[markmall]

Has anyone posted this? Sailfish's creator is selling it to end users that want freedom from Google data collection.

https://www.slashgear.com/jolla-want...h-os-11503600/

Could BB ever pull off this sort of model? Would Prem allow his puppet CEO to spend any money on something that might endanger his interest payments if it didn't work?

OK, let's hear how it costs $10 billion to marry on OS to a chipset.

[Invictus0]

Excluding the fact that "buy and install your own OS" is a niche market for phones, elements of BB10's security are added during manufacturing so it wouldn't be possible to do it after the fact.

If this model appeals to you then you're probably better off just buying Sailfish X and supporting the initiative. There is a Sailfish thread on CrackBerry as well,

https://forums.crackberry.com/genera...sh-os-1112341/

[John Vieira]

The only issue with something like this is that you'll need very specific phone models, and you'll have to unlock their bootloaders, etc.

It's just really not viable.

[app_Developer]

Has anyone posted this? Sailfish's creator is selling it to end users that want freedom from Google data collection.

https://www.slashgear.com/jolla-want...h-os-11503600/

Could BB ever pull off this sort of model? Would Prem allow his puppet CEO to spend any money on something that might endanger his interest payments if it didn't work?

OK, let's hear how it costs $10 billion to marry on OS to a chipset.

Sailfish doesn’t have to spend any money marrying their OS to a chipset because they had the engineering sense to use Linux, which already runs on everything.

BB doesn’t have the luxury of a good decision on that front. So, no, this won’t work for BB10.

[anon(9803228)]

I get that for the BB10 faithful, Chen should be the Antichrist and no opportunity should be wasted to attack him, but this one is kind of ROFL/LMAO: "puppet CEO" and an investor who is worried that sth "might endanger his interest payments"... The horror! Someone investing more than $1B in a company and wanting to have a say in the selection of the CEO - and someone investing more than $1B in a company and wanting to get an optimal return on his investments!!! - this is for sure, the incarnation of absolute evil!

[markmall]

I get that for the BB10 faithful, Chen should be the Antichrist and no opportunity should be wasted to attack him, but this one is kind of ROFL/LMAO: "puppet CEO" and an investor who is worried that sth "might endanger his interest payments"... The horror! Someone investing more than $1B in a company and wanting to have a say in the selection of the CEO - and someone investing more than $1B in a company and wanting to get an optimal return on his investments!!! - this is for sure, the incarnation of absolute evil!

It's much more complicated than that. The debt-holders have different interests than the equity holders in terms of risk. The debt-holders should not be making strategic decisions unless it's in a debt covenant and they have the right to veto a decision. My personal opinion is that Prem discouraged or forbade Chen from taking the risks necessary for the long term success (or possible failure) of the company. This is because Prem would prefer interests payments from a zombie company than taking risks to maximize return to equity holders.

It's a subtle difference between the interests of debt-holders and equity-holders but Prem didn't accumulate his billions by missing this stuff. Chen's fiduciary duties, however, are to the equity-holders. Same with the Board. I'm not sure they satisfied their duties if Prem's interests as a debt-holder took precedence.

[anon(9803228)]

I do get what you say, and you have a point with regards to difference between interests of debt and equity holders.
What is debatable whether it would have served the interests of the equity holders to continue development and/or sale of BB10.

Second point, even though you might argue that Chen's actions reflect the precedence of Prem Watsa as debt-holder, but he is still not a "puppet CEO" (compare with, for example "puppet regimes" of the XX century all around the world)

Edit: this was obviously in reply to post #6

[JSmith422]

It's much more complicated than that. The debt-holders have different interests than the equity holders in terms of risk. The debt-holders should not be making strategic decisions unless it's in a debt covenant and they have the right to veto a decision. My personal opinion is that Prem discouraged or forbade Chen from taking the risks necessary for the long term success (or possible failure) of the company. This is because Prem would prefer interests payments from a zombie company than taking risks to maximize return to equity holders.

It's a subtle difference between the interests of debt-holders and equity-holders but Prem didn't accumulate his billions by missing this stuff. Chen's fiduciary duties, however, are to the equity-holders. Same with the Board. I'm not sure they satisfied their duties if Prem's interests as a debt-holder took precedence.

Well stated, and a point missed by most here on CB.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

Cold hard fact is BlackBerry is a company, one that has always placed IT's interests before customers.... If I had only learned that lesson when the abandoned STORM users....

Anyway there are a couple of Sailfish as an alternative threads already..... and why that won't work for BB10. With the announcement of BB10's EOL, this is pretty much a moot point.

As for Chen.... what he managed to do is nothing short of a miracle. No it wasn't what BB10 fans wanted, but it is much better than what most shareholders (outside of the few in the I support thread) expected.

[app_Developer]

It's much more complicated than that. The debt-holders have different interests than the equity holders in terms of risk. The debt-holders should not be making strategic decisions unless it's in a debt covenant and they have the right to veto a decision. My personal opinion is that Prem discouraged or forbade Chen from taking the risks necessary for the long term success (or possible failure) of the company. This is because Prem would prefer interests payments from a zombie company than taking risks to maximize return to equity holders.

It's a subtle difference between the interests of debt-holders and equity-holders but Prem didn't accumulate his billions by missing this stuff. Chen's fiduciary duties, however, are to the equity-holders. Same with the Board. I'm not sure they satisfied their duties if Prem's interests as a debt-holder took precedence.

Fairfax is both. They have debt and equity investments here. And keep in mind, Watsa has his own investors that he is accountable to and this BBRY/BB thing was a *huge* bet relative to the size of his fund. He has no choice but to salvage what he can out of this.

[PantherBlitz]

Maybe if enough people buy into it Mobile Nations will open a Sailfish Blog. CBK will become SFK.

[markmall]

Also, I'm not saying that BlackBerry necessarily should have kept BB10 longer. My opinion though is that Chen was too much a cheapskate in marketing the phones before giving up.

Posted via CB10

[Chuck Finley69]

Also, I'm not saying that BlackBerry necessarily should have kept BB10 longer. My opinion though is that Chen was too much a cheapskate in marketing the phones before giving up.

Posted via CB10

There was no money to market even if there had been a product to market. Everybody returned all the Z10s and there was a huge write down. BlackBerry never got paid any profits or revenue for those phones..... They were outta money like 50 year old crack hos lookin for customers in the Bellagio. They weren't competitive and broke....

[app_Developer]

These convertible debt issues are pretty common with distressed companies. Yes it gives Watsa a disproportionate advantage in that his downside is protected more than yours and mine.

However, he still stands to make a lot more money if the stock recovers. So I don’t think interests are misaligned.

[Chuck Finley69]

These convertible debt issues are pretty common with distressed companies. Yes it gives Watsa a disproportionate advantage in that his downside is protected more than yours and mine.

However, he still stands to make a lot more money if the stock recovers. So I don’t think interests are misaligned.

Plus other shareholders have right to make similar offer for similar options like convertible debt or preferred issues.

Many people here forget too, at time, any transaction with BlackBerry was big risk.

[Emaderton3]

Someone is selling snake oil lol.

[Invictus0]

Someone is selling snake oil lol.

Sailfish is a legitimate OS, it may not meet your needs but it's certainly not "snake oil".

[Emaderton3]

Sailfish is a legitimate OS, it may not meet your needs but it's certainly not "snake oil".

Just a joke.

Edit: and I realized I posted this in wrong thread also. Was meant for the Passport with Android. Somehow I fused the two in my head. Sorry!

[Invictus0]

Just a joke.

Oh you.

[Dunt Dunt Dunt]

Sailfish is a legitimate OS, it may not meet your needs but it's certainly not "snake oil".

Might not have started off as "snake oil", but at this point that kinda fits. Jolla spends more time trying to pump their prospect in order to get investor funding, than they do on delivering on those promises.

Sailfish is an OS.... but legitimate, from most of what I've seen on Sailfish sites. Most users don't see it as something to use as a daily driver - at least not paired with having to go out an buy an Xperia device, void the warranty and then trying to get Sailfish installed and working. And with native developer support waning, and Android compatibility erroring.... it's looking more and more illegitimate. Much like BB10 there was a lot of promise there... but an OS alone doesn't make a platform.

Like ture "snake oil" salesman, they are promising some new devices for Europe and Latin America as well as deals in Russia.... But their private investor backing is running out.

[Invictus0]

Might not have started off as "snake oil", but at this point that kinda fits. Jolla spends more time trying to pump their prospect in order to get investor funding, than they do on delivering on those promises.

Sailfish is an OS.... but legitimate, from most of what I've seen on Sailfish sites. Most users don't see it as something to use as a daily driver - at least not paired with having to go out an buy an Xperia device, void the warranty and then trying to get Sailfish installed and working. And with native developer support waning, and Android compatibility erroring.... it's looking more and more illegitimate. Much like BB10 there was a lot of promise there... but an OS alone doesn't make a platform.

Like ture "snake oil" salesman, they are promising some new devices for Europe and Latin America as well as deals in Russia.... But their private investor backing is running out.

Certainly not, Jala and INOI have released Sailfish devices in Russia and Latin America this year as part of that initiative. Jolla themselves have released Sailfish X for European markets.

There are plenty of OEM's and OS developers who take money or build a following and don't deliver anything, but Sailfish/Jolla have. Just because a platform isn't popular or doesn't have apps doesn't make it "snake oil".

[Chuck Finley69]

Certainly not, Jala and INOI have released Sailfish devices in Russia and Latin America this year as part of that initiative. Jolla themselves have released Sailfish X for European markets.

There are plenty of OEM's and OS developers who take money or build a following and don't deliver anything, but Sailfish/Jolla have. Just because a platform isn't popular or doesn't have apps doesn't make it "snake oil".

Both devices from both manufacturers appear to be coming soon from sometime around February 2017. They still don't appear to be available for sale...

[Invictus0]

Both devices from both manufacturers appear to be coming soon from sometime around February 2017. They still don't appear to be available for sale...

Both devices have unboxing videos from users on Youtube so they're either out or close to it.

Edit:

https://together.jolla.com/question/...-sailfish-rus/

[lolo9269]

I keep my all Blackberry phone Os 10 and when it was necessary i think i buy when it will be available librism 5 with pureos (privacy secure phone)
https://puri.sm/shop/librem-5/ but no physical no keyboard

[markmall]

In order to clarify my point a little bit, I am aware of the fact that Watsa owns shares of stock as well as convertible debt. But if he views any return on the stock as more speculative and return on his debt as a lucrative safe bet, he will use his influence on the board and with his CEO to serve the interests of the debt holders.

(Even after the much ballyhooed conversion to a software company, Blackberry is still losing money. If we are waiting for income from self driving cars then good luck with that and it will be a long wait.)

I admit I haven't laid out Watsa's debt/equity positions in a spreadsheet (or in Docs to go) and analyzed them. But I do not think that this is so common a scenario in publicly traded companies. Perhaps I'm wrong but that doesn't change the ethical issues.

Posted via CB10