[_StephenBB81]

Why is the iPhone any different than any other phone, all of which are subsidized when sold on contract?

Oh other phones are bad as well,
But the iPhone is the heaviest subsidized phone, and Apple isn't one to negotiate their terms like RIM, and other hardware guys are forced to do,

It was the iPhone that sparked touchscreen smartphone craze, which has lead to this margin erosion, it would have happened anyway eventually, but the iPhone the trigger factor which is why it is brought up in the margin talks most

[[email protected]]

And . . .

Put it in context. This means that he thought that RIM should continue to develop BB10 and stay in the handset market. Abandoning that strategy was the kind of seismic change that he was talking about.

Do you disagree with that?

Hahaha... You lost any chance of a civilized dialogue with me with you accused me of spreading "disinformation"(being the proper term. Taken in context)

I give a direct quote and you proceed to interpret that quote how you see fit, while telling me that my, and many other's interpretations as well, are incorrect.

Humorus.

EVERYONE, with the possible exception of YOU and a few blind patriots knew that something drastic had/has to change. And now it seems that Heins knows this as well and has backtracked on his previous comments.

Hence:

�My own reality check on where the entire company really is.� "Substantial change is what RIM needs."

Now, I'm sure you're ready to tell me that, taken in context, "drastic" in the former and "substantial" in the latter mean two completely different things.

[mtint]

How does the qwerty device fit with the Chinese language? I was under the impression there are more than 500 regularly used Chinese characters, with far more less regular.

Touchscreens seem to accommodate this better than the traditional qwerty.

and I do agree RIM doesn't understand the Chinese market yet, and that is something they need to learn and address, it is different from India,

The more or less regularly (in general, not only SMS/BBM etc.) used are somewhere 3-4 000 (thousand), and up to 8-10 000 all of them.

Touchscreen is convenient when you "draw" the character ... the same time there are systems, one of them is called "pinyin", which allows you to use standard qwerty keyboard (on computers or smartphone) to "type" the character.

As non native speaker I prefer pinyin over "drawing" - better-half is fine with both but in fact she also prefers qwerty (no matter physical virtual). Actually under impression majority of Chinese friends are better with the qwerty method - probably will ran kinda of "research" to be sure.

Chinese market is dominated by Chinese handset makers ZTE and Huawei. It's all touch screen. Also iPhone has a huge following in the major cities.

Handsets - ZTE Corporation

Huawei has 17 smartphone models:

Smartphones - Huawei Device Co., Ltd..

In the emerging markets, these two companies are beating RIM in the low-end smartphone market with cheaper phones running Android. In my previous posts, I saw this coming. Commoditization is a reason I don't own RIM stock--too risky.

Hardly seeing at the moment Huawei and ZTE dominating Chinese handsets market. Matter of fact most popular Chinese brands overseas but on the local market there are few dozens of local manufacturers which, I guess most of them, are heading Android.
Recently an Android based smartphone called "xiao mi" should be considered most popular.

Samsung is very popular brand, Nokia and HTC (for smartphones) as well, but definitely in high-end iPhone rules.

[lawguyman]

Hahaha... You lost any chance of a civilized dialogue with me with you accused me of spreading "disinformation"(being the proper term. Taken in context)

Here is what you said: "Heins' first comments were that there was NOTHING wrong with the direction the company was moving in."

Here is the quote: ""I don't think that there is some drastic change needed. We are evolving ... but this is not a seismic change."

To sum up you said Heins said that "NOTHING" should be done [emphasis is yours] and Heins said that RIM is "evolving."

What you said is different than what Heins said. He contemplates change, you said he contemplated no change.

By definition, you are spreading misinformation. Sorry if you don't want to accept that but it is true.

[lawguyman]

Oh other phones are bad as well,
But the iPhone is the heaviest subsidized phone, and Apple isn't one to negotiate their terms like RIM, and other hardware guys are forced to do,

It was the iPhone that sparked touchscreen smartphone craze, which has lead to this margin erosion, it would have happened anyway eventually, but the iPhone the trigger factor which is why it is brought up in the margin talks most

On what information do you rely in saying that the iPhone is the heaviest subsidized phone?

If Apple cuts a hard bargin it is only because it is in a position to do that. Sometimes one party to a deal wants/needs something more than the other. If Apple is in that position, I think it earned it by having the single most popular phone on the planet. No one is forcing carriers to buy it or people to want it. It is just supply and demand.

[lawguyman]

EVERYONE, with the possible exception of YOU and a few blind patriots knew that something drastic had/has to change. And now it seems that Heins knows this as well and has backtracked on his previous comments.

Executing better and releasing good products could save RIM. Are those kinds of changes drastic? Or, does RIM need abandon hardware/license BB10/turn into a services company/sell itself to someone?

What Heins is now saying that is different than what he said earlier is that all options are on the table. Before, he only contemplated the first: better execution.

Personally, I want RIM to succeed with BB10 and become a rival to Android and iOS but I do see that this is a longshot.

[vrs626]

On what information do you rely in saying that the iPhone is the heaviest subsidized phone?

If Apple cuts a hard bargin it is only because it is in a position to do that. Sometimes one party to a deal wants/needs something more than the other. If Apple is in that position, I think it earned it by having the single most popular phone on the planet. No one is forcing carriers to buy it or people to want it. It is just supply and demand.

Google is your friend. A simple search of "iPhone" and "subsidy" reveals hundreds of articles. Try this one:

All smartphones weigh on carriers' margins, since wireless carriers pay a hefty subsidy up front to buy the phones from the handset manufacturers. They make up the difference over the life of a two-year contract.

But the subsidies on the iPhone -- roughly $450 per device -- are the highest in the industry. AT&T's subsidies are even more exacerbated because it gives away the iPhone 3GS for free.

http://http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/...sidy/index.htm

[lawguyman]

Google is your friend. A simple search of "iPhone" and "subsidy" reveals hundreds of articles. Try this one:



http://http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/...sidy/index.htm

Thanks for that.

Like I explained earlier, this kind of thinking misses the mark. Margins are one thing but profitability is another. The iPhone has made AT&T more profitable even if it has eroded margins slightly.

[[email protected]]

Here is what you said: "Heins' first comments were that there was NOTHING wrong with the direction the company was moving in."

Here is the quote: ""I don't think that there is some drastic change needed. We are evolving ... but this is not a seismic change."

To sum up you said Heins said that "NOTHING" should be done [emphasis is yours] and Heins said that RIM is "evolving."

What you said is different than what Heins said. He contemplates change, you said he contemplated no change.

By definition, you are spreading misinformation. Sorry if you don't want to accept that but it is true.

You fall back to exactly the same position. That being YOUR interpretation of his actual statement.

Of course he's contemplating change. It's adapt or die now. Darwin's law. However this was NOT his first position.

But please, show me a actual quote that backs up your POV and I'll gladly reconsider.

Until then it's your, and a few other's, interpretation.

Misinformation: distorted information or of information known to be false.

Disinformation: false information intended to deceive or mislead

I'll let you choose. But it sounded like you accused me of the former.

[TGR1]

Thanks for that.

Like I explained earlier, this kind of thinking misses the mark. Margins are one thing but profitability is another. The iPhone has made AT&T more profitable even if it has eroded margins slightly.

Yes. Hit upfront but they do make it up on the contracts. The iPhone has a number of unique restrictions.

Having said that, the carriers will shun Apple as soon as its phones no longer demonstrates the stickiness and brand draw they currently do. Apple messes with their power base too much.

[lawguyman]

You fall back to exactly the same position. That being YOUR interpretation of his actual statement.

Of course he's contemplating change. It's adapt or die now. Darwin's law. However this was NOT his first position.

But please, show me a actual quote that backs up your POV and I'll gladly reconsider.

Until then it's your, and a few other's, interpretation.

Misinformation: distorted information or of information known to be false.

Disinformation: false information intended to deceive or mislead

I'll let you choose. But it sounded like you accused me of the former.

It is not about interpretation. "NOTHING" is not the same as the non-seismic changes that Heins was then contemplating. What you said was simply wrong. Thus, misinformation.

[lawguyman]

Yes. Hit upfront but they do make it up on the contracts. The iPhone has a number of unique restrictions.

Having said that, the carriers will shun Apple as soon as its phones no longer demonstrates the stickiness and brand draw they currently do. Apple messes with their power base too much.

Yes. If iPhone loses its ability to draw people in, the supply and demand equation changes and carriers will insist on different terms.

[[email protected]]

What Heins is now saying that is different than what he said earlier is that all options are on the table. Before, he only contemplated the first: better execution.

How do you know?

[[email protected]]

It is not about interpretation. "NOTHING" is not the same as the non-seismic changes that Heins was then contemplating. What you said was simply wrong. Thus, misinformation.

Wrong. When all of his statements are taken in context. He went from "non-seismic" to "reality check"(implying that his view of RIM's situation was not what was actually was) and "drastic"(severe).

Adding these up should lead one to realize that he really had no clue(and I don't in any way blame him for this. He was possibly not privy to much information) what RIM's real state-of-affairs were when he had his first press conference.

[lawguyman]

Wrong. When all of his statements are taken in context. He went from "non-seismic" to "reality check"(implying that his view of RIM's situation was not what was actually was) and "drastic"(severe).

Adding these up should lead one to realize that he really had no clue(and I don't in any way blame him for this. He was possibly not privy to much information) what RIM's real state-of-affairs were when he had his first press conference.

Is non-seismic evolution a kind of change or is it "nothing."

[lawguyman]

How do you know?

I listened to the recent earnings call.

[[email protected]]

Is non-seismic evolution a kind of change or is it "nothing."

Personally, I don't even know what non-seismic evolution means.

Enjoy your Sunday Brother. Sunshine is calling my name.

[lawguyman]

Personally, I don't even know what non-seismic evolution means.

Those are the terms that Heins was using. If you don't know what they mean, perhaps you should not comment on them.

Enjoy the sun.

[[email protected]]

If you don't know what they mean, perhaps you should not comment on them.

Enjoy the sun.

*Sigh* Just when I thought we could agree to disagree.

[JasW]

As long as BB 10 is a success RIM will survive as a major player in the smart phone industry.

BB10 would have to be a success of unprecedented proportions for RIM to "survive as a major player." RIM is well along the road to simply being a niche player.

[Sith_Apprentice]

BB10 would have to be a success of unprecedented proportions for RIM to "survive as a major player." RIM is well along the road to simply being a niche player.

At this point being 1 or 2 in the mobile space is well beyond RIM. They need to focus on being the number 3 choice.

[JasW]

At this point being 1 or 2 in the mobile space is well beyond RIM. They need to focus on being the number 3 choice.

My crystal ball is in the shop, but I have a feeling RIM may end up number 4 after the Metro Windows phones come out. There's a ton of buzz and I don't see RIM matching that at all.

[Sith_Apprentice]

My crystal ball is in the shop, but I have a feeling RIM may end up number 4 after the Metro Windows phones come out. There's a ton of buzz and I don't see RIM matching that at all.

You are quite correct on the 'buzz' and advertising. RIM has NEVER been good at this and they need to become very good at it, and quickly in order to stay relevant at all.

[PineappleUnderTheSea]

Is non-seismic evolution a kind of change or is it "nothing."

You guys are arguing over "nothing" (yes, there is a pun there)

You're both right: evolution is a slooow process that can take millions of years, so in effect you don't see if happening in your lifetime. So it could be "nothing".

But, on the other end, evolution does mean that a change is happening, albeit slowly, over time, and thus it is "something".

Now if you go and tell me that you don't believe in evolution, well Cheese and Crackers I just give up.

[the_sleuth]

Hardly seeing at the moment Huawei and ZTE dominating Chinese handsets market. Matter of fact most popular Chinese brands overseas but on the local market there are few dozens of local manufacturers which, I guess most of them, are heading Android.
Recently an Android based smartphone called "xiao mi" should be considered most popular.

Samsung is very popular brand, Nokia and HTC (for smartphones) as well, but definitely in high-end iPhone rules.

Xiaomi Phone hands-on redux: dual partition system explained (video) -- Engadget

I wasn't familiar with Xiaomi. If Engadget is reporting correctly, this phone at competitive price of $310, it would devastate the margins of Samsung et al if it flooded into N. American market. This is commoditization unleashed!