09-30-17 11:16 AM
30 12
tools
  1. hakan duran's Avatar
    Look at BlackBerry as an company for the last 10 years..
    Everything what they did is not logical from an economical point of view.
    First of all there is no marketing..
    There is no retail and no technical support for my understanding nowhere..
    They come up with bb10 there is no logic in changing it in android becouse bb10 is much better.. they tryed worsening Os with their updates till they made an anouncement that they go over android.. why? Becouse there are no aps? There is no profit? All lies..
    Now they come up with new update for the bbm.. all presidents are yousing BlackBerry. So my thing is. Is BlackBerry actually a intelligence agency or is there an shadow government behind BlackBerry who come up with the decisions.. becouse there is no logic in the company's strategy if you look at it economics

    Posted via CB10
    joker333 likes this.
    09-20-17 02:52 PM
  2. conite's Avatar
    BlackBerry isn't in the device business anymore.

    They licence their BlackBerry Android OS to three global handset makers, and would be happy doing the same with BB10, but no one is interested.

    Consumer BBM on Android and iOS is licenced to Emtek in Indonesia, and they are in charge of updates and marketing. BlackBerry handles the legacy consumer app on BB10 only.

    BlackBerry is out of the consumer space, and has been for some time. They are interested in the Enterprise market with their EMM software, secure messaging (BBM Enterprise, SecureSmart, Ad-Hoc), IoT software (like Radar) and autonomous auto.

    You will never see an ad from BlackBerry, as they have nothing to sell you.
    09-20-17 03:08 PM
  3. glwerry's Avatar
    They come up with bb10 there is no logic in changing it in android becouse bb10 is much better.. they tryed worsening Os with their updates till they made an anouncement that they go over android.. why? Becouse there are no aps? There is no profit? All lies..
    becouse there is no logic in the company's strategy if you look at it economics

    Posted via CB10
    Are you freaking serious?????

    In YOUR opinion BB10 is better than Android.
    The MARKET, on the other hand, REJECTED BB10 - people did NOT buy BB10 and I am sure that you can still get public access to the financial statements that detail the huge losses on BB10 and the phones that ran it.

    There IS logic in the company's strategy. It's very simple. They were LOSING THEIR SHIRT (GOING BROKE) on BB10 and the phones that run it, so they abandoned BB10 and went to Android, allowing them to escape the huge costs associated with developing and maintaining BB10.

    Seriously, Dude - read what conite posted also.
    09-20-17 03:22 PM
  4. hakan duran's Avatar
    Are you freaking serious?????

    In YOUR opinion BB10 is better than Android.
    The MARKET, on the other hand, REJECTED BB10 - people did NOT buy BB10 and I am sure that you can still get public access to the financial statements that detail the huge losses on BB10 and the phones that ran it.

    There IS logic in the company's strategy. It's very simple. They were LOSING THEIR SHIRT (GOING BROKE) on BB10 and the phones that run it, so they abandoned BB10 and went to Android, allowing them to escape the huge costs associated with developing and maintaining BB10.

    Seriously, Dude - read what conite posted also.
    You are looking differently at the situation.. never will be somebody will choose an BlackBerry keyone above an samsung. Maybe becouse of an pysical key..
    If people go for BlackBerry they go becouse of an purpose. Security? Multitasking possibilitys? Key one is not going to save BlackBerry.. it's not going to get more customers.. they are acting becouse of an different purposes enterprising? Going in software and selling their licenses? Who knows.. I read the specs on the marketplace. Bb10 is much better then android I have them both but I know what's more buisness..

    Posted via CB10
    09-20-17 03:44 PM
  5. conite's Avatar
    You are looking differently at the situation.. never will be somebody will choose an BlackBerry keyone above an samsung. Maybe becouse of an pysical key..
    If people go for BlackBerry they go becouse of an purpose. Security? Multitasking possibilitys? Key one is not going to save BlackBerry.. it's not going to get more customers.. they are acting becouse of an different purposes enterprising? Going in software and selling their licenses? Who knows.. I read the specs on the marketplace. Bb10 is much better then android I have them both but I know what's more buisness..

    Posted via CB10
    BlackBerry does NOT sell devices. The KEYᵒⁿᵉ is NOT a BlackBerry device - so it would never SAVE BlackBerry even if it sold well.

    The KEYᵒⁿᵉ is a TCL (BlackBerry Mobile) handset - made, marketed, sold, and supported by TCL.
    09-20-17 03:52 PM
  6. app_Developer's Avatar
    A lot of times people invent conspiracy theories because they can't admit the truth. There is no intelligence agency driving this change at BlackBerry. They got themselves out of the handset business because it was a massive multi-billion dollar failure. Chen found a way, over a few years, to save the company and get it to a more stable position.

    He spent very little money on marketing and very little on support because either would have been a waste of money since they are moving away from that business.
    Dunt Dunt Dunt likes this.
    09-20-17 03:54 PM
  7. glwerry's Avatar
    You are looking differently at the situation.. never will be somebody will choose an BlackBerry keyone above an samsung. Maybe becouse of an pysical key..
    If people go for BlackBerry they go becouse of an purpose. Security? Multitasking possibilitys? Key one is not going to save BlackBerry.. it's not going to get more customers.. they are acting becouse of an different purposes enterprising? Going in software and selling their licenses? Who knows.. I read the specs on the marketplace. Bb10 is much better then android I have them both but I know what's more buisness..

    Posted via CB10
    Like I said, read what conite posted. BB is OUT of the phone business - the KeyONE is NOT a BB phone, it's built by someone else and BB is getting money by licensing their Android to the manufacturer.

    For years BB has been saying that it is transitioning to be a SOFTWARE company.

    There's no secret, no conspiracy - they have moved to becoming a software company and they are doing that because they can make money doing that.

    Putting it another way, BB has said "we are no longer a phone company, we are not relying on phones for our profit. To be profitable we are becoming a software company".
    They have been publicly saying this for 3 or more years.
    09-20-17 03:55 PM
  8. Troy Tiscareno's Avatar
    Even the motorheads were able to let Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Mercury, and Plymouth go with a lot more grace than some BB fans. But just like those once-successful car brands, they aren't coming back, and neither is BB coming back to smartphones (except to license their brand and some Android apps to other companies).
    Dunt Dunt Dunt and idssteve like this.
    09-20-17 11:15 PM
  9. i_plod_an_dr_void's Avatar
    Even the motorheads were able to let Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Mercury, and Plymouth go with a lot more grace than some BB fans. But just like those once-successful car brands, they aren't coming back, and neither is BB coming back to smartphones (except to license their brand and some Android apps to other companies).
    Okay for fun... I'll take the bait! Even motorheads to this day dream of a revival of Pontiac...then again the brand/models were retired during massive gov't bailouts (both Cdn and US) of major automakers because of the squeeze of the financial crisis in 2008 yet the major automakers didn't exit the Auto-manufacturing business completely did they?. Alas no gov't to rescue BlackBerry as the bb10 device manufacturer in i dunno 2015? despite the squeeze of the Google/Android Open Handset Alliance (competitors collaborating in a marketplace - with BlackBerry being one of the consequential victims, maybe intended or maybe not but still the same result).
    2017 Pontiac Trans AM – Pontiac Cars Review! | Muscle Horsepower
    idssteve likes this.
    09-21-17 12:19 AM
  10. grover5's Avatar
    Even the motorheads were able to let Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Mercury, and Plymouth go with a lot more grace than some BB fans. But just like those once-successful car brands, they aren't coming back, and neither is BB coming back to smartphones (except to license their brand and some Android apps to other companies).
    How will you spend your free time.
    i_plod_an_dr_void likes this.
    09-21-17 12:20 AM
  11. Carjackd's Avatar
    How will you spend your free time.
    I spend my time reading Conite's posts telling people over and over that "BlackBerry is no longer in the hardware business" .
    09-21-17 12:32 AM
  12. conite's Avatar
    I spend my time reading Conite's posts telling people over and over that "BlackBerry is no longer in the hardware business" .
    I spend my free time typing it. What a coincidence!
    09-21-17 07:43 AM
  13. glwerry's Avatar
    Okay for fun... I'll take the bait! Even motorheads to this day dream of a revival of Pontiac...then again the brand/models were retired during massive gov't bailouts (both Cdn and US) of major automakers because of the squeeze of the financial crisis in 2008 yet the major automakers didn't exit the Auto-manufacturing business completely did they?. Alas no gov't to rescue BlackBerry as the bb10 device manufacturer in i dunno 2015? despite the squeeze of the Google/Android Open Handset Alliance (competitors collaborating in a marketplace - with BlackBerry being one of the consequential victims, maybe intended or maybe not but still the same result).
    2017 Pontiac Trans AM – Pontiac Cars Review! | Muscle Horsepower
    "yet the major automakers didn't exit the Auto-manufacturing business completely did they". Actually his comparison is much more valid than you think.

    If you go back to the early 1970s, each of the major brands in GM had their OWN engines: Chev, Pontiac, Oldsmobile all had 350 engines that were unique to each brand.
    With the huge pollution control demands of the mid to late 1970s, GM DROPPED all of these unique engines and focussed their entire efforts on the Chev engines. So, if you bought a 1972 Pontiac with a 350 it was a PONTIAC 350. If you bought a 1979 Pontiac with a 350, it was a CHEVROLET 350.

    The point? ADAPT OR DIE. So you are correct - the auto manufacturers did not exit the auto building game entirely - but they have made huge and dramatic swings in the way that they do things - dropping engine lines and even entire car divisions that have been around for GENERATIONS in order to adapt to / handle their pressing business issues.
    09-21-17 10:54 AM
  14. i_plod_an_dr_void's Avatar
    "yet the major automakers didn't exit the Auto-manufacturing business completely did they". Actually his comparison is much more valid than you think.

    If you go back to the early 1970s, each of the major brands in GM had their OWN engines: Chev, Pontiac, Oldsmobile all had 350 engines that were unique to each brand.
    With the huge pollution control demands of the mid to late 1970s, GM DROPPED all of these unique engines and focussed their entire efforts on the Chev engines. So, if you bought a 1972 Pontiac with a 350 it was a PONTIAC 350. If you bought a 1979 Pontiac with a 350, it was a CHEVROLET 350.

    The point? ADAPT OR DIE. So you are correct - the auto manufacturers did not exit the auto building game entirely - but they have made huge and dramatic swings in the way that they do things - dropping engine lines and even entire car divisions that have been around for GENERATIONS in order to adapt to / handle their pressing business issues.
    We are the borg, you will be assimilated!
    Hmmmm....pollution controls....privacy controls...pollution controls..privacy controls....that's got me thinking.
    09-21-17 11:18 AM
  15. i_plod_an_dr_void's Avatar
    "yet the major automakers didn't exit the Auto-manufacturing business completely did they". Actually his comparison is much more valid than you think.
    If you go back to the early 1970s, each of the major brands in GM had their OWN engines: Chev, Pontiac, Oldsmobile all had 350 engines that were unique to each brand.
    With the huge pollution control demands of the mid to late 1970s, GM DROPPED all of these unique engines and focussed their entire efforts on the Chev engines. So, if you bought a 1972 Pontiac with a 350 it was a PONTIAC 350. If you bought a 1979 Pontiac with a 350, it was a CHEVROLET 350.
    The point? ADAPT OR DIE. So you are correct - the auto manufacturers did not exit the auto building game entirely - but they have made huge and dramatic swings in the way that they do things - dropping engine lines and even entire car divisions that have been around for GENERATIONS in order to adapt to / handle their pressing business issues.
    We are the borg, you will be assimilated! Your thoughts are our thoughts!
    Hmmmm....pollution controls....privacy controls...pollution controls..privacy controls....that's got me thinking.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=nNdfxHPQVyQ
    09-21-17 11:22 AM
  16. Dunt Dunt Dunt's Avatar
    Look at BlackBerry as an company for the last 10 years..
    Everything what they did is not logical from an economical point of view.
    First of all there is no marketing..
    There is no retail and no technical support for my understanding nowhere..
    They come up with bb10 there is no logic in changing it in android becouse bb10 is much better.. they tryed worsening Os with their updates till they made an anouncement that they go over android.. why? Becouse there are no aps? There is no profit? All lies..
    Now they come up with new update for the bbm.. all presidents are yousing BlackBerry. So my thing is. Is BlackBerry actually a intelligence agency or is there an shadow government behind BlackBerry who come up with the decisions.. becouse there is no logic in the company's strategy if you look at it economics

    Posted via CB10
    Economics.... it's easier than it looks, especially in hindsight.
    glwerry likes this.
    09-21-17 05:01 PM
  17. joker333's Avatar
    Everything what they did is not logical from an economical point of view.
    I was wondering a similar question. I'm not an economist whatsoever but somehow I don't see the logic too.

    In some sources I found that BB10 had 2-3 million fans. Ok hardware is expensive, and they quit it, that's understandable. Why not buying the handsets from some Chinese companies? Like TCL's for example? They should be cheap (compared to making them in-house).

    Say 2 million people fan base. And say that a phone would cost 550 USD that's 1.1 Billion dollars. Ok not everyone buys the phone once released, but in a span of 2 years I'm pretty sure all those 2 million people would want it. So that amount isn't enough to cover their costs? To me this is weird.
    09-21-17 07:33 PM
  18. app_Developer's Avatar
    I was wondering a similar question. I'm not an economist whatsoever but somehow I don't see the logic too.

    In some sources I found that BB10 had 2-3 million fans. Ok hardware is expensive, and they quit it, that's understandable. Why not buying the handsets from some Chinese companies? Like TCL's for example? They should be cheap (compared to making them in-house).

    Say 2 million people fan base. And say that a phone would cost 550 USD that's 1.1 Billion dollars. Ok not everyone buys the phone once released, but in a span of 2 years I'm pretty sure all those 2 million people would want it. So that amount isn't enough to cover their costs? To me this is weird.
    They were already using contract manufacturers. When we say they were making phones, we mean they were holding inventory on their own balance sheet. Now they aren't. That doesn't materially change the cost of the phones as much as it shifts risk from BBRY to TCL.

    Which brings us to your second point: a billion is a lot of money to a company the size of BB. To tie a billion into phones on the *hope* that maybe you might be able to sell them in 2 years is utter foolishness. Why not invest that money into something more productive?

    BTw, the cost of manufacturing is less than $550, but you have to add in distribution and marketing costs and all the rest. But the biggest issue is having a ton of phones on your balance sheet that you hope you can sell maybe. Investors don't like that.
    09-21-17 07:39 PM
  19. SuperDarkr's Avatar
    I was wondering a similar question. I'm not an economist whatsoever but somehow I don't see the logic too.

    In some sources I found that BB10 had 2-3 million fans. Ok hardware is expensive, and they quit it, that's understandable. Why not buying the handsets from some Chinese companies? Like TCL's for example? They should be cheap (compared to making them in-house).

    Say 2 million people fan base. And say that a phone would cost 550 USD that's 1.1 Billion dollars. Ok not everyone buys the phone once released, but in a span of 2 years I'm pretty sure all those 2 million people would want it. So that amount isn't enough to cover their costs? To me this is weird.
    Because they already tried with priv and dtek
    Unless you mean buy handsets from them to.run bb10
    Two problems
    Bb10 is.a proprietary os
    Meaning any new hardware.requires drivers and it.isnt cheap
    The existing bb10 drivers only run on outdated 801 processors and s4 pros.which aren't manufactured anymore
    As.thorstien Heins mentioned
    Unless you find an old.wearhouse full of.them bb10 is dead BlackBerry can't afford the new mobile and graphic drivers
    09-21-17 07:53 PM
  20. Troy Tiscareno's Avatar
    BB had 3700 people working on BB10 development (not counting manufacturing, supply chain, marketing, distribution, etc.). My "back-of-a-napkin" estimate for those workers is $925M per year - nearly a billion. That's what it cost to develop and maintain BB10, its first-party apps, and BB World each year.

    If there are 2M BB10 users, each of whom can be counted on to buy a new phone every other year, that would be 1M phones sold per year - that need to cover the OS/platform development costs of $925M per year. That means the per-phone cost to develop BB10 is $925.

    Of course, that is JUST software costs. Then you would need to design and build the phones themselves, and distribute and market them. A phone like the K1 running BB10, covering costs and making a profit, would need to retail for about $1600 - and that assumes you can guarantee 1M units sold per year at that price - if you can't, then you have to adjust the price up to compensate.

    Remember that BB10 has lost most of the little developer support it once had, and that wouldn't change, plus the Android Runtime is forever stuck at v4. 3, which is no longer supported and is down to 5% of active devices and falling quickly. So you'd still be stuck with a handful of native app and the browser. Good enough for a few, but probably not 2M people, or anything close.

    That's why BB lost so much money on BB10, and why Chen's "minimum annual sales to break even" number was 10M per year - enough to spread out R&D costs to a manageable number.

    Android's R&D costs to BB are a tiny fraction of that amount, as Google does most of the work and bears most of the costs. But you still need a volume of sales to break even, and BB couldn't even reach that much lower number at the end.
    glwerry and DrBoomBotz like this.
    09-22-17 04:15 PM
  21. byex's Avatar
    The consumer market has spoken. Get over it.


    Posted via CB10
    09-22-17 06:03 PM
  22. idssteve's Avatar
    Lol... stupidity rarely makes sense. Lol.

    BB10, great as it was, represented a tragically epic still birth. Set up to fail from conception, imo. Each step of the whole journey has seemed SO stupidly self destructive... imo.

    BB10 wasn't just an OS. It was a new platform assembled largely from ground on up. A "fresh start" intentionally sequestered from much of RIM's legacy experience. Apparently because of a silly book Mike had read. Go figure... lol.

    Building, and breathing life into, an entire platform represented no small challenge to tech monsters like Apple and Google. Tiny RIM never enjoyed resources in the same league. Not financial nor talent resources. Nor consumer experience...

    Compared with Apple & Google, Rim commanded next to zero ‎consumer experience. And they far too willingly surrendered their considerable asset of ‎superior‎ enterprise experience in pursuit of consumer "easy money", imo. A game both Apple and Google dominated well before iPhone, imo. ‎

    IMO, fwiw (everyone's got one... lol), tiny RIM simply lacked resources and talent to build a new consumer oriented business model platform from nearly total scratch while simultaneously defending their enterprise oriented platform. Imo. They were ultimately forced to choose between one or the other which led to abandonment and stranding of tens of millions of loyal legacy user base. ‎ Abandoning loyal customers is rarely a successful path to expansion, imo. ‎


    Not that I think RIM was totally helpless to survive, just that, imo, I believe they stood a better chance of still producing something resembling a true business machine today had they leveraged their superior enterprise experience into defending that niche. That might have meant nursing BBOS a few years longer AND getting their experienced BBOS devs into genuine collaboration with BBX guys. Imo.

    Worth pointing out that Dan's QNX really came to the table with less consumer oriented experience than RIM. Imo. An unfortunate marriage to attempt birth of a consumer oriented child. Imo.

    With perfect hindsight, it might be argued that loyal legacy users, like myself, might still have access to something resembling true BlackBerry handset experience had Mike left QNX alone and ported OS7.1 (or 8+?) into droid as a peace offering to Verizon... ?? Imo. Fwiw.

    Yes, BB's in business to make money. So am I. None of us are here for charitable motives. Lol. I, myself, will forever miss the fabulous handset designs from RIM. I think the world is missing out on communications efficiency they will never suspect. Oh well.

    I've watched and lived thru this entire journey. It's been quite a ride but I, personally, see far more stupidity than conspiracy along the way. Lesson learned? You can't fix stupid. Lol.
    09-23-17 11:11 AM
  23. donnation's Avatar
    No OP, they've just made dumb decisions.
    09-23-17 05:54 PM
  24. joker333's Avatar
    Meaning any new hardware.requires drivers and it.isnt cheap
    Could you give an approximation about the costs involved? Maybe a minimum and a maximum? Thanks
    09-23-17 06:33 PM
  25. SuperDarkr's Avatar
    Could you give an approximation about the costs involved? Maybe a minimum and a maximum? Thanks
    A quote from troy
    If there are 2M BB10 users, each of whom can be counted on to buy a new phone every other year, that would be 1M phones sold per year - that need to cover the OS/platform development costs of $925M per year. That means the per-phone cost to develop BB10 is $925.
    If drivers cost millioms how's .likely will blackberry afford new.development of the OS to match the said proccessors without 3rds party developer support
    Plus meet the minimum amount of orders needed to buy said proccessors
    It's highly unlikely they will bleed billions to.help a couple million users
    09-23-17 08:15 PM
30 12

Similar Threads

  1. Can I change Android OS to BlackBerry OS?
    By Gokulraj gr in forum Hybrid OS
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-19-17, 06:58 PM
  2. The BlackBerry KEYone sucks!
    By roba5263 in forum BlackBerry KEYone
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 09-23-17, 09:37 AM
  3. Blackberry z10 battery issue
    By Upam Sarmah in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 09-21-17, 12:48 PM
  4. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-20-17, 03:50 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-20-17, 02:30 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD