02-17-18 07:44 PM
433 ... 1213141516 ...
tools
  1. ZeroBarrier's Avatar
    Blackberry failed Blackberry, BB10 was just caught in the wrong place at the wrong time.

    Posted via CB10
    Fret Madden likes this.
    02-12-17 03:23 AM
  2. anon(6125289)'s Avatar
    I am not sure that Windows phone is dead. My impression is that they are planning on keeping it alive until they release their "Surface phone."
    If it isn't dead then that's a shame. Microsoft supported windows 10 mobile even worse than Blackberry did with BB10. I bought a lumia 950XL at launch. I still own it but the OS took over a year to get in any acceptable state. It's downright embarrassing that Microsoft had the gall to release that OS in the sort of state it did. I will never buy a Microsoft mobile product again after that.

    Posted via CB10
    02-12-17 05:45 AM
  3. app_Developer's Avatar
    The problem with this conclusion is that he used the same launch strategy with his android phones. He failed in marketing them adequately and they languished on store shelves. No one knew that blackberry existed or the Priv existed just like during the BB10 phone launches.
    Exactly the same reasoning applies to Android. You have the same 3 choices: (1) don't do it, (2) do it with additional investment/risk in advertising or (3) do it with no additional financial risk. He chose #3 again. Although he had reduced commitments by then, they were still significant enough to preclude #1 (see quarterly financials again).

    Also I still think you are exaggerating the SoC commitment numbers and also making a lot of assumptions. Wasn't it only $1.3B in parts and $300M in assembly? And how do you know how much of this were SoCs versus something like screens or cases that could be used in a blackdroid phone just as easily as a BB10 phone? You have no idea. None of us do.
    For my argument it makes no difference how much of this was SoCs. The point is BBRY was on the hook for buying parts and making phones. They could either make them and try to sell them cheaply. Or not make them and have to settle a large payment to suppliers.

    This is why it's so frustrating talking about this. You guys talk like you have facts you don't have.
    Somewhat inherent to any "what if" discussion. For example, none of us can know exactly how many additional sales (net returns) we'd have seen from every million impressions. Isn't that an assumption you're making when you say they should have advertised in major metro newspapers or other ideas?
    Last edited by app_Developer; 02-12-17 at 11:49 AM.
    DrBoomBotz and StephanieMaks like this.
    02-12-17 09:46 AM
  4. AluminiumRims's Avatar
    Chen is a trojan horse just like Stephen Elop and his missions was to kill BB10.

    USA is supposed to be the "information" nav in this beautiful globalist society and this means that all personal operating systems are supposed to be developed in the USA or at least their HQs must be legally located there. The purpose is eavesdropping on the entire world's population, like Stasi on steroids. We can already see today laws in the USA that impose operating system companies to add functionality that forces them to have an open door to NSA (read Stasi).

    Symbian was killed for the same reason and this is also the reason why Microsoft could just dance through regulations. Symbian even got EU money because they wanted a European operating system so why would they go against something they spent money on? Against popular belief, both BB10 and Symbian was sustainable and there was no reason to cancel any of them. Look at Blackberry today, their Android phones sell worse than their BB10 phones.

    Microsoft and Google today incorporate a lot of eavesdropping and privacy invading "features". Using Android is like having your mom watching you masturbate.
    02-12-17 10:33 AM
  5. conite's Avatar
    Chen is a trojan horse just like Stephen Elop and his missions was to kill BB10.

    USA is supposed to be the "information" nav in this beautiful globalist society and this means that all personal operating systems are supposed to be developed in the USA or at least their HQs must be legally located there. The purpose is eavesdropping on the entire world's population, like Stasi on steroids. We can already see today laws in the USA that impose operating system companies to add functionality that forces them to have an open door to NSA (read Stasi).

    Symbian was killed for the same reason and this is also the reason why Microsoft could just dance through regulations. Symbian even got EU money because they wanted a European operating system so why would they go against something they spent money on? Against popular belief, both BB10 and Symbian was sustainable and there was no reason to cancel any of them. Look at Blackberry today, their Android phones sell worse than their BB10 phones.

    Microsoft and Google today incorporate a lot of eavesdropping and privacy invading "features". Using Android is like having your mom watching you masturbate.
    https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=BYIhNOZvH2o
    Ronindan and app_Developer like this.
    02-12-17 10:44 AM
  6. early2bed's Avatar
    The awareness that is envisioned, here, simply can not be purchased with advertising dollars at any price.

    First of all, the carriers have always used flagship phones to attract and retain customers. The value of each wireless subscriber is something like $3000 in future profits so carriers spend huge advertising dollars to recruit and retain them. They know pretty quickly which smartphones their subscribers want. They don't spend money because the CEO of BlackBerry wants them to. In Losing the Signal, Verizon executives called Mike Lazaridis in to tell him that he was going to pay them for the returns of the Storm. That was at the height of BlackBerry's market power. That was a $100M marketing campaign for Verizon and they were pissed. That's probably the last time that any carrier put in significant marketing dollars based on BlackBerry's reputation.

    Next is the brand awareness that comes from seeing people you live and work with using iPhones and Samsungs. Kiosks and pop-up stores aren't going to do it when there is a packed Apple Store at the center of the most premium retail centers and Samsungs at every carrier and big box store. How much would you have to spend to overcome that? Putting up ad dollars against that is practically flushing it down the toilet - fine if it's someone else's money.

    Finally, you can't just throw the ad dollars out there, collect orders, and then ship the handsets a few months later. You have to actually order components, manufacture them, stock, and distribute them months ahead of time. That's easily a billion dollar decision. You can't tell John Chen that it will cost $100 million to promote the Passport. You have to tell him that he needs to bet the company, again, on a handset that most people would never consider using.
    02-12-17 11:45 AM
  7. app_Developer's Avatar
    Finally, you can't just throw the ad dollars out there, collect orders, and then ship the handsets a few months later. You have to actually order components, manufacture them, stock, and distribute them months ahead of time. That's easily a billion dollar decision. You can't tell John Chen that it will cost $100 million to promote the Passport. You have to bet the company - again.
    This is an enormously important point. If you advertise a lot, get people to go to a store to look at your phone, and then tell them you're out of stock, most people will just choose some other phone. This is especially true since BB doesn't have their own outlets, and so customers will be looking at the BB phone right among a sea of other phones which are actually in stock.
    02-12-17 11:55 AM
  8. sidtek50's Avatar
    All those who say apps and everything... you are wrong!

    It was the way BlackBerry presented the operating system. It should have catered to its own people first and then gone on to steal the android and ios users. It made the huge mistake by launching the Z10 first. We all know that the unique selling proposition of BlackBerry is its keyboard. They should have launched the Q10 first with a tool belt and Z30's specifications.
    The next all touch phone they could have launched should have been the Z30. They should have done Samsung and Apple level of Marketing for these two. And the snapdragon s4 pro with the adreno 320 gpu was very relevant in 2012-13. It was considered flagship grade. In 2013 should have launched passport and another all touch phone which matched passport's specs. All this would attract a lot of users. And once you have a lot of users developers ignoring your platform seems like a career suicide for them. Blackberry's problem was too little...too late. If they fixed that well BlackBerry 10 would have outdone ios if not android.

    Posted via CB10
    No, it was apps. My friend develops apps for a huge global company and we've spoken about it at length. BB10 wasn't attracting developers for reasons discussed in this thread. No devs = project suffers

    Posted via CB10
    02-12-17 12:53 PM
  9. markmall's Avatar
    If it isn't dead then that's a shame. Microsoft supported windows 10 mobile even worse than Blackberry did with BB10. I bought a lumia 950XL at launch. I still own it but the OS took over a year to get in any acceptable state. It's downright embarrassing that Microsoft had the gall to release that OS in the sort of state it did. I will never buy a Microsoft mobile product again after that.

    Posted via CB10
    You can't say this here. Conite & Co. use Windows Phone as evidence that it doesn't matter how much support Blackberry would have given BB10 because powerful Microsoft was fully behind Windows Phone and it still failed. Your reality undermines their narrative. (They like to cite fake evidence for their arguments.)

    Posted via CB10
    02-12-17 08:41 PM
  10. markmall's Avatar
    Exactly the same reasoning applies to Android. You have the same 3 choices: (1) don't do it, (2) do it with additional investment/risk in advertising or (3) do it with no additional financial risk. He chose #3 again. Although he had reduced commitments by then, they were still significant enough to preclude #1 (see quarterly financials again).



    For my argument it makes no difference how much of this was SoCs. The point is BBRY was on the hook for buying parts and making phones. They could either make them and try to sell them cheaply. Or not make them and have to settle a large payment to suppliers.



    Somewhat inherent to any "what if" discussion. For example, none of us can know exactly how many additional sales (net returns) we'd have seen from every million impressions. Isn't that an assumption you're making when you say they should have advertised in major metro newspapers or other ideas?
    I'm not saying BB10 would have succeeded with better marketing. I'm saying it COULD NOT succeed as a matter of certainty with the poor marketing under Chen's watch. I think he squandered the best opportunity the company will ever have. Now another company will take the brand from Waterloo and try on another platform. Who knows what scraps BlackBerry will get, if anything, from THL's efforts.

    Posted via CB10
    02-12-17 08:44 PM
  11. markmall's Avatar
    This is an enormously important point. If you advertise a lot, get people to go to a store to look at your phone, and then tell them you're out of stock, most people will just choose some other phone. This is especially true since BB doesn't have their own outlets, and so customers will be looking at the BB phone right among a sea of other phones which are actually in stock.
    They went out of stock immediately anyway! Chen blew the whole Passport rollout by not having any stock! I had an Uber driver tell me this out of the blue when he saw my phone. Even he knew.

    People all over the place were talking about this new BlackBerry phone, the Passport. So it's really funny you pick out that point as an unacceptable risk.



    Posted via CB10
    roleli and arkenoi like this.
    02-12-17 08:50 PM
  12. markmall's Avatar
    No, it was apps. My friend develops apps for a huge global company and we've spoken about it at length. BB10 wasn't attracting developers for reasons discussed in this thread. No devs = project suffers

    Posted via CB10
    The question raised is what apps were so essential that were missing in 2013 not why there were not more devs.

    Posted via CB10
    02-12-17 08:51 PM
  13. conite's Avatar
    The question raised is what apps were so essential that were missing in 2013 not why there were not more devs.

    Posted via CB10
    Everyone has a different list of essential apps. The point is that almost everyone has a list.
    StephanieMaks likes this.
    02-12-17 08:55 PM
  14. tre10's Avatar
    I'm not saying BB10 would have succeeded with better marketing. I'm saying it COULD NOT succeed as a matter of certainty with the poor marketing under Chen's watch. I think he squandered the best opportunity the company will ever have. Now another company will take the brand from Waterloo and try on another platform. Who knows what scraps BlackBerry will get, if anything, from THL's efforts.

    Posted via CB10
    The Blackberry board conceded defeat as a hardware maker when they tried to sell the company. If we're saying their was a niche BB10 could fill that would mean the users would expect some kind of long term support. That's something blackberry couldn't promise in 2013 because they were over committed and bleeding money.

    Chen would have had to convince the board to throw more good money after bad (in their eyes at least) all the while not being a hardware oriented CEO.

    We also need to address something else. If there's such an untapped niche for other operating systems to exploit why do the alternatives to Android and iOS never get any traction. It's always one excuse after another. No marketing, horrible management etc. Maybe just maybe most people are happy with these two choices and can't be bothered with anything else.

    Just like the PC market. No apocalypse resulted from that duopoly. I think we'll survive this one as well .
    02-12-17 09:17 PM
  15. early2bed's Avatar
    Most people never buy more than 100 different kids of items from the grocery store on a weekly basis but shop at supermarkets with more than 10,000 items. Try opening a grocery store that carries only the 100 essential food items that any family would need and see how far that gets you.

    BB10 was a success according to what John Chen used it for - an off-ramp to transition to Android and, ultimately, exit the hardware business. He had that strategy in place within 30 days of joining the company when he sent his hardware chief over to Google to work out the Android details. If you're hanging on to BB10 then you are using an OS that had its future cancelled about 3 years ago.
    02-12-17 09:18 PM
  16. app_Developer's Avatar
    They went out of stock immediately anyway! Chen blew the whole Passport rollout by not having any stock! I had an Uber driver tell me this out of the blue when he saw my phone. Even he knew.

    People all over the place were talking about this new BlackBerry phone, the Passport. So it's really funny you pick out that point as an unacceptable risk.
    The point being that if Chen had ramped up advertising, he'd have also had to ramp up inventory, making the whole idea unpalatable to the board who were ready to move on.
    02-12-17 10:01 PM
  17. Velocitymj's Avatar
    BlackBerry 10 failed because "Time Shift" sucks.

    Jes sayin.

    Posted via CB10
    02-13-17 12:55 AM
  18. Tre Lawrence's Avatar
    LOL @ "Conite and Co."

    This thread keeps getting funnier and funnier.
    StephanieMaks and Fret Madden like this.
    02-13-17 01:02 AM
  19. Tre Lawrence's Avatar
    The Blackberry board conceded defeat as a hardware maker when they tried to sell the company. If we're saying their was a niche BB10 could fill that would mean the users would expect some kind of long term support. That's something blackberry couldn't promise in 2013 because they were over committed and bleeding money.

    Chen would have had to convince the board to throw more good money after bad (in their eyes at least) all the while not being a hardware oriented CEO.

    We also need to address something else. If there's such an untapped niche for other operating systems to exploit why do the alternatives to Android and iOS never get any traction. It's always one excuse after another. No marketing, horrible management etc. Maybe just maybe most people are happy with these two choices and can't be bothered with anything else.

    Just like the PC market. No apocalypse resulted from that duopoly. I think we'll survive this one as well .
    Fake evidence, sir. You are now a part of "Conite and Co."
    02-13-17 01:04 AM
  20. markmall's Avatar
    The Blackberry board conceded defeat as a hardware maker when they tried to sell the company. If we're saying their was a niche BB10 could fill that would mean the users would expect some kind of long term support. That's something blackberry couldn't promise in 2013 because they were over committed and bleeding money.

    Chen would have had to convince the board to throw more good money after bad (in their eyes at least) all the while not being a hardware oriented CEO.

    We also need to address something else. If there's such an untapped niche for other operating systems to exploit why do the alternatives to Android and iOS never get any traction. It's always one excuse after another. No marketing, horrible management etc. Maybe just maybe most people are happy with these two choices and can't be bothered with anything else.

    Just like the PC market. No apocalypse resulted from that duopoly. I think we'll survive this one as well .
    Man, what planet have you been on? And why do you troll BB10 forums? Users would expect long term support? What do you think Chen promised over and over again? That he would support BB10 hardware. Are you saying Dear Leader Chen was lying? It's 2017. Is the hardware still supported? Yes or no?

    The world only needs two OS's? Is that what Google said before it released Android? And do you really think people love Android as an OS? People are captive due to the app situation. This is why the Clinton administration went after Microsoft. Forcing Play Store usage makes things worse and I hope Google gets destroyed by Trump or the EU.
    02-13-17 01:25 AM
  21. markmall's Avatar
    The point being that if Chen had ramped up advertising, he'd have also had to ramp up inventory, making the whole idea unpalatable to the board who were ready to move on.
    You think the Board makes any decisions? You don't know this company if you think it does.
    arkenoi likes this.
    02-13-17 01:27 AM
  22. Tre Lawrence's Avatar
    Man, what planet have you been on? And why do you troll BB10 forums? Users would expect long term support? What do you think Chen promised over and over again? That he would support BB10 hardware. Are you saying Dear Leader Chen was lying? It's 2017. Is the hardware still supported? Yes or no?

    The world only needs two OS's? Is that what Google said before it released Android? And do you really think people love Android as an OS? People are captive due to the app situation. This is why the Clinton administration went after Microsoft. Forcing Play Store usage makes things worse and I hope Google gets destroyed by Trump or the EU.
    Where did he imply that the world only needs to OSes?

    What he did say seems to be backed up by current marketshare. For the most part, most folks seem happy with the two main choices. We can argue about why that is bad, but I do not see how you can dispute that simple fact.

    Another thing... what's up with the "Dear Leader Chen" thing? I'm sure I am wrong as to why you use it...
    Velocitymj likes this.
    02-14-17 12:35 AM
  23. anon(6125289)'s Avatar
    People don't care what OS they use as long as it isn't broken as hell and has the applications they want. Microsoft made the smart decision. OS market share is a winner takes all kind of thing. If they are not completely done with it, I would be very surprised. And if Microsoft does return to the realm of phones it won't be anything like current windows phones.
    02-14-17 12:48 AM
  24. Tre Lawrence's Avatar
    People don't care what OS they use as long as it isn't broken as hell and has the applications they want.
    I actually agree.

    Folks like us (OS purists) are the anomaly. I think most folks pick off a small set of criteria.
    02-14-17 12:54 AM
  25. markmall's Avatar
    I actually agree.

    Folks like us (OS purists) are the anomaly. I think most folks pick off a small set of criteria.
    I don't know. Older people lean towards iOS I think because Android is more cumbersome. BlackBerry seems to think it's Hub is so valuable that it has tried to port it over.

    Even if you're right though, it doesn't take many who want a more elegant OS in a market this big.

    Posted via CB10
    02-14-17 02:02 AM
433 ... 1213141516 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-29-17, 10:46 AM
  2. Replies: 61
    Last Post: 07-07-17, 10:45 AM
  3. How to back up contacts on bb10
    By K Ts in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-10-17, 08:51 PM
  4. Why is blackberry not recommended for countries other than the US, UK and CANADA?
    By Sand_rina4 in forum General BlackBerry Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 02-03-17, 10:06 PM
  5. I dont know why my phone stop receiving text messages
    By CrackBerry Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-01-17, 12:31 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD