[Loc22]

Of course it did - but it lost BB only a tiny fraction of what they lost on BB10.

This doesn't make sense unless the people at BlackBerry has no business acumen to sell the Priv at a high margin when the market is a thin margin and high competitive environments.

Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android

[app_Developer]

This doesn't make sense unless the people at BlackBerry has no business acumen to sell the Priv at a high margin when the market is a thin margin and high competitive environments.

They did price the Priv pretty highly initially. I'm not sure that's a lack of acumen. They know they cannot compete in a low margin, high volume game. They thought their security and pkb would place them in a high margin segment.

Also remember the cost of producing a line of Android phones is less than the cost of BB10 phones, resulting in much smaller losses.

[ardakca]

I think marketing and brand image is a huge issue, but it goes even beyond that to corporate culture, and all sorts of other mistakes.

Posted via CB10

This. If BlackBerry had resources for marketing bb10 would have succeeded. Not flying like samsung or apple but they would have a solid user Base.

[Troy Tiscareno]

This. If BlackBerry had resources for marketing bb10 would have succeeded. Not flying like samsung or apple but they would have a solid user Base.

MS had plenty of money for advertising, and spent many billions promoting WinPhone. It failed for much the same reason as BB - late to the game and no apps. I'm not saying advertising wasn't a requirement of success - it is and was - but it's also no guarantee of success. BB10 had many major things against it, and advertising was only one of them.

[Invictus0]

This. If BlackBerry had resources for marketing bb10 would have succeeded. Not flying like samsung or apple but they would have a solid user Base.

They had a pretty big marketing push for BB10,

http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.co...-new-campaign/

[ardakca]

MS had plenty of money for advertising, and spent many billions promoting WinPhone. It failed for much the same reason as BB - late to the game and no apps. I'm not saying advertising wasn't a requirement of success - it is and was - but it's also no guarantee of success. BB10 had many major things against it, and advertising was only one of them.

Windows Phone never had a big and famous user Base as BlackBerry. I was using a bold in 2011 then went for my military service. When I came back BlackBerry was gone. Poof.

[ardakca]

They had a pretty big marketing push for BB10,

http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.co...-new-campaign/

200 million $ is not big in anyways . Samsung had 14 billion dollars in 2013 .
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/samsung-14b...history-525979

I'm not discussing the fact BlackBerry could not afford huge marketing. I'm saying without a huge marketing budget, you can not mainstream a newly found OS. Don't get me wrong.

[Troy Tiscareno]

Windows Phone never had a big and famous user Base as BlackBerry.

Actually, WinPhone was 4-5 times the size of BB a couple of years ago. You just weren't paying attention. Besides, we're not talking BBOS, we're talking BB10.

[Troy Tiscareno]

200 million $ is not big in anyways . Samsung had 14 billion dollars in 2013 .
Samsung's $14bn is 'Biggest Marketing Budget in History'

Except that was Samsung's spending on everything they make - only a small fraction of which is smartphones. At most, they spend about $1.5B on smartphone advertising - but they also make about 50-60 models and are a/the leading manufacturer of smartphones in dozens of countries.

[Invictus0]

200 million $ is not big in anyways . Samsung had 14 billion dollars in 2013 .
Samsung's $14bn is 'Biggest Marketing Budget in History'

I'm not discussing the fact BlackBerry could not afford huge marketing. I'm saying without a huge marketing budget, you can not mainstream a newly found OS. Don't get me wrong.

As the article mentions it was the most amount of money BlackBerry had ever spent on advertising, I doubt a company of their size was in a position to match even a fraction of what Samsung spent on advertising.

[ardakca]

Again, I am not expecting BlackBerry to have matched samsung. Plus windows phone was nowhere to be seen until Nokia made the effort. Guess it wasn't billions for them back then also.
Why would I differentiate BBOS and bb10? If Apple released a new OS tomorrow, people would not vanish.

By the way nice read.

http://www.androidauthority.com/appl...t-2013-366238/

[dcal1701]

Win phone was on Nokia and I think HTC at that time so......

Posted via CB10

[ardakca]

Win phone was on Nokia and I think HTC at that time so......

Posted via CB10

Htc had 2 models on win phone. Apart from those all other models were android.

[dcal1701]

No I'm just saying, at that point HTC could of went either way if the market had swayed and so were spending on adverts on both.

Thing is, look at all of Blackberry's contemporaries from back then, Nokia is gone, Motorola has been bought and sold and failed and tried again, Sony Ericsson disappeared and now Sony acknowledge it's handsets are a loss leader for them and HTC lives off of contract manufacturing just about.

Really it's amazing BlackBerry has endured as long as it has in a market as hostile as this android is coke apple is Pepsi win phone RC I dunno is blackberry irn bru or something. I'm rambling now goodnight!

Posted via CB10

[idssteve]

I am typing this on a VKB and yet I lack of a full screen is no impediment.

I agree that 99 % of phone buyers will purchase an all touch 16:9 phone. The slider is a subset of the 1% leftover of smartphone buyers.

Anecdotal evidence here on CB would suggest that PRIV owners only use their PKB occasionally. In addition there many complaints about the clicking sound when typing on the PKB. Many found that the PRIV keyboard was not as good as a 9900, Q10 or a Classic .

Ultimately, the BlackBerry PKB market is not large enough to support multiple PKB devices . The sales figures for the PRIV would suggest that the slider format did not increase the popularity of PKB's amongst the broader Android community.

"Need to have " means that typing on a glass screen is the input method of last resort.

If BB's hope for Priv was to carve out a new niche in "AndyWorld", all power to them. Hope it works. BUT, if BB's hope was for Priv to seduce migration from their own PKB user base, they missed the target, imo.

I've no clue about droid users' wants but for quite a few of us BB PKB fans, quickly accessible PKB shortcuts & speed dials are a BIG part of our typical daily use. Possibly even half+. Hence, our "need to have" a "full time" PKB. And our willingness to compromise screenestate in exchange.

What good are PKB shortcuts & speed dials when Priv's PKB is hiding "sheepishly" behind the display? That compromise of essential BB PKB experience on Priv, & most other slider configurations, is a non-starter, for many like me. Fwiw.

After all, how much of a screen does one really view while typing on a PKB?? I routinely type paragraphs at a time without even glancing at my 9900, for example. just did. Lol.

Fwiw, a preferable compromise toward providing "full time" PKB access might've been to slide the keyboard up in FRONT of the display when stowed...??

Such a "full time" PKB slider configuration might conceivably approximate 9900's exquisitely compact form when collapsed while a full 16:9 display is just a slide away for the relatively few times it's really wanted. ???

Also, that PKB, "boldly" displayed full time, might stand chance to attract attention and potential interest. ??

Obviously, some provision for transitioning between 4:3 and 16:9 would need sorting out.

Oh well... Chen hasn't called seeking MY pitiful advice, lately. Lol.

[Bbnivende]

If you do not get a full time keyboard next spring.

https://www.cnet.com/how-to/the-comp...ice-shortcuts/

I am not a short cut / power user myself probably because I no longer use a phone for business.