BB - BlackBerry

[AZ_Value]

 

"The issue comes down to one thing. Do you want the freedom which Android offers (bugs and all) or do you want the closed but easy-to-use world of iOS. It's your choice."

 

hmm... how does RIMM fits in?

 

Come on now... we're all adults here, can we stop pretending that Playbook thing is even comparable to the competition? Before they even deserve to be mentionned in the tablet Pc world they should first stop disappointing with their phones then we can maybe, just maybe, take them seriously!

[Guest valueInv]

 

"The issue comes down to one thing. Do you want the freedom which Android offers (bugs and all) or do you want the closed but easy-to-use world of iOS. It's your choice."

 

hmm... how does RIMM fits in?

 

It's a quote from the link posted above.

[alertmeipp]

 

"The issue comes down to one thing. Do you want the freedom which Android offers (bugs and all) or do you want the closed but easy-to-use world of iOS. It's your choice."

 

hmm... how does RIMM fits in?

 

It's a quote from the link posted above.

 

Understood. Was trying to think what would make ppl use playbook - besides the form factor and lower pricing (security??) ? It's closed but not easy-to-use since no apps support..

 

How can the new version of their OS change that?

[rmitz]

"The issue comes down to one thing. Do you want the freedom which Android offers (bugs and all) or do you want the closed but easy-to-use world of iOS. It's your choice."

 

Totally depends on the device.  The tablet is inherently a device I want to use simply to get things done....I want the "freedom" on a real PC, which is why I am somewhat disturbed by Apple's moves in this area (App Store for the desktop, etc.) 

[Smazz]

 

Understood. Was trying to think what would make ppl use playbook - besides the form factor and lower pricing (security??) ? It's closed but not easy-to-use since no apps support..

 

How can the new version of their OS change that?

In 2.0 the Android Apps (or I should say those that have gone through the Appworld Process) work on the Playbook 2.0.  Im pretty sure that they intend to not have redundant or as many fart apps go through as you would have on the entire Android library.

[Uccmal]

No kidding.  Alot of useless apps out there.  149 fart apps and around 150 flashlights for Iphone.

 

Not to mention calculators...... daytimers, calendars, music channels

[hardincap]

Globally, much of the world is still on 2g and 2.5g, and RIMM thrives in that environment. As Merkhet pointed out I think people are underestimating RIMM's numbers in international markets.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDQNdEC5O1g&feature=related

[Liberty]

Globally, much of the world is still on 2g and 2.5g, and RIMM thrives in that environment. As Merkhet pointed out I think people are underestimating RIMM's numbers in international markets.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDQNdEC5O1g&feature=related

 

How long will they stay on 2G and 2.5G, though? If RIMM really is better in that environment, will that environment stick around long enough for them to turn around? The price of 3G gear is dropping year by year, and the first network to offer 3G in a 2G area will have a huge competitive advantage, forcing others to upgrade. This can't last forever.

[merkhet]

 

 

Globally, much of the world is still on 2g and 2.5g, and RIMM thrives in that environment. As Merkhet pointed out I think people are underestimating RIMM's numbers in international markets.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDQNdEC5O1g&feature=related

 

 

How long will they stay on 2G and 2.5G, though? If RIMM really is better in that environment, will that environment stick around long enough for them to turn around? The price of 3G gear is dropping year by year, and the first network to offer 3G in a 2G area will have a huge competitive advantage, forcing others to upgrade. This can't last forever.

 

 

That's the question I'm pondering as well.  I still haven't figured out exactly what's driving international growth in RIMM, but I really hope it's not just the 2G and 2.5G situation.  As Liberty pointed out, that means they'll grow for (my guess) about 3 to 4 years max before 3G comes in and overwhelms them again.

 

Perhaps there's a cost issue as well, but I just don't know at this time...

[DCG]

"The issue comes down to one thing. Do you want the freedom which Android offers (bugs and all) or do you want the closed but easy-to-use world of iOS. It's your choice."

 

Totally depends on the device.  The tablet is inherently a device I want to use simply to get things done....I want the "freedom" on a real PC, which is why I am somewhat disturbed by Apple's moves in this area (App Store for the desktop, etc.)

 

What does the App Store for the desktop have to do with freedom? The App Store just makes the process of buying software/apps a hell of a lot easier.  Publishers are not required to sell their software through the App Store.

[hardincap]

 

 

Globally, much of the world is still on 2g and 2.5g, and RIMM thrives in that environment. As Merkhet pointed out I think people are underestimating RIMM's numbers in international markets.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDQNdEC5O1g&feature=related

 

 

How long will they stay on 2G and 2.5G, though? If RIMM really is better in that environment, will that environment stick around long enough for them to turn around? The price of 3G gear is dropping year by year, and the first network to offer 3G in a 2G area will have a huge competitive advantage, forcing others to upgrade. This can't last forever.

 

 

That's the question I'm pondering as well.  I still haven't figured out exactly what's driving international growth in RIMM, but I really hope it's not just the 2G and 2.5G situation.  As Liberty pointed out, that means they'll grow for (my guess) about 3 to 4 years max before 3G comes in and overwhelms them again.

 

Perhaps there's a cost issue as well, but I just don't know at this time...

 

you dont have to know it to make money - sell puts. its trading at just 2x ncav. i would buy a lot of rimm at 1-1.3x ncav

[hardincap]

ok before anyone points out, im assuming international sales will be good for at least another year. the co is still growing in subscribers, fcf positive, has dd% roe. sell puts a year out approaching ncav.

[merkhet]

 

 

That's the question I'm pondering as well.  I still haven't figured out exactly what's driving international growth in RIMM, but I really hope it's not just the 2G and 2.5G situation.  As Liberty pointed out, that means they'll grow for (my guess) about 3 to 4 years max before 3G comes in and overwhelms them again.

 

Perhaps there's a cost issue as well, but I just don't know at this time...

 

 

you dont have to know it to make money - sell puts. its trading at just 2x ncav. i would buy a lot of rimm at 1-1.3x ncav

 

 

It depends on how you invest. 

 

I make concentrated investments, so for someone like me, I need to know the why.  I only like to hold somewhere between 4-8 investments.  If you invest like Walter Schloss and have 80+ positions, then you can get away with not knowing as much about companies.

 

It really boils down to how you want to handle risk.  You can hold fewer positions and handle risk through knowledge.  Or you can hold more positions and handle risk through diversification.

[txlaw]

The sense I get about RIM's position abroad is that it is primarily about first mover advantage, efficiency of hardware on the 2G networks, proprietary network, and Blackberry Messenger, which only recently has had to face a viable competing product.

 

If I were RIM, I would not be so sanguine about their position abroad.  Android and iOS hardware get cheaper every year, already have far more support from developers, and companies like Samsung and LG will certainly looking to get people to switch over to their devices.  Security is also becoming less of a differentiator, if you believe recent reports about government agencies (including US agencies) switching over.

 

I still contend it is safest to view RIM's platform business as a runoff business.  If Blackberry 10 somehow gains traction, that would be great, but I would not count on it.

 

Keep in mind, I own some RIM.

[hardincap]

 

 

That's the question I'm pondering as well.  I still haven't figured out exactly what's driving international growth in RIMM, but I really hope it's not just the 2G and 2.5G situation.  As Liberty pointed out, that means they'll grow for (my guess) about 3 to 4 years max before 3G comes in and overwhelms them again.

 

Perhaps there's a cost issue as well, but I just don't know at this time...

 

 

you dont have to know it to make money - sell puts. its trading at just 2x ncav. i would buy a lot of rimm at 1-1.3x ncav

 

 

It depends on how you invest. 

 

I make concentrated investments, so for someone like me, I need to know the why.  I only like to hold somewhere between 4-8 investments.  If you invest like Walter Schloss and have 80+ positions, then you can get away with not knowing as much about companies.

 

It really boils down to how you want to handle risk.  You can hold fewer positions and handle risk through knowledge.  Or you can hold more positions and handle risk through diversification.

 

 

that seems to me a little like straight jacketing yourself based on your committed investment style and rejecting perfectly good opportunities that don't fit. i very much like to hold concentrated investments for long periods, but if a perfectly good 1-2% holding opportunity comes by then why not take it? Buffett does investors a disservice by  painting himself as a 8 holding kind of guy, when in reality he trades "a hell of alot" in his personal account, according to his biographer Schroeder.

[link01]

Buffett does investors a disservice by  painting himself as a 8 holding kind of guy, when in reality he trades "a hell of alot" in his personal account, according to his biographer Schroeder.

 

i'm sure WEBS personal trading account is tiny compared to berkshire's, so his universe of opportunities is substantially greater. and for that reason must encompass many different opportunity sets than berkshire's. but berkshire still engages in trading: that's where all those massive realized gains have come from over the many years. his favorite holding period may be forever for certain stocks but its certainly not the case for all his investments, stocks or otherwise.

[hardincap]

ok before anyone points out, im assuming international sales will be good for at least another year. the co is still growing in subscribers, fcf positive, has dd% roe. sell puts a year out approaching ncav.

 

with all due respect, most of the value of a business is the terminal value, derived from fcf in the out years. how much is one or two years of growing revenue in int business woth on a dcf basis?. btw, do we know how profitable it is? There is more a race to the bottom approach with heavy competition against nok samsung and the Chinese in lower priced phones. It's a bad business. It's a device business and less a subscription business.  the market knows all about the rimm int business and doesn't think it's worth much. Android is going to be the low price leader and msft intends to play there as well.

 

all valid points, but as berkowitz would say, take it to an illogical extreme. given a difficult future, how much would you NOT pay for the co? $10 $8 $5? My position is that if you have a reasonable degree of confidence that ncav won't drastically fall over the next year, it is perhaps a good idea to commit to buying at near ncav, given large patent holdings that will likely attract potential acquirers shoudl the price approach ncav. with prem on board the chance of the co draining cash in unproductive ways is small.

[merkhet]

 

that seems to me a little like straight jacketing yourself based on your committed investment style and rejecting perfectly good opportunities that don't fit. i very much like to hold concentrated investments for long periods, but if a perfectly good 1-2% holding opportunity comes by then why not take it? Buffett does investors a disservice by  painting himself as a 8 holding kind of guy, when in reality he trades "a hell of alot" in his personal account, according to his biographer Schroeder.

 

 

The 1% or 2% holding will most likely not take 1% or 2% of my time, unfortunately.

 

I'll invert it and say this -- if I'm not confident enough to put 10% of my funds into this stock, then why am I bothering with it at all?  Of course, there are no straight and narrow rules to this either -- I do have a 1% position that is a flyer, but it offers much, much higher potential returns than RIMM going back to $60 or even $150.

 

And I'm not trying to pattern myself after Buffett.  I much prefer Munger.

 

That said, I'm not trying to convince you not to hold 1% or 2% positions.  Different strokes for different folks.

[hardincap]

 

that seems to me a little like straight jacketing yourself based on your committed investment style and rejecting perfectly good opportunities that don't fit. i very much like to hold concentrated investments for long periods, but if a perfectly good 1-2% holding opportunity comes by then why not take it? Buffett does investors a disservice by  painting himself as a 8 holding kind of guy, when in reality he trades "a hell of alot" in his personal account, according to his biographer Schroeder.

 

 

The 1% or 2% holding will most likely not take 1% or 2% of my time, unfortunately.

 

I'll invert it and say this -- if I'm not confident enough to put 10% of my funds into this stock, then why am I bothering with it at all?  Of course, there are no straight and narrow rules to this either -- I do have a 1% position that is a flyer, but it offers much, much higher potential returns than RIMM going back to $60 or even $150.

 

And I'm not trying to pattern myself after Buffett.  I much prefer Munger.

 

That said, I'm not trying to convince you not to hold 1% or 2% positions.  Different strokes for different folks.

 

selling puts and making it 1% position is a commitment to buy a 10% position if stock falls to your target price. Buffett sells puts the same way.

 

i get your bias w/ munger. i like his do nothing until there is something to do that you just cant ignore strategy. but strategies change as a function of asset size, and i don't believe munger would employ the sit on your ass strategy with under $50m aum.

[racemize]

i get your bias w/ munger. i like his do nothing until there is something to do that you just cant ignore strategy. but strategies change as a function of asset size, and i don't believe munger would employ the sit on your ass strategy with under $50m aum.

 

That's interesting--are you sure?  How big was his initial partnership?  I thought he held concentrated positions for semi-long periods of time (e.g., 3 years or more) in that one?

[compoundinglife]

that seems to me a little like straight jacketing yourself based on your committed investment style and rejecting perfectly good opportunities that don't fit. i very much like to hold concentrated investments for long periods, but if a perfectly good 1-2% holding opportunity comes by then why not take it? Buffett does investors a disservice by  painting himself as a 8 holding kind of guy, when in reality he trades "a hell of alot" in his personal account, according to his biographer Schroeder.

 

It's been a while since I have read the snowball but the point at which AS talks about active trading, options and copper futures was during a time where he needed to raise some money and it was not IMO portrayed as SOP. While I don't doubt over history he has traded more than most people think, I believe its the success of his concentrated bets that has set him leagues ahead of over investors.

 

 

[Liberty]

that seems to me a little like straight jacketing yourself based on your committed investment style and rejecting perfectly good opportunities that don't fit. i very much like to hold concentrated investments for long periods, but if a perfectly good 1-2% holding opportunity comes by then why not take it? Buffett does investors a disservice by  painting himself as a 8 holding kind of guy, when in reality he trades "a hell of alot" in his personal account, according to his biographer Schroeder.

 

It's been a while since I have read the snowball but the point at which AS talks about active trading, options and copper futures was during a time where he needed to raise some money and it was not IMO portrayed as SOP. While I don't doubt over history he has traded more than most people think, I believe its the success of his concentrated bets that has set him leagues ahead of over investors.

 

With small amounts, Buffett would probably also do more net-nets, cigar butts, etc.. which you tend to hold for shorter periods of time.

[hardincap]

i get your bias w/ munger. i like his do nothing until there is something to do that you just cant ignore strategy. but strategies change as a function of asset size, and i don't believe munger would employ the sit on your ass strategy with under $50m aum.

 

That's interesting--are you sure?  How big was his initial partnership?  I thought he held concentrated positions for semi-long periods of time (e.g., 3 years or more) in that one?

 

not 100.00% sure, but im doing a bit of interpreting from having read everything about him possible, meeting him several occasions, attending his wesco talks, etc...

[merkhet]

hardincap,

 

If my 1% put position turns into a 10% stock position, then I would think it'd be helpful to understand a little more about RIMM -- for me, personally, anyway.  I mean, again, different strokes for different folks, but I want to know a good deal about my 10% positions.

 

I'd also disagree with your thoughts on Munger's approach sub-$50 million in AUM.  On page 104 of Damn Right!, Janet Lowe indicates that by 1974, the assets in Wheeler, Munger were around $7 million.  Also, let's not forget that Charlie put over 100% of his AUM into the BC Power Bonds situation, so I'd say that when he ran his own partnership, he still employed the sit on your ass strategy.

 

That said, we may have to agree to disagree on both the above.

[merkhet]

As an addendum in the above, I'd add that later on the same page of Damn Right! Janet Lowe writes that the partnership in 1974 was comprised of 61% Blue Chip Stamps.  I believe Charlie started buying sometime after the consent decree in 1967 and before 1970 when Warren started buying it for Berkshire.

 

In either case, by 1970, Charlie had started investing in Blue Chip Stamps and held them until 1974, so I'd categorize that as "sit on your ass" investing.