licensing since the high-profile departures of Mark Kokes and Sandeep Chennakeshu in 2017 and 2018 respectively. It will be Yearwood’s job to ratchet up monetisation efforts. This should not be a struggle given the breadth of BlackBerry’s assets.

In 2014, the Canadian tech giant overhauled its patent strategy, moving away from its relatively passive stance to focus more on monetisation, with a clear emphasis on a robust licensing business. Its success can be seen in the numbers. Licensing revenues grew to $328 million in FY2020 (running from 28 February 2019 to 29 February 2020) up from $196 million two years earlier (see table below). Still, its patent monetisation has not reached the same scale of the likes of Nokia and Ericsson which have billion-dollar operations, let alone the billions generated by Qualcomm each year.

[…]

According to BlackBerry’s FY2020 annual report, licensing revenue jumped $42 million on 2019’s numbers, largely due to a $126 million increase in direct licensing arrangements consisting of patent licensing transactions and the BBM Consumer licensing arrangement, as well as an additional $4 million received relating to the sale of intellectual property. However, the total revenue was partially offset by a $78 million decrease in revenue from BlackBerry’s patent licensing agreement with Teletry.

Despite the drop, the company notes that it derives “a significant portion of its patent licensing revenue” from the relationship with the Marconi Group entity. The agreement with Teletry was announced in 2017 and allowed BlackBerry to outsource much of its licensing activity in the smartphone space. At the time it was not clear if the Canadian tech company entered the deal entirely willingly, but it certainly now has reason to be pleased given the contribution to its top line.

Prior to his departure, Kokes – formerly the senior vice president of IP, licensing and standards – pointed to the breadth of the BlackBerry patent portfolio, telling IAM that it: “Covered multiple technologies – maybe 40-plus. We have depth in areas like smart grids, gambling, manufacturing, mobile communications, radars and tracking, logistics, and many more.” He also emphasised that the company was constantly mining the portfolio looking at new verticals. The question to answer – and one that Yearwood surely asked - is whether this statement still rings true.

Analysis conducted by Sumair Riyaz and Subhanesh Perinbaraj, lead business development and analyst, tech industry, at Dolcera, reveals that BlackBerry’s portfolio continues to address a range of technologies. It has coverage across mobile communication, network infrastructure, automotive subsystems, cybersecurity, smart grid and energy management, healthcare, and industrial automation (see graph below).

[…]

BlackBerry’s portfolio has an emphasis on mobile communication, network infrastructure and automotive subsystems technologies, but industrial automation is the field where filing has increased post-2017 (see graph below). According to Dolcera’s analysts, in this area Blackberry has leveraged its internet of things (IoT) and embedded programming tools for human machine interface, and other connectivity related applications.

[…]

Aside from technological breadth and relevance, BlackBerry CEO John Chen has previously pointed to the importance of the age of the company’s portfolio, arguing that it is “one of the youngest patent portfolios in the entire industry”. And, therefore, an important asset in its monetisation push.

Even though Chen made this statement in 2016, it is still the case today. According to research conducted using Anaqua’s AcclaimIP, the company has 21,816 global assets. Of these, 17,104 are grants and 4,712 applications, while the average age by publication date is 6.62 years.

One thing worth noting, though, is that the portfolio is currently projected to see negative annual growth in the next five years due to a combination of patent expirations and low filing levels (see graph below).

[…]

However, the drop in patent output is not necessarily a cause for concern, especially given the age of the portfolio and number of active global grants. Further, BlackBerry’s research and development spend has been consistent over time, accounting for somewhere between 21% and 25% of its total revenues. This means that we may see an uptick in filing levels in the next few years.

[…]

Buy and sell data

BlackBerry’s CEO has previously made it clear that when it comes to monetisation the focus is on patent licensing and not selling, but that doesn’t mean the company hasn’t divested a few fair assets over the years.

Analysis conducted by Richardson Oliver Insights (ROI) shows the company has transferred a total of 569 US patents since 2015 (see table below). A large number of its transactions were with corporations, such as US semiconductor company NXP and Citrix, but BlackBerry has also executed a number of deals with NPEs, including Fundamental Innovations Systems International (FISI) and Provenance Asset Group.

The Canadian tech company spun off a portfolio related to USB charging to FISI back in 2015 in a deal backed by Centerbridge Partners. Since then, FISI has inked deals with the likes of RPX, Samsung, LG and Huawei. The licensing entity picked up its campaign earlier this year filing a slew of infringement suits in US district courts against a group of eight device makers including Lenovo, Coolpad and TCL.

BlackBerry has also recorded a number of inbound assets amounting to 839 patents. However, a large majority of these transactions have been with companies the business already owns, including Certicom, Good Technology, WatchDox and Movirtu (see table below). That said, the likes of LG Electronics and Ericsson also feature on the inbound list.

[…]

Litigation breakdown

Any company that wants to have a serious licensing business needs to know when to play hardball and Blackberry is certainly no stranger to this. It has made headlines for its litigation campaigns against the likes of Avaya, Nokia, Snap, Twitter and Facebook. According to data pulled from Lex Machina, BlackBerry has been involved in 239 US patent suits (filed since 1st January 2009), acting as the defendant in 202, third-party in 28 and the plaintiff in 10 (see graph below). It has 13 open cases, only one of which it initiated (against Facebook).

BlackBerry has been fairly quiet this year with no new lawsuits filed. Last year it went on the offensive once in a case against Twitter.

[…]

IAM says:

This week’s data analysis confirms two things: BlackBerry has a valuable portfolio and it’s open for business.

While the company’s shrinking pipeline of grants may seem a cause for concern it is not likely that BlackBerry will let its most prized assets fall by the wayside, while its continued R&D efforts are almost certainly going to lead to the creation of more IP.

Yearwood has a long track record in the monetisation market and is armed with a portfolio that continues to show value. With that in mind we can expect his team to be very busy over the coming years.

[Chuck Finley69]

I'm always hesitant to take people who speak in absolutes seriously. I think arguments can be made for both sides of that coin, which really doesn't get anyone further ahead. There are people who use skin in the game to rationalize bad behavior, and there are those who use it to realize they better have their ducks in a row.

Look at an online poker game, and compare how people play with fake money, vs low penny stakes, vs moderate stakes. It's night and day. You still get both camps at the moderate stakes, but fortunately the feedback time on poker is pretty short (weeks/months), so usually they don't last long, compared to say stocks which can be 5-10 years. Look at the big short with options plays. AMD, or a host of others. I'll use AMD as a perfect example. For 10 years it languished at like $3-10. Now it sits at $75. Even had you bought 12 years ago, despite being "wrong" and "losing" for 10, you've now enjoyed outsized returns, and hindsight shows it to have been the right play.

Housing booms are the other side of the coin. Their cycles are even longer than stocks, but would also say people are far more emotional about it, and use that to justify bad choices when the fundamentals make absolutely no sense. Canadian market is perfect example. From a financial viewpoint, particularly in the big cities, prices detached from the financials (incomes, rents earned, population growth) like 10 years ago, yet it's enjoyed a bull run like no other.

Yes but looking backward at historical data Is worthless for looking forward with individual positions. It can help formulate strategy looking forward but it’s only part of performance. All you need to find the next AMD that’s mixed in with all the other almost twins is some immense luck.

Regardless, skin in the game is a conflict of interest for me with clients per SEC, DOL and FINRA unless I subject myself to regulations to advantage clients at my expense.

The regulations also pretty much insure most true professional research analysts don’t have skin in the game. There’s a saying about eating one’s cooking when I entered the industry back in 1992 with the old gunslingers.

Now, that idea has evolved to pharmaceutical salespeople using their own product ie smoking or snorting their profits and eventual too much inventory.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

Yes but looking backward at historical data Is worthless for looking forward with individual positions. It can help formulate strategy looking forward but it’s only part of performance. All you need to find the next AMD that’s mixed in with all the other almost twins is some immense luck.
.

I don't know... lot's of historical data to look back at.

BlockBuster
Palm
Compaq
AOL
Yahoo
Kodak
Polaroid
MySpace
RadioShack
Toys R Us
Pebble
Nortel

And then there is BlackBerry. In the end... "Never resist innovation as a business. Make sure to listen to your customer’s needs and keep up with the trends."

[Corbu]

PR:
https://www.newswire.ca/news-release...835731677.html
BlackBerry Achieves NIAP Certification for BlackBerry UEM; Strengthens Security Portfolio for Government and Regulated Industries

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

PR:
https://www.newswire.ca/news-release...835731677.html
BlackBerry Achieves NIAP Certification for BlackBerry UEM; Strengthens Security Portfolio for Government and Regulated Industries

Did it not have it already?

[app_Developer]

Then again, are automakers even talking to BlackBerry as a Tier1 supplier, or only tangentially because Tier1 (or lower) suppliers are using BlackBerry?

Where does BlackBerry sit with automakers anyway? In the same banquet hall? The kiddie room? Or are they at home with the baby sitter? Is BlackBerry the one invited, or are they the "plus 1"?

That would help explain a lot too.

The answer is it's a bit of all of it. They are behind some of our suppliers and they are also working with us directly.

But here is the math for us: in a normal year, we ship about 10M vehicles. If 50% of our mix have advanced capabilities, and if the sum of all QNX costs (direct and indirect) for those products rises by $5, then that's $25M in new commitment. If it's $10, then I'm at $50M.

Now do I want to spend that $25M there or would I rather see that go towards our nextgen efforts which give us *more* differentiation (vs our own competitors) and which also happen to be AGL based here? That's the problem BB faces. If they ask us for $50M (incremental and annual), then the answer is probably we're just that much more likely to accelerate our AGL nextgen systems in our roadmap.

Which gets me back to my bigger point. To add $5 to the stock price, BB has to create $2.5B in value to the company. You aren't going to find $2.5B in net new value in QNX. So investing a ton of money in bringing QNX tooling up the level of AGL might not be a very good investment at all.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

The answer is it's a bit of all of it. They are behind some of our suppliers and they are also working with us directly.

But here is the math for us: in a normal year, we ship about 10M vehicles. If 50% of our mix have advanced capabilities, and if the sum of all QNX costs (direct and indirect) for those products rises by $5, then that's $25M in new commitment. If it's $10, then I'm at $50M.

Now do I want to spend that $25M there or would I rather see that go towards our nextgen efforts which give us *more* differentiation (vs our own competitors) and which also happen to be AGL based here? That's the problem BB faces. If they ask us for $50M (incremental and annual), then the answer is probably we're just that much more likely to accelerate our AGL nextgen systems in our roadmap.

Which gets me back to my bigger point. To add $5 to the stock price, BB has to create $2.5B in value to the company. You aren't going to find $2.5B in net new value in QNX. So investing a ton of money in bringing QNX tooling up the level of AGL might not be a very good investment at all.

The bottom line is if QNX were so valuable and had such a great future in Automotive.... it would have been worth more than $200 Million back in 2010. It wasn't worth much back then, because everyone could see the difficulties it faced moving forward.

And that was before, AGL, Apple, Google and Tesla were involved.

[EchoTango]

The bottom line is if QNX were so valuable and had such a great future in Automotive.... it would have been worth more than $200 Million back in 2010. It wasn't worth much back then, because everyone could see the difficulties it faced moving forward.

And that was before, AGL, Apple, Google and Tesla were involved.

If these valuations are accurate, then Radar may become Blackberry's most valuable asset !

I wonder what Blackberry is thinking when they pontificate on their automotive market dominance. Do they really believe they're the dominant player ? I'm thinking more hype than reality which is a hell of a go-to-market strategy.

No wonder the stock can't get over $6.

[app_Developer]

If these valuations are accurate, then Radar may become Blackberry's most valuable asset !

I wonder what Blackberry is thinking when they pontificate on their automotive market dominance. Do they really believe they're the dominant player ? I'm thinking more hype than reality which is a hell of a go-to-market strategy.

No wonder the stock can't get over $6.

They do still dominate this market, but it's because they are the incumbent choice. It's the default choice. Many of the current systems are 4th or 5th generation of systems that originally went into design 20 years ago. At that time, with the hardware we had then, QNX had real advantages (and AGL didn't exist). So QNX became the default. This is way before BB was involved at all.

But it's NOT the default choice for all of the next-gen systems. AGL is making inroads there. Hardware is totally different than before. Nvidia has become a major player. The technical advantages of QNX are disappearing or becoming irrelevant. So all of this is pricing pressure. You can get by for a long time as the incumbent choice because it takes a long time (particular in cars) for things to change.

So BB/QNX can continue the business for years because the pace of change is so slow (we don't make new models every year and the total development cycle for many components is closer to 10 years). BUT what they can't do very easily is try to increase the price dramatically. Because if they push too hard on price, then we have other options. So that's the pricing pressure that BB faces.

But again, who cares? For the stock price to move the way we want, it doesn't matter what happens in some little IP case or some supplier in Korea chose them for a prototype. Those will never amount to billions. BB needs to generate on the order of *billions* in net new value even just to get back above $10.

The only thing I see in their portfolio that can do that is Cylance. And it can definitely do that, but they have to really really work harder on that IMO.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

They do still dominate this market, but it's because they are the incumbent choice. It's the default choice. Many of the current systems are 4th or 5th generation of systems that originally went into design 20 years ago. At that time, with the hardware we had then, QNX had real advantages (and AGL didn't exist). So QNX became the default. This is way before BB was involved at all.

But it's NOT the default choice for all of the next-gen systems. AGL is making inroads there. Hardware is totally different than before. Nvidia has become a major player. The technical advantages of QNX are disappearing or becoming irrelevant. So all of this is pricing pressure. You can get by for a long time as the incumbent choice because it takes a long time (particular in cars) for things to change.

So BB/QNX can continue the business for years because the pace of change is so slow (we don't make new models every year and the total development cycle for many components is closer to 10 years). BUT what they can't do very easily is try to increase the price dramatically. Because if they push too hard on price, then we have other options. So that's the pricing pressure that BB faces.

But again, who cares? For the stock price to move the way we want, it doesn't matter what happens in some little IP case or some supplier in Korea chose them for a prototype. Those will never amount to billions. BB needs to generate on the order of *billions* in net new value even just to get back above $10.

The only thing I see in their portfolio that can do that is Cylance. And it can definitely do that, but they have to really really work harder on that IMO.

Agree Cylance is all they have that has the potential to create ongoing revenues on the magnitude that most here want.

Scary thing is with all these "pump" public releases they have put out before the earnings... none have mentioned Cylance. Holding that for the security summit in October?

[EchoTango]

I hope folks realize my "Radar" comment was pure sarcasm as it's probably the least valuable asset they have. I do agree Cylance might be the main revenue driver in the future provided they continue to evolve it's features and functions to keep it relevant.

I wonder if we're going the hear how the SPARK customer take-up is going and if the general user experience is positive on the upcoming earnings call. I suppose whatever we hear will be heavily biased and therefore suspect.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

I hope folks realize my "Radar" comment was pure sarcasm as it's probably the least valuable asset they have. I do agree Cylance might be the main revenue driver in the future provided they continue to evolve it's features and functions to keep it relevant.

I wonder if we're going the hear how the SPARK customer take-up is going and if the general user experience is positive on the upcoming earnings call. I suppose whatever we hear will be heavily biased and therefore suspect.

I think if the numbers aren't supporting Chen more positive view of the year.... he will have to provide some reasoning on what he believes is going to happen. Or "suspect" is putting it mildly... Unless Chen's counting on Onwards phone IP to make a big splash?

If their work from home solutions hit a cord... we will see some results. If Cylance or Spark are making a mark on the industry.... we will see some results.

[dusdal]

I believe this is the frivolous counter-suit that FB initiated after BB's.

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/...1602.135.0.pdf

Defendants BlackBerry Limited and BlackBerry Corporation (collectively, “BlackBerry”) hereby notify the Courtthat, on September 10, 2020,the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office(the “Office”) issued an Office Action in the pending ex partereexamination (No. 90/014,500)of U.S. Pat. No. 6,356,841 asserted in this case. In the Office Action, the Office foundas unpatentable, inter alia, claims 12, 23, and 26 of the ’841 Patent, which are the remaining claims asserted in this case. The Office found claim 12 unpatentable as obvious in view of four separate grounds of invalidity, and claim 23 and 26 unpatentable as obvious in view of two separate grounds each. A true and correct copy of the Office Action is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

Additionally, on September 4, 2020, the Office issued an Office Action in the pending ex parte reexamination (No. 90/014,503)of U.S. Pat. No. 7,228,432 asserted in this case. In this Office Action, the Office found as unpatentable, inter alia, claims 1 and 5 of the ’432 Patent, which are the remaining claims asserted in this case. The Office found claims 1 and 5 anticipated bytwo separate grounds of invalidity. A true and correct copy of the Office Action is attached hereto as Exhibit B.

[rarsen]

Not sure if announcement was previously clearly mentioned. Personally using the KEY2, but enjoy continued occasional use of Passport, Z-10 and Z-30. :

BlackBerry legacy devices and services will reach End of Life on January 4, 2022
https://crackberry.com/blackberry-le...nuary-4-2022-0
If you're making use of an Android-based BlackBerry smartphone, it's important to note that none of this applies to you. BlackBerry Android devices will not be impacted, and applications such as BBMe will continue to work per usual unless they are assigned an Enterprise Sim Based License (ESBL).

[BanffMoose]

The answer is it's a bit of all of it. They are behind some of our suppliers and they are also working with us directly.

But here is the math for us: in a normal year, we ship about 10M vehicles. If 50% of our mix have advanced capabilities, and if the sum of all QNX costs (direct and indirect) for those products rises by $5, then that's $25M in new commitment. If it's $10, then I'm at $50M.

Now do I want to spend that $25M there or would I rather see that go towards our nextgen efforts which give us *more* differentiation (vs our own competitors) and which also happen to be AGL based here? That's the problem BB faces. If they ask us for $50M (incremental and annual), then the answer is probably we're just that much more likely to accelerate our AGL nextgen systems in our roadmap.

Which gets me back to my bigger point. To add $5 to the stock price, BB has to create $2.5B in value to the company. You aren't going to find $2.5B in net new value in QNX. So investing a ton of money in bringing QNX tooling up the level of AGL might not be a very good investment at all.

How does the open source nature of AGL factor into your differentiation when you're all expected to contribute your code back? Isn't that the point of open source?

[app_Developer]

How does the open source nature of AGL factor into your differentiation when you're all expected to contribute your code back? Isn't that the point of open source?

The changes we make to the kernel are trivial. Differentiation is in the driver and passenger experience. Think Tesla. Look at how valuable their in-car experience has been to their brand!

(They use Linux, too, as I’m sure you know)

[Corbu]

BofA

BlackBerry

2Q preview: expect Licensing strength, looking for Enterprise recovery

Maintain Rating: NEUTRAL | PO: 5.50 USD | Price: 4.86 USD

2Q21 results likely to bring Licensing upside

We preview Blackberry’s 2Q21 earnings results, scheduled for 9/24. Our revenue/EPS estimates are slightly above consensus at $244mn/3c vs $235mn/2c. A key difference is our estimate for stronger Licensing sales, at $82mn vs the Street’s $69mn. Guidance for Licensing indicated strong sequential growth in 2Q, and we model +45% QoQ. In recent years, Licensing has tended to outperform, especially when management signals any optimism. However, we believe Enterprise growth recovery is more critical for the stock. Positively, Cylance and the core UEM products are now more tightly integrated as the ‘Spark’ platform, but we see some risks that recent management changes may take time to bear fruit. QNX also remains highly sensitive to any macro slowdown. We remain Neutral given the balance of positives and negatives in the near-term.

Enterprise turnaround aided by Cylance, UEM integration

Blackberry fully integrated Cylance with its core Enterprise efforts in 1Q21. As a result, management combined the revenue segments to create one holistic Software and Services segment. Still, we expect management to provide qualitative updates on the Enterprise turnaround efforts and believe investors are looking for ARR growth vs the $500mn reported in 1Q. The dollar-based NRR was 93% in 1Q, and improvement in this metric may signal evidence of improving upsell/cross-sell as a result of the Spark integration. Management also named Tom Eacobacci President in June (previously with Citrix), which could help to right the Enterprise ship over coming quarters.

QNX remains headwind given macro environment

We expect QNX to represent the main growth headwind in 2Q due to the macro environment stalling auto production/projects. Specifically, management sees some Professional Services and Developer Seats related to QNX paused, which has an immediate impact on revenue. The royalties per car can lag the starts and stops of projects, per management. Though depressed vehicle sales remain an ongoing risk for QNX, we believe most impacted projects are delayed versus canceled.

[rarsen]

General information on demand of Cobalt for 5G and batteries:

Cobalt demand for 5G technology to challenge electric vehicles
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-c...-idUSKCN26C1EQ