[_StephenBB81]

@dR -yah but if that avatar is an indication of what you look like you'd have half the audience at your command.

It truly is unfortunate that I work in an Industry that is as male dominated, and populated, as the cosmetic industry is female dominated and populated.

[xanadome]

This is becoming to sound rather crazy. I do not know the context of this interview, but thought Mike was holding a PB in his hands. That might have something to do with the abrupt response by him. There might be an underlying agreement that the interviewer should not stray from the agenda (about PB?).

Having said that, I thought that Mike's response, as a half-CEO (sarcastically) of the company sounded and looked awfully immature.

When the interviewer asked the question, it did give me an impression that he was not completely aware of the nature of the issue but wanted to ask it anyway as part of the routine. It did not sound particularly an unfair question when he asked it.

Then, suddenly, it was actually Mike who inadvertently turned it into a security issue, as if there might be something more to it.
His responses such as [It just isn't fair] or [we are just picked on] did not sound right, but incredibly childish, as I do not believe RIM was just picked on. All he had to say was to put the words back into the interviewer's mouth and say something like [The issue came up precisely because the security of the RIM system is so tight and even the government cannot get in there]. After that, and if the interviewer still persisted, then smoke him up with usual legal response such as [RIM would not comment on the security issue] etc.

Whether Mike had a point or not, abruptly leaving the interview like that with childish parting shots left me only with bad aftertaste with the impression of childishness of this half-CEO. And he kept referring to the voice from the side? Sigh....

[belfastdispatcher]

I think there might be an explanation for this, I think Mike didn't realise BBC was gonna air the breif interview, they probably thought they will stop it. It was not a live interview anyway.
I think Mike got annoyed and talked to the presenter on a personal level, not as a CEO.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[xanadome]

When the interviewer asked the question, it did give me an impression that he was not completely aware of the nature of the issue but wanted to ask it anyway as part of the routine.

Oops, it should read;

"it did give me an impression that he was completely aware of the nature of the issue"

[avt123]

I think Mike got annoyed and talked to the presenter on a personal level, not as a CEO.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

And that was foolish on his part.

[andyahs]

Oops, it should read;

"it did give me an impression that he was completely aware of the nature of the issue"

You can edit the post.

[xanadome]

Well, you know, my original post was correct.
Terribly embarrassed!

This happens when I open my mouth before a strong shot of morning coffee.

[lnichols]

The interviewer states basically the following at the end:

Quoted to best of my memory: We have a lot of viewers in the Middle East and Asia, can you guarantee them that they won't lose any Blackberry services?

Right after that Mike ends the interview. If I were a BB user in these area I'd be worried. There is another clip out there of the same BBC interviewer talking to Mike wearing the same clothing, so obviously the interview was for a different segment, and Mike was all too happy to go on and on about the greatness of the Playbook. Here is a link to that video:

BBC - dot.Rory: Two tablets to take on iPad

Also at the bottom of the linked article here is what the interviewer said about the entire thing:

Whilst we were chatting about his new toy, in which RIM has invested so much of its future, Mike Lazaridis was bubbly and enthusiastic. Then I asked a question about RIM's problems in India and the Middle East where it has been in battles with governments concerned that the Blackberry is just too secure for their police to monitor.

Suddenly, the atmosphere in the room chilled, Mr Lazaridis told me my question was unfair, and his PR executive informed us that the interview was over. We were there, apparently, to discuss the new product and nothing else.

[belfastdispatcher]

The interviewer states basically the following at the end:

Quoted to best of my memory: We have a lot of viewers in the Middle East and Asia, can you guarantee them that they won't lose any Blackberry services?

Right after that Mike ends the interview. If I were a BB user in these area I'd be worried. There is another clip out there of the same BBC interviewer talking to Mike wearing the same clothing, so obviously the interview was for a different segment, and Mike was all too happy to go on and on about the greatness of the Playbook. Here is a link to that video:

BBC - dot.Rory: Two tablets to take on iPad

Also at the bottom of the linked article here is what the interviewer said about the entire thing:

BBC still doesn't get it.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[_StephenBB81]

The interviewer states basically the following at the end:

Quoted to best of my memory: We have a lot of viewers in the Middle East and Asia, can you guarantee them that they won't lose any Blackberry services?

Right after that Mike ends the interview. If I were a BB user in these area I'd be worried. There is another clip out there of the same BBC interviewer talking to Mike wearing the same clothing, so obviously the interview was for a different segment, and Mike was all too happy to go on and on about the greatness of the Playbook. Here is a link to that video:

BBC - dot.Rory: Two tablets to take on iPad

Also at the bottom of the linked article here is what the interviewer said about the entire thing:

Mike was Smart to NOT comment on the future with India, his counterpart Jim tried to get an NHL team and was so bold as to start selling tickets before the team even was his, that resulted in the deal being KILLED and the chances of him ever getting an NHL team being near Zero,

IF Mike were to comment on the future of service in India without it being 99% resolved with the government the government could simply choose to stop negotiations due to arrogance and that could really hurt RIM

[lnichols]

Mike was Smart to NOT comment on the future with India, his counterpart Jim tried to get an NHL team and was so bold as to start selling tickets before the team even was his, that resulted in the deal being KILLED and the chances of him ever getting an NHL team being near Zero,

IF Mike were to comment on the future of service in India without it being 99% resolved with the government the government could simply choose to stop negotiations due to arrogance and that could really hurt RIM

A simple I can't comment because of ongoing discussions or NDA's or something would have been smart. Almost looking like your about ready to cry and storming off is not smart. I think that both Mike L and Jim B are too emotionally invested in the company and take any criticism as a personal attack and therefore should not be put into a position of speaking directly with the public. PR firms or internal marketing people would be much better.

[_StephenBB81]

A simple I can't comment because of ongoing discussions or NDA's or something would have been smart. Almost looking like your about ready to cry and storming off is not smart. I think that both Mike L and Jim B are too emotionally invested in the company and take any criticism as a personal attack and therefore should not be put into a position of speaking directly with the public. PR firms or internal marketing people would be much better.

Oh I agree with you there that Mike and Jim should NOT be the spokes people for RIM!

[jd914]

After that interview, Mike L and RIM are really shining now, what a drama queen

[hootyhoo]

It's like I said before. It's an ego problem. They feel it's still their company, but once they go public and grow using other people's money, it's not theirs anymore. They need and are expected to do what is best for the investors.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[CanuckBB]

That's the point of an interview, right? To get an idea, straight from the horse's mouth?

Have you ever given or conducted an interview before? If they knew everything, what would be the point?

The interviewer is not there to educate himself. He is there on behalf of the audience. He should have knowledge of every subject to be broached, in order to acertain if the answer is accurate or not. The same principle applies to an interviewer as to a trial lawyer "never ask a question you don't know the answer to".

[BoldtotheMax]

Mike did what he needed to finally do IMO. Well down Mike, well done!

[mustangv8]

That is some loser leadership right there.

[mustangv8]

It's like I said before. It's an ego problem. They feel it's still their company, but once they go public and grow using other people's money, it's not theirs anymore. They need and are expected to do what is best for the investors.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

YES, exactly.

I trade stocks for many years now and we see this problem over and over again. The owners pay their crazy salary, pay for all costs involved in the company, and the owners get none of the profit RIM makes at all.

The only way the owners make money in RIM, is if other people buy up the shares and the market increases the price of RIM shares.

Imagine if you and your brother owned a hardware store that made 200,000 profit last year most would think that you and your brother would split the cash.
No matter what RIM owners make in profit from the stock, RIM does not give the money to their shareholders.

[jvic31]

[DJBS4LIFE]

I would of done the same thing. We are men.. We have tempers.. We had them and fought from the beginning of time. Good luck changing that. GOOD JOB RIM!!!

[_StephenBB81]

LMAO at office space reference!!!!

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[tkwolf]

I think that presenter interviewed too many politicians.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

YES thats more like it! To begin with, the interviewer probably only knew half of the story and that's from speculations and random reports written and told around him. Whether Mike was being in denial or not (which i honestly don't care), Mike knows better since he knows RIM.

Not trying to sound biased but really, i thought the reporter sounded douchey

[lnichols]

That is ******* priceless!!!!!!!!!!!

Anyway I watched a clip of Jim B talking to Bloomberg yesterday. Go over to engadget if your interested. Jim B did a surprisingly great job. Said native e-mail is coming "soon" in an update. Think that we won't be seeing Mike L much on the interview circuit.

[jvic31]

Jim did a far better job in that Bloomberg interview. I didn't agree with everything he said, and I'm curious what a 'full full web' is (kidding, i know what he meant) but at least he stuck to his talking points and handled any questions that had a negative slant in a positive manner. Far better all around.

[moretreelessbush]

I think he also did a better job in the wsj interview

blogs.wsj.com/digits/2011/04/15/rims-balsillie-talks-about-playbook-security-concerns/

"RIM also has been in the news lately because of conflicts with some governments that want backdoor access to users’ information. Mr. Balsillie said those countries should go to mobile networks or the BlackBerry user’s employer with a warrant and demand information from them instead of RIM. “It’s because of architecture we can’t do this, not by choice.”