10-13-13 10:23 AM
48 12
tools
  1. Pilchard's Avatar
    That's a bit of a stretch. Sure, the funds received from MS were helpful, as it kept the company operating at a time when it was cash poor. But the odds are that had MS not invested, some other investor would have done something. The terms would have been different, because the investor would have been more concerned about making money than Microsoft was, but they're likely would have been some additional capital from somewhere.
    I might have the emphasis wrong but I thought it was accepted wisdom. I thought it was more than cash poor, I thought it was about to become insolvent without the massive cash injection from MS. You can bet Steve Jobs would rather have taken money from anyone rather than Bill Gates which indicates to me there was no one else. Apple was out of time at that point. Am I really stretching?

    There are articles both ways, but look at this one:

    http://www.techhive.com/article/1697...ved_Apple.html

    Naturally Jobs would not have admitted that Gates had saved Apple.
    Last edited by Pilchard; 10-06-13 at 11:12 AM.
    10-06-13 10:55 AM
  2. Wiki Cydia's Avatar
    Naturally Jobs would not have admitted that Gates had saved Apple.
    Gates didn't "save" Apple. Microsoft wrote a check that bought Apple time, but without the iMac, there's nothing. I'm not understating the importance of the investment, but as the saying goes, you don't solve money problems with money. What saved Apple was getting the iMac released, as it was the "hail mary" product; the company was never really in trouble after that.
    10-06-13 11:33 AM
  3. Pilchard's Avatar
    Gates didn't "save" Apple. Microsoft wrote a check that bought Apple time, but without the iMac, there's nothing. I'm not understating the importance of the investment, but as the saying goes, you don't solve money problems with money. What saved Apple was getting the iMac released, as it was the "hail mary" product; the company was never really in trouble after that.
    Without the time bought with the cash there would have been no iMac and no Apple. Now going back to my point when I referenced the MS investment in Apple, companies rarely escape the predicament BB is in. Apple did it with a cash injection from MS and a great new product. BB has neither of those things does it?
    Etios likes this.
    10-06-13 11:36 AM
  4. Wiki Cydia's Avatar
    Without the time bought with the cash there would have been no iMac and no Apple.
    Except you do not know what would have happened without the MS investment. That's where your argument fails; it's all conjecture because things never got that far.

    But also, I can keep this chain going. Without Steve Jobs returning to the company in the NeXT acquisition, MS doesn't invest because it was Jobs who approached Microsoft when Microsoft saved Apple. But then if Jobs hadn't started NeXT, there would be nothing for Apple to acquire, so maybe the founding of NeXT saved Apple. But then there was only a NeXT because Steve Jobs was fired from Apple, so you could say that Apple firing Steve Jobs ultimately saved Apple. Apple is where it is today because each of these events occurred, so they're all relevant. But here's the bottom line: Apple was in trouble before the iMac, but they were fine after it. You can't say that about any of these other events.
    helio9965 likes this.
    10-06-13 11:54 AM
  5. Pilchard's Avatar
    Except you do not know what would have happened without the MS investment. That's where your argument fails; it's all conjecture because things never got that far.

    But also, I can keep this chain going. Without Steve Jobs returning to the company in the NeXT acquisition, MS doesn't invest because it was Jobs who approached Microsoft when Microsoft saved Apple. But then if Jobs hadn't started NeXT, there would be nothing for Apple to acquire, so maybe the founding of NeXT saved Apple. But then there was only a NeXT because Steve Jobs was fired from Apple, so you could say that Apple firing Steve Jobs ultimately saved Apple. Apple is where it is today because each of these events occurred, so they're all relevant. But here's the bottom line: Apple was in trouble before the iMac, but they were fine after it. You can't say that about any of these other events.
    All of which is completely off topic...
    10-06-13 12:03 PM
  6. qwerty4ever's Avatar
    He'll need more than one barrel.
    That barrel is like Santa's sack of toys at Christmas.
    10-06-13 01:10 PM
  7. FSeverino's Avatar
    So... does burning $2 billion in 18 months not mean that they will NOT go bankrupt in the next year and a half?

    sorry, but thats what im getting from this.

    if these people are saying that BB is going to burn up $2 b, but they have OVER $2b and may be heading in a clear direction for the first time in years... is this not, in a way a good thing? even these 'analysts' dont think BB can burn MORE than $2b in 18 months.
    10-07-13 02:01 PM
  8. Troy Tiscareno's Avatar
    So... does burning $2 billion in 18 months not mean that they will NOT go bankrupt in the next year and a half?
    Perhaps, but it would also mean that they wouldn't have enough cash left to continue to operate.

    Let me give you a hypothetical example:

    You have a job, and it's the only job you can get, and you just took a 50% cut in pay, because your company is in trouble. They promise to restore your income in 10 months, but you have to survive until then. You need 80% of your previous pay in order to survive, so the missing 30% has to come out of your savings. Let's say that 30% is $1000 a month. You have $10,000 in savings, so it seems like you can wait it out 10 months, right?

    Not so fast. This doesn't account for the fact that you have to spend $4000 each month, early in the month, before you receive your paycheck, in order to pay your bills on time. Your paycheck does eventually come, but you have to find that $4000 up-front each month for rent, bills, insurance, fuel, etc. in order to be able to live, eat, and get to work.

    The first 6 months you can manage, but by Month 7, there's only $3000 in your savings, and you need to come up with $4000 in advance. With $3000, you can pay your rent and power, but there's nothing left over for car insurance or gas, so now you can't get to work. You have $3000 in the bank, but it's not enough to continue playing the game for the last 3 months. You are either out of a job or out of a place to live. For you, it's Game Over.

    Similarly, BB needs a certain amount of cash to function each month, and while they make revenue, they have to have cash up-front to do so. At some point before they drain the bank account try, they'd drop below the amount of cash they needed to keep functioning.

    All of that supposes that BB's investors would allow BB to continue blowing through their cash, which is really the investors' cash. Without a viable, believable plan to turn the company around (which I don't think anyone believes exists), investors will throw out the BoD and force an asset sale long before that cash goes to zero.
    Mack Gans likes this.
    10-07-13 05:15 PM
  9. BCITMike's Avatar
    Perhaps, but it would also mean that they wouldn't have enough cash left to continue to operate.

    Let me give you a hypothetical example:

    You have a job, and it's the only job you can get, and you just took a 50% cut in pay, because your company is in trouble. They promise to restore your income in 10 months, but you have to survive until then. You need 80% of your previous pay in order to survive, so the missing 30% has to come out of your savings. Let's say that 30% is $1000 a month. You have $10,000 in savings, so it seems like you can wait it out 10 months, right?

    Not so fast. This doesn't account for the fact that you have to spend $4000 each month, early in the month, before you receive your paycheck, in order to pay your bills on time. Your paycheck does eventually come, but you have to find that $4000 up-front each month for rent, bills, insurance, fuel, etc. in order to be able to live, eat, and get to work.

    The first 6 months you can manage, but by Month 7, there's only $3000 in your savings, and you need to come up with $4000 in advance. With $3000, you can pay your rent and power, but there's nothing left over for car insurance or gas, so now you can't get to work. You have $3000 in the bank, but it's not enough to continue playing the game for the last 3 months. You are either out of a job or out of a place to live. For you, it's Game Over.

    Similarly, BB needs a certain amount of cash to function each month, and while they make revenue, they have to have cash up-front to do so. At some point before they drain the bank account try, they'd drop below the amount of cash they needed to keep functioning.

    All of that supposes that BB's investors would allow BB to continue blowing through their cash, which is really the investors' cash. Without a viable, believable plan to turn the company around (which I don't think anyone believes exists), investors will throw out the BoD and force an asset sale long before that cash goes to zero.
    They will have a line of credit to cover this. I can't imagine them not getting a line of credit with money in the bank (high credit rating) and I think you only lose them if you miss payments, even if you are not in the same situation as initially approved.
    10-07-13 06:11 PM
  10. tmb2013's Avatar
    6 quarters does not equal coming months. 6 quarters is 2 1/2 years. This article is sensationalist. If BlackBerry recovers losing $2B will be worth it. Not saying it's not true or the WSJ is lying but their is a fine line between lying and bending the truth. They are manipulating their words to make it sound much worse. The rest of the article is based on analyst speculation. Stop listening to this garbage. Question your media people. In North America the media tends to be very biased to get attention.
    New math?

    6/4 = 1.5 years = 18 months.
    eddy_berry likes this.
    10-07-13 10:40 PM
  11. FFR's Avatar
    New math?

    6/4 = 1.5 years = 18 months.
    Blackberry math.
    That is quite embarrassing.
    10-07-13 10:43 PM
  12. KermEd's Avatar
    What is interesting to me...

    Is this is a financial analyst. Coming to this conclusion *now* about two quarters after everyone else.

    Yes, blackberrys current burn rate means it could run out of money unless it makes some cuts.

    Like the ones it already did. And is still doing to its operations budget. Seems the analyst is still 6 months in the past.

    Posted via CB from my LE
    10-07-13 11:14 PM
  13. eddy_berry's Avatar
    New math?

    6/4 = 1.5 years = 18 months.
    This whole time I never even noticed the mistake. Fixed and my post still stands. Media likes to make mountains out of molehills. Burning $2B in the coming months sounds like a couple months not 18. Still a long way to go. We can't tell what will happen in those 18 months.
    10-11-13 03:57 PM
  14. Turnda643's Avatar
    I've said it before, I'll say it again. Consumers, prosumers, companies, teens, doesn't matter who it is. If they don't know about the product, how do you expect them to buy it?!

    Keyword: MARKETING!!!!

    Subscribe to Tri County Catering and Party Idea Channel. Pin #C00123065
    10-11-13 09:22 PM
  15. Gerii's Avatar
    Another example, not this big, would be another (mobile!) computing pioneer: Psion. Psion made very popular handheld PCs like the Psion Series 3, Siena, Series 5 or the Revo. Back when laptops were way too large and too heavy, smartphones and generic PDAs weren't actually available, they packed your office into your pocket.
    It wouldn't be that bad if BlackBerry 10 lived on backed by most of the mayor smartphone manufacturers like EPOC/Symbian did at that time.

    Posted via CB10
    10-12-13 11:04 AM
  16. Javid Gozalov's Avatar
    BlackBerry Mth Lab

    Posted via CB10
    10-12-13 12:13 PM
  17. TGR1's Avatar
    BlackBerry Mth Lab

    Posted via CB10
    OMG, which vowel should I choose to buy?! A or E?
    10-12-13 01:22 PM
  18. TGR1's Avatar
    I might have the emphasis wrong but I thought it was accepted wisdom. I thought it was more than cash poor, I thought it was about to become insolvent without the massive cash injection from MS. You can bet Steve Jobs would rather have taken money from anyone rather than Bill Gates which indicates to me there was no one else. Apple was out of time at that point. Am I really stretching?

    There are articles both ways, but look at this one:

    1997: Steve Jobs Was Wrong and Microsoft Saved Apple | TechHive

    Naturally Jobs would not have admitted that Gates had saved Apple.
    US DOJ saved Apple, in that case, by forcing MS to need a "viable" competitor. BTW, it wasn't the $150 million that was the most important feature but the promise to keep MS Office for Mac alive for 5(?) years. No MS Office would assuredly have killed Apple.

    But yes, as Wiki Cydia said it is best regarded as Jobs making the deal in order to buy Apple time to develop the iMac. Jobs and the Apple management have made whatever deals needed (MS, Cingular/AT&T) but by and large Apple has been responsible for its own success.
    10-12-13 01:30 PM
  19. bennelong's Avatar
    It wouldn't be that bad if BlackBerry 10 lived on backed by most of the mayor smartphone manufacturers like EPOC/Symbian did at that time.

    Posted via CB10
    I saw an ad/article on CB which said: "Epoc coming to Blackberry". I didn't look at it, but it was a bit of a "what the?" type moment.
    But anyhow, I think we'll see a leaner and meaner BlackBerry in the future.
    Life doesn't often give one second chances.. but it does happen.

    Z10 via CB10
    10-12-13 05:09 PM
  20. 75911's Avatar
    I may not be a financial genius, but I wouldn't invest billions for a company that is losing billions each year unless I could chop it up and make a quick profit.

    If the road to profit takes more than a few months, and the company is losing billions, how does it make sense for any investor to drop billions to buy it?

    It would only make sense in my mind to buy it for almost nothing,(kind of like when Brawn GP bought Honda's F1 team for a dollar I believe) seeing as how the company is so close to being in the red. I imagine that would be the only way the hardware business could remain.

    Without the hardware business, blackberry doesn't matter to most of us...

    Posted via CB10
    10-13-13 12:04 AM
  21. 75911's Avatar
    10-13-13 12:10 AM
  22. lnichols's Avatar
    Too bad they didn't burn it on marketing the devices around the launch! It is almost criminal how little they did to market launching a completely new platform. They probably paid Alicia Keys more than they did on real commercials and advertising and I bet most people don't know that she is involved any way with BlackBerry.

    Posted via CB10
    10-13-13 10:09 AM
  23. eddy_berry's Avatar
    Too bad they didn't burn it on marketing the devices around the launch! It is almost criminal how little they did to market launching a completely new platform. They probably paid Alicia Keys more than they did on real commercials and advertising and I bet most people don't know that she is involved any way with BlackBerry.

    Posted via CB10
    I'm not even sure Alicia Keys' diehard fans knew.
    10-13-13 10:23 AM
48 12

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 10-06-13, 05:35 AM
  2. BlackBerry Done..........Still getting my Z30
    By nyzfinestdomini in forum General BlackBerry Discussion
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 10-05-13, 03:39 AM
  3. BlackBerry Maps - Which Countries Have Turn by Turn?
    By Benjamin_NYC in forum BlackBerry 10 OS
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-05-13, 03:19 AM
  4. T-Mobile USA 10.1.0.2006 to 10.1.0.4200 Upgrade Notice
    By jupiter8 in forum BlackBerry 10 OS
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-04-13, 04:05 PM
  5. Can deleted photos off a blackberry be remotely accessed?
    By trulymadlycourtney in forum General BlackBerry Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-04-13, 02:04 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD