[eshropshire]

You have a link to that statement?

Otherwise saying it won't make it so..... Do you really think they have sold millions already?

For TCL it does not take a lot to be counted as a success. Their only other big effort recently has been their Windows 10 mobile phone and it has been a complete disaster. The phone is reported to be the best current Win 10 Mobile, but the OS is all but dead.

[eshropshire]

Who might that be? Can you direct me where I could find it. Most inquiries to BlackBerry Mobile CEO point to John Chen. And with other business partner scheduled to produce BlackBerries, is TCL considered solely BlackBerry Mobile.

Posted via CB10

If BlackBerry Mobile inquiries point to Chen then the press is messed up. Same as asking the Nokia CEO about Nokia phone sales.

[Chuck Finley69]

I went to You Tube to see the latest John Chen interview with Bloomberg, hoping it was shed light on the question of this thread " are the new BlackBerry selling"?

The reporter asked about the new BlackBerry device sales in Indonesia, and he responded that he didn't know off hand and would have to meet with the Indonesian business partners to be updated.
I was thinking; if the CEO was going to meet with Bloomberg, he might have anticipate questions of device sales being asked.

And for the BlackBerry Consumer; the question points to whether the success of this product will effect continued BlackBerry Mobile Device production and BlackBerry software support for the foreseeable future, given BlackBerry's past history in response to device sales outcomes.

If he doesn't have the answer, who does?

Posted via CB10

http://www.tclcom.com/?page=chairmans_message

Here is the boss man of TCL Communications.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

For TCL it does not take a lot to be counted as a success. Their only other big effort recently has been their Windows 10 mobile phone and it has been a complete disaster. The phone is reported to be the best current Win 10 Mobile, but the OS is all but dead.

That windows phone didn't cost them much.... they took and existing design and popped Windows (which if free) into it.

For the KEYone TCL created the whole BlackBerry Mobile division, had to make changes in how TCL does business in the US - like adding support channels. There is licensing involved in the KEYone so they are having to work with BlackBerry. I would hope that TCL didn't expect much profit from their first device.... that they are in fact playing a long game.

But really to be a success probable isn't about profit at this point... hopefully it would be about paving the path for BlackBerry Mobile with sales partners like Carriers and Retailers and most importantly with their ultimate customer..... ENTERPRISE.

Has BlackBerry Mobile shown that they can be a key supplier? Deliver product on time and as contracted. Are their products "quality" devices that is trouble free for their customers and thus have low support/return rate for those sales partners? Is it a product that see increasing sales as the "word gets out", or does it makes a splash at launch and then sales drop?

In the end, ENTERPRISE is they key for BlackBerry Mobile... without that customer I don't see a point in a SLAB BlackBerry.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

For TCL it does not take a lot to be counted as a success. Their only other big effort recently has been their Windows 10 mobile phone and it has been a complete disaster. The phone is reported to be the best current Win 10 Mobile, but the OS is all but dead.

That windows phone didn't cost them much.... they took and existing design and popped Windows (which if free) into it.

For the KEYone TCL created the whole BlackBerry Mobile division, had to make changes in how TCL does business in the US - like adding support channels. There is licensing involved in the KEYone so they are having to work with BlackBerry. I would hope that TCL didn't expect much profit from their first device.... that they are in fact playing a long game.

But really to be a success probable isn't about profit at this point... hopefully it would be about paving the path for BlackBerry Mobile with sales partners like Carriers and Retailers and most importantly with their ultimate customer..... ENTERPRISE.

Has BlackBerry Mobile shown that they can be a key supplier? Deliver product on time and as contracted. Are their products "quality" devices that is trouble free for their customers and thus have low support/return rate for those sales partners? Is it a product that see increasing sales as the "word gets out", or does it makes a splash at launch and then sales drop?

In the end, ENTERPRISE is they key for BlackBerry Mobile... without that customer I don't see a point in a SLAB BlackBerry.

[techvisor]

Your post was too long to quote, but many of the factors that you mention existed prior to John Chen being made CEO. Lots of the bad decisions happened way before he got in.

Yeah I agree the issues didn't start with JC but he needed to change the company, instead same mistakes over and over.

Correct you are he is only partly to blame. I really thought BB had a chance to recover with the first Android device Priv, instead it was a hardware and software riddled disaster, completely avoidable.

[eshropshire]

I mostly agree, but any product requires a level of manufacturing and software development to get the OS customized to your device. The cost may have been low, but distribution and packaging is expensive. Either way, TCL spent money to create the Windows phone and the sales are not there.

Short of TCL coming up with a new brand, they have pretty much bet a lot on BlackBerry Mobile. From everything I can see this is their direction as a public brand. I am still willing to bet that the KeyOne is the most successful TCL phone to date. TCL is a small player in the mobile phone market, their expectations are very different from BlackBerry of 3-4 years ago.

[Troy Tiscareno]

Yeah I agree the issues didn't start with JC but he needed to change the company, instead same mistakes over and over.

He DID change the company - to an enterprise software company, which was his mandate when he was hired. He said as much his first week on the job.

He was NOT hired to save the smartphone division - you'd have to be naive to believe that - but BB had a lot of inventory and a lot of purchase commitments that had to be burned down before BB could really exit the smartphone business, so Chen had to do his best to walk a line that implied hope and sold devices, while spending as little money as possible on the process. He did quite well IMO.

Your disappointment is that you believed otherwise - mostly because you WANTED to believe rather than because of the facts or the actions taken - but Chen did exactly as I and others assumed he would do, and it was the right thing to do for BB as a company. I get that you aren't happy about that as a BB smartphone customer, but BB's smartphone chances effectively died in the spring of 2013 when BB10 failed to be a hit, which led to two huge write-downs, putting the company up for sale (and getting no takers), and the ousting of the CEO and much of the upper management. It's *really* amazing that Chen was able to keep BB in the smartphone business as long as he did and not lose too much more money on it. Many CEOs would have written the whole thing off in late 2013 and eaten the cost of the purchase agreements so they could slash staff and start fresh.

[Chuck Finley69]

He DID change the company - to an enterprise software company, which was his mandate when he was hired. He said as much his first week on the job.

He was NOT hired to save the smartphone division - you'd have to be naive to believe that - but BB had a lot of inventory and a lot of purchase commitments that had to be burned down before BB could really exit the smartphone business, so Chen had to do his best to walk a line that implied hope and sold devices, while spending as little money as possible on the process. He did quite well IMO.

Your disappointment is that you believed otherwise - mostly because you WANTED to believe rather than because of the facts or the actions taken - but Chen did exactly as I and others assumed he would do, and it was the right thing to do for BB as a company. I get that you aren't happy about that as a BB smartphone customer, but BB's smartphone chances effectively died in the spring of 2013 when BB10 failed to be a hit, which led to two huge write-downs, putting the company up for sale (and getting no takers), and the ousting of the CEO and much of the upper management. It's *really* amazing that Chen was able to keep BB in the smartphone business as long as he did and not lose too much more money on it. Many CEOs would have written the whole thing off in late 2013 and eaten the cost of the purchase agreements so they could slash staff and start fresh.

Exactly this!!! Many don't understand the reasons for hiring a software turnaround expert like Chen. What he did with Sybase is the stuff legends are made off. If he can repeat his success once more, beyond what he's already succeeded with BlackBerry, his name will be more recognized.

[bb10adopter111]

He DID change the company - to an enterprise software company, which was his mandate when he was hired. He said as much his first week on the job.

He was NOT hired to save the smartphone division - you'd have to be naive to believe that - but BB had a lot of inventory and a lot of purchase commitments that had to be burned down before BB could really exit the smartphone business, so Chen had to do his best to walk a line that implied hope and sold devices, while spending as little money as possible on the process. He did quite well IMO.

Your disappointment is that you believed otherwise - mostly because you WANTED to believe rather than because of the facts or the actions taken - but Chen did exactly as I and others assumed he would do, and it was the right thing to do for BB as a company. I get that you aren't happy about that as a BB smartphone customer, but BB's smartphone chances effectively died in the spring of 2013 when BB10 failed to be a hit, which led to two huge write-downs, putting the company up for sale (and getting no takers), and the ousting of the CEO and much of the upper management. It's *really* amazing that Chen was able to keep BB in the smartphone business as long as he did and not lose too much more money on it. Many CEOs would have written the whole thing off in late 2013 and eaten the cost of the purchase agreements so they could slash staff and start fresh.

Troy,

Thank you for taking the time and effort to detail the facts about Blackberry's corporate history over the past 5-7 years. Except where you've clearly indicated, NOTHING you've described should be viewed as opinion. It's a digest of the plain, indisputable facts that all of us have observed and that were widely reported here and in the press.

I've often started replies like that, but have always run out of patience feeling like I shouldn't have to explain the obvious. But that doesn't help people who may not have been close observers at the time.

Something like this chronicle should be posted and "stickied" on the forums, so we could spend our time discussing opinions instead of disputing facts.

Posted with my trusty Z10

[techvisor]

He DID change the company - to an enterprise software company, which was his mandate when he was hired. He said as much his first week on the job.

He was NOT hired to save the smartphone division - you'd have to be naive to believe that - but BB had a lot of inventory and a lot of purchase commitments that had to be burned down before BB could really exit the smartphone business, so Chen had to do his best to walk a line that implied hope and sold devices, while spending as little money as possible on the process. He did quite well IMO.

Your disappointment is that you believed otherwise - mostly because you WANTED to believe rather than because of the facts or the actions taken - but Chen did exactly as I and others assumed he would do, and it was the right thing to do for BB as a company. I get that you aren't happy about that as a BB smartphone customer, but BB's smartphone chances effectively died in the spring of 2013 when BB10 failed to be a hit, which led to two huge write-downs, putting the company up for sale (and getting no takers), and the ousting of the CEO and much of the upper management. It's *really* amazing that Chen was able to keep BB in the smartphone business as long as he did and not lose too much more money on it. Many CEOs would have written the whole thing off in late 2013 and eaten the cost of the purchase agreements so they could slash staff and start fresh.

Yes I believe he was hired to try and save handsets if possible, but if not possible then exit. Are you saying BB had no plans or hope to save smartphones when Chen was hired?

[markmall]

Yes I believe he was hired to try and save handsets if possible, but if not possible then exit. Are you saying BB had no plans or hope to save smartphones when Chen was hired?

That is what they are saying because they have idealized fantasies about Chen, the quality of management over the last three or whatever years and the current state of the company.

Even if Chen's only purpose was to shut down the hardware business, he has failed badly in creating a software business. So in my book, it's a double fail.

Every promise, every light at the end of tunnel -- and there have been many -- has been a complete and utter failure.

It looks to me like Chen has no more tall tales to tell to investors. The company is merely hoping to break even after all these quarters of being free of its core business that had some promise in the right hands. Once the notes to Prem are paid off, the company should just sell off the pieces and distribute the funds to the shareholders.

Posted via CB10

[bb10adopter111]

Yes I believe he was hired to try and save handsets if possible, but if not possible then exit. Are you saying BB had no plans or hope to save smartphones when Chen was hired?

For whatever it's worth, I don't believe it was possible for BlackBerry to save its mobile device business by late 2013 when John Chen arrived. Certainly it was too late for BB10, and BlackBerry would have had to start from scratch to switch to Android, which would have taken more than a year (which it did) with no guarantee of success.

I think it's just possible that BlackBerry could have carved out a niche with BB10 if they had launched as late as 2011 and if they had put a lot more money than they did into app compatibility, but I don't think it would have been a smart investment, economically, as the small potential return would not have been worth the substantial risk.

To compete effectively with their own OS, BlackBerry would have needed to launch it in the 2007-9 time frame.

Posted with my trusty Z10

[evodevo69]

For whatever it's worth, I don't believe it was possible for BlackBerry to save its mobile device business by late 2013 when John Chen arrived. Certainly it was too late for BB10, and BlackBerry would have had to start from scratch to switch to Android, which would have taken more than a year (which it did) with no guarantee of success.

I think it's just possible that BlackBerry could have carved out a niche with BB10 if they had launched as late as 2011 and if they had put a lot more money than they did into app compatibility, but I don't think it would have been a smart investment, economically, as the small potential return would not have been worth the substantial risk.

To compete effectively with their own OS, BlackBerry would have needed to launch it in the 2007-9 time frame.

Posted with my trusty Z10

Correct. Had they acquired qnx during that time and launched bb10 during that same period google came with android, they would have had a very very good chance.

But they didn't because they were too focused on the increasing demand and how to meet this demand for their bbos handsets and Mike also believed the idea of a computer in your phone and the App Store would never work with carriers networks loll

By the time they bought qnx and started working on it it was probably too late I think.

[markmall]

For whatever it's worth, I don't believe it was possible for BlackBerry to save its mobile device business by late 2013 when John Chen arrived. Certainly it was too late for BB10, and BlackBerry would have had to start from scratch to switch to Android, which would have taken more than a year (which it did) with no guarantee of success.

I think it's just possible that BlackBerry could have carved out a niche with BB10 if they had launched as late as 2011 and if they had put a lot more money than they did into app compatibility, but I don't think it would have been a smart investment, economically, as the small potential return would not have been worth the substantial risk.

To compete effectively with their own OS, BlackBerry would have needed to launch it in the 2007-9 time frame.

Posted with my trusty Z10

Small potential return to be a third alternative in the smartphone market? Small return? What do you consider a large enough potential return if you consider that to be too small? Building the next generation tactical fighter jet for the U.S. military? A foothold in the smartphone market would have presented opportunity for growth that is now light years away for the company.

Those of us still using the Passport know what a tragic waste of talent and resources the poor promotion of the BB10 phones was. The company should have kept swinging and gone down with their heads high if they couldn't make it knowing that they put out a great product and stood behind it with sufficient marketing. Shareholders possibly would have been better off with a liquidation and distribution of funds that could be invested somewhere else.

Under Chen/Prem, BlackBerry will never create products as good as their best BB10 phones. If they couldn't sell those they won't be able to sell anything else. Enterprise software seems to have gotten much more competitive than when Chen worked at Sybase.



Posted via CB10

[eshropshire]

Yes I believe he was hired to try and save handsets if possible, but if not possible then exit. Are you saying BB had no plans or hope to save smartphones when Chen was hired?

If BlackBerry's BoD prime goal was to save phones they would have hired a CEO with mobile hardware experience. They hired an expert in transforming enterprise software companies.

[DreadPirateRegan]

Yep, they could have stuck with BB10 and gone bankrupt. It was such an astounding success that the company was put up for sale months after its release.

I don't think "they" can go bankrupt with QNX and the automobile Industry but as a mobile software/hardware I suppose so..

..however I dunno as I do not follow the stock so just toss around what I think I know and hope to be corrected and learn.

I do know that QNX is running in a ton of vehicles infotainment units. That must bring in the dough..



Posted via CB10

[bb10adopter111]

Small potential return to be a third alternative in the smartphone market? Small return? What do you consider a large enough potential return if you consider that to be too small? Building the next generation tactical fighter jet for the U.S. military? A foothold in the smartphone market would have presented opportunity for growth that is now light years away for the company.

Those of us still using the Passport know what a tragic waste of talent and resources the poor promotion of the BB10 phones was. The company should have kept swinging and gone down with their heads high if they couldn't make it knowing that they put out a great product and stood behind it with sufficient marketing. Shareholders possibly would have been better off with a liquidation and distribution of funds that could be invested somewhere else.

Under Chen/Prem, BlackBerry will never create products as good as their best BB10 phones. If they couldn't sell those they won't be able to sell anything else. Enterprise software seems to have gotten much more competitive than when Chen worked at Sybase.



Posted via CB10

If you think there were significant economic profits to be made as a niche player in smartphones, I won't argue with you.

I think BlackBerry would have had to invest billions to make millions. Most companies try to do it the other way around!

Posted with my trusty Z10

[Chuck Finley69]

Small potential return to be a third alternative in the smartphone market? Small return? What do you consider a large enough potential return if you consider that to be too small? Building the next generation tactical fighter jet for the U.S. military? A foothold in the smartphone market would have presented opportunity for growth that is now light years away for the company.

Those of us still using the Passport know what a tragic waste of talent and resources the poor promotion of the BB10 phones was. The company should have kept swinging and gone down with their heads high if they couldn't make it knowing that they put out a great product and stood behind it with sufficient marketing. Shareholders possibly would have been better off with a liquidation and distribution of funds that could be invested somewhere else.

Under Chen/Prem, BlackBerry will never create products as good as their best BB10 phones. If they couldn't sell those they won't be able to sell anything else. Enterprise software seems to have gotten much more competitive than when Chen worked at Sybase.



Posted via CB10

Even if BB had BB10 at same time IOS and / or Android was introduced, the results would have been the same. Keep in mind that Microsoft had Windows Mobile already. The problem for BB was that anything moving from BBOS to different OS reduced their monthly SAF revenues and they had no replacement for that revenue which is mostly profit as it's licensing/software related.

Even with the BBOS revenues they had and if they could have kept that model, it never generated the cash that Apple, Google, or Microsoft had at time or would have in future. They were going to be outspent and look at how even other second tier Android players were outspent. Motorola is a great example.

By time BB10 rolled out, their cash pile was burned through on development and they never replaced BBOS monthly SAF. Each BBOS to BB10 device transition cost them both revenue, profit and more importantly, cash flow. They were literally cutting off their oxygen with BB10. Had they been more successful getting more people off BBOS to BB10, they would have put BB in bankruptcy or liquidation.

Face it, BB phone business was dead as soon as mobile devices with carrier data were in demand, because their business model of monthly BB data with SAF was against the business interests of ALL carriers.

[Invictus0]

Small potential return to be a third alternative in the smartphone market? Small return? What do you consider a large enough potential return if you consider that to be too small? Building the next generation tactical fighter jet for the U.S. military? A foothold in the smartphone market would have presented opportunity for growth that is now light years away for the company.

Third? There's no way BlackBerry could have sold devices as competitively or in as many markets as Microsoft/Windows Phone was. Even fourth was a crowded fight that they eventually lost to Samsung and Tizen.

[markmall]

Third? There's no way BlackBerry could have sold devices as competitively or in as many markets as Microsoft/Windows Phone was. Even fourth was a crowded fight that they eventually lost to Samsung and Tizen.

Microsoft bombed badly and was at least as half-a__ed about their mobile OS as BlackBerry. I would not use Microsoft as proof of anything.

Posted via CB10

[Invictus0]

Microsoft bombed badly and was at least as half-a__ed about their mobile OS as BlackBerry. I would not use Microsoft as proof of anything.

Posted via CB10

Can't argue with their marketshare and spend though. They only began slowing down on phones once Ballmer left.

[Chuck Finley69]

Microsoft bombed badly and was at least as half-a__ed about their mobile OS as BlackBerry. I would not use Microsoft as proof of anything.

Posted via CB10

Even with the right OS, BB was doomed without the access to huge levels of long term positive cash flow to fight against the war chests of Apple, Google and Microsoft. Look at the amount of money that Microsoft spent on the Nokia acquisition. BlackBerry never had that kind of money in one shot to spend on a mistake. They spent billions to develop BB10 and they practically had no cash left to keep running the company. The financial commitment of building and maintaining a mobile OS had grown exponentially from 2005-2013 and BlackBerry never had alternative revenue streams to keep up let alone surpass.

[Prem WatsApp]

What is Optiemus not Merah Putih, and India not Indonesia?

I'll take BB10 Trivia for 200...

I thought so, too.... :-)

•   BlackBerry... where are we heading...? Pray tell... ;-D   •

[Troy Tiscareno]

I don't think "they" can go bankrupt with QNX and the automobile Industry but as a mobile software/hardware I suppose so..

..however I dunno as I do not follow the stock so just toss around what I think I know and hope to be corrected and learn.

I do know that QNX is running in a ton of vehicles infotainment units. That must bring in the dough..

There are several different uses and "layers" that QNX is used for in cars.

By far, the most common use is to control the basics of the car - engine, fuel, and suspension management. QNX runs this in a whole lot of cars, but the revenue from this is very small - not much more than $1 per vehicle. And while QNX is good at it, there are alternatives, which is why QNX doesn't have a lot of leverage for a higher fee.

Then there is QNX as an Infotainment framework - separate from the basic vehicle control stuff. QNX and some generic car Infotainment modules are licensed by the car manufacturer and used to build a custom Infotainment system (with a custom UI and features selected by the auto manufacturer). Ford using QNX for their SyncIII is a good example. This makes them quite a bit more money per car - I think I read something like $14/per car.

QNX also has made an entire QNX Infotainment system, and showed it off at car shows, but no one has licensed it or are likely to. The auto manufacturers want to control as much as they can - and license as little as they can - and they prefer to make their own custom interfaces that they fully control.

Finally, QNX has relatively recently (3-5 years) invested a lot of money building "driverless" technology that they hope to license to automakers, and could potentially bring in a lot more money - potentially $50 or more per car. QNX would become a significantly more important part of the car, and worth more money.

But that's the future, and we don't know exactly what car manufacturers are going to do. AGL (Automotive-Grade Linux) is potentially a big competitive threat, and a number of manufacturers are investing in it and developing it. I believe QNX has the lead for now, but as we all know, if you throw a significant amount of money and resources at a project, you can catch up pretty quickly, and automakers are looking at this long-term, because it will matter for a long time.