[Old_Mil]

Although BB10 may be going nowhere there are still more BB10 users out there than Chendroid users. In the aftermarket the Passport commands more than the Priv.

So where is Chendroid going?

Blackberry should have adopted a two handset model from the start:

The classic form factor for those who like the pkb, and the Z30 for those who want a high end full screen device.

The rest of their efforts should have been directed at software (BB10). That's what they want to be, right? A software company?

[Jack Chin]

- I agree with the first point, the advantage of being in China, the market itself and not spending much on marketing.

- I disagree with the second point.. I knew you were going to reference the level of production, By the way I've read the definition up there.. And let me say this.. OnePlus doesn't sell many devices yet they're selling them cheap.. and don't tell me they're owned by Oppo.. that has nothing to do with it.. Each company has its own budget and level of production.. OnePlus doesn't have "Economies of Scale".. Yet they can sell fantastic devices for quite cheap.

"Economy of scale: a proportionate saving in costs gained by an increased level of production"... One Plus doesn't have the previous.. They don't have a massive production level.. Until very recently, they only sold devices by invite.

You can't cherry pick like that. Either the aggregate firm enjoys economies of scale, or it doesn't. Otherwise, it'd be like claiming that the Cadillac brand doesn't benefit from the purchasing power of the rest of General Motors; that Sam's Club doesn't benefit from the purchasing power of Wal-Mart; or that Minute Maid Orange Juice doesn't benefit from the purchasing power of its parent, The Coca-Cola Company.

Of course they do.


Posted via CB10

[ToniCipriani]

BB10 is dead? Are you sure?

BlackBerry BB10 forever

Well if you're a large corporation with a multi billion dollar contract with tens of thousands of units on order, I'm sure they're willing to build something for you.

[Sairos]

You can't cherry pick like that. Either the aggregate firm enjoys economies of scale, or it doesn't. Otherwise, it'd be like claiming that the Cadillac brand doesn't benefit from the purchasing power of the rest of General Motors; that Sam's Club doesn't benefit from the purchasing power of Wal-Mart; or that Minute Maid Orange Juice doesn't benefit from the purchasing power of its parent, The Coca-Cola Company.

Of course they do.


Posted via CB10

I didn't cherry pick anything.. They don't have it.. OnePlus doesn't have a high level of production.. Every company has its own budget set.. So OnePlus doesn't get endless cash from Daddy Oppo..

Please read this again and understand what we're discussing..

Economies of scale: a proportionate saving in costs gained by an increased level of production.

OnePlus doesn't have a high level of production.. Xiaomi didn't when they started.. All the Chinese companies that started out and disrupted the market with cheap phones, didn't also have a high level of production... There is company out there called UMi.. They sell a phone for $178.. UMi Super.. Excellent phone with mid range specs, 4GB RAM..Mediatek Helio P10, 4,000mAh, Fast Battery charging and lots of features.. Most people didn't even hear about them.. No High level of production by any means, yet they're able to produce a cheap excellent product.

[togarika]

I didn't cherry pick anything.. They don't have it.. OnePlus doesn't have a high level of production.. Every company has its own budget set.. So OnePlus doesn't get endless cash from Daddy Oppo..

Please read this again and understand what we're discussing..

Economies of scale: a proportionate saving in costs gained by an increased level of production.

OnePlus doesn't have a high level of production.. Xiaomi didn't when they started.. All the Chinese companies that started out and disrupted the market with cheap phones, didn't also have a high level of production... There is company out there called UMi.. They sell a phone for $178.. UMi Super.. Excellent phone with mid range specs, 4GB RAM..Mediatek Helio P10, 4,000mAh, Fast Battery charging and lots of features.. Most people didn't even hear about them.. No High level of production by any means, yet they're able to produce a cheap excellent product.

Ok Sairos, you have proved your point. Chinese companies don't necessarily need economies of scale to sell cheap phones. But I think we can't say the same for BlackBerry. They would either need to relocate to China or outsource production to a Chinese company otherwise they will need to scale up their production to be able to benefit from economies of scale for the to be able to sell their phones at cheap prices.

BlackBerry BB10 forever

[togarika]

I think the Android project is ok and if they are able to sell the mid range phones at cheap prices it might just be able to turn things around for BlackBerry. But I still think that they should not abandon BB10. Maybe the should have a Android line of devices (Priv and the other 2 devices coming) and a BB10 line of devices too ( maybe Passport 2, Z30 replacement and PlayBook 2).

BlackBerry BB10 forever

[Sairos]

Ok Sairos, you have proved your point. Chinese companies don't necessarily need economies of scale to sell cheap phones. But I think we can't say the same for BlackBerry. They would either need to relocate to China or outsource production to a Chinese company otherwise they will need to scale up their production to be able to benefit from economies of scale for the to be able to sell their phones at cheap prices.

BlackBerry BB10 forever

Yeah we can't say the same about BlackBerry, that I agree on

[anon(3983727)]

I think Android for ultra low and low end only. Mid and high end should be BB10. A company the size of Blackberry with no manufacturing has no place trying to compete with OEMs that can do everything in house. I really don't think they should do any Android devices at all.. license out software like the hub and the keyboard instead. Less risk and likely more profitable.

[Jack Chin]

I didn't cherry pick anything.. They don't have it.. OnePlus doesn't have a high level of production.. Every company has its own budget set.. So OnePlus doesn't get endless cash from Daddy Oppo..

Please read this again and understand what we're discussing..

Economies of scale: a proportionate saving in costs gained by an increased level of production.

OnePlus doesn't have a high level of production.. Xiaomi didn't when they started.. All the Chinese companies that started out and disrupted the market with cheap phones, didn't also have a high level of production... There is company out there called UMi.. They sell a phone for $178.. UMi Super.. Excellent phone with mid range specs, 4GB RAM..Mediatek Helio P10, 4,000mAh, Fast Battery charging and lots of features.. Most people didn't even hear about them.. No High level of production by any means, yet they're able to produce a cheap excellent product.

In Unicornland, people who didn't understand basic microeconomics terms yesterday (or even the difference between micro- and macroeconomics) give lectures today. What a genuine lol!

You're trying, rhetorically, to redefine OnePlus such that it fits your misunderstood and misapplied conception of EofS. If OnePlus is a subsidiary of Oppo (or is an otherwise closely affiliated firm), and if Oppo is a large smartphone OEM (which apparently it is), then it's a lock (from common sense) that OnePlus is benefiting from the inventory and capital purchasing of its parent/senior affiliate. And likewise, the additional output of OnePlus would tend to improve the cost position of the parent (to some degree to a point), however marginal.

This is the way of the world, and it's not a new concept.

What you're attempting to do is separate one part of the larger company in order to apply an analysis that depends upon the whole. This is illogical.

And nowhere does anyone claim EofS is some magical phenomenon that can turn underpriced lead into profitable gold. I have no idea what OnePlus's margin is. Their handsets may be a loss-leading vanity project for Oppo. Given their limited availability, they may be a project to leverage slack time on Oppo's production lines, benefiting the firm by keeping the factory running and attempting to gain a foothold in developed markets via a long-view play. I don't know.

But if OnePlus is a marketing brand or subsidiary of another mark (which it apparently is), you cannot seriously consider its EofS (if any) in isolation.



Posted via CB10

[Sairos]

In Unicornland, people who didn't understand basic microeconomics terms yesterday (or even the difference between micro- and macroeconomics) give lectures today. What a genuine lol!

You're trying, rhetorically, to redefine OnePlus such that it fits your misunderstood and misapplied conception of EofS. If OnePlus is a subsidiary of Oppo (or is an otherwise closely affiliated firm), and if Oppo is a large smartphone OEM (which apparently it is), then it's a lock (from common sense) that OnePlus is benefiting from the inventory and capital purchasing of its parent/senior affiliate. And likewise, the additional output of OnePlus would tend to improve the cost position of the parent (to some degree to a point), however marginal.

This is the way of the world, and it's not a new concept.

What you're attempting to do is separate one part of the larger company in order to apply an analysis that depends upon the whole. This is illogical.

And nowhere does anyone claim EofS is some magical phenomenon that can turn underpriced lead into profitable gold. I have no idea what OnePlus's margin is. Their handsets may be a loss-leading vanity project for Oppo. Given their limited availability, they may be a project to leverage slack time on Oppo's production lines, benefiting the firm by keeping the factory running and attempting to gain a foothold in developed markets via a long-view play. I don't know.

But if OnePlus is a marketing brand or subsidiary of another mark (which it apparently is), you cannot seriously consider its EofS (if any) in isolation.



Posted via CB10

I was discussing one thing, Level of production and the ability to come out with a cheap product with a low level of production.. Even the guy who I was arguing with, agreed with me in the end. I didn't use OnePlus as an example only.. I used quite a few companies.. If only big companies can offer cheap products, then there would've been no way for small companies to come out and disrupt them.

Regarding, the Macro & Micro.. Macro concerns economies and countries, while Micro focuses on Companies and individuals.. Its even in the word with Macro being the wider, and Micro being more concentrated.. I do understand the difference between them.. It was a simple typo when I wrote Macro up there.. As I already didn't know the term so when I read about it, It didn't settle in my mind if its Macro or Micro.. I'm man enough to admit when I'm wrong, and I've admitted that I didn't know the term "Economies of Scale".. One can't simply know everything, and he who boosts to know everything, is in fact ignorant.

I've proven my point, the guy I was discussing the issue with was mature enough to come out and accept my point and admit it.. But some people are so fixed on their opinions, they will keep spinning comments.. talk about many different things that I've not discussed.. I didn't use one example, I used several.. as Xiaomi, UMi.. and other Chinese companies who started small.. You responded by discussing one example only which is, One+.. so you can keep talking about Oppo..

Companies can produce cheap quality products without having high level of production.. This was my argument.. You can't dispute this, not a word of what you said disputed this with facts.. you're deviating from the subject of the discussion.. So have fun, I'm not going into another long argument.

[Jack Chin]

Dude, it's not some epiphany that a lot of cheap products are made in China. Have you ever heard of this little store called Wal-mart?

Posted via CB10

[Sairos]

Dude, it's not some epiphany or miracle that a lot of cheap products are made in China.

Posted via CB10

Hahaha.. Okay Cheers Mate.

[Jack Chin]

Hahaha.. Okay Cheers Mate.

Hah, fair enough. Cheers to you!

Posted via CB10

[jemmz84]

Blackberry should have stuck to the things that made it an icon for all those years.. change the body and features but keeping the working engine... BB10 was an experiment that worked. not as well as we would have liked. But had they not tried to reinvent the wheel, they would be a force to reckon with...

Blackberry and Android is like iPhone and Windows... Its not a partnership that works.

BB should go back to basics. Basics worked and got the fan base it has today.. clearly evidenced by such forums

[GoJaysGo]

500,000 units sold last quarter and they insist on bringing more devices to the market that will fail? That's an awesome strategy. Blackberry lists 6 devices (Priv, Passport, Classic, Leap, P'9983, Z30) so that's 500,000 devices sold between 6 devices across the entire globe. It's not pretty, and adding more devices is as ridiculous as Blackberry's website design....

[ToniCipriani]

500,000 units sold last quarter and they insist on bringing more devices to the market that will fail? That's an awesome strategy. Blackberry lists 6 devices (Priv, Passport, Classic, Leap, P'9983, Z30) so that's 500,000 devices sold between 6 devices across the entire globe. It's not pretty, and adding more devices is as ridiculous as Blackberry's website design....

They're starting to clear out the Passport, stopped production on the Classic, and presumably all the others based on the S4 Plus as well.