1. cgk's Avatar
    Short version: RIM declines everywhere (surveyed) except france, Android increases (except US) and WP largely flat everywhere.

    Kantar, which bases its conclusions on millions of interviews with consumers every month (1 million in Europe alone, it notes), found that Samsung is currently the top-selling brand in Europe at the moment, thanks in part to a successful launch of the S3 in May, but also aggressive pricing in a region hit by economic pressures. Samsung accounted for 45% of all smartphone sales across the UK, Germany, France, Italy and Spain in the last 12 weeks that ended July 8. Arch-rival Apple, in contrast, accounted for just 16% of all sales in the region, Kantar analyst Dominic Sunnebo tells me. In fact, Apple has declined in every market Kantar surveyed, except for the UK and U.S.

    Androidís share of sales across the big-five European countries is now at 66%, a big jump from 43% a year ago, Kantar notes. In Australia, Android took 60.5% of all sales in the period, and in the U.S. it accounted for just over 51% of all sales.
    Kantar On Smartphones: Samsung 45% Of Euro Sales; Apple Gained Only In UK, US; RIM Holds On In France | TechCrunch
    08-06-12 04:41 PM
  2. Rickroller's Avatar
    Not too surprising. More and more people want the most bang for their buck..and pocket PC's are the way of the future.
    08-06-12 04:54 PM
  3. howarmat's Avatar





    June -> July numbers for comparison
    08-06-12 04:54 PM
  4. ccbs's Avatar
    The article is a great read on the current state of the western mobile market. Europe is starting to be more price sensitive and this trend will definitely hurt Apple sale.
    08-06-12 05:07 PM
  5. anon1727506's Avatar
    The article is a great read on the current state of the western mobile market. Europe is starting to be more price sensitive and this trend will definitely hurt Apple sale.
    If people want a less expensive phone, Apple sells their older models at discounted prices. Overall you get the same ecosystem and user experience...

    If "price sensitivity" is going to be a problem for anyone it will be for RIM. RIM will have their Premium BB10 devices, which lets face it if they contain the top of the line hardware we want them too, they will be at the top of the price range also. So consumers will have a choice from RIM - buy an expensive BB10 phone or an older BB7 model with an unsupported OS (by developers and most everyone else) and no ecosystem. Even when they release a low end CURVE type device, with a dual core processor it is going to be pricy compared to the low end ZTE Android devices.

    RIM really needs to release a broad range of devices at different price points, all using use BB10. And they need to drop OS7 completely so that the Blackberry brand is not fragmented into two camps. IMHO
    amazinglygraceless likes this.
    08-07-12 08:30 AM
  6. cgk's Avatar
    RIM really needs to release a broad range of devices at different price points, all using use BB10.
    Don't have the scale to do it - that's the bottom line, RIM is just too small. Even with two premium phones, they will struggle to get the same margins as Apple or Samsung because they don't have either infrastructure (Samsung) or Cashpile (Apple) to drive component prices down.
    08-07-12 09:07 AM
  7. Sith_Apprentice's Avatar
    Thus why RIM needs to license out BB10 to someone that has the economic scale to do these low cost low end devices. (HTC might be a good one to approach). They need to license the OS for free and just make money off of the BIS acocunts.
    08-07-12 09:08 AM
  8. cgk's Avatar
    Thus why RIM needs to license out BB10 to someone that has the economic scale to do these low cost low end devices. (HTC might be a good one to approach). They need to license the OS for free and just make money off of the BIS acocunts.
    I think RIM are going to have to prove that BB10 is a sales success before anyone wants to jump on that offer.
    08-07-12 09:12 AM
  9. Sith_Apprentice's Avatar
    You are very possibly correct, but Android wasnt a success (not really) when companies jumped on that. Free OS and they just tool the hardware for it. It has worked tremendously well, and if they use the stock BB10 and just build hardware for it, they also could make money off of this. Remember, Android vendors (outside of Samsung) make basically nothing, this could give them a chance to make money outside of Android.
    08-07-12 09:15 AM
  10. cgk's Avatar
    You are very possibly correct, but Android wasnt a success (not really) when companies jumped on that. Free OS and they just tool the hardware for it. It has worked tremendously well, and if they use the stock BB10 and just build hardware for it, they also could make money off of this. Remember, Android vendors (outside of Samsung) make basically nothing, this could give them a chance to make money outside of Android.
    But your assumption is that they could make money off high volume, low margin handsets for an OS which currently has no marketshare at all, I would think that most companies would want an indicator that there is a market.

    For me the android analogue falls down because the OEMs were not limited to making phones for the low-end, they can make them for whatever market they want - I would think any licensing would want similar carte blanche to turn out premium handsets (that directly compete against RIM) if they wish.

    Remember, Android vendors (outside of Samsung) make basically nothing
    It worse than that, nobody on any OS makes any operating profits beyond Samsung and Apple (and Apple had 77% of operating profits last quarter).

    To an extant, OSes are a red herring, the real problem is a structural issue with the mobile sector which means that two of the players are now so large it is difficult for anyone else to have the economic firepower to compete.
    08-07-12 09:25 AM
  11. Sith_Apprentice's Avatar
    Well I would think any vendor could make the high end, but one thing RIM should do is make sure BB10 isnt changed. it should be the same experience across all devices, and the device itself should be what changes. The low end is where RIM is going to get hurt, and hurt big. They cannot evolve their devices fast enough for the low end market and thats where they need help. Let HTC or ZTE or anyone else also make high end, but the primary goal of any licensing agreement should be to fill that low end market.

    If BB10 is licensed free it allows the companies to put it on the same level of android (the OEMs anyway). Let them throw it on as many devices as they want and flood the market. Or better yet, come out with the same hardware for both android and BB10. Very little additional R/D costs.
    08-07-12 09:41 AM
  12. Cesare21's Avatar
    IF BB10 is licensed to OEMs, you run two risks which could be terminal for RIM.

    1. If the OEMs make better handsets, then you are hurting your sales. It's not necessary that RIM will make the better devices just because they own the OS. It's more to do what the user experience is like.

    2. RIM does license out BB10, it will lead to fragmentation just like Droids out there. Another thing, RIM is growing (at least better than developed markets) in the developing world like India, Jamaica, Indonesia and so on. If RIM gives out BB10 to OEMs for these markets, they lose out crucial marketshare and hurt their bottom lines.

    I personally would like RIM to go alone no matter what, it does keep it's own individuality.
    08-07-12 10:05 AM
  13. cgk's Avatar
    Yeah channel conflict is a problem, I'm surprised it hasn't been more of an issue for google/motorola... maybe next year?
    08-07-12 10:06 AM
  14. Sith_Apprentice's Avatar
    Well you do run the hardware risk most certainly. I do believe RIM should make ONE device, and it should be a QWERTY device. It has been shown time and time again that they make the best keyboards. So let them excel at it. Throw the hardware R/D money into that alone. License out the OS for the all touch devices. Helps with the erosion of sales due to internal competition, and keeps the BlackBerry faithful happy.

    Why would licensing an OS lead to fragmentation if RIM controls the software. It should just be an OS update to be pushed out just like any other device they make. If the devices conform to a specific set of specifications (obviously able to exceed that) there shouldn't be any fragmentation per se.

    RIM shouldnt care if there are 100 BB10 models out there if they all have the same screen resolution/aspect ratio. The devs shouldnt care either as the apps would look the same regardless. RIM is having 4 device types (potentially 5 with the 10" playbook). Stick to that and let the OEMs build to their hearts content.


    While this would put RIM much closer to a software and services company, that wouldnt necessarily hurt their bottom line. Making 4-8$ per device per month, and increasing your overall subscribers cannot hurt. Say they sell 5mil BB10 devices themselves and make $50 per device in 2013. They also license out their software and sell 15mil low end phones through other means. They would make $250 mil on handset sales, and $20-40 million/month on the access fees. They would ALSO make $60-120 million per month in access fees from the "other" sales of the handsets.

    Now I would go so far as to say RIM should offer some of the access fees to the OEMs that sell the phones. Keep the $8/mo they make off of their sales, and give the OEMs $2/mo for each phone they sell. While RIM makes a small profit off of these, it is still virtually 100% profit (excluding network fees). This would also offer an incentive OEMs to push the devices.
    Last edited by Sith_Apprentice; 08-07-12 at 10:24 AM.
    08-07-12 10:17 AM
  15. Cesare21's Avatar
    @Sith_apprentice: I kinda like this plan, but do have a few reservations. With the same screen resolution/aspect ratio, don't you think there will device clones with self destructive results to it?

    I know RIM isn't making good profit off their hardware and have trainloads being written off, but I think that was more to do with the overall package that they delivered. Your idea has good premise, however that would be feasible when BB10 is very stable (unlike other BB OS's) and shakes a few feathers in the competition. Once they can do that, they could partner with some other company for device software and give them sales incentives, while having a tight control on the software they outfit for such devices.

    Another good point would be to have excited app developers to develop an ecosystem of their own. This is where QNX will come into play, and making it big should be RIM's top 3 priority if not the top 1.
    08-07-12 11:11 AM
  16. Sith_Apprentice's Avatar
    I put both screen resolution and aspect ratio in there and never went back and clarified. This should be similar to what Apple does with the iPhone and iPad. The iPad was 2x the iPhone for all intents and purposes, and it was easy to scale applications as such. If RIM did this and standardized you could easily go from 3 devices (4/5 with PB) and go to many many times that with all the potential variations. As long as the ratio was something documented for devs and easy to scale it opens up quite a few options.
    08-07-12 11:23 AM
  17. ccbs's Avatar
    High end market is the only market for RIM to have any chance of making back investment on BB10.

    In global scale, there is the free Firefox OS coming, which depends solely on HTML5 apps. It might be seen as a joke, but it has already gotten support from manufacturers to the like of ZTE and other Chinese mobile handset backers. In localised market scale, there are alot of spinoff from Android. In local chinese market, there are quite a few Android spinoff like Baidu, XiaoMi, Weibo, maybe QQ. Similar thing is happening at India market too. Together with the upcoming $3~$5 A9 based Mediatek Application proc, the competition in the low end market is vastly fiercer than the absolute high end. Soon, there will be closed to zero margin to be gained in the entry segment of smartphone.
    08-07-12 03:36 PM
  18. randall2580's Avatar
    I've said this before and it's a good time to repeat. If you have money you can use like going to the casino - go have a good time and if you make money - GREAT - all the better, take a chance if you have a feeling - like putting your chips on 7.

    But buying a stock with a chart like RIM's is "spitting in the wind" you are trying to say you know better than the market does. It's not an investment to buy a company with a chart like this.

    "The trend is your friend" is a good one to remember. If RIM come up with a killer BB10 product, launch it on time to good reviews, there will be plenty of time to buy the stock of a good company that's reversed the trend and starting a new one. Folks like to point out Apple as the example RIM can follow - the Phoenix rising from the ashes. Look at the chart over a long period of time, there has been plenty of time to buy a healthy company with growing sales and widening margins. If you didn't buy Apple at $10 but waited till $70 - hows that working out for you?

    RIM will probably be a better buy at $10 than at $7 (without a takeover), as it will mean the trend is reversed and things are doing much better for them. Not an easy concept to understand I know - but one traders use all the time.

    If you learn one thing from these stories of big investors who poorly entered the market on RIM remember that catching "a falling knife" can be dangerous.
    08-07-12 07:25 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD