[BBTIN]

If it's worth to offer the BlackBerry hub suite as SaaS for Android users, could it be worth to offer the BB10 OS as-a-Service as well?
Obviously there is a customer demand to keep BB10 with Android app emulation alive, including myself. What are the limitations? Of course, the user base is much smaller than Android but if this user base is also willing to pay a regular fee would this business model be at least cost covering? The upside for BlackBerry would be keeping a very good and secure OS alive for the call option to re-enter the market in the future. Blackberry would also still act as a pure software company. The hardware part could be played as it is right now, for example it could be licensed/outsourced to TCL and/or others.
Here are some basic questions in order to understand if this business model makes sense at all:
What is the potential user base and how much would a potential user pay, monthly? Maybe the same as for the hub suite, 99p?
How many developers are needed to maintain and further develop BBOS10?
Is it technically possible to utilise up to date Android Runtime Environment for BBOS 10 and how much would it cost to get it licensed?
Any other limitations or issues to cope with?

[kvndoom]

define "customer demand" ... a few dozen Crackberry posters? it will take millions of dollars annually to keep an OS up to date. and there will be no android runtime... the legal reasons being have been explained many times before.

so www.notgonnahappen.com

[Emaderton3]

Not to mention any future offering of BB10 can not have the Android runtime included. So know one is going to license it when most services will not work on it.

Posted via CB10

[LSDBerry]

So if we assume that everyone still posting on this forum will subscribe to BB10. That's say ~60-70 users.

BB10 cost several billion to develop as part of a multi faceted rebranding strategy, but in maintenance mode it will cost nowhere near this to maintain.

Say BlackBerry needs to retain maybe ~20-30 core staff members to make ongoing updates and maintenance realistic, with these core skilled workers drawing ~between 50-100k salaries. You've then got regulatory costs, logistical costs, support staff, material costs, accounting, real estate, maintaining compatibility with other services and the additional load it places on those services, etc. Also let's not forget that they need to make profit (even though they seemed to forget this when BB10 was still in active development).

You're looking at a few million per year to keep BB10 going. Without BlackBerry revealing their internal figures, we can't tell exactly how many millions this is - but we can make a few guesses.

If it's 30 million, our 70 subscribers will be paying £428,000 per year for their subscription.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that things like offices, phone lines, payroll, management, and app support are not needed, and just say that only the core salaries are necessary. Our running cost might fall to say ~3 million.

So our subscribers would in this case be paying around £40,000 per year. It's a lot less, but it's still quite a lot.

What if we don't want to develop the OS, but just maintain it in it's current form and bugfix when necessary? You might need 3 or 4 skilled workers (again with no office, management, or means of contacting each other) which might bring your running cost down to 200-300k.

At the low end of this, your subscription would cost ~3,000 per year. Achievable for some working people, but how many could afford this?

Let's try to cut the fat a bit more: We only maintain the servers, and have no more updates and one server guy. Your subs might go down to under £1,000.

But I think this is about where we are now with BlackBerry.

Posted via CB10

[BBTIN]

I like the cost estimation approach but I disagree with only 70 potential subscribers.

The Play Store shows more than 1 million downloads (up to 5 million) for the hub suite. It is very hard to predict the potential user base but if we assume for a second that one million users would actually subscribe at a monthly fee of $1. Or 500k subscribers would for $2 a month. This would result in annual revenues of $12 million. Based on 30 developers (let’s say $3 million) and some additional staff (let’s say another $1 million) plus utilizing the existing BlackBerry business (again another $1 million), there should be enough to generate a positive contribution margin (up to $7 million).

I believe an Android runtime update is crucial for any potential subscriber. From the discussions on crackberry I had the impression it was an issue because of the Priv (no Android runtime update if a handset manufacturer is selling Android devices). Well, as BlackBerry is a pure software company now, this shouldn’t be the problem for potential negotiations with Google. But it would be a problem for TCL, if we assume they are the only ones allowed to manufacture new BBOS devices keeping their license agreement with BlackBerry in mind. Any suggestion for this problem?

[BBTIN]

I like the cost estimation approach but I disagree with only 70 potential subscribers.

The Play Store shows more than 1 million downloads (up to 5 million) for the hub suite. It is very hard to predict the potential user base but if we assume for a second that one million users would actually subscribe at a monthly fee of $1. Or 500k subscribers would for $2 a month. This would result in annual revenues of $12 million. Based on 30 developers (let’s say $3 million) and some additional staff (let’s say another $1 million) plus utilizing the existing BlackBerry business (again another $1 million), there should be enough to generate a positive contribution margin (up to $7 million).

I believe an Android runtime update is crucial for any potential subscriber. From the discussions on crackberry I had the impression it was an issue because of the Priv (no Android runtime update if a handset manufacturer is selling Android devices). Well, as BlackBerry is a pure software company now, this shouldn’t be the problem for potential negotiations with Google. But it would be a problem for TCL, if we assume they are the only ones allowed to manufacture new BBOS devices keeping their license agreement with BlackBerry in mind. Any suggestion for this problem?

[conite]

A handful of people could not pay the 9 figure annual cost of rehashing the epic financial failure that was BB10.

And without the Android Runtime, to say the ecosystem is deprecated is an understatement.

For your own health, just let it go. BlackBerry has.

[joeldf]

The problem is, we don't know the full extent of the deal between Google and BlackBerry. BlackBerry never became an official member of the OHA - either on the software or hardware side. And, while TCL is not a direct member, Alcatel (a subsidiary) is. Either way, you can be sure whatever deal was made, both hardware and software were covered.

There are OHA members in the strictly "software" category.

BlackBerry will never update the runtime version. No matter what fantasy scenario we can dream up.

BlackBerry gave up on BB10. It's time the rest of us did too.

[glwerry]

A handful of people could not pay the 9 figure annual cost of rehashing the epic financial failure that was BB10.

And without the Android Runtime, to say the ecosystem is deprecated is an understatement.

For your own health, just let it go. BlackBerry has.

Completely agree.

Furthermore, BB as a corporation has transitioned AWAY from providing BB10, it's not part of their business model any more and so WHY would they want to pick up that Albatross again?

[BBTIN]

The discussion is about a NEW/additional business model for BlackBerry with pros and cons (some of them listed above). The difference is offering an OS as a Service, not selling devices again. This hypothetical business model would be in line with their strategy because they license and sell software. If your view is that this business model doesn't make sense, fair enough, but please explain where you see the shortcomings.

[Nguyen1]

So.... you're thinking something like what sailfish OS is doing, right?

Realistically, as long as functional bb10 phones are out there, I don't think anyone will want to pay extra just to use a more crippled (no runtime) version of Bb10.

I wonder, hypothetically (never mind cost or practicality), if it would be possible to transform bb10 into some PDA OS, like on the upcoming Gemini PDA with qwerty keyboard...

Signature: Still typing away on my Passport SE!

[app_Developer]

The discussion is about a NEW/additional business model for BlackBerry with pros and cons (some of them listed above). The difference is offering an OS as a Service, not selling devices again. This hypothetical business model would be in line with their strategy because they license and sell software. If your view is that this business model doesn't make sense, fair enough, but please explain where you see the shortcomings.

The biggest problem is that if you don't update BB10 to support new hardware, then your total market size will continue to shrink. Every month some number of your customers will finally give up on (or drop or lose or whatever) their 2,3,4 year old phone and go out and buy a new phone. Slowly but surely that will happen every month. We all eventually buy new phones, cars, TV's, etc. So for this business to make any sense, you have to be able to support new devices, which means you now have much higher development costs. Right now BB10 does not run and cannot run on any device coming out of any factory in the world. It does not even run on any SoC coming off any line anywhere.

The second problem is that you start the business with 0 subscribers paying $0 a month. Now you have to grow a subscriber business, from scratch, by selling into a market that is itself shrinking every month. You don't get to wait until you sell a million subs and then go hire the team and start the work. You have to invest in the business first whilst you have your 0 subscribers. So why would the BB board want to do that? They can take that same money and invest it in something else instead. They could use that money to buy back shares instead, which would be a much better idea.

The third problem is what kind of engineers are going to take this job? The pay outlined is very poor for anyone who knows how to maintain a browser, or make security fixes, or any of the things you need. And when those same engineers can go to Google or Apple instead, or even work on the QNX self-driving car software, then why would they choose to work on the maintenance of an operating system that is getting no new features, runs on none of the newest phones, and sells into a shrinking market. If I were in an interview with you, how would you sell this opportunity to me?

[Ment]

Download numbers of the hub or any BB apps from the Playstore has little weight. Using/trying those are very easy for the end user either preloaded or just a search away. How many apps would be downloaded if you had to go buy a separate device , load the BB Android OS yourself and rely on most tech support on fan sites: not many.

[BBTIN]

So.... you're thinking something like what sailfish OS is doing, right?

Realistically, as long as functional bb10 phones are out there, I don't think anyone will want to pay extra just to use a more crippled (no runtime) version of Bb10.

I wonder, hypothetically (never mind cost or practicality), if it would be possible to transform bb10 into some PDA OS, like on the upcoming Gemini PDA with qwerty keyboard...

Signature: Still typing away on my Passport SE!

You got it. There are some serious guys out there trying to establish a complete new mobile OS. This does not guarantee the success such a BB10 OS-as-aService but as I personally believe there is a market for a "secure" OS alternatives. And I agree with you that without the proper runtime no one would subscribe.

[BBTIN]

So.... you're thinking something like what sailfish OS is doing, right?

Realistically, as long as functional bb10 phones are out there, I don't think anyone will want to pay extra just to use a more crippled (no runtime) version of Bb10.

I wonder, hypothetically (never mind cost or practicality), if it would be possible to transform bb10 into some PDA OS, like on the upcoming Gemini PDA with qwerty keyboard...

Signature: Still typing away on my Passport SE!

You got it. There are some serious guys out there trying to establish a complete new mobile OS. This does not guarantee the success such a BB10 OS-as-aService but as I personally believe there is a market for a "secure" OS alternatives. And I agree with you that without the proper runtime no one would subscribe.

[app_Developer]

You got it. There are some serious guys out there trying to establish a complete new mobile OS. This does not guarantee the success such a BB10 OS-as-aService but as I personally believe there is a market for a "secure" OS alternatives. And I agree with you that without the proper runtime no one would subscribe.

Sailfish also has huge advantages in building on Linux and Mer, and building an open source community around their OS. That allows them to run on some modern phones for a fraction of the cost of porting QNX.

[BBTIN]

The biggest problem is ...

Awesome feedback, thank you.

Re: biggest problem
Agreed, new devices need to be issued, but not by BlackBerry. This brings me to the question, if it is possible at all to develop an OS without the hardware (which in this case would be outsourced)? By the way, the outlined model doesn’t consider licensing revenues from hardware manufacturers for new devices.
You mentioned development costs would be higher, do you think that 30 developers are not enough? I don't have a clue how much manpower this needs.

Re: second problem
Of course, you are absolutely right. In corporate finance there is a commonly accepted way to decide if to do a new business or not by calculating the IRR or see if the NPV of the project (including investments) is higher than your alternative investment projects. In addition, there is also the value of the option to keep the OS alive. But this is really tough to measure, so it should be just the icing of the cake once one comes to the conclusion this business model is promising a positive NPV.

Re: third problem
First of all, I can’t believe that BlackBerry has laid off all of its BBOS 10 developers. Additionally and as far as I know, offering an OS-as-a-service haven’t been done before. Developers would at the forefront of a maybe new kind of business model in general/ industry change. Don’t say this is ridiculous, application software started with one off payments as well and is now transitioning to SaaS more and more. So, why not getting there with offering OS. Although, there might be some serious cons from a technical point of view as questioned above.

[conite]

Awesome feedback, thank you.

Re: biggest problem
Agreed, new devices need to be issued, but not by BlackBerry. This brings me to the question, if it is possible at all to develop an OS without the hardware (which in this case would be outsourced)? By the way, the outlined model doesn’t consider licensing revenues from hardware manufacturers for new devices.
You mentioned development costs would be higher, do you think that 30 developers are not enough? I don't have a clue how much manpower this needs.

Re: second problem
Of course, you are absolutely right. In corporate finance there is a commonly accepted way to decide if to do a new business or not by calculating the IRR or see if the NPV of the project (including investments) is higher than your alternative investment projects. In addition, there is also the value of the option to keep the OS alive. But this is really tough to measure, so it should be just the icing of the cake once one comes to the conclusion this business model is promising a positive NPV.

Re: third problem
First of all, I can’t believe that BlackBerry has laid off all of its BBOS 10 developers. Additionally and as far as I know, offering an OS-as-a-service haven’t been done before. Developers would at the forefront of a maybe new kind of business model in general/ industry change. Don’t say this is ridiculous, application software started with one off payments as well and is now transitioning to SaaS more and more. So, why not getting there with offering OS. Although, there might be some serious cons from a technical point of view as questioned above.

No one wants this. No one is asking for this. Why all the trouble and monumental expense? Government, business, and consumers are more than happy with Android and iOS.

[app_Developer]

Re: biggest problem
Agreed, new devices need to be issued, but not by BlackBerry. This brings me to the question, if it is possible at all to develop an OS without the hardware (which in this case would be outsourced)? By the way, the outlined model doesn’t consider licensing revenues from hardware manufacturers for new devices.
You mentioned development costs would be higher, do you think that 30 developers are not enough? I don't have a clue how much manpower this needs.

I think the number is in the hundreds at the very least. But the problem isn't just the number, it's the type of developers and the access you need to the chipset developers if you stay with QNX. Plus your own compiler team and all of that (if you expect this OS to be competitive in battery life and performance)

A much, much better idea (and one I wish BB had done originally) is to do what Sailfish does: use Linux, because then Qualcomm and Google and many other companies are doing a substantial amount of work for you. Now you're at least on a level playing field with Sailfish.

Re: second problem
Of course, you are absolutely right. In corporate finance there is a commonly accepted way to decide if to do a new business or not by calculating the IRR or see if the NPV of the project (including investments) is higher than your alternative investment projects. In addition, there is also the value of the option to keep the OS alive. But this is really tough to measure, so it should be just the icing of the cake once one comes to the conclusion this business model is promising a positive NPV.

How do you get people to this conclusion of positive NPV? Let alone a compelling one?

Re: third problem
First of all, I can’t believe that BlackBerry has laid off all of its BBOS 10 developers. Additionally and as far as I know, offering an OS-as-a-service haven’t been done before. Developers would at the forefront of a maybe new kind of business model in general/ industry change. Don’t say this is ridiculous, application software started with one off payments as well and is now transitioning to SaaS more and more. So, why not getting there with offering OS. Although, there might be some serious cons from a technical point of view as questioned above.

I think developers can be motivated by a new business model, if that opportunity is big enough. If it's hey you get to work on an OS that a tiny fraction of people in the world will ever see, that's a hard sell.

Now, if you can say you get to do that work in the open and show the world how awesome you are, that could help. But you have to pay them quite a bit more than what you were estimating.

And you have to get BB to agree to open source BB10.

What would help even more is a technical vision for what this new OS will do! You can't staff an entire company with BlackBerry fans. Engineers who are not BB fans are going to roll their eyes at a secure bootloader (who really cares?!), so what is the real security vision there? There are good ideas out there about how you *really* keep real people safe on their phones. You'd need to tap into that.

[BBTIN]

No one wants this. No one is asking for this. Why all the trouble and monumental expense? Government, business, and consumers are more than happy with Android and iOS.

Okay, you believe that there is absolutely no market demand. Understood and noted. Thank you for your point of view. Let's see if others agree or not

[BBTIN]

No one wants this. No one is asking for this. Why all the trouble and monumental expense? Government, business, and consumers are more than happy with Android and iOS.

Okay, you believe that there is absolutely no market demand. Understood and noted. Thank you for your point of view. Let's see if others agree or not

[thurask]

Okay, you believe that there is absolutely no market demand. Understood and noted. Thank you for your point of view. Let's see if others agree or not

Market demand for BB10 has had almost five years to show itself, and yet it doesn't. I wonder why.

[Emaderton3]

Okay, you believe that there is absolutely no market demand. Understood and noted. Thank you for your point of view. Let's see if others agree or not

It has already been proven by dismal sales and near bankruptcy.

Posted via CB10

[BBTIN]

app_Developer is probably right with the number of developers because Jolla (Sailfish OS) seems to employ arround 150 developers. Interestingly, Jolla raised $14 million in last years series C funding round. Therefore, a $15 million R&D expense guess for 150 developers does not seem to be too far stretched.

On the other hand, Jolla is now selling the Sailfish X software package, which the owners of Xperia X devices can purchase, download and install on their own devices for 49.90. From a developers point, I am not able to compare SFOS with BB10 but I trust app_Developer when saying SFOS is in clear advantage.

However, I'm is still not convinced that this business model cannot work for BB10 OS. Especially by others persistent saying there is no market demand at all, while there is obviously a demand to install blackberry hub suite on android devices. I would be more than willing to purchase and install BB10 OS (including Android app support) instead of Sailfish OS on a device, preferably for $1-2 a month. Am I really the only one?

[conite]

app_Developer is probably right with the number of developers because Jolla (Sailfish OS) seems to employ arround 150 developers. Interestingly, Jolla raised $14 million in last years series C funding round. Therefore, a $15 million R&D expense guess for 150 developers does not seem to be too far stretched.

On the other hand, Jolla is now selling the Sailfish X software package, which the owners of Xperia X devices can purchase, download and install on their own devices for 49.90. From a developers point, I am not able to compare SFOS with BB10 but I trust app_Developer when saying SFOS is in clear advantage.

However, I'm is still not convinced that this business model cannot work for BB10 OS. Especially by others persistent saying there is no market demand at all, while there is obviously a demand to install blackberry hub suite on android devices. I would be more than willing to purchase and install BB10 OS (including Android app support) instead of Sailfish OS on a device, preferably for $1-2 a month. Am I really the only one?

You're not the "only" one, but one of a very few.

HUB suite use on Android is a complete red herring.