Second and third tier players want BB10?
- BlackBerry is a software company. BB10 is software.
What's so unbelievable about it?
Posted from my Q10 via CB1010-04-16 07:37 AMLike 0 -
There isn't really any other credible player with deep enough pockets. Someone is going to pop up and mention Samsung but they have a) their own solution and b) sell more android phones to enterprise in a week than BBRY does in a quarter.10-04-16 07:43 AMLike 0 -
There isn't really any other credible player with deep enough pockets. Someone is going to pop up and mention Samsung but they have a) their own solution and b) sell more android phones to enterprise in a week than BBRY does in a quarter.
* It's never made a dime of profit for its parent company
* Not a single phone in four years made with this OS has been a hit
* At least two of the phones required writedowns of assets because they were such a bomb
* It has no functional ecosystem to speak of
* The development team is basically disbanded
* The development tools are outdated
* There is no carrier support for this OS
* It will require new drivers (Highly expensive) to support new chipsets
* It's *perceived* by the industry and enterprise buyers as a failure
So a third party is going to pay a licensing fee and then spend many many millions developing and promoting a known failure and expects a different outcome from its maker?
Yes I find that rather unbelievable.10-04-16 07:49 AMLike 8 - UziRetired ModeratorBecause the only people with pockets deep enough to support a mobile OS which costs more than it makes are... Microsoft and they already have windows mobile as a way to burn money.
There isn't really any other credible player with deep enough pockets. Someone is going to pop up and mention Samsung but they have a) their own solution and b) sell more android phones to enterprise in a week than BBRY does in a quarter.
These are the facts that a third party has to look at:
* It's never made a dime of profit for its parent company
* Not a single phone in four years made with this OS has been a hit
* At least two of the phones required writedowns of assets because they were such a bomb
* It has no functional ecosystem to speak of
* The development team is basically disbanded
* The development tools are outdated
* There is no carrier support for this OS
* It will require new drivers (Highly expensive) to support new chipsets
* It's *perceived* by the industry and enterprise buyers as a failure
So a third party is going to pay a licensing fee and then spend many many millions developing and promoting a known failure and expects a different outcome from its maker?
Yes I find that rather unbelievable.
posted via the last true BlackBerry10-04-16 08:40 AMLike 3 - If BlackBerry announces a deal with TCL in north america i will be very pleased. I've played with the DTEK50 and in terms of a budget phone ive been very impressed with the build quality of the device. DTEK60 will be more of the same imho.
Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android10-04-16 10:36 AMLike 0 - If BlackBerry announces a deal with TCL in north america i will be very pleased. I've played with the DTEK50 and in terms of a budget phone ive been very impressed with the build quality of the device. DTEK60 will be more of the same imho.
Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android10-04-16 10:45 AMLike 0 -
Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android10-04-16 10:46 AMLike 0 -
But I come back to... if BlackBerry couldn't make money, how will anyone else?
I'm sure with the licensing deal they could cut the $100 per phone "extra cost" way down. But someone still got to pay for Android and App development if those are to proceed. And is the BlackBerry brand really of any value in the US market? Indonesia... YES. Maybe in China where it isn't really known it would be. But I question if it even valuable in markets like India or South Africa anymore....
But then two the US carrier's haven't been too keen on the Chinese low cost OEMs over the last few years.... think if they have to support and warranty them, they want better quality and better support in place by the OEMs. And without US Carrier support in the US... a phone will need a lot of marketing and sales support from it's maker. BLU is about the only brand I've seen outside of the supported Carrier brands that is making much headway... but that is purely based on price (sub $100 phones)10-04-16 01:54 PMLike 2 -
-
But then two the US carrier's haven't been too keen on the Chinese low cost OEMs over the last few years.... think if they have to support and warranty them, they want better quality and better support in place by the OEMs. And without US Carrier support in the US... a phone will need a lot of marketing and sales support from it's maker. BLU is about the only brand I've seen outside of the supported Carrier brands that is making much headway... but that is purely based on price (sub $100 phones)Dunt Dunt Dunt likes this.10-04-16 01:57 PMLike 1 -
I have about 12 people in my immediate family..... Two of them got free Galaxy S7 from Carriers, and three of them got free iPhone 7 from Carrier. Don't really know how the promotions are done and who pays for what. But there is a reason that I don't think flagship phones are dead... (just have to give them away). Really wish I didn't have a corporate phone.10-04-16 02:14 PMLike 0 - Because the only people with pockets deep enough to support a mobile OS which costs more than it makes are... Microsoft and they already have windows mobile as a way to burn money.
There isn't really any other credible player with deep enough pockets. Someone is going to pop up and mention Samsung but they have a) their own solution and b) sell more android phones to enterprise in a week than BBRY does in a quarter.
These are the facts that a third party has to look at:
* It's never made a dime of profit for its parent company
* Not a single phone in four years made with this OS has been a hit
* At least two of the phones required writedowns of assets because they were such a bomb
* It has no functional ecosystem to speak of
* The development team is basically disbanded
* The development tools are outdated
* There is no carrier support for this OS
* It will require new drivers (Highly expensive) to support new chipsets
* It's *perceived* by the industry and enterprise buyers as a failure
So a third party is going to pay a licensing fee and then spend many many millions developing and promoting a known failure and expects a different outcome from its maker?
Yes I find that rather unbelievable.
Because of name: Xiaomi.
If it was BlackBerry, it would be different story (sentiments etc.).
That's why, if those Chinese companies want to go to enterprise, it is much easier by doing it with well known brand, not their own.
That's why you can buy a lot of those Blaupunkt (well known German brand), Sharp (well known brand in US), Toshiba and other well known branded TVs produced by various Chinese manufacturers sold in western markets (i.e. Hi-Sense is being sold as Sharp in US). You wouldn't know and trust (or buy for that matter) Hi-Sense, as it is "unknown/unreliable" brand. Actually, they are cheap, good quality, nice specs, but bad perception within mass users in the west (although acclaimed by advanced ones). Just like Xiaomi.
Blaupunkt, Sharp, etc just sell their brands and that's it. Sharp TVs won't be made by Sharp anymore | TechHive
Same business model would be for BlackBerry.
Simples.app_Developer likes this.10-05-16 02:35 AMLike 1 - I have about 12 people in my immediate family..... Two of them got free Galaxy S7 from Carriers, and three of them got free iPhone 7 from Carrier. Don't really know how the promotions are done and who pays for what. But there is a reason that I don't think flagship phones are dead... (just have to give them away). Really wish I didn't have a corporate phone.Bbnivende likes this.10-05-16 02:38 AMLike 1
-
however, you should not underestimate enterprises... some of them actually want bb1010-05-16 04:34 AMLike 0 - They really don't - we know this from BBRY's own sales figures - at least not in the volumes that are needed for phone matter. Android/iOS won that battle - their security is 'good enough' for most and where it's not... well they don't represent a large or attractive volume.10-05-16 07:15 AMLike 4
- They really don't - we know this from BBRY's own sales figures - at least not in the volumes that are needed for phone matter. Android/iOS won that battle - their security is 'good enough' for most and where it's not... well they don't represent a large or attractive volume.10-06-16 08:21 AMLike 0
-
Why would someone pick a BB10 made on a here today, gone tomorrow short-term license by Doogee or Wileyfox over a device made by samsung?JeepBB likes this.10-06-16 08:28 AMLike 1 - BlackBerry knows this very well. That's why Chen wants to provide security on iOS and Android for those who feel security is not good enough. It's obvious BlackBerry 10 doesn't do this and everyone chasing unicorns should go and watch the Disney channel I think.
BlackBerry now is about software and not hardware and not only when it comes to phones. I hope the Mercury hits the market as a BlackBerry in-house device, but I'm not getting my hopes up it'll actually hit the market.
I want the company to succeed. This move out of hardware is, sadly for me, the best thing for them to do. Let's be real. And even then, we have to wait and see if BlackBerry can remain relevant. Which I hope they can.10-06-16 08:57 AMLike 0 - BlackBerry knows this very well. That's why Chen wants to provide security on iOS and Android for those who feel security is not good enough. It's obvious BlackBerry 10 doesn't do this and everyone chasing unicorns should go and watch the Disney channel I think.
BlackBerry now is about software and not hardware and not only when it comes to phones. I hope the Mercury hits the market as a BlackBerry in-house device, but I'm not getting my hopes up it'll actually hit the market.
I want the company to succeed. This move out of hardware is, sadly for me, the best thing for them to do. Let's be real. And even then, we have to wait and see if BlackBerry can remain relevant. Which I hope they can.
And yes, BlackBerry is a software company. And BB10 is software. So why would they not seek to monetize it through licensing agreements if they can?
Posted from my Q10 via CB10world traveler and former ceo likes this.10-06-16 10:57 AMLike 1 - But 2 unicorns can't do the Charleston wearing corduroy.
Posted from my Q10 via CB10DrBoomBotz and JeepBB like this.10-06-16 05:53 PMLike 2 -
-
- Forum
- Popular at CrackBerry
- General BlackBerry News, Discussion & Rumors
Second and third tier players want BB10?
« Blackberry's blog post on the DTEK60
|
1 sentence prediction on BlackBerry eleven years from now! »
Similar Threads
-
why jio sim is not responding to my bb10
By bhuva in forum Ask a QuestionReplies: 17Last Post: 11-01-16, 08:27 AM -
Was the Priv more popular than any BB10 phone?
By d987654321 in forum General BlackBerry News, Discussion & RumorsReplies: 90Last Post: 10-10-16, 01:50 PM -
Mobile Nations Weekly: Pixeling, retargeting, and pivoting
By CrackBerry News in forum CrackBerry.com News Discussion & ContestsReplies: 1Last Post: 10-05-16, 08:50 PM -
Nexdock and Passport?
By fanchettes in forum BlackBerry PassportReplies: 2Last Post: 10-04-16, 06:13 AM -
Sharing WiFi access and stickers
By Loc22 in forum General BBM ChatReplies: 0Last Post: 10-02-16, 02:38 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD