View Poll Results: Did you buy shares ?

Voters
1110. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, I'm acting now !

    694 62.52%
  • No

    416 37.48%
  1. morganplus8's Avatar
    Thought I would add some of the details of one of the many reports that I received while searching for an answer on BBRY's valuation:

    The BBRY Café.  [Formerly: I support BBRY and I buy shares]-valuation-breakout-june-24-2015.png

    Notice how the lowest numbers are used when talking about the most bullish scenario, like patent values? No wonder Chen isn't ready to give up here, he can see these assets being worth much more down the road.

    I do want to comment on the share buy back, it is important for several reasons, 12 MM shares happens to be a large number when you consider that average daily volume will now drop to the norm and when you factor in how much of that daily trading is just resell and churn, pulling out 587,000 shares or more permanently is important. Stock options are priced at a weighted average of a number of days of trading, they won't be exercised for some time to come. By the time they are worth exercising, we will all have wonderful profits too.

    Okay, some targets and benchmarks from one analyst:

    The BBRY Café.  [Formerly: I support BBRY and I buy shares]-bb-targets-june-24-2016.png

    Not too far off ?? .... they really do want to see some growth before we take off here, we need Chen to continue what he is doing and provide more clarity along the way.
    06-25-15 01:28 PM
  2. sidhuk's Avatar
    OOPS my trollex watch just went off again. LOL

    It is important that we develop a system to keep track of analysts so that we can hold them to the fire and figure out which ones make sense and which ones don't. If a large firm like MS says they took in $ 70 MM in patent revenues, that is the standard for that industry. The point being made is that there is no need to speculate on better numbers if the company itself doesn't care. Its a form of punishment.
    This breed has no conscious IMO. by working as a gang, they do manipulate the market. at the same time, it brings a bigger reward for the minority who do not believe in their BS. Halo is perfect example. once again, thank you very much for being on this thread. every time you write something, is very appreciated by me and i believe by majority of this thread.
    Thanks Morgan+8
    06-25-15 01:31 PM
  3. BACK-2-BLACK's Avatar
    This would the virtual sim solution courtesy of Movirtu. Target market are users who carry two phones because they need/want two separate phone numbers. A small niche market.
    Don't think this would be a small niche market (at least, i hope not)

    WorkLife and Movirtu "ManyMe" to be offered from carriers.

    As I posted before, with the new California Law that passed, where employers are responsible for reimbursing employees with BYOD and use their personal device for work... this would be ideal !

    This Law will eventually spread like wild fire and become the norm everywhere (if it hasn't with some areas already)

    EVEN as a small business owner, this would be ideal imo !! All these web based businesses for example... how many would love NOT to publish their personal number online ! or simply have multiple businesses in this mobile world. ..... no more multiple phones or trying to find dual sim phones....

    I cant wait for this offering from my carrier !!
    06-25-15 01:33 PM
  4. slipstream89's Avatar
    Morgan, that is superb work I cannot believe you went the extra mile for this! have you considered sending this to blackberry so they can actually review it?

    Great work again! patiently waiting for the stock to reach $11 again
    06-25-15 01:47 PM
  5. morganplus8's Avatar
    This breed has no conscious IMO. by working as a gang, they do manipulate the market. at the same time, it brings a bigger reward for the minority who do not believe in their BS. Halo is perfect example. once again, thank you very much for being on this thread. every time you write something, is very appreciated by me and i believe by majority of this thread.
    Thanks Morgan+8
    Thanks for those kind words, I did what anyone else could have done, call them up and try to glean something more out of them. I think most professions protect their own, having said that, it appears that fund managers don't buy into the mentality of their own analysts, they work from a different set of rules. MS is no different, they don't follow the research from their own media sensation do they? I know many in the industry, I spoke with a senior broker a couple of days ago and he is questioned when his mix of investments includes some stray cats. He finds it easier to omit the challenging investments in favour of the standard or across the board consensus choices. I was never that kind of broker I can tell you!

    At least we now know that analysts need to hear about a deafening amount of data before they will jump into the fire and go against their own. That still doesn't explain MOBL does it? LOL
    La Emperor, Corbu, Mr BBRY and 8 others like this.
    06-25-15 01:56 PM
  6. Munx's Avatar
    OOPS my trollex watch just went off again. LOL

    I have completed my talks with several name brand analysts and I will not mention their names (if I ever wish to talk to them again).

    I asked several questions as politely as I possibly could be of course! The first question went to an analyst who missed revenue by 35% and handset unit sales by considerably more, my question was," I see that you were light on revenues going into Q1, you also missed on handset unit sales and that explains the revenue miss to some extent, in addition, you are assigning a full $ 70 MM towards patent revenue, this in itself still doesn't amend your miss regarding revenues, .... can you explain to me why you lowered your PT on BBRY to $ 10.00 from $ 11.00"?
    ....
    It is important that we develop a system to keep track of analysts so that we can hold them to the fire and figure out which ones make sense and which ones don't. If a large firm like MS says they took in $ 70 MM in patent revenues, that is the standard for that industry. The point being made is that there is no need to speculate on better numbers if the company itself doesn't care. Its a form of punishment.
    1. The analysts are assigning $70M to the patent revenue because that is what the company provided on the call!!! In this case there is no mystery, ambiguity or analyst bias. Here is the relevant discussion:

    "Tim Long - BMO Capital Markets
    Just, too, maybe they have been asked but I want to be, maybe a little more direct. If we look at last year's first quarter, we did $54 million in software revenues. If that was growing low 20s, that would imply that excluding the license fees, licenses revenues, that the core software business was flat or down sequentially. I want to make sure that is accurate math."
    ....

    "John Chen - Chief Executive Officer
    That number -- tell him...

    James Yersh - Chief Financial Officer
    25 and 23. So it's mid-20s."

    And this is the math that the analysts performed: $54M x 1.24 = $67M (core software revenue in quarter)
    $137M - $67M = $70M (IP deal value)

    2. Core software revenue reported last quarter was $66M. This is why the Street punished the company. Core software revenue appears flat sequentially. It's that simple.

    3. Now, when asked directly if revenue was flat sequentially, the response was:

    "John Chen - Chief Executive Officer
    No. No. Wait, hold a second. We will get that number. Because I look at the number, we have grown rather solidly over the core business."

    Now everyone is waiting on clarification regarding core software growth because the hard numbers provided indicate no growth...but JC said it's not flat. Until further info is provided by the company the $70M number stands as it rightly should.
    sati01, RigoMonster and iamagod like this.
    06-25-15 02:03 PM
  7. morganplus8's Avatar
    Morgan, that is superb work I cannot believe you went the extra mile for this! have you considered sending this to blackberry so they can actually review it?

    Great work again! patiently waiting for the stock to reach $11 again
    I do think BlackBerry understands the business behind going public, all of them have been a major part of that sector for a long time now. I would suggest that Chen work this crowd a bit better though, perhaps he is waiting to seize the moment at a better time. How often do we hear from CEO's that over talk the prospects for their company? HALO is a perfect example of a company that was brought to its knees because of a rumour about thrombosis issues. Once you concluded that thrombosis is better than death, you would/could mortgage the house and buy the stock, sort of all you can eat at $ 7.00 ! Name one analyst that stepped up to that plate, well, maybe BMO did/hinted at it but everyone else ran from it.

    What is so crazy about this sport is the fact that despite the fact that our consensus target for the stock is now $ 3.00 a share, we will be moving higher shortly! LOL GL
    Corbu, Mr BBRY, bbjdog and 8 others like this.
    06-25-15 02:07 PM
  8. morganplus8's Avatar
    1. The analysts are assigning $70M to the patent revenue because that is what the company provided on the call!!! In this case there is no mystery, ambiguity or analyst bias. Here is the relevant discussion:

    "Tim Long - BMO Capital Markets
    Just, too, maybe they have been asked but I want to be, maybe a little more direct. If we look at last year's first quarter, we did $54 million in software revenues. If that was growing low 20s, that would imply that excluding the license fees, licenses revenues, that the core software business was flat or down sequentially. I want to make sure that is accurate math."
    ....

    "John Chen - Chief Executive Officer
    That number -- tell him...

    James Yersh - Chief Financial Officer
    25 and 23. So it's mid-20s."

    And this is the math that the analysts performed: $54M x 1.24 = $67M (core software revenue in quarter)
    $137M - $67M = $70M (IP deal value)

    2. Core software revenue reported last quarter was $66M. This is why the Street punished the company. Core software revenue appears flat sequentially. It's that simple.

    3. Now, when asked directly if revenue was flat sequentially, the response was:

    "John Chen - Chief Executive Officer
    No. No. Wait, hold a second. We will get that number. Because I look at the number, we have grown rather solidly over the core business."

    Now everyone is waiting on clarification regarding core software growth because the hard numbers provided indicate no growth...but JC said it's not flat. Until further info is provided by the company the $70M number stands as it rightly should.
    Semantics are driving the story; Chen can't give you the breakout, he can't suggest any numbers that would lead you to that conclusion. Analysts admitted this to me, they are using FY Q4 base numbers because they can't pull out the real numbers. Chen did not disclose any numbers, nor did anyone else that would lead us to a $ 70 million dollar conclusion. The number is used because the base number of $ 67 million was used as the benchmark not $ 54 million as you suggest.
    Go back and listen to how he tries to use QoQ numbers, 20 % plus growth sequentially, (Q over Q) and finally a 30 % plus growth number to explain software while not telling you how to calculate the patent transaction. I mentioned the $ 60 - $ 70 MM issue at 11:55 AM on the day of earnings, long before anyone else even thought of it. The analysts I talked to never considered the 20% plus of $ 54 MM bucks at any time in their research.

    PS. The closest estimate of real software growth came from our very own _dimi_ who suggested that the educated number is in the realm of $ 67 MM x 23% - 33% when you look at FY2015 Q4 as the benchmark. So why would you cloud the picture by looking at Fiscal 2015 growth numbers versus Q1 FY2015? That makes little sense. BlackBerry have to hustle when the questions turned to a way to breakout the data. They covered it up nicely.

    If you read that dialog again, you will see a huge mistake in BMO's supposition.
    Last edited by morganplus8; 06-25-15 at 02:33 PM.
    Corbu, Mr BBRY, bbjdog and 11 others like this.
    06-25-15 02:22 PM
  9. Bilaal's Avatar
    Ok guys, troll alert received.
    Let's focus on topic and enjour OUR forseeable perspecives !
    Cheers
    SF

    P.S: FTR : NEVER expect any device/SW release news on ER. Never.
    Except announcing the cancellation of the BB10 update on the PlayBook? Lol.

    I kid I kid.
    Mr BBRY, gg22, sidhuk and 1 others like this.
    06-25-15 02:26 PM
  10. Munx's Avatar
    Semantics are driving the story; Chen can't give you the breakout, he can't suggest any numbers that would lead you to that conclusion. Analysts admitted this to me, they are using FY Q4 base numbers because they can't pull out the real numbers. Chen did not disclose any numbers, nor did anyone else that would lead us to a $ 70 million dollar conclusion. The number is used because the base number of $ 67 million was used as the benchmark not $ 54 million as you suggest.
    Go back and listen to how he tries to use QoQ numbers, 20 % plus growth sequentially, (Q over Q) and finally a 30 % plus growth number to explain software while not telling you how to calculate the patent transaction. I mentioned the $ 60 - $ 70 MM issue at 11:55 AM on the day of earnings, long before anyone else even thought of it. The analysts I talked to never considered the 20% plus of $ 54 MM bucks at any time in their research.
    Semantics??? It is there in plain text....I am not sure what more you could ask for and this is precisely where the $70M figure came from.
    sati01 likes this.
    06-25-15 02:27 PM
  11. morganplus8's Avatar
    Semantics??? It is there in plain text....I am not sure what more you could ask for and this is precisely where the $70M figure came from.
    Reading is important, now go back and read your argument again. They didn't look at the $ 54 MM because they have known about that number and the subsequent growth for months now. That is so irrelevant to the argument, you must be on a mission of some sort. BMO makes a major error, you can't seem to find it though.

    Got to go, my trollex just went off again.
    bbjdog, theRock1975, zyben and 4 others like this.
    06-25-15 02:47 PM
  12. Munx's Avatar
    Reading is important, now go back and read your argument again. They didn't look at the $ 54 MM because they have known about that number and the subsequent growth for months now. That is so irrelevant to the argument, you must be on a mission of some sort. BMO makes a major error, you can't seem to find it though.

    Got to go, my trollex just went off again.
    Morgan - it's ok to be wrong, you will still be just as highly liked. Here is another quote from the call:

    "First, we expect our core software business in enterprise and BTS, which brought us by the way $247 million in revenue last year, will be growing at 20% year-over-year as a continued base business."

    And this was in the prepared portion of his statement! Later he clearly states 23-25% YoY on the $54M figure. Despite all this you are thinking the core software business is growing at 20% quarter-over-quarter, unfairly calling me a troll, and questioning my reading ability?

    I would also point out that all major market participants listened to that call and based on the current SP it is painfully clear what they also understood.
    sati01 likes this.
    06-25-15 03:04 PM
  13. morganplus8's Avatar
    Morgan - it's ok to be wrong, you will still be just as highly liked. Here is another quote from the call:

    "First, we expect our core software business in enterprise and BTS, which brought us by the way $247 million in revenue last year, will be growing at 20% year-over-year as a continued base business."

    And this was in the prepared portion of his statement! Later he clearly states 23-25% YoY on the $54M figure. Despite all this you are thinking the core software business is growing at 20% quarter-over-quarter, unfairly calling me a troll, and questioning my reading ability?

    I would also point out that all major market participants listened to that call and based on the current SP it is painfully clear what they also understood.
    The reason I often ignore you is because you have a agenda, it is clear when your support comes from other trolls only. If you can't understand what is said, take it elsewhere.
    bbjdog, Corbu, zyben and 7 others like this.
    06-25-15 03:09 PM
  14. sati01's Avatar
    Go back and listen to how he tries to use QoQ numbers, 20 % plus growth sequentially, (Q over Q) and finally a 30 % plus growth number to explain software while not telling you how to calculate the patent transaction.
    I didn't find any reference of 20% QoQ growth in Software. He did say many times 2x% YoY in the earnings call and following interviews.
    06-25-15 03:15 PM
  15. masterful's Avatar
    Ignored

    #BBFactCheck
    06-25-15 03:18 PM
  16. Munx's Avatar
    The reason I often ignore you is because you have a agenda, it is clear when your support comes from other trolls only. If you can't understand what is said, take it elsewhere.
    You seem befuddled by the analyst's figures and the market's response to the call.

    I am very clear on both and simply want to communicate the numbers to my fellow longs.

    I hope that I am very wrong and that Chen's prepared statements are wrong and that you are very right in your theory that core software is growing a 20% quarter over quarter.

    Posted via CB10
    06-25-15 03:18 PM
  17. DaSchwantz's Avatar
    OMFG yes this is so tiresome. BlackBerry has NOT given any numbers for CORE software so why are people INSISTING that they can do q over q comparisons? I think we know the answer....but all I can see is major revenue growth this last quarter. How about we compare q over q or Y over Y TECHNOLOGY LICENSING growth? That would be in the thousands, yet we don't know how it was booked before....You can't have one without the other.

    The truth is that BlackBerry surprised them all by finding a major source of revenue that they all ignored, and instead of being impressed, they acted like a bunch of lazy spoiled brats. Those are buying opportunities in my books.

    Posted via CB10
    foxdog0007, bbjdog, 3MIKE and 17 others like this.
    06-25-15 03:22 PM
  18. spiller's Avatar
    I've been particularly interested in the anticipated software solution that would compel folks to only use one phone. Assume this was a reference to a solution for closing the app gap. Seemed ike the rumors about an Android phone were part of this solution. The silence from BlackBerry on Tuesday regarding this point is disappointing. Almost get a feeling that BlackBerry was working on such a solution and have hit some kind of roadblock... so now they're backing off from such talk... Do think that BlackBerry is building a solid portfolio of EMM products, but believe that devices will continue to struggle without a solution that brings all app to BlackBerry devices.

    Passport on AT&T
    Or they don't want to announce something that will make people wait and thus kill their device sales even more....i think we may hear more late July at the security meeting if they have some success securing android, or perhaps announce they can use hypervisor and full android /gps

    Posted via CB10
    06-25-15 03:22 PM
  19. bbjdog's Avatar
    It hurts me that people are calling me a troll! Trolls are disgusting humans. They actually enjoy the pain they inflict on others. I do not think that I am a troll, but if you guys say that I am, guess I have to except it. If anyone wants a troll watch I have them for sale.lol
    Last edited by bbjdog; 06-25-15 at 04:21 PM.
    06-25-15 03:47 PM
  20. W Hoa's Avatar
    You seem befuddled by the analyst's figures and the market's response to the call.

    I hope that I am very wrong and that Chen's prepared statements are wrong and that you are very right in your theory that core software is growing a 20% quarter over quarter.
    Your hopes are realized. You are wrong. To quote Chen:

    The enterprise business which included BES and VAS, value-added services, and our QNX business, turned in double-digit growth year-over-year again, and it was two quarters in a row now.
    The key phrase is "two quarters in a row". Cheers.
    06-25-15 03:50 PM
  21. ZayDub's Avatar
    I passed the Series 66! Whoooooooop!

    Tour 9630 > Bold 9650 > Q10 > Classic or Passport???
    06-25-15 03:51 PM
  22. DaSchwantz's Avatar
    The problem is with Tim Long's statement about core software growth being 'sequentially' flat (meaning q on q). The reality is that he can't use the whole category to represent core, and he also should have realized that q4/14 to q1/15 was ALSO flat in terms of software Rev growth (whole category). There's something called seasonality, Mr. Long. You just flunked.

    Posted via CB10
    3MIKE and zyben like this.
    06-25-15 04:08 PM
  23. rarsen's Avatar
    More and more discussions on QNX showing up:

    BlackBerry's QNX: Can it win the auto IoT war? | ZDNet
    Corbu, bbjdog, morganplus8 and 5 others like this.
    06-25-15 04:11 PM
  24. rarsen's Avatar
    Anyone care to give an opinion on the general direction of Microsoft efforts?

    Why did Microsoft just combine its Windows and Devices businesses? | ZDNet
    ".... At the very least, the move MUST be signaling that Microsoft plans to exit the Windows Phone hardware business, some argue, given that business is just limping along. Nadella was said to be initially opposed to Microsoft's purchase of Nokia's handset business. But that doesn't mean Nadella was anti-phone. In fact, Myerson, the new head of the combined Windows and Devices business, was formerly head of engineering for Windows Mobile/Windows Phone. Microsoft is betting its future on cross-platform software and cloud services these days. Windows and devices are still very important to the company, but will likely become smaller pieces, going forward, of Microsoft's overall make-up."

    Microsoft's new Office apps are now generally available for Android phones | ZDNet
    06-25-15 04:18 PM
  25. helopilot06's Avatar
    I know that this is a company that we are all very invested in both financially and emotionally, but I think we need to take a minute and be calm. Yall know my stance here on BBRY and how long I am having held it since pre-BB10, but let's not get goin on calling everyone a troll or hating on optimism either.

    We have all stated that we don't know what the actual numbers are. Picking this sentence or that word or so on allows us to stipulate at the numbers. But unless they come straight out and tell us that's all it is on either side, stipulation. I would love to see some more clarity in the presentation of our quarterly numbers but that's not what we were given and it's led to analysts being able to craft it however they want or feel is most likely true (that said I would love for some Crack down on analysts that clear conflict of interests aka Mr douchette.)

    Now yall know I admire most of you and have learned more from you all than I ever could have otherwise so take this as my 2cents said with respect.

    Posted via crackberry10 on my new Z30!
    morganplus8, gg22, sidhuk and 11 others like this.
    06-25-15 04:23 PM
106,800 ... 34343435343634373438 ...

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