08-04-11 10:16 PM
65 123
tools
  1. qbnkelt's Avatar
    When I read this news this morning two thought occurred simultaneously...first, they're being even more aggressive than they had previously announced they would be - no, this is not so much news as RIM following through on what they announced they were planning. It is a very prudent action. Extremely harsh, particularly for those whose jobs will be cut. But they said they would cut jobs. Second thought...the forum will be jumping today and the sharks who are in the midst of a feeding frenzy because they smell blood in the water will go insane with glee.
    Yup...just as I thought...on both counts.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    _StephenBB81 and Dapper37 like this.
    07-25-11 10:43 AM
  2. belfastdispatcher's Avatar
    I do not want to see Rim without Mike at the top. I have a lot of respect for the guy, he literally changed the world and how it communicates.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    01itr likes this.
    07-25-11 10:52 AM
  3. PlugGuy's Avatar

    This is what happens when the co-CEOS haven't been replaced as needed.
    ^

    What he said. Idiotic move that the two billionaires at the top aren't stepping aside. They need to.
    1812dave likes this.
    07-25-11 10:52 AM
  4. 01itr's Avatar
    I agree with only one thing from this post. Mike created this company from nothing. That's it. Moving forward, it is obvious that he has lost his handle on the consumer market, and if RIM's idea is to recapture the consumer market, then it's time for a change up top.
    ^

    What he said. Idiotic move that the two billionaires at the top aren't stepping aside. They need to.

    Worked good for Apple when they canned Steve Jobs in the 80s right? Oh wait...
    07-25-11 10:56 AM
  5. belfastdispatcher's Avatar
    ^

    What he said. Idiotic move that the two billionaires at the top aren't stepping aside. They need to.
    They are not just CEO, they built Rim, they put everything they had in it, took massive risks to become billionaires and give a lot of their money to charity. Anybody that hasn't been with Rim from the very beginning will not have the vision to keep it going.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    01itr likes this.
    07-25-11 10:57 AM
  6. scorpiodsu's Avatar
    I do not want to see Rim without Mike at the top. I have a lot of respect for the guy, he literally changed the world and how it communicates.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    That's cool but if he can't adapt to the changing environment you can't keep people around for past success. He may have been brilliant in the past when Blackberry was the main player in town and competition was weak. But how he exercises his leadership in the current environment will determine if he should still be at the top, not what he did years ago. I look at it like an old football coach that wants to play the game like he did 20 years ago when that style of play was dominant and he was the best at it. But the game changed, but the coach still wants to play the old way. At some point, no matter how good the guy was for the organization and how much he contributed to the game years ago, he will need to be replaced if he doesn't adapt to the way the game is played now. Just how it goes. You can appreciate everything he done but still realize that he's no longer the answer. Not saying that's the case with Mike, but it certainly is feasible.

    That's just business. Everyone's time eventually comes to and end. And with some, even the best innovators, the times past them by.
    Last edited by scorpiodsu; 07-25-11 at 11:03 AM.
    Laura Knotek, howarmat and avt123 like this.
    07-25-11 11:00 AM
  7. 01itr's Avatar
    That's just business. Everyone's time eventually comes to and end. And with some, even the best innovators, the times past them by.
    This is true, but unfortunately it is not time for Mike yet. In 12 months time you will be eating your words. (I hope lol)
    07-25-11 11:06 AM
  8. Economist101's Avatar
    Worked good for Apple when they canned Steve Jobs in the 80s right? Oh wait...
    Steve Jobs didn't ride Apple down into a crevasse the way RIM's Co-CEOs have; when Apple cratered he was a safe distance away.
    07-25-11 11:08 AM
  9. belfastdispatcher's Avatar
    That's cool but if he can't adapt to the changing environment you can't keep people around for past success. He may have been brilliant in the past when Blackberry was the main player in town and competition was weak. But how he exercises his leadership in the current environment will determine if he should still be at the top, not what he did years ago. I look at it like an old football coach that wants to play the game like he did 20 years ago when that style of play was dominant and he was the best at it. But the game changed, but the coach still wants to play the old way. At some point, no matter how good the guy was for the organization and how much he contributed to the game years ago, he will need to be replaced if he doesn't adapt to the way the game is played now. Just how it goes. You can appreciate everything he done but still realize that he's no longer the answer. Not saying that's the case with Mike, but it certainly is feasible.

    That's just business. Everyone's time eventually comes to and end. And with some, even the best innovators, the times past them by.
    Blackberry MDA, Balance, Bridge are all innovations that get overlooked as they don't sound exciting, but that is showing leadership. How much do you wanna bet all platforms will have "Bridge" soon? Not to mention security that cannot be compromised. Some people couldn't wait to get their hands on the PlayBook so they can root it, has it happened yet? NO
    Some things sit at oposing ends. You can't have your cake and eat it. Mike needs to stay.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    01itr and Dapper37 like this.
    07-25-11 11:11 AM
  10. scorpiodsu's Avatar
    This is true, but unfortunately it is not time for Mike yet. In 12 months time you will be eating your words. (I hope lol)
    Actually, I won't be eating anything because I didn't say this was the case with Mike. Just simply stating that it's possible for ANYONE to be passed by the changing of the times and can't keep a person for past success if in fact you are heading the wrong direction. It's just business. But I don't wish any ill will on RIM or Mike because I want the best platforms out there and more competition so companies can continue to push each other to offer better products and services. I don't want to see RIM fail at all. They are the reason I became a smartphone user years ago. But I won't act like everything is fine nor act as if anyone in the company is untouchable. At this juncture, if it gets worst, anything can happen to any of them regardless of past achievements.
    07-25-11 11:12 AM
  11. scorpiodsu's Avatar
    Blackberry MDA, Balance, Bridge are all innovations that get overlooked as they don't sound exciting, but that is showing leadership. How much do you wanna bet all platforms will have "Bridge" soon? Not to mention security that cannot be compromised. Some people couldn't wait to get their hands on the PlayBook so they can root it, has it happened yet? NO
    Some things sit at oposing ends. You can't have your cake and eat it. Mike needs to stay.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Like I said, no one is untouchable in business. What do those innovations mean to investors? That's the question. No one cares about those things if the company is going in the wrong direction. And I never said nor implied that I want Mike gone or whatever. I'm only stating that he and any other CEO of any company would get "relieved of their duties" if the company was in a very critical state regardless of what they did in the past. If not, then he'll (and any other CEO) would just go down with the ship and in that case, no one wins either. I'm just not going to act like keeping Mike is necessary to continued success. Afterall, he hasn't been able to stop the free fall the past few years. You'll have to excuse me if I don't cry if he goes.
    07-25-11 11:15 AM
  12. 01itr's Avatar
    Steve Jobs didn't ride Apple down into a crevasse the way RIM's Co-CEOs have; when Apple cratered he was a safe distance away.
    That's not my point. My point is that the firing of the CEO didn't do anything for the company. People seem to think that Mike and Jim are maybe forcing their employees to not be creative or maybe forcing them to make phones that aren't as good as they could be making??? I'm not really sure why they would be doing this, but apparently a new CEO will come in and the company will be churning out cutting-edge phones the week after.
    07-25-11 11:26 AM
  13. Economist101's Avatar
    That's not my point. My point is that the firing of the CEO didn't do anything for the company. People seem to think that Mike and Jim are maybe forcing their employees to not be creative or maybe forcing them to make phones that aren't as good as they could be making??? I'm not really sure why they would be doing this, but apparently a new CEO will come in and the company will be churning out cutting-edge phones the week after.
    Fact check: Steve Jobs wasn't CEO when he was fired. In fact, his first (and only) stint as Apple CEO began in 1997. Apple's CEOs during their early years were Mike Scott and John Sculley. So again, Steve Jobs didn't run Apple into the ground the way RIM's co-CEOs have, in part because he didn't become CEO until after the company cratered. Now this doesn't mean Mike and Jim should be fired, but it does make you wonder whether they have what it takes to get RIM back on the right track.
    07-25-11 11:33 AM
  14. 01itr's Avatar
    Okay, you guys make some good and valid points. But I still think that the company needs someone with drive and ambition now more than ever. And I think the best candidates with those characteristics are the ones already in charge. However, maybe splitting the roles would be a better idea? Mike CEO and Jim something else or whatever... Might help sort out complications?
    07-25-11 11:46 AM
  15. shlammed's Avatar
    Rim already has manufacturing plants in Mexico and Hungary and recently they announced they'll open more in Argentina.
    This is what happens the factories are moved abroad for cheaper labor, you can't relocate employees. Apple builds their stuff in China, remember?

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    ...except RIM has been outsourcing their manufacturing for years so that's hardly news.
    07-25-11 11:47 AM
  16. belfastdispatcher's Avatar
    Like I said, no one is untouchable in business. What do those innovations mean to investors? That's the question. No one cares about those things if the company is going in the wrong direction. And I never said nor implied that I want Mike gone or whatever. I'm only stating that he and any other CEO of any company would get "relieved of their duties" if the company was in a very critical state regardless of what they did in the past. If not, then he'll (and any other CEO) would just go down with the ship and in that case, no one wins either. I'm just not going to act like keeping Mike is necessary to continued success. Afterall, he hasn't been able to stop the free fall the past few years. You'll have to excuse me if I don't cry if he goes.
    What free fall in the past few years? Rim has done nothing but growing. 5 years ago they were selling 1.5 million devices a quarter, now they sell 13 million. Where's the fall?

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    01itr likes this.
    07-25-11 11:53 AM
  17. scorpiodsu's Avatar
    What free fall in the past few years? Rim has done nothing but growing. 5 years ago they were selling 1.5 million devices a quarter, now they sell 13 million. Where's the fall?

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Tell me what the stock price was in 2008 and tell me what is it today.... that free fall. That's the one that matter to investors. Not giving away free cell and/or cheap cell phones. Are you still in denial about RIM?
    07-25-11 12:04 PM
  18. chiefbroski's Avatar
    Yeah, the media loves to create a mountain out of a molehill. Even apple wasn't done with loads debt and consecutive losses each year. RIM has very far to go until that happens...Without introducing many devices recently, of course their profit goes down. They aren't as cool anymore, yeah, but anything goes out of style quickly.

    They will bounce back if they make decent phones (the new phones look pretty good!). With the slew of new devices releasing around august-october they will sell quite a few of them as always. Their profit may not be as high, but being still higher than 95% of companies on any stock exchange, I really REALLY think they are ok for now.

    To many investors, if you're not growing in the tech sector, you are either well-established (Microsoft, IBM....) which pay dividends or you're finished because investors see no reason why they can make an investment off you.
    01itr likes this.
    07-25-11 12:12 PM
  19. belfastdispatcher's Avatar
    Tell me what the stock price was in 2008 and tell me what is it today.... that free fall. That's the one that matter to investors. Not giving away free cell and/or cheap cell phones. Are you still in denial about RIM?
    How much profit were they generating in 2008 and how much now? Stock prices going down are good for some investors, bad for others, somebody wins, the other loses. It's not all bout shares you know.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    chiefbroski likes this.
    07-25-11 12:41 PM
  20. brucep1's Avatar
    These are dark days for RIM. With the writing on the wall I'm surprised that there are some here that think RIM will miraculously pull out of this. Layoffs, losing market share, antiquated devices plunging stock prices all spell disaster.
    I just hope RIM can hold out long enough for QNX on phones. Judging by RIM's previous timelines, I don't see one coming out for at least a year. I know the idea is Q1 right now, but I've had enough experience with this company to know that they are more likely to miss a deadline than meet one.
    07-25-11 12:44 PM
  21. brucep1's Avatar
    How much profit were they generating in 2008 and how much now? Stock prices going down are good for some investors, bad for others, somebody wins, the other loses. It's not all bout shares you know.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Its not all about profits either...


    If you want to look at the financials until you find something positive, go ahead. Unfortunately, in reality, this company is on its second round of layoffs.
    scorpiodsu likes this.
    07-25-11 12:48 PM
  22. scorpiodsu's Avatar
    How much profit were they generating in 2008 and how much now? Stock prices going down are good for some investors, bad for others, somebody wins, the other loses. It's not all bout shares you know.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Dude, seriously, do you not think that all the investor meetings and calls are to be ignored? I can clearly see you are one of those people with their head in the sand acting as if everything is just perfect. While I'm not one to proclaim doom and gloom for RIM, I'm sure not going to ignore everything. And obviously they aren't ignoring it (now) either with all the changes they are making and giving themselves a few months to re-evaluate the dual CEO role. What do you think they are doing that for? PRESSURE FROM INVESTORS. Period. The entire smartphone market has grown so while RIM has a smaller percentage it has more users. We know that. But in the grand scheme of things they are in much worst position then they were a couple years ago even with more users. Why do you think that is? Why are they migrating to QNX? Why all of a sudden are apps and cameras important to RIM? Why do you think all these folks are getting fired? This is not happenstance. Everything isn't as rosey as you would like it to be. It's not as dreadful as others overstate but certainly not as good as you want to make it seem. Keep your head in the sand and let's see what happens.
    1812dave likes this.
    07-25-11 12:50 PM
  23. 01itr's Avatar
    Exactly. Some people just contradict themselves. On one hand they use Apple as an example of a company that bounced back but on the other hand refuse to acknowledge the series of events that took place within the company. Don't say "look at Apple in the 90s and look at how they came back. RIM can do the same things" while at the same time saying RIM doesn't need to make any changes at the top WHERE APPLE DID before their comeback.

    It's ironic too that some of these same people claim iOS users worship Jobs while they are now exhibiting the same type of "worship" behavior towards Mike and/or Jim. But surely, they aren't worshipers though . Just funny how people criticize iOS users for recognizing the importance of Jobs but at the same time they are just as emphatic in their support for RIM's CEOs. Just hypocrisy.
    It is not that they gained success because they changed CEOs, it is who they changed it to. No one else would have the drive and ambition to see Apple succeed than the person who created the company in his garage.

    That is what I'm talking about. Mike built this company from the ground up. Name one person who would have a greater drive and ambition to see the company at the top.

    I think you belong here IMHO http://forums.tipb.com/
    Last edited by 01itr; 07-25-11 at 01:25 PM.
    grover5 likes this.
    07-25-11 01:18 PM
  24. belfastdispatcher's Avatar
    Dude, seriously, do you not think that all the investor meetings and calls are to be ignored? I can clearly see you are one of those people with their head in the sand acting as if everything is just perfect. While I'm not one to proclaim doom and gloom for RIM, I'm sure not going to ignore everything. And obviously they aren't ignoring it (now) either with all the changes they are making and giving themselves a few months to re-evaluate the dual CEO role. What do you think they are doing that for? PRESSURE FROM INVESTORS. Period. The entire smartphone market has grown so while RIM has a smaller percentage it has more users. We know that. But in the grand scheme of things they are in much worst position then they were a couple years ago even with more users. Why do you think that is? Why are they migrating to QNX? Why all of a sudden are apps and cameras important to RIM? Why do you think all these folks are getting fired? This is not happenstance. Everything isn't as rosey as you would like it to be. It's not as dreadful as others overstate but certainly not as good as you want to make it seem. Keep your head in the sand and let's see what happens.
    I guess we're gonna have to wait and see.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    07-25-11 01:21 PM
  25. brucep1's Avatar
    It is not that they gained success because they changed CEOs, it is who they changed it to. No one else would have the drive and ambition to see Apple succeed than the person who created the company in his garage.

    That is what I'm talking about. Mike built this company from the ground up. Name one person who would have a greater drive and ambition to see the company at the top.
    Anyone who could have thought an HD screen, camera, or mp3 player on the phone would be a good idea.
    07-25-11 01:23 PM
65 123
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD