BB - BlackBerry

[FrankArabia]

The best thing RIM has is Prem on the board to keep them from doing dumb things. With that said, I'm not quite sure if you should look at FFH buying/selling as a signal of any sort. They clearly have been wrong on this trade but we'll see. BB10 is not going to do anything material is my guess.

[Guest valueInv]

The best thing RIM has is Prem on the board to keep them from doing dumb things.

 

Prem is not going to be setting their product strategy - the area where the need their most help.

[FrankArabia]

Prem won't set their strategy, but if someone comes by and wants to acquire it, Prem won't allow for some guy to say "no, we'll do it on our own" hopefully.

[Guest rimm_never_sleeps]

so far wasta on the board has meant nothing. in fact they are proceeding with what likely is going to be a failed strategy of rolling out bbx. He certainly didn't understand the business nor the mobile industry when he made his initial investment. I doubt he understands it any better today. And I will go further. If rimm was HQ and founded in detroit, he never would have invested.

[txlaw]

Sebastian Marineau-Mes on the Internet of Things, "curated openness", and (by implication) QNX/BB10:

 

http://gigaom.com/mobile/rim-internet-of-things-mobilize-2012/

 

As a side note -- and to be very blunt -- anyone who says that HWIC doesn't have any better understanding of the mobile industry today versus when they first bought RIM is smoking crack. 

[Guest valueInv]

Sebastian Marineau-Mes on the Internet of Things, "curated openness", and (by implication) QNX/BB10:

 

http://gigaom.com/mobile/rim-internet-of-things-mobilize-2012/

Let RIM keep talking:

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13746_7-57450583-48/what-siris-eyes-free-feature-means-for-cars/

 

As a side note -- and to be very blunt -- anyone who says that HWIC doesn't have any better understanding of the mobile industry today versus when they first bought RIM is smoking crack.

Read this thread around last year to see who was smoking crack.

[Guest rimm_never_sleeps]

going ahead with bbx tells me all I need to know about their "current" understanding of the mobile industry.

[txlaw]

Sebastian Marineau-Mes on the Internet of Things, "curated openness", and (by implication) QNX/BB10:

 

http://gigaom.com/mobile/rim-internet-of-things-mobilize-2012/

Let RIM keep talking:

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13746_7-57450583-48/what-siris-eyes-free-feature-means-for-cars/

 

First off, it's not just Apple that's getting into cars, but also Microsoft and Google.  QNX, of course, has been in cars for a while. 

 

Clearly, you haven't watched the video.  Otherwise, I would have expected a more insightful post.

 

As a side note -- and to be very blunt -- anyone who says that HWIC doesn't have any better understanding of the mobile industry today versus when they first bought RIM is smoking crack.

Read this thread around last year to see who was smoking crack.

 

It certainly wasn't me.  Read any of my comments on this thread from way back. 

 

See, e.g.:

http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/investment-ideas/rim-research-in-motion/msg53460/#msg53460

http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/investment-ideas/rim-research-in-motion/msg53522/#msg53522

http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/investment-ideas/rim-research-in-motion/msg71727/#msg71727

 

I'm quite rational about RIM and pretty non-biased, I hope.

 

I've heard some pretty crazy stuff on the AAPL thread too -- basically, Apple can do no wrong in some people's eyes.

 

Somehow, I think that HWIC is not so biased and does a bit more homework than people give them credit for.

[txlaw]

going ahead with bbx tells me all I need to know about their "current" understanding of the mobile industry.

 

Are you criticizing RIM or HWIC?  Somehow, you seem to have gotten the two confused.

[Guest rimm_never_sleeps]

no I don't have them confused. wasta invested more money after he understood the strategy would be to go ahead with bbx. therefore I believe he sanctioned the decision. he is on the bod after all. and please don't patronize me any more. stick to the company. you're quite defensive of both wasta and rimm.

[warrior]

Privately, I asked Pem twice in 2010 and 2012 if Rim was a mistake, on both occasions he said NO-with explanations and perspectives for the future of company.

We shall see if that was a mistake…

for me it is  the file too hard to determine, will revisit at 5 $

 

[Uccmal]

so far wasta on the board has meant nothing. in fact they are proceeding with what likely is going to be a failed strategy of rolling out bbx. He certainly didn't understand the business nor the mobile industry when he made his initial investment. I doubt he understands it any better today. And I will go further. If rimm was HQ and founded in detroit, he never would have invested.

 

FFH understands far more than you are giving them credit for.  These guys are not rubes.  They have their own analysts who have pulled the entire industry to pieces.  They also utilize experts wherever they need them. 

 

on Rim, time will tell.  They are being hammered for delaying their new Bb10 phones.  The delay is not bad thing if the product is much better.  Google hasn't yet rushed a phone to market either, even though we all know that is their intent. 

[Guest rimm_never_sleeps]

I assume they employed these "experts" when the shares were $45?

 

the delay is bad. very bad. things move at lightning pace in mobile. if and when bbx finally comes out IP5 will be entrenched, GS3 will be entrenched, GS4 will be announced, Google will have new Nexus products out, and HTC and Nokia will each have "hero" Windows phone 8 devices on carrier shelves. That's 5 devices already vying for shelf space. It does not even count the DROID brand of Verizon, which put Android on the map. And who knows what GOOG has up it's sleeve now that it owns MOTO. You can get an IP4 for free on contract in the USA.

 

There is simply no room for bbx in the marketplace. it does not fill a need. rimm lost. they made poor decisions. there are consequences to those poor decisions. Even companies that made good decisions all along may lose out. Because it's absolutely brutal out there. In fact HTC may already be the odd man out. And that company has been developing quality Android phones for years.

 

rimm is up against MSFT GOOG and AAPL. each have established ecosystems in place that are improving rapidly. prior to the last two years rimm had zero experience developing the kind of mobile OS you need to compete in today's market. it probably still lacks the expertise in house. rimm may release an OS. But it won't have an ecosystem. Developing modern OS is not a core competency of the firm. Each of rimm competitor has a core competency of producing modern mobile OS.

 

rimm is already way behind competition, and moving slower. That's a recipe for failure in technology industry, which among other things, is based on speed to market.

 

curated openness? Is he kidding?

[shalab]

Here is an article on Yahoo! employee smartphone choices:

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-57513927-501465/yahoos-free-phone-offer-snubs-rims-blackberry/

 

* Apple iPhone 5

* Android:

- Samsung Galaxy S3

- HTC One X

- HTC EVO 4G LTE

* Windows Phone 8:

- Nokia Lumia 920

 

 

[SharperDingaan]

You might want to keep in mind than the FFH & non-institutional interests are NOT the same.

 

It is highly likely that if RIM isn't sold it will be privatized, refinanced, & spun out via an IPO at an inflated price. The privatization offer will be at rock-bottom, with lots of flag waving & 'savour' commentary, but there will be no control premium, & the outcome will be guaranteed via a share lock-up. FFH will gain; the non-institutional interests - not so much.

 

 

 

 

[Guest valueInv]

You might want to keep in mind than the FFH & non-institutional interests are NOT the same.

 

It is highly likely that if RIM isn't sold it will be privatized, refinanced, & spun out via an IPO at an inflated price. The privatization offer will be at rock-bottom, with lots of flag waving & 'savour' commentary, but there will be no control premium, & the outcome will be guaranteed via a share lock-up. FFH will gain; the non-institutional interests - not so much.

 

Why is that likely? If BB marketshare goes to very little, where is the value? Why would someone take that on?

 

Why would FFH gain at a rock-bottom offer? Their cost basis is much higher than the price today. Wouldn't t hey be wiped out?

[shalab]

RIMM pays Microsoft for patents:

 

http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/Press/2012/Sep12/09-18RIMPR.aspx

 

[SharperDingaan]

RIM has 'value' but not what the public 'market' says it is. Remove the public reporting (privatization), put RIM in the VC game, & IPO the whole thing in 3-5 years as a growth company at a inflated multiple in a better investment climate. In a strong enough wind even the turkeys can fly.

 

Look at the FFH playbook. Russell, ABH, Brick, etc, etc, etc. When investments go bad they double down repeatedly. If it still doesn't work they do a 'work-out'. Creeping takeovers with no control premiums, & always acting on 'invitations' to help turn XYZ coy around.

[txlaw]

no I don't have them confused. wasta invested more money after he understood the strategy would be to go ahead with bbx. therefore I believe he sanctioned the decision. he is on the bod after all. and please don't patronize me any more. stick to the company. you're quite defensive of both wasta and rimm.

 

Actually, I wasn't being patronizing.  If anything, I was being a wee bit condescending.  And the reason I took that tone was because of what I believe is an incorrect analysis of how I believe the HWIC team works.

 

This is what you said:

 

"He certainly didn't understand the business nor the mobile industry when he made his initial investment. I doubt he understands it any better today."

 

The first part is an overstatement -- I'm sure HWIC did their due diligence on the business and had an understanding of the mobile industry before they put money into RIM.  But the reality is that RIM is not -- and will never be -- an "inevitable", so what I think HWIC was wrong on initially was the margin of safety coming in at X price (not sure what they paid for their first shares), given the potential for decline in the business.  I've said as much in the past.

 

The second part is just a misguided insult.  These guys didn't just dump money into RIM solely because it went down in price.  As Uccmal says, these guys aren't rubes.  Any investor worth their salt would have taken the collapse in share price and reexamined the original thesis, really focusing even more intensely on the industry dynamics. 

 

I expect HWIC did just that.

 

---------

 

As for some of your assertions re: BB10 (it's not called BBX anymore, by the way):

 

"There is simply no room for bbx in the marketplace. it does not fill a need. rimm lost. they made poor decisions. there are consequences to those poor decisions."

 

This might be true in NA.  In fact, I have said in the past that one of the big risks for RIM is that BB10 will be dead on arrival (DOA) in NA due to the delay.  Hopefully, not.  But we shall see.  To declare this now is premature, though.  Just like declaring that NOK will be successful as a result of their jumping onto Win 8.  We have to wait and see and then make the declaration.

 

It's not necessarily true outside of NA, particularly in the markets where BB still has a lot of traction.  BB10 could easily gain traction in countries that will switch to 3G and then 4G much later than NA.

 

The best thing to do after RIM rejected the overtures of MSFT and AMZN (which arguably were poor decisions) was to maximize the value of their various assets.  And I think they're trying to do that, even while going forward with BB10. 

 

"rimm may release an OS. But it won't have an ecosystem."

 

RIM may not have a pre-BB10 release ecosystem, depending on how you define "ecosystem", but it is too premature to say that they won't put forth an attempt at an ecosystem.  Indeed, that is the very point of BB10.  It will be very interesting to see what their approach is and how they will try to get partners to fill in the gaps.

 

Will they be successful?  It remains to be seen.  Handicap it however you like, but don't declare this a done deal.

 

"Developing modern OS is not a core competency of the firm" and "failure in technology industry, which among other things, is based on speed to market."

 

Not true.  QNX is a modern OS, and BB10 will be a modern OS. 

 

The best analogy is Palm/HP and WebOS.  I think most would agree that WebOS was a modern OS that had tons of potential.  It's just that it got killed due to various poor decisions that were made, with the rush to launch being one of the worst decisions of all.  RIM does not want BB10 to be half baked and to have a weird launch akin to WebOS and the Palm Pre.  It's unfortunate that the delay was necessary, but RIM appears to have made the right decision to do so, as they really had no choice given past decisions and the reality of market dynamics. 

 

Perhaps BB10 will become another WebOS, but they seems to be doing what they can to make sure that doesn't happen.  I'm rooting for them and would be doing so even if I didn't have a financial interest in the outcome.  Because we need more than MSFT, GOOG, and AAPL working on this stuff.

[Guest valueInv]

RIM has 'value' but not what the public 'market' says it is. Remove the public reporting (privatization), put RIM in the VC game, & IPO the whole thing in 3-5 years as a growth company at a inflated multiple in a better investment climate. In a strong enough wind even the turkeys can fly.

 

Look at the FFH playbook. Russell, ABH, Brick, etc, etc, etc. When investments go bad they double down repeatedly. If it still doesn't work they do a 'work-out'. Creeping takeovers with no control premiums, & always acting on 'invitations' to help turn XYZ coy around.

 

What do you mean by VC game?

 

Can you explain creeping takeovers?

[Guest valueInv]

no I don't have them confused. wasta invested more money after he understood the strategy would be to go ahead with bbx. therefore I believe he sanctioned the decision. he is on the bod after all. and please don't patronize me any more. stick to the company. you're quite defensive of both wasta and rimm.

 

Actually, I wasn't being patronizing.  If anything, I was being a wee bit condescending.  And the reason I took that tone was because of what I believe is an incorrect analysis of how I believe the HWIC team works.

 

This is what you said:

 

"He certainly didn't understand the business nor the mobile industry when he made his initial investment. I doubt he understands it any better today."

 

The first part is an overstatement -- I'm sure HWIC did their due diligence on the business and had an understanding of the mobile industry before they put money into RIM.  But the reality is that RIM is not -- and will never be -- an "inevitable", so what I think HWIC was wrong on initially was the margin of safety coming in at X price (not sure what they paid for their first shares), given the potential for decline in the business.  I've said as much in the past.

 

The second part is just a misguided insult.  These guys didn't just dump money into RIM solely because it went down in price.  As Uccmal says, these guys aren't rubes.  Any investor worth their salt would have taken the collapse in share price and reexamined the original thesis, really focusing even more intensely on the industry dynamics. 

 

I expect HWIC did just that.

 

---------

 

As for some of your assertions re: BB10 (it's not called BBX anymore, by the way):

 

"There is simply no room for bbx in the marketplace. it does not fill a need. rimm lost. they made poor decisions. there are consequences to those poor decisions."

 

This might be true in NA.  In fact, I have said in the past that one of the big risks for RIM is that BB10 will be dead on arrival (DOA) in NA due to the delay.  Hopefully, not.  But we shall see.  To declare this now is premature, though.  Just like declaring that NOK will be successful as a result of their jumping onto Win 8.  We have to wait and see and then make the declaration.

 

It's not necessarily true outside of NA, particularly in the markets where BB still has a lot of traction.  BB10 could easily gain traction in countries that will switch to 3G and then 4G much later than NA.

 

The best thing to do after RIM rejected the overtures of MSFT and AMZN (which arguably were poor decisions) was to maximize the value of their various assets.  And I think they're trying to do that, even while going forward with BB10. 

 

"rimm may release an OS. But it won't have an ecosystem."

 

RIM may not have a pre-BB10 release ecosystem, depending on how you define "ecosystem", but it is too premature to say that they won't put forth an attempt at an ecosystem.  Indeed, that is the very point of BB10.  It will be very interesting to see what their approach is and how they will try to get partners to fill in the gaps.

 

Will they be successful?  It remains to be seen.  Handicap it however you like, but don't declare this a done deal.

 

"Developing modern OS is not a core competency of the firm" and "failure in technology industry, which among other things, is based on speed to market."

 

Not true.  QNX is a modern OS, and BB10 will be a modern OS. 

 

The best analogy is Palm/HP and WebOS.  I think most would agree that WebOS was a modern OS that had tons of potential.  It's just that it got killed due to various poor decisions that were made, with the rush to launch being one of the worst decisions of all.  RIM does not want BB10 to be half baked and to have a weird launch akin to WebOS and the Palm Pre.  It's unfortunate that the delay was necessary, but RIM appears to have made the right decision to do so, as they really had no choice given past decisions and the reality of market dynamics. 

 

Perhaps BB10 will become another WebOS, but they seems to be doing what they can to make sure that doesn't happen.  I'm rooting for them and would be doing so even if I didn't have a financial interest in the outcome.  Because we need more than MSFT, GOOG, and AAPL working on this stuff.

 

From this post, it sounds like your investment is based on hope and prayer rather than handicapping.

[txlaw]

no I don't have them confused. wasta invested more money after he understood the strategy would be to go ahead with bbx. therefore I believe he sanctioned the decision. he is on the bod after all. and please don't patronize me any more. stick to the company. you're quite defensive of both wasta and rimm.

 

Actually, I wasn't being patronizing.  If anything, I was being a wee bit condescending.  And the reason I took that tone was because of what I believe is an incorrect analysis of how I believe the HWIC team works.

 

This is what you said:

 

"He certainly didn't understand the business nor the mobile industry when he made his initial investment. I doubt he understands it any better today."

 

The first part is an overstatement -- I'm sure HWIC did their due diligence on the business and had an understanding of the mobile industry before they put money into RIM.  But the reality is that RIM is not -- and will never be -- an "inevitable", so what I think HWIC was wrong on initially was the margin of safety coming in at X price (not sure what they paid for their first shares), given the potential for decline in the business.  I've said as much in the past.

 

The second part is just a misguided insult.  These guys didn't just dump money into RIM solely because it went down in price.  As Uccmal says, these guys aren't rubes.  Any investor worth their salt would have taken the collapse in share price and reexamined the original thesis, really focusing even more intensely on the industry dynamics. 

 

I expect HWIC did just that.

 

---------

 

As for some of your assertions re: BB10 (it's not called BBX anymore, by the way):

 

"There is simply no room for bbx in the marketplace. it does not fill a need. rimm lost. they made poor decisions. there are consequences to those poor decisions."

 

This might be true in NA.  In fact, I have said in the past that one of the big risks for RIM is that BB10 will be dead on arrival (DOA) in NA due to the delay.  Hopefully, not.  But we shall see.  To declare this now is premature, though.  Just like declaring that NOK will be successful as a result of their jumping onto Win 8.  We have to wait and see and then make the declaration.

 

It's not necessarily true outside of NA, particularly in the markets where BB still has a lot of traction.  BB10 could easily gain traction in countries that will switch to 3G and then 4G much later than NA.

 

The best thing to do after RIM rejected the overtures of MSFT and AMZN (which arguably were poor decisions) was to maximize the value of their various assets.  And I think they're trying to do that, even while going forward with BB10. 

 

"rimm may release an OS. But it won't have an ecosystem."

 

RIM may not have a pre-BB10 release ecosystem, depending on how you define "ecosystem", but it is too premature to say that they won't put forth an attempt at an ecosystem.  Indeed, that is the very point of BB10.  It will be very interesting to see what their approach is and how they will try to get partners to fill in the gaps.

 

Will they be successful?  It remains to be seen.  Handicap it however you like, but don't declare this a done deal.

 

"Developing modern OS is not a core competency of the firm" and "failure in technology industry, which among other things, is based on speed to market."

 

Not true.  QNX is a modern OS, and BB10 will be a modern OS. 

 

The best analogy is Palm/HP and WebOS.  I think most would agree that WebOS was a modern OS that had tons of potential.  It's just that it got killed due to various poor decisions that were made, with the rush to launch being one of the worst decisions of all.  RIM does not want BB10 to be half baked and to have a weird launch akin to WebOS and the Palm Pre.  It's unfortunate that the delay was necessary, but RIM appears to have made the right decision to do so, as they really had no choice given past decisions and the reality of market dynamics. 

 

Perhaps BB10 will become another WebOS, but they seems to be doing what they can to make sure that doesn't happen.  I'm rooting for them and would be doing so even if I didn't have a financial interest in the outcome.  Because we need more than MSFT, GOOG, and AAPL working on this stuff.

 

From this post, it sounds like your investment is based on hope and prayer rather than handicapping.

 

Wrong.  My investment is based on run-off/break-up value as MOS, with potential multi-bagger upside resulting from BB10 actually being successful. 

 

Sorry that RIM isn't Apple.  Everyone on the board can see that you harbor ill will towards any potential Apple competitor and view everything through those Apple-colored lenses. 

 

Good luck with that mentality -- you're gonna need it. 

[Green King]

no I don't have them confused. wasta invested more money after he understood the strategy would be to go ahead with bbx. therefore I believe he sanctioned the decision. he is on the bod after all. and please don't patronize me any more. stick to the company. you're quite defensive of both wasta and rimm.

 

Actually, I wasn't being patronizing.  If anything, I was being a wee bit condescending.  And the reason I took that tone was because of what I believe is an incorrect analysis of how I believe the HWIC team works.

 

This is what you said:

 

"He certainly didn't understand the business nor the mobile industry when he made his initial investment. I doubt he understands it any better today."

 

The first part is an overstatement -- I'm sure HWIC did their due diligence on the business and had an understanding of the mobile industry before they put money into RIM.  But the reality is that RIM is not -- and will never be -- an "inevitable", so what I think HWIC was wrong on initially was the margin of safety coming in at X price (not sure what they paid for their first shares), given the potential for decline in the business.  I've said as much in the past.

 

The second part is just a misguided insult.  These guys didn't just dump money into RIM solely because it went down in price.  As Uccmal says, these guys aren't rubes.  Any investor worth their salt would have taken the collapse in share price and reexamined the original thesis, really focusing even more intensely on the industry dynamics. 

 

I expect HWIC did just that.

 

---------

 

As for some of your assertions re: BB10 (it's not called BBX anymore, by the way):

 

"There is simply no room for bbx in the marketplace. it does not fill a need. rimm lost. they made poor decisions. there are consequences to those poor decisions."

 

This might be true in NA.  In fact, I have said in the past that one of the big risks for RIM is that BB10 will be dead on arrival (DOA) in NA due to the delay.  Hopefully, not.  But we shall see.  To declare this now is premature, though.  Just like declaring that NOK will be successful as a result of their jumping onto Win 8.  We have to wait and see and then make the declaration.

 

It's not necessarily true outside of NA, particularly in the markets where BB still has a lot of traction.  BB10 could easily gain traction in countries that will switch to 3G and then 4G much later than NA.

 

The best thing to do after RIM rejected the overtures of MSFT and AMZN (which arguably were poor decisions) was to maximize the value of their various assets.  And I think they're trying to do that, even while going forward with BB10. 

 

"rimm may release an OS. But it won't have an ecosystem."

 

RIM may not have a pre-BB10 release ecosystem, depending on how you define "ecosystem", but it is too premature to say that they won't put forth an attempt at an ecosystem.  Indeed, that is the very point of BB10.  It will be very interesting to see what their approach is and how they will try to get partners to fill in the gaps.

 

Will they be successful?  It remains to be seen.  Handicap it however you like, but don't declare this a done deal.

 

"Developing modern OS is not a core competency of the firm" and "failure in technology industry, which among other things, is based on speed to market."

 

Not true.  QNX is a modern OS, and BB10 will be a modern OS. 

 

The best analogy is Palm/HP and WebOS.  I think most would agree that WebOS was a modern OS that had tons of potential.  It's just that it got killed due to various poor decisions that were made, with the rush to launch being one of the worst decisions of all.  RIM does not want BB10 to be half baked and to have a weird launch akin to WebOS and the Palm Pre.  It's unfortunate that the delay was necessary, but RIM appears to have made the right decision to do so, as they really had no choice given past decisions and the reality of market dynamics. 

 

Perhaps BB10 will become another WebOS, but they seems to be doing what they can to make sure that doesn't happen.  I'm rooting for them and would be doing so even if I didn't have a financial interest in the outcome.  Because we need more than MSFT, GOOG, and AAPL working on this stuff.

 

+1 good points this seems more like a contrarian bet than anything. Good luck

[txlaw]

+1 good points this seems more like a contrarian bet than anything. Good luck

 

I appreciate the positivity.

 

However, I try not be contrarian per se because I don't think one is right on an investment solely by going against prevailing opinion.  As Graham said . . . [fill in the blank].

 

In this case, it is more like I believe the downside risk is low at current prices (and even was low at $14 and change, when I first established a position) and the perceived inevitable failure of BB10, resulting in ostensibly $0 worth of value being retained in the software business, is creating an opportunity that one doesn't get very often.

[kevin4u2]

 

From this post, it sounds like your investment is based on hope and prayer rather than handicapping.

 

Sounds like your a growth investor not a value investor.  You don't enjoy dumpster diving, most value investors do.  Take off the apple shaped glasses. 

 

Based on your non stop posting about Apple, it appears like your whole identity and self worth is on the line.  If so, (as the other poster said) good luck.  Emotions and investing don't work well. 

 

I would agree the downside is really quite low on RIM but that depends how far management is willing to go into debt to make BB10 work.  The patents alone are worth the market cap (currently $3.3 billion).  That said, I don't own either RIM or Apple because I can't predict the future ten years out.  What I can almost guarantee is that there will be a new, hip and cool device.  Will it be an Apple device?  I don't know.  To me, Apple is really looking like RIM circa 1997, with all the crackberry talk. 

 

What I do know is five years from now the new device will be all the rage and this discussion will be happening all over again.  Competition is fierce in technology and almost all tech companies keep huge cash stock piles to go to war against each other.