12-17-12 07:58 AM
128 12345 ...
tools
  1. bungaboy's Avatar
    So we'll just ignore the Duke law professor who is quoted as saying there is a "high risk" of litigation. Okeedoke.



    ?????????? Jeez, are we thin-skinned, or what? And "for weeks now," I've seen nothing -- NOTHING -- to be optimistic or positive about.



    So this guy Gassee is so influential that he can dupe a NY Times reporter into writing an article that has no basis in reality? Of course it has a basis in reality, with or without Gassee. Shareholder lawsuits are not exactly his idea alone. And as the article points out, the problem is proving that Heins knew there would be a delay back when he gave his speech in early May, and whether there will actually be any percentage in pursuing a suit given RIM is in deep trouble as it is.
    For every Duke professor you will find a dozen more who will disagree.

    You believe everything you read in a Newspaper or Blog?

    Be up front with us here. What's your agenda anyway?
    07-09-12 02:05 PM
  2. Thunderbuck's Avatar
    I think you guys are missing the point. The alleged willfull misrepresentation would center around whether Heins knew that BB10 was going to be delayed when he made statements about BB10 being ready by year's end. I'm sure that will be one of the main subjects of discovery if any suit is filed. Heins' knowledge or lack thereof will be the subject of depositions, document requests for internal communications, etc.

    The article touched on the fact that the relatively short amount of time between Heins' statement that BB10 would be ready by year's end and his latter postponement of BB10 into 2013 seems fishy.

    RIMM blowing its deadline is besides the point.
    Here's how this likely worked: any major project has certain "reality checks" scheduled on the timeline. I'm willing to bet that such a reality check was deliberately avoided in advance of BB World, and that up to that point enough of the other work had been completed that there was no reason to suspect a delay at that point. This is crucial, because the case would hang on what Heins knew as of the day of his pronouncement.

    After BBW, they likely held the scheduled "gut check" and encountered some significant-but-resolvable integration issues. This fits with the timeline that a developer (whose name escapes me at the moment--sorry!) reported, namely that she'd started hearing in the first half of June about a potential delay.

    Consider the scope of the project; there are likely dozens of teams covering many disciplines (rf, UI, OS, hardware, etc.) and if a delay is anticipated, that needs to be run past all of those teams to confirm that one delay doesn't set up dependencies that will cascade into OTHER delays. Let's say the OS team asked for another six weeks; that request would have to be studied in terms of what impact it might have on other teams before the full extent of the delay could be determined.

    What it LOOKS like is that it was determined in early June that there'd be a little extra time needed, and that it took a couple of weeks to determine the impact before Heins announced it ahead of the earnings call.

    There may be some grounds for an argument that Heins could have been more forthcoming about the extent of the quarterly loss, but he DID warn it was coming.

    I think this is groundless.
    howarmat and Laura Knotek like this.
    07-09-12 02:13 PM
  3. chr1sny's Avatar
    Here's how this likely worked: any major project has certain "reality checks" scheduled on the timeline. I'm willing to bet that such a reality check was deliberately avoided in advance of BB World, and that up to that point enough of the other work had been completed that there was no reason to suspect a delay at that point. This is crucial, because the case would hang on what Heins knew as of the day of his pronouncement.
    Just out of curiosity, is it a regular business practice to avoid such a reality check in advance of a large-scale public event where the CEO will be prognosticating about the company's future?
    07-09-12 02:22 PM
  4. howarmat's Avatar
    Here's how this likely worked: any major project has certain "reality checks" scheduled on the timeline. I'm willing to bet that such a reality check was deliberately avoided in advance of BB World, and that up to that point enough of the other work had been completed that there was no reason to suspect a delay at that point. This is crucial, because the case would hang on what Heins knew as of the day of his pronouncement.

    After BBW, they likely held the scheduled "gut check" and encountered some significant-but-resolvable integration issues. This fits with the timeline that a developer (whose name escapes me at the moment--sorry!) reported, namely that she'd started hearing in the first half of June about a potential delay.

    Consider the scope of the project; there are likely dozens of teams covering many disciplines (rf, UI, OS, hardware, etc.) and if a delay is anticipated, that needs to be run past all of those teams to confirm that one delay doesn't set up dependencies that will cascade into OTHER delays. Let's say the OS team asked for another six weeks; that request would have to be studied in terms of what impact it might have on other teams before the full extent of the delay could be determined.

    What it LOOKS like is that it was determined in early June that there'd be a little extra time needed, and that it took a couple of weeks to determine the impact before Heins announced it ahead of the earnings call.

    There may be some grounds for an argument that Heins could have been more forthcoming about the extent of the quarterly loss, but he DID warn it was coming.

    I think this is groundless.
    Excellent post and review of how the timeline could have gone. I agree this could be a situation of where others might have not been truthful to the new CEO and he would have been clear from wrong doing at the earlier conferences. I think more problems might stem from the BB Jam session where many people were told that everything is on track with a fall launch. But then again the people at these Jams might have been kept in the dark for as long as possible too.
    07-09-12 02:29 PM
  5. Thunderbuck's Avatar
    Just out of curiosity, is it a regular business practice to avoid such a reality check in advance of a large-scale public event where the CEO will be prognosticating about the company's future?
    It wouldn't be unusual to hold off on looking for bad news. It would be tantamount to going out of your way to find bad news to present at an event that celebrates your brand. How's this analogy: you have a vague suspicion your spouse is cheating, and you can check his/her cell-phone records. But maybe you'll leave that check until AFTER the 25th anniversary party the kids are throwing you in two days.

    If there were a pattern of evasive behavior, yes, this would reinforce it. In RIM's case, I don't believe there has been such a pattern since Heins took the CEO chair, so I'm personally OK with it.
    hpjrt and Bobcat665 like this.
    07-09-12 02:36 PM
  6. DenverRalphy's Avatar
    It wouldn't be unusual to hold off on looking for bad news. It would be tantamount to going out of your way to find bad news to present at an event that celebrates your brand. How's this analogy: you have a vague suspicion your spouse is cheating, and you can check his/her cell-phone records. But maybe you'll leave that check until AFTER the 25th anniversary party the kids are throwing you in two days.
    Summed up in two words... Plausible Deniability.
    07-09-12 02:50 PM
  7. JasW's Avatar
    For every Duke professor you will find a dozen more who will disagree.

    You believe everything you read in a Newspaper or Blog?

    Be up front with us here. What's your agenda anyway?
    I don't think you will find any securities law expert who would disagree that there is a very real risk of securities litigation here. The article does in fact point out the other side: that there may not be a risk due to RIM being already so badly damaged.

    There are truths being observed here, and I am sorry that you and the overly sensitive French dude do not like it. I daresay I have been using a BB longer than 99% of the posters here, and I am very much unhappy with the company's repeated stumblings and general ineptitude.

    If I am not a mindlessly kneejerk defender of RIM, I must have an agenda? OK, here it is: world domination.
    07-09-12 02:53 PM
  8. Thunderbuck's Avatar
    Summed up in two words... Plausible Deniability.
    Absolutely. Among my favorite concepts

    In isolation, not actually unethical. When used to hide genuinely unethical behavior, it's kind of an aggravating factor.

    Again, in this case, I don't view the way this delay was announced as being unethical.
    07-09-12 02:57 PM
  9. amazinglygraceless's Avatar
    Absolutely. Among my favorite concepts

    In isolation, not actually unethical. When used to hide genuinely unethical behavior, it's kind of an aggravating factor.

    Again, in this case, I don't view the way this delay was announced as being unethical.
    For me that is where the problem comes in. I can see the case for both
    sides of the argument.

    That notwithstanding I am a little concerned with what if any material effect
    this will have on RIMM as they try to right their ship. Even the hint of a possible
    shareholder mutiny cannot be seen in any positive light.

    The AGM will be interesting to say the least.
    07-09-12 03:03 PM
  10. Thunderbuck's Avatar
    I don't think you will find any securities law expert who would disagree that there is a very real risk of securities litigation here. The article does in fact point out the other side: that there may not be a risk due to RIM being already so badly damaged.

    There are truths being observed here, and I am sorry that you and the overly sensitive French dude do not like it. I daresay I have been using a BB longer than 99% of the posters here, and I am very much unhappy with the company's repeated stumblings and general ineptitude.

    If I am not a mindlessly kneejerk defender of RIM, I must have an agenda? OK, here it is: world domination.
    Yes, that's worth bearing in mind. I chose to invest in RIM last fall, after the LOOOONG BB10 delay was announced last fall. That might sound like an odd time for an investor to buy in, but that announcement signaled to me that something significant had shifted.

    If you look at RIM's communications and execution since that delay (that and the massive Playbook writedown), you'll see that the company has been much more consistent and reliable. Execution has improved considerably. I don't think RIM actually met a release target in 2011. They've met all of them this year (with the exception of that fairly-small bump in the BB10 release).

    If RIM were still behaving the way it was in 2010 and 2011, it would be fair to judge them in the context of that record. But I don't believe that's true.
    07-09-12 03:04 PM
  11. Thunderbuck's Avatar
    For me that is where the problem comes in. I can see the case for both
    sides of the argument.

    That notwithstanding I am a little concerned with what if any material effect
    this will have on RIMM as they try to right their ship. Even the hint of a possible
    shareholder mutiny cannot be seen in any positive light.

    The AGM will be interesting to say the least.
    In terms of liability over this specific issue, I doubt you'll find a case. Where there'd be a case: if there were multiple, significant milestones that weren't getting met before BBW and even without the deadline review it was clear that BB10 wouldn't make a release by the end of 2012.

    Again, if we can trust what we're being told now, (and I recognize for some that's a big "if"), this is a relatively minor delay. The general consensus here is that it's a couple of months. They could probably have gotten away with pushing back a full quarter and still claim it to be "relatively minor".

    If they meet this target, then I think we're good. I'll grant, though, that if there's a further, significant delay (one that pushed the release out to May-June, for instance), then the announcements being made now would be cast in a very suspicious light.

    My own 2 cents: if RIM knows that BB10 runs the risk of being seriously flawed, or could be delayed any further, they'd already be going to Microsoft and agreeing to adopt WP8. They're not doing this, and I take that to mean they have faith in the platform they're getting set to launch.
    JBenn911 likes this.
    07-09-12 03:13 PM
  12. BB10FTW's Avatar
    I personally do not think anyone has a case against RIM. I agree with Thorsten that RIM is fine the way it is and I do not see how people can argue that. He didn't mean the situation was fine because he himself has admitted it isn't. What he meant is that the company has changed and it is now more complete and focused. RIM has a new leader and several new team members. RIM is laser-focused on the success of BB10. It made complete sense to me when Thorsten said the company was fine because I knew what he meant.
    As far as the delay of BB10 Thorsten also cleared this up in a recent interview with Al from CIO.com. Thorsten stated that everything was infact ready to go later this year but after playing with what was the final build he was unsatisfied. Thorsten chose to delay the launch because BB10 wasn't what it should be. It wasn't stable enough and it didn't feel as smooth as it needs to feel. I simply cannot see how people can sue when the facts are right in front of you. I haven't heard Thorsten say the company is tip top and they are not lagging behind. I have heard him acknowledge the struggles RIM faces and the fact that RIM as a company is performing as it should after the changes he made.

    Just because the media twists words and takes things at face value doesn't mean that RIM or Thorsten are wrong and should be sued. Frankly I am sick of people not digging deeper into the meaning of what is being said. If you take it as you hear it and do not explore what the underlying meaning than you haven't truly formed your own opinions because you do not understand the facts.

    This is MY Opinion, Long Live RIM! Also Thorsten is an Amazing CEO, I couldn't be happier with who was chosen to lead my favorite company.
    Last edited by BB10FTW; 07-09-12 at 03:23 PM.
    silversun10 and crazeee4u like this.
    07-09-12 03:17 PM
  13. PineappleUnderTheSea's Avatar
    Here's how this likely worked: any major project has certain "reality checks" scheduled on the timeline. I'm willing to bet that such a reality check was deliberately avoided in advance of BB World
    I don't think there was anything deliberate, he probably truly believed that it would be launched on time, but simply changed his darned mind once he realized that it wouldn't launch with all the fancy features he truly wanted. And that realization happen to occur after BB World. So the guy changed his mind, probably for the better.

    And as for reality checks, my view on that is simple: he's the CEO for cripes sake! There's nothing more important at the moment than BB10. I'm sure he gets daily updates on its progress--the future of RIM might depend on that OS. Even if the "quality" of the updates were suspicious, I'd still think that he would have known that something was very wrong.

    I'm still going with my theory that he simply changed his mind about launching. BB10 could likely launch by the end of the year, but it maybe wouldn't have the wow factor that Heins wants. So lets wait.
    silversun10 and Canuck671 like this.
    07-09-12 03:22 PM
  14. Thunderbuck's Avatar
    I don't think there was anything deliberate, he probably truly believed that it would be launched on time, but simply changed his darned mind once he realized that it wouldn't launch with all the fancy features he truly wanted. And that realization happen to occur after BB World. So the guy changed his mind, probably for the better.

    And as for reality checks, my view on that is simple: he's the CEO for cripes sake! There's nothing more important at the moment than BB10. I'm sure he gets daily updates on its progress--the future of RIM might depend on that OS. Even if the "quality" of the updates were suspicious, I'd still think that he would have known that something was very wrong.

    I'm still going with my theory that he simply changed his mind about launching. BB10 could likely launch by the end of the year, but it maybe wouldn't have the wow factor that Heins wants. So lets wait.
    That's probably mostly true. I'm sure Heins stays as informed as he wants to be on an informal basis.

    There IS a difference between informal status reports and hard milestones, and there's a couple of things to remember: 1) the informal ones are non-binding, just kind of a general "how's things?", and there's no obligation to pass that on to anyone. Such informal checks can actually be counter-productive if they're happening too often or require too much detail 2) Every major project DOES have hard status checks, and that's where the legal reporting requirements come into play.

    I'm guessing that the formal status checks were scheduled for after BBW. They're completely entitled to do that, as long as it didn't violate any other requirements.
    amazinglygraceless likes this.
    07-09-12 03:44 PM
  15. morlock_man's Avatar
    Just think about how many of those crying foul and saying its the End Times will have to eat those words in the future.

    People tend to forget about things that happened last year, but the Internet doesn't forget. (It just gets censored.)
    07-09-12 03:44 PM
  16. rcheung135's Avatar
    It's pretty obvious that RIM has had its stock held to ransom by the media. They need to stop giving people bad ideas.

    As a shareholder, I'd realize that giving the company the resources and until the company comes out with their phone instead of driving the company down to the ground in fending off lawsuits.
    07-09-12 03:44 PM
  17. PineappleUnderTheSea's Avatar
    That's probably mostly true. I'm sure Heins stays as informed as he wants to be on an informal basis.

    There IS a difference between informal status reports and hard milestones, and there's a couple of things to remember: 1) the informal ones are non-binding, just kind of a general "how's things?", and there's no obligation to pass that on to anyone. Such informal checks can actually be counter-productive if they're happening too often or require too much detail 2) Every major project DOES have hard status checks, and that's where the legal reporting requirements come into play.

    I'm guessing that the formal status checks were scheduled for after BBW. They're completely entitled to do that, as long as it didn't violate any other requirements.
    Ah yes, I see what you're getting at, in terms of the more formal legal reporting (I was going more of the informal route). Good point.
    amazinglygraceless likes this.
    07-09-12 03:49 PM
  18. amazinglygraceless's Avatar
    Ah yes, I see what you're getting at, in terms of the more formal legal reporting (I was going more of the informal route). Good point.
    Yeah, that clarified things for me a bit too.
    07-09-12 03:54 PM
  19. CairnsRock's Avatar
    Sadly enough, almost anyone can file a lawsuit. Most people who think they have been wronged in some way can find an attorney willing to take their money despite whether or not they have a legitimate case.

    Unfortunately, there are far to many bloggers/reports/analyst that think they know the law, but are not attorneys, nor do they do their case law research before they write articles. So, incorrect information continues to bleed into the bloggospher which shows up on Google Finance-RIMM and investors start pushing the sell buttons.

    Cry wolf and the sheep will run!
    Or, cancel free speech and shoot the dissenters.
    07-09-12 05:13 PM
  20. thebignewt's Avatar
    I get the anger, but "willful misrepresentation?"

    Makes me feel a little queasy. Yes, RIM has been a poor with the execution, but I just do not believe RIM wants to be in a bad place. I don't know that I agree with the threatened lawsuits, but I did not lose as much as those shareholders either.
    The CEO has the responsibility for knowing what's going on with RIM. Can you imagine Steve Jobs pulling this? True, he delayed some 1980's hardware projects, but software? What it tell me is that the suits don't have a clue as to what's going on there, or for some reason the need for BB10 is running out of gas. In either case it's misleading to shareholders, and frankly embarrasing. The company may go in the pooper before BB10 comes out.
    07-09-12 05:22 PM
  21. amazinglygraceless's Avatar
    Unfortunately, there are far to many bloggers/reports/analyst that think they know the law, but are not attorneys, nor do they do their case law research before they write articles. So, incorrect information continues to bleed into the bloggospher which shows up on Google Finance-RIMM and investors start pushing the sell buttons.!
    This statement would hold weight were it not for the fact that the article did not
    rely solely on bloggers/reporters/analysts/etc. The article quotes the view of FOUR (4)
    law professors.

    I would imagine these people do in fact know the law.
    07-09-12 05:25 PM
  22. soren203's Avatar
    Interesting read, I suppose that the share holders could point out all of the delays RIM has with product/ software launches recently...not good
    JBenn911 likes this.
    07-09-12 05:31 PM
  23. Stewartj1's Avatar
    There's no doubt Jaguar will be leading the charge.
    BlackStormRising likes this.
    07-09-12 05:33 PM
  24. amazinglygraceless's Avatar
    There's no doubt Jaguar will be leading the charge.
    If this goes anywhere I expect Mr Albioni to be leading the pack. He has
    all but telegraphed his disdain for RIMM.
    07-09-12 05:38 PM
  25. Doc Z's Avatar
    I think they should absolutely get sued. The state of the company as it is = complete joke. More and more promises that fail to materialize.
    07-09-12 05:40 PM
128 12345 ...
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD