View Poll Results: Did you buy shares ?

Voters
1106. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, I'm acting now !

    693 62.66%
  • No

    413 37.34%
  1. Reed Richards's Avatar
    Because BB7 isn't the future of BlackBerry.

    BB10 needs to be successful, to be successful it needs a user base and ever BB7 device is one less person that could be buying a BB10 device. It is a sales and BB will make money on it... but in the long run it might hurt them to contiue their legacy devices.
    Ok, I can see your point to some degree here, but I have a hard time believing that BlackBerry could have made a higher-end OS for first-world enterprise users that could compete with high end Droids and iPhones, which at the same time could run on lower end handsets running in emerging markets on non-4G networks. That just sounds like asking too much, even for an OS based on lighter-weight QNX.

    I don't think continuing to deploy BB7 in emerging markets is a problem; I think the problem is that this strategy wasn't announced from the get-go. I think it comes across as an unplanned move.
    Kid Vibe and Shanerredflag like this.
    07-15-13 04:11 PM
  2. Nathan Bael's Avatar
    There. Will. Be. A. Low. Range. BB10. By. The. End. Of. The. Year. Q5. Is. Mid. Range.

    Posted via CB10
    If Q5 is midrange, what is Q10? A10?
    07-15-13 04:11 PM
  3. Superfly_FR's Avatar
    Perhaps because the new BB7 device does not exist in the market yet? And the fact that there is no pricing info, reasonable or not, for their throwback device? And the fact that Heins et al have repeatedly and continuously said BB10 is the future for BBRY handsets? And, well you get the idea I hope.

    Coming soon means very little from BBRY I am afraid.
    Also stated that os7 will still have support for up coming years (was around BB10 launch) and dedicated teams.

    Posted via CB10
    bungaboy likes this.
    07-15-13 04:14 PM
  4. cjcampbell's Avatar
    Ok, I can see your point to some degree here, but I have a hard time believing that BlackBerry could have made a higher-end OS for first-world enterprise users that could compete with high end Droids and iPhones, which at the same time could run on lower end handsets running in emerging markets on non-4G networks. That just sounds like asking too much, even for an OS based on lighter-weight QNX.

    I don't think continuing to deploy BB7 in emerging markets is a problem; I think the problem is that this strategy wasn't announced from the get-go. I think it comes across as an unplanned move.
    They had actually stated a while ago that they were looking at and thinking about offering a new BBOS device. It wasn't set in stone but it was on the table as an option.
    Reed Richards likes this.
    07-15-13 04:15 PM
  5. take99's Avatar
    I guess I was daydreaming earlier....
    07-15-13 04:20 PM
  6. Reed Richards's Avatar
    They had actually stated a while ago that they were looking at and thinking about offering a new BBOS device. It wasn't set in stone but it was on the table as an option.
    Ah, ok thank you. That makes sense. My guess is that the announcement sounded like a fall-back option because BB10 devices didn't sell as well as anticipated, rather than a well-thought out approach.
    cjcampbell and Superfly_FR like this.
    07-15-13 04:20 PM
  7. JLagoon's Avatar
    We got out of the second wedge (blue lines), and seem to be trending at the top line of the third wedge (black line). We are on the 11th day in this downtrend. We need to get out of the third wedge. Let's see, if history repeats itself within the next 3 days for a break out, as it did with a very similar drop in December 2012.

    The BBRY Café.  [Formerly: I support BBRY and I buy shares]-screen-shot-2013-07-15-5.11.57-pm.jpg

    The BBRY Café.  [Formerly: I support BBRY and I buy shares]-screen-shot-2013-07-15-5.14.36-pm.jpg
    07-15-13 04:21 PM
  8. Superfly_FR's Avatar
    This I didn't know... I thought the Q5 was low range?
    Must be at least my 10th repetition lol.

    Posted via CB10
    Bugmapper likes this.
    07-15-13 04:23 PM
  9. cjcampbell's Avatar
    Ah, ok thank you. That makes sense. My guess is that the announcement sounded like a fall-back option because BB10 devices didn't sell as well as anticipated, rather than a well-thought out approach.
    Nah... If you give it a world wide look, and look at the clientele that has been buying BB's over the last couple of years, and the fact they still take the lions share of sales, it is a smart move. I just wish they had done this last year to fill the void so those folks would have had a new offering and have a newer one out now. Oh well, we will just have to wait and see how they are received to determine how smart, or not, the move was.
    07-15-13 04:25 PM
  10. Superfly_FR's Avatar
    If Q5 is midrange, what is Q10? A10?
    As of date Q10 and Z10 are high range.
    Q5 is mid range, A10 will be high range on phablet segment (edit) and probably flagship for Joes.

    Posted via CB10
    Bugmapper, bungaboy and rarsen like this.
    07-15-13 04:27 PM
  11. notfanboy's Avatar
    There. Will. Be. A. Low. Range. BB10. By. The. End. Of. The. Year. Q5. Is. Mid. Range.
    I'd like to see a source link for this please.
    07-15-13 04:34 PM
  12. sidhuk's Avatar
    this is a huge step forward guys. Blocking stolen blackberries. BlackBerry Does What No Other Manufacturer Does in [Market-Ticker]
    07-15-13 05:21 PM
  13. peter9477's Avatar
    I think some people haven't heard of the concept of market segmentation. They seem to think you must bring a product out at the price that would immediately maximize sales numbers, rather than tapping some of the market that's happy to support a higher margin product in return for being an early adopter and only later lowering the price.... later, when you've also been able to ramp up production enough that you won't have trouble meeting demand.

    Is it my imagination or is that what's behind the spate of armchair CEO comments about Q5 pricing (not just here)? Same as how all the other products they've released were initially "too expensive" and then, when the price was dropped (a planned event, even if the exact timing isn't determined in advance) it's always reported as a desperate attempt to increase sales or to dump inventory of a failed product.

    Do we have any MBAs in this crowd who can talk about typical strategies along these lines? I think we need some education. (I'm sure I do... just not from some of the posters I've seen here lately.)

    Posted via CB10
    07-15-13 05:23 PM
  14. Shanerredflag's Avatar
    Awesome posts guy's...Psssst, (that's a beer), now to put a shadowy banger on the BBQ.

    And happy your moving forward M8, hoping they fix it once and for all.
    Last edited by Shanerredflag; 07-15-13 at 06:04 PM.
    07-15-13 05:48 PM
  15. dusdal's Avatar
    I think some people haven't heard of the concept of market segmentation. They seem to think you must bring a product out at the price that would immediately maximize sales numbers, rather than tapping some of the market that's happy to support a higher margin product in return for being an early adopter and only later lowering the price.... later, when you've also been able to ramp up production enough that you won't have trouble meeting demand.

    Is it my imagination or is that what's behind the spate of armchair CEO comments about Q5 pricing (not just here)? Same as how all the other products they've released were initially "too expensive" and then, when the price was dropped (a planned event, even if the exact timing isn't determined in advance) it's always reported as a desperate attempt to increase sales or to dump inventory of a failed product.

    Do we have any MBAs in this crowd who can talk about typical strategies along these lines? I think we need some education. (I'm sure I do... just not from some of the posters I've seen here lately.)

    Posted via CB10
    It's known as 'discriminatory pricing', or at least a somewhat modified version of it.

    It's exactly what you said, setting prices differently for different consumers based on what they will pay for exactly the same item. In this way the early adopters will pay more to have it before everyone else. Later it's dropped into the range where others will buy it who don't value being first.

    A truer form of discriminatory pricing might be selling Q10s at the porsche dealership for much more than they are priced at the Wireless Wave kiosk at the other end of the mall, but the principle still holds the same.

    If you envision the typical supply demand chart you notice that the curve, of course, is continuous. Prices of consumer goods cannot be continuous because they have to be preset and so would appear as bars alongside the demand curve. Any gap between your square price bar and your smoothly sloping demand curve represents either lost sales (price was too high for demand) or loss profits (price was too low for demand, could have gotten more $$).

    Thus, discriminatory pricing aims to produce many skinny price 'bars' along the x-axis in order to trace the demand curve as closely as possible and minimize the two types of losses mentioned above.

    Hope this is somewhat useful haha, apologies for the ramble. Wiki may be more useful to you.
    07-15-13 06:09 PM
  16. m0de25's Avatar
    I think some people haven't heard of the concept of market segmentation. They seem to think you must bring a product out at the price that would immediately maximize sales numbers, rather than tapping some of the market that's happy to support a higher margin product in return for being an early adopter and only later lowering the price.... later, when you've also been able to ramp up production enough that you won't have trouble meeting demand.

    Is it my imagination or is that what's behind the spate of armchair CEO comments about Q5 pricing (not just here)? Same as how all the other products they've released were initially "too expensive" and then, when the price was dropped (a planned event, even if the exact timing isn't determined in advance) it's always reported as a desperate attempt to increase sales or to dump inventory of a failed product.

    Do we have any MBAs in this crowd who can talk about typical strategies along these lines? I think we need some education. (I'm sure I do... just not from some of the posters I've seen here lately.)

    Posted via CB10

    Hi Peter!

    I don't have an MBA, but I can't help think of Playbook in this situation where BB was asking for iPad premiums right out of the gate. What you outlined makes sense for a company(ies) in the driver's seat, but not so much for a company who is trying to attract market/mindshare with virtually no comparable ecosystem to the giants. BlackBerry doesn't have enough clout and enough time on their hands to expect premiums back during Playbook and at this point in time as well.

    Meh... hindsight is 20/20 but I thought it was a dunce move to price the new BB10 right at the same level as the latest iphone/Sammy device. Now, I feel the same mistake is being made with Q5. Look at what Google did... They offered their Nexxus phones at huge discounts because they saw the value of "subscribers" feeding out of Google play, versus upfront margins.
    peter9477 likes this.
    07-15-13 06:14 PM
  17. Superfly_FR's Avatar
    I'd like to see a source link for this please.
    I believe you'll have a solid part within EMEA VP interview I translated some weeks ago... or you can just believe me lol.
    Edited, but now with link!
    http://forums.crackberry.com/showthread.php?t=813671

    Nie guys !
    Posted via CB10
    take99, bungaboy, rarsen and 1 others like this.
    07-15-13 06:44 PM
  18. Nathan Bael's Avatar
    Do we have any MBAs in this crowd who can talk about typical strategies along these lines? I think we need some education. (I'm sure I do... just not from some of the posters I've seen here lately.)

    Posted via CB10
    I'm not finished with my MBA, but close. You can price things higher initially, and then relax prices as things move forward. Look at video cards.

    The problem is that many of us are assuming the Q5 is low end. This means it needs to be geared towards lower income markets.

    All of this goes out the window if, as some have said, the Q5 is supposed to be mid-range.
    peter9477 likes this.
    07-15-13 07:08 PM
  19. Zarpan's Avatar
    Do we have any MBAs in this crowd who can talk about typical strategies along these lines? I think we need some education. (I'm sure I do... just not from some of the posters I've seen here lately.)

    Posted via CB10
    Typically smartphone prices decrease about 20% after 1 year and 40% after 2 years, although that was based on information from a year and a bit ago, so the product lifecycle may have shortened since then.

    We'd expect a Z10 that sold for $700 at a particular outlet to typically sell for around $550 at the same outlet when the A10 comes out. Maybe they'd discount it a bit more to differentiate it some more from the A10 price wise - so perhaps $500 to $550.

    Most smartphones seemed to follow that particular pricing curve.
    peter9477 likes this.
    07-15-13 08:55 PM
  20. Zarpan's Avatar
    I'm not finished with my MBA, but close. You can price things higher initially, and then relax prices as things move forward. Look at video cards.

    The problem is that many of us are assuming the Q5 is low end. This means it needs to be geared towards lower income markets.

    All of this goes out the window if, as some have said, the Q5 is supposed to be mid-range.
    I think nearly all articles about the Q5 have mentioned it as a mid-range phone.
    07-15-13 09:01 PM
  21. Zarpan's Avatar
    Meh... hindsight is 20/20 but I thought it was a dunce move to price the new BB10 right at the same level as the latest iphone/Sammy device. Now, I feel the same mistake is being made with Q5. Look at what Google did... They offered their Nexxus phones at huge discounts because they saw the value of "subscribers" feeding out of Google play, versus upfront margins.
    Yeah, I'm not sure what would be better for optics though. Selling say 4.5 million BB10 units and losing $70 million more, or selling 2.7 million with the current financials. Tough call.
    07-15-13 09:09 PM
  22. BlackistheBerry's Avatar
    Regarding the price cuts by carriers.....

    BlackBerry insists that major price cuts given its flagship Z10 smartphone by U.S. carriers and retailers aren?t all that unusual. ?It?s part of life cycle management to tier the pricing for current devices to make room for the next ones,? a company spokesman told The Wall Street Journal.


    http://allthingsd.com/20130715/black...tory-concerns/
    Shanerredflag and bungaboy like this.
    07-15-13 09:16 PM
  23. Nathan Bael's Avatar
    I think nearly all articles about the Q5 have mentioned it as a mid-range phone.
    It may well be. However, it is only midrange if they release something lower end. Currently it is one of the cheaper barriers to entry into the BB10 world. Sadly, with the price cuts to the Z10, it may well not be the cheapest soon.

    There is midrange in specs and midrange for the lineup of a company. With A10 having better specs than the Z10 and Q10, that makes the Q5 low end of Blackberry's lineup, at least for now. It also has the effect of making the Q10 and Z10 Blackberry's midrange products, again for now.

    Thoughts everyone?
    m0de25 likes this.
    07-15-13 09:37 PM
  24. Bugmapper's Avatar
    Not that my opinion means anything, but I see the A10, Z10, and Q10 as roughly on the same level , just addressing different consumer profiles. The Q5 is more of a value phone for those who can't / won't pay for premium devices. What you call them is irrelevant (hi end, mid range, etc.) because they will always be compared to other phones that have different specs/prices so it is a pointless discussion.

    One thing I really don't like is people referring to a particular phone as a "flagship" device. It is about as useful of a description as a "make or break quarter ". Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think BlackBerry actually calls any of their devices "flagship". I think analysts and fans stick that moniker on whatever they want.

    Posted via CB10 on a Z10 root device!
    07-15-13 10:11 PM
  25. m0de25's Avatar
    Yeah, I'm not sure what would be better for optics though. Selling say 4.5 million BB10 units and losing $70 million more, or selling 2.7 million with the current financials. Tough call.
    They're stuck between a rock and a hard place, no doubt.

    At this point, all we can do is hope that these recent "traditional discounts", combined with partnership announcement, random reboot solution + other OS improvements, A10 excitement, a smooth-working-cross-platform BBM, Android runtime will take us well over 2.7M in sales!

    Nite everyone!
    Last edited by m0de25; 07-15-13 at 11:34 PM.
    07-15-13 10:54 PM
105,492 ... 15411542154315441545 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Does the Motion have the paratek antenna?
    By Steve Pogue in forum BlackBerry Motion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-13-18, 12:33 AM
  2. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 11-23-17, 11:06 PM
  3. Will Hub+ work on the new Google Pixelbook?
    By danosman in forum BlackBerry HUB+ Suite
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-02-17, 07:42 AM
  4. BlackBerry highlights the impact of KRACK vulnerability on BlackBerry products
    By CrackBerry News in forum CrackBerry.com News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-30-17, 03:10 PM
  5. Hub and Viber notifications broken
    By LyoobaBerry in forum BlackBerry HUB+ Suite
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-30-17, 02:54 PM

Tags for this Thread

LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD