[JohnKCG]

The major contributing factor to the failure of Amazon's Fire Phone was that they didn't have access to the Google Play Store. Amazon marketed the bejeebus out of it for the first year it was released, and still it couldn't gain any traction. Not to mention that they never successfully replaced Google Play Services liked they claimed to do (managed a few replacements, but couldn't nail them all). Sales were horrible.

You can't compare Samsung's store (which even most Samsung users forget even exists) with Amazon's attempt, because Samsung isn't trying to control which store is used. It's merely added as an afterthought. Amazon however doesn't want their device owners using another store. The Amazon Fire Phone's only purpose is to market Amazon's services. That's why they forked and stayed outside the AOSP and OHA requirements. And that isn't going to change anytime soon.

Then there's the point that Amazon doesn't manufacture devices. They order them from other manufacturers and put their brand on it. Amazon would have to split the branding benefits with Blackberry, which is a major hit right there. It's hard enough in the industry for OEM's to break past the big names already selling Android devices, and cutting any perceived benefits or revenue in half would be an exercise in futility. The only people who'd make any money would be the manufacturers who build the devices for them (because they get paid whether the devices sell or not).

And that's all before there's ever any consideration as to who exactly is licensing BBRY's proprietary patents/software. Amazon certainly isn't going to do it if they have to split with BB (and BBRY wants the revenue from licensing). The manufacturers aren't going to do it if they're not receiving the sole benefit of retail sales (which they wouldn't because Amazon is going to want a cut of retail sales, otherwise what's the point of putting their name on it).

The only option BBRY has in making any money from device sales (aside from manufacturing their own) is to license to a manufacturer/OEM and get a cut (licensing fee) of each device sale, giving both parties an opportunity to make money. And even that's a risk for manufacturers/OEMs if their not confident of huge sales. Adding a 3rd party simply makes it altogether infeasible, because in any scenario, one of the three will be getting the short end of the stick and would be foolish to jump into it.

To summarize... Amazon's goal is to increase revenue on their services, so they're not going to deviate from a proprietary store and services in favor of Googles store and services. Blackberry and Amazon would have to split the benefits and revenue in an industry where it's hard enough trying to generate revenue without splitting it.

[edit]Oh yeah... and there's no way in hell Amazon is going to foot the bill for all the advertising marketing. They're going to expect BBRY to pony up an even amount of cash as well.

Good points actually, the first one to come with a big argument, I Will give you a long answer once My Q10 have enough battery lol

Posted via CB10

[donnation]

Good points actually, the first one to come with a big argument, I Will give you a long answer once My Q10 have enough battery lol

Posted via CB10

We can't wait.

[JohnKCG]

We can't wait.

As ubuntu (Canaima) tells me when I install it in a New netbook:

"Ahora rel�jese y t�mese un cafesito venezolano"

Translation: Now relax and take a venezuela's coffee

Posted via CB10

[JohnKCG]

What will they do with $600 a week?

Buy Chen a good Coffee of Starbucks with a Red Apple v:

Posted via CB10

[JohnKCG]

Ah. One of those. They're becoming quite popular these days.

Its not a thread like that..... I actually want to know what people thinks about things like this

Posted via CB10

[TgeekB]

No.

[joeldf]

Struggling to find sources for outside of the U.S., but as usual your declarations are gross exaggerations

Amazon�s Fire tablets achieved massive growth during the quarter. The company shipped 2.2 million devices in Q1 2016, up 5,422% YoY. The Fire tablet accounted for 5.7% of the market last quarter, up from 0.1% in Q1 2015. Amazon's success is due in large part to the relatively low cost of its products. The Fire tablet retails for $50, but has also been sold in bundles of 6 for as low as $250, or ~$40 a piece. Amazon is using the device to bring more customers into its retail ecosystem.

Amazon is gaining ground in the tablet market - Business Insider

Thurask was referring to the BlackBerry user base.

And your source is about the tablet, which Amazon has had very good success with.

Try looking up info on the Fire Phone.


Posted via CB10

[Troy Tiscareno]

The major contributing factor to the failure of Amazon's Fire Phone was that they didn't have access to the Google Play Store. <snip>

In addition to all of these excellent points, you forgot to mention that BB's license for GMS and Google Play would prohibit BB from a phone partnership with Amazon anyway, since Amazon uses a forked version of Android.

[Prem WatsApp]

No.

TL;DR version right here... :-D

�   "BB10 dead?" - "Let's dance the Danse MacaBBRY! ... or is it..?" ;-D   �

[GendelPrime]

I don't think you have quite right. The fire phone failed because it was priced like a flagship when amazon customers were used to paying mid range prices for devices.

If it failed due to lack of play store access then the Fire tablets and Fire TV would be failures as well but they are both very successful.

BTW I have owned two fire phones it was a great device and I might get another for a backup phone now that my beloved Z10 kicked the bucket.

Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android

[Nguyen1]

I own a fire phone too! Superb device. And google play store can be installed. It's rootable too if you know what you're doing. I've seen the phone around for $75 now, which is an amazing price.

Sent from my BlackBerry Passport SE

[howarmat]

fire phone hardware was great at the time and i still love the size and feel of the phone but you cant get a newer rom on it and you are stuck on android 4.4 I think

[Nguyen1]

Yes, stuck on 4.4 or the amazon equivalent. Amazon stopped support on it. Too bad because it is still a very snappy device. Videos are fast, access to amazon movies is solid, play store access is great, the included earphones are great and can control volume.

Sent from my BlackBerry Passport SE

[cribble2k]

Amazon and BlackBerry have gone to bed before, and considering than Fire OS was a heavy failure, why not join with someone with more exp in the field?, BlackBerry could make good things with Amazon, I could even see rebranded tablets if things go Ok (hello playbook?)

Posted via CB10

Fire OS failed, so logically Amazon should partner with BlackBerry, makers of the BB10 OS, which also failed hard.

I fail to see any good for either company here.

[Prem WatsApp]

BlackBerry should just release an iPhone... ;-D

�   "BB10 dead?" - "Let's dance the Danse MacaBBRY! ... or is it..?" ;-D   �

[PRGDR]

Not sure what amazon, a company whose business revolves around gathering your preferences and selling you stuff, would have in common with BlackBerry, who claims to protect your privacy and secure your info.

A better fit for BlackBerry would be any company who wants to provide a secure, end-to-end solution for mobile communications. Maybe someone like Cisco, or IBM, or even a division of Samsung or something.

Posted via CB10

How about security for your shopping transactions?

[darkehawke]

These forums seem to be filled with terrible ideas

[Bla1ze]

Two wrongs don't make a right.

[TGR1]

Is Amazon actually global? I am under the impression their online services officially serve a handful of select countries, all notably not in typical BB strongholds.

Amazon also did not get to where they are by being charitable to their competitors.

[DenverRalphy]

I don't think you have quite right. The fire phone failed because it was priced like a flagship when amazon customers were used to paying mid range prices for devices.

At release, the phone was sold at a low range price. $199 USD for the 32GB model, and $299 USD for the 64GB model. In 2014 when it was released, I wouldn't call that flagship prices. And the specs were definitely not low-range specs at the time of release. Flagship prices were already $599 USD in 2014.

In fact, there was quite the ado in the media about the crazy low price for the specs it had. And Amazon took major criticism for basically selling the devices "at cost" instead of trying to make a buck or two out of hardware sales.

It was crazy low priced, had a lot of marketing, and still it didn't sell.

[donnation]

These forums seem to be filled with terrible ideas

From people with no experience in sales or marketing who for some reason believe they are experts in sales and marketing.

[Nguyen1]

At release, the phone was sold at a low range price. $199 USD for the 32GB model, and $299 USD for the 64GB model. In 2014 when it was released, I wouldn't call that flagship prices. And the specs were definitely not low-range specs at the time of release. Flagship prices were already $599 USD in 2014.

In fact, there was quite the ado in the media about the crazy low price for the specs it had. And Amazon took major criticism for basically selling the devices "at cost" instead of trying to make a buck or two out of hardware sales.

It was crazy low priced, had a lot of marketing, and still it didn't sell.

Uh... no. The firephone was actually priced TOO high and was criticized for that. Plus, the lack of SD slot and no google store killed the phone. Only later was the price dropped to what you quoted but the damage was done.

Sent from my BlackBerry Passport SE

[DenverRalphy]

Uh... no. The firephone was actually priced TOO high and was criticized for that. Plus, the lack of SD slot and no google store killed the phone. Only later was the price dropped to what you quoted but the damage was done.

Sent from my BlackBerry Passport SE

The fire phone was only high priced if you bought it off contract from a carrier. If you bought it on contract from a carrier, or on/off contract through Amazon, it was $199.

The only people who'd pay full $600+ for the device were those who'd buy off contract from a carrier. And who ever ever does that?

[JohnKCG]

Two wrongs don't make a right.

- plus - = +, that is the very first thing you see in high school

Posted via CB10

[JohnKCG]

From people with no experience in sales or marketing who for some reason believe they are experts in sales and marketing.

Well let crackberry die then, this is a forum for discussing, I know perfectly than Amazon and BlackBerry doesn't fit that good, but I wanted to hear what people thinks about it

Posted via CB10