[timmy t]

Also, I am one of those customers who does not pay for BIS because I only want email.
I would be more inclined to pay $2 than $5/month to get what I want so they may add me while losing others.

[timmy t]

I don't know how it would do as a service offering.

I think many would frown from paying extra, especially when they have text messaging to contacts friends, etc.

-j

How much do you think they pay for text messaging? Do you think it is free?

[timmy t]

They are planning to get money from their NOC by having car companies use it worldwide for thing like M2M communications.
The analysts see one thing that they can comprehend and drive down the price without realizing that there will be other sources of revenue to take its place.

[GTiLeo]

Data compression is becoming less of an issue nowadays. You can normally go from 100MB to 500MB for $5/mo and you can go to >1GB for another $5. Data is getting cheaper but processing it is getting more complicated and expensive.

The real value for RIM is they have a lot of compression + encryption + push IP technology and infrastructure and they need to unlock the value there. For the life of me I don't know why they don't have a BIS dev kit so small developers can leverage the full power of BIS in ways no one has thought of yet.

Perhaps an openBIS if you will. You could set up your own BIS servers for a small fee or simply go with RIM as a hosted solution. There are certain functions that many apps need. Guaranteed realtime delivery and distribution of data is one. Cloud services with high bandwidth and security capabilities is another.

RIM would do well to strike a deal with Google to find a way to leverage these services while retaining some control.

but thats my point for the BIS fee you won't need to increase your data package, a $2-4 rather then $5 extra is better value is it not?

[PestPro#IM]

What the heck is RIM trying to do force people to leave, by raising the prices or fees. If they do that will leave...

[OMGitworks]

I believe this might open the way for BBM to become platform agnostic. RIM should make money from other users on IOS and Android to use BBM.

Why would iOS and android folks want to use BBM?

[lawguyman]

It was obvious that that this was going to happen when RIM decided to implement ActiveSync.

Let's face it, active sync push email works just as well as BES/BIS email. When faced with the choice, users will go with what is free. Frankly, I can't see businesses holding on to BES either. Surely, some will opt into RIM's device managment system, but if BBs can be managed just like iPhone/Android devices, most will go with what they already have.

RIM has two options: (1) act like everyone else in the market and say good bye to service fee or (2) Build a brand new business (businesses) to replace service fee revenue. Neither of these is a great option but it is the reality.

RIM can capitalize of several things (1) BBM; and (2) its secure network. What does this mean? RIM could be putting together an ecosystem of features that people can subscribe to. It might include: (1) BBM, (2) secure cloud data storage, (3) BBM music, (4) network data compression, and (4) a video rental service. These services would be tightly integrated into BB10 and make for a great user experience.

This means that BBM might no longer be on every BB phone - you'd have to pay for it.

How much would you pay for this kind of service? $5 a month? $10 a month?

RIM could go cross-platform with something like this but it faces obstacles, at least with Apple. Apple wants like 30% of revenue, which is why Apple and MS cannot agree on making Office available on iOS.

I think an offering like this could be profitable but I have no idea if it could come close to replacing service revenue from BIS/BES.

Or, RIM could just make and sell phones like everyone else and limits its business to that.

[Double_J75]

There was a thread a little while ago about bb10 using BIS and many folks seemed upset thet would have to pay for the BIS. Of course they have been paying it all along in a round about way.

What I'm curious to know with this tier service would it also apply to data compression. For example today I use a 1gb data package and I go pretty close to that cap. With bb10 if I don't pay for that service I might save $5 but I would likely need to pay for a higher data package regardless.

I know they were speaking of security but maybe they also meant compression as well. Guess we will find out soon.

[Double_J75]

Also if data is one of the tier and I opt out how would that impact the speed of my browsing. It would be one less hop but more data to the phone. I'm speculating of course

[anon(4018671)]

They are planning to get money from their NOC by having car companies use it worldwide for thing like M2M communications.
The analysts see one thing that they can comprehend and drive down the price without realizing that there will be other sources of revenue to take its place.

That's a bit unfair. They don't invest based on what might happen (although speculators will) and they might view things as you do. Until BB10 is released on Jan 30th it would be inappropriate to risk peoples money, right.

[Dirkmyer]

I really hope they don't throw these pricing tiers to carriers. Imagine how confusing that will be to get a BB10 plan:

"Hi I want the awesome BB10 phone"
"Ok, do you want it with BBM, with data compression, with seecurity..."
"ugh what does it matter? Why do I have to pick and choose now?"
"....?..."
"I'll just get something else"...

They shouldn't split BBM from the BlackBerry experience, and they shouldn't split their service offerings and make consumers pick. It will be too confusing.

If they have to tier price their service fees, why couldn't they do it based on volume? First 10M $.50 fee/device, next 10M $1.00/device... etc etc. That way smaller carriers will have smaller fees, and as BB10 gains popularity, the service revenues will pick up...

[anon(4185604)]

I believe the two ideas of an advertisement based BlackBerry Messenger or BBM on other platforms are absolutely terrible.
I know that the ad based BBM wouldn't make people pay more (in some cases it would), but majority wouldn't bother and would trash their Berries.
BlackBerry devices are unique, with BlackBerry messenger. It's also a major reason to BUY a BlackBerry (amazing instant messaging app; brilliant interface and features).
It would be RIM's worst decision (if they put BBM on other platforms)

[anon(4018671)]

Also if data is one of the tier and I opt out how would that impact the speed of my browsing. It would be one less hop but more data to the phone. I'm speculating of course

RIM has a patent that is supposed to increase browsing speed by caching on the NOC. Apparently they used to compress the data in real-time. With the new method they may be using an already compressed cache when your phone is in a low coverage area. That's how I understand it.

from their patent application: RIM Publishes Patent For Selectively Performing Proxy Services - N4BB

[0026] In this disclosure, "proxy services" or "proxy service" refers to any tool for improving browsing experience by caching, image transcoding, filtering, JavaScript compilation, pre-fetching, code reduction, video stream decoding, or compression, and may be referred to as web accelerators, compression services, or other terms known in the background for decreasing bandwidth or latency of web content delivered to a client browser. Another example of proxy services may include selection between versions of content that are available for client applications. For example, a proxy service may be implemented to retrieve one of several versions of an image for delivery to a client browser. It is not necessary for the proxy service to perform compression of an image if a previously-compressed version of the image may be retrieved by the proxy service.

they also say that they could deliver a smaller image or video, one that better matches your display ie: if in a poor coverage area you might not get a HD stream but a lower res version to make the experience better/smoother.

[Dapper37]

I don't know this for sure but doesn't RIM currently have pricing in place for lower end devices that are based on services offered? I seem to have read about this in the past. I wonder if they are thinking about extending that model.

That's how it is in Thailand!

[lorax1284]

How much do you think they pay for text messaging? Do you think it is free?

Exactly: what is appalling to me is how many people willfully pay $5 to $10 a month for "text messaging" which SHOULD be free (as it piggybacks on normal infrastructure communications) and think nothing of it, but to pay for BBM (a service that works RELIABLY, INTERNATIONALLY, QUICKLY) should be "free". Sheesh.

I don't know this for sure but doesn't RIM currently have pricing in place for lower end devices that are based on services offered? I seem to have read about this in the past. I wonder if they are thinking about extending that model.

Some of the talk a few months ago was how RIM's infrastructure allows for very discrete filtering of internet data to a degree much more sophisticated than other techniques... so if Android and iOS devices were to be able to use this infrastructure, then carriers could leverage it to switch up data plans and offer unique and limited services at much lower costs to Android and iOS customers. So the network might still have a life, not for the top-tier users, but perhaps as a means to an end for emerging markets to better control the traffic on their networks.

[ADGrant]

Exactly: what is appalling to me is how many people willfully pay $5 to $10 a month for "text messaging" which SHOULD be free (as it piggybacks on normal infrastructure communications) and think nothing of it, but to pay for BBM (a service that works RELIABLY, INTERNATIONALLY, QUICKLY) should be "free". Sheesh.



Some of the talk a few months ago was how RIM's infrastructure allows for very discrete filtering of internet data to a degree much more sophisticated than other techniques... so if Android and iOS devices were to be able to use this infrastructure, then carriers could leverage it to switch up data plans and offer unique and limited services at much lower costs to Android and iOS customers. So the network might still have a life, not for the top-tier users, but perhaps as a means to an end for emerging markets to better control the traffic on their networks.

BBM should be free because it competes with other free services. Why give someone a reason not to buy a BB 10 device.

[timmy t]

That's a bit unfair. They don't invest based on what might happen (although speculators will) and they might view things as you do. Until BB10 is released on Jan 30th it would be inappropriate to risk peoples money, right.

Yes, but this falling service revenue was announced back in June or July. And now it is suddenly a reason to drive down the share price.

[timmy t]

BBM should be free because it competes with other free services. Why give someone a reason not to buy a BB 10 device.

Then they can use the free service if they don't want to pay. BBM is considered the cream of the crop quailty wise. The only issue is getting people back to using it.

[berklon]

Then they can use the free service if they don't want to pay. BBM is considered the cream of the crop quailty wise. The only issue is getting people back to using it.

And you're not going to get people back to using it by charging for it - especially when it used to be free, and other chat apps are free.

With so many people on iOS and Android and with MS pushing WP8 - a closed chat app like BBM isn't going to make/break RIM. It's there if you want it, but it ultimately winds up being irrelevant as people need to chat to anyone regardless of what device they're using. A universal solution is always best.

[morlock_man]

I'm expecting BBM video chats and BBM voice chats over cellular data to be part of the new pricing structure that was referred to last night.

Likely text-based BBM will become free, with the ability for any device to use BBM video or voice over wifi. This would likely be the lowest tier. A plan that allows a consumer to use the video or voice over cellular would require additional fees. QNX and RIM have some excellent data compression technologies though. If they can offer video and voice over cellular that use less bandwidth than competing services like FaceTime, they'll clean up.

The flucuations of the last day seem like the shorts pushing for a long squeeze to avoid the full brunt of the short squeeze they were facing.

Crackberry should man up and stop freaking out though. Its unseemly.

[allengeorge]

I doubt RIM will charge for BBM directly (at least for the text-only version of BBM). As Chris U. mentioned, I don't think they know exactly how they're going to replace the BES/BIS revenue, but they know that the current position is indefensible. I suspect they'll try by:

1. Charging for add-on BBM-related services (BBM money, music, etc.)
2. Opening up NOC usage to partners (Timmy-T mentioned M2M for cars - that's a great idea, and highly likely)

[MisterMe11]

Has RIM made any public statements on this? I have seen some discussion in the forum here, but I assumed it was speculation. It would be great if they are making progress towards this.
Tech moves quite slowly in automotive, though. It will take time for this to ramp up if they are successful

They are planning to get money from their NOC by having car companies use it worldwide for thing like M2M communications.
The analysts see one thing that they can comprehend and drive down the price without realizing that there will be other sources of revenue to take its place.

[notfanboy]

Exactly: what is appalling to me is how many people willfully pay $5 to $10 a month for "text messaging" which SHOULD be free (as it piggybacks on normal infrastructure communications) and think nothing of it, but to pay for BBM (a service that works RELIABLY, INTERNATIONALLY, QUICKLY) should be "free". Sheesh.

Because you can reach everybody with a phone with SMS. That's what makes it indispensable. With BBM, I can reach maybe 10% of the people I know.

[SEAWARRIOR]

I don't know how it would do as a service offering.

I think many would frown from paying extra, especially when they have text messaging to contacts friends, etc.

-j

i personally wouldn't pay a dime for bbm/music etc or any other service fee,,, i'm the only person i know w/ a bb,,, i don't miss what i don't use to begin w/,,, i have yet to see what makes bbm/music/money so great,,, & if as a bb owner i don't see an advantage, why would anyone w/ another device even consider it as an option???

[sexybabe88]

BBM should be free because it competes with other free services. Why give someone a reason not to buy a BB 10 device.

exactly. and from a purely pragmatic point of view, even if it is free, bbm is already at a disadvantage since its userbase is so small.

it's like asking people to pay for a new video streaming service that offers fast streaming speeds with no ads. you can't fight youtube's content database or pricing(free).

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk