Guest valueInv Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 Article from the Verge going through the RIM/BBRY timeline: http://www.theverge.com/2012/2/21/2789676/rim-blackberry-mike-lazaridis-jim-balsillie-lost-empire It's a pretty good summary of the situation, although I think the analysis of Heins is probably wrong. I think he's less of an "incrementalist" than they think he is, given all of the developments that have occurred since he took over. They also completely gloss over QNX and the reasons why Lazaridis set out to buy that company. Perhaps that is because Lazaridis has never come out and said why he thinks QNX is so great. Maybe they get QNX :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wellmont Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 as expected 08:19 AM EDT, 08/30/2013 (MidnightTrader) -- "Morgan Stanley (MS) is holding off on upgrading its employees to BlackBerry Ltd.'s (BB.TO, BBRY) newest smartphones and operating system because of concerns that the Canadian company may not back its platform long-term, according to two people with knowledge of the bank's plans," Bloomberg reported. Price: US10.22, Change: -0.04, Percent Change: -0.4 http://www.midnighttrader.com © 1999-2013 MidnightTrader, Inc. All rights reserved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest valueInv Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 as expected 08:19 AM EDT, 08/30/2013 (MidnightTrader) -- "Morgan Stanley (MS) is holding off on upgrading its employees to BlackBerry Ltd.'s (BB.TO, BBRY) newest smartphones and operating system because of concerns that the Canadian company may not back its platform long-term, according to two people with knowledge of the bank's plans," Bloomberg reported. Price: US10.22, Change: -0.04, Percent Change: -0.4 http://www.midnighttrader.com © 1999-2013 MidnightTrader, Inc. All rights reserved. This not only effects the device business but also the MDM business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smazz Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 these days corporations are letting employees bring their own phone to work. nobody wants to have two phones, one for work and one for everything else. bbry is losing share in corporations and it's just getting started. I don't believe bbry will survive as a device company. I think their software and services technology will live on somewhere. again "web presence" means about as much as "eye balls" from a shareholder perspective. Yes yes yes. I know. BYOD movement, blackberry is dying, they are non competitive, they dont have apps, QNX isnt going anywhere, they cant sell phones, blah blah blah. I get it. You bears are broken records just like the bulls. You have made a habit of demanding that people post facts and numbers instead of opinions. I saw numbers that made me scratch my head. How does a company that is hemorhagging subscribers increase its global OS count by 26% over that same time? I ran figures, found out new BB10 users are using their phones more, extrapolated the trend and found that BB has the potential to beat sales estimates this quarter based on those calls. I presented my analysis. I want someone to tell me where the flaw is in the argument - tear down my assumptions - break my calculations - or at least provide another perspective on the analysis. If I wanted to hear your condescending opinions about how bad they were I'd just go to through the last 200 pages of this thread. I've got numbers that you demanded. Now I want intelligent discourse on why they are or aren't to be trusted - not your opinions or hyperbole. You says web presence means nothing. Maybe you're right. How do they increase they're web presence by 26%, losing millions of customers, if they aren't selling new phones? If they're selling phones, that does mean something. That's what I'm driving at. Prove it wrong. ZachMansell most people dont listen to that poster. He is just a mole here - used to be CEO lol don't waste any fingertip skin on him/it whomever. I havent read a post of his in a long time and Im sure I am not the only one here, basically for reasons you listed in your quote. There are alot of other good posters here but you wont have a tough time differentiating. Hint: the ones who have better things to do than write trash ALL DAY LONG on a company they care nothing about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest valueInv Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 Sounds like a lot of fans for the Q10: http://blackberryq10.tumblr.com How come nobody mentioned the quality of the app store? http://www.buzzfeed.com/jwherrman/blackberry-is-a-failed-state Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txlaw Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 Article from the Verge going through the RIM/BBRY timeline: http://www.theverge.com/2012/2/21/2789676/rim-blackberry-mike-lazaridis-jim-balsillie-lost-empire It's a pretty good summary of the situation, although I think the analysis of Heins is probably wrong. I think he's less of an "incrementalist" than they think he is, given all of the developments that have occurred since he took over. They also completely gloss over QNX and the reasons why Lazaridis set out to buy that company. Perhaps that is because Lazaridis has never come out and said why he thinks QNX is so great. " "Turn that off." Interview over. Arguably, Lazaridis had a point, at least about the phrasing of the question. The interviewer wanted to ask about the Indian government's threat to shut down BlackBerry operations in the country unless RIM provided surveillance access to BlackBerry Messenger and email." This goes to my point earlier about open vs. closed source code. Regardless of how secure a company says its code is, if the company can be strongarmed into installing backdoors for governments it isn't secure. I'm more of a hardware guy, but I was talking with someone who is an expert on encryption and security issues and he agrees with microkernals being preferable, but thinks the future of microkernels will be something like seL4 where each piece of the OS is formally verified from the kernel on up. In light of recent events trusting a company to keep its code backdoor free doesn't sound like a good idea. To the extent you are talking about protecting communications and data from governments and legal process, then I think you're right about that. However, the customers that BBRY really needs to keep -- enterprise customers -- tend to be okay with (certain) governments having the ability to get a hold of their data/communications pursuant to legal process. Protecting their proprietary data from other private parties (or internal miscreants) is their main concern. Thus, they're willing to outsource security to BBRY because they understand that BBRY's encryption technology is pretty robust, the devices/software are more secure than competing solutions, and because they trust the company (a necessity since, for communications, we're talking about a centralized architecture here with messages going through their servers across the globe). The same is true with entities who use iMessage or Skype. Ultimately, you're placing your trust in these third parties who will undoubtedly respond to government inquiries. With respect to BBRY's encryption IP, check out: http://www.certicom.com/ http://www.certicom.com/pdfs/FAQ-TheNSAECCLicenseAgreement.pdf http://www.nsa.gov/business/programs/elliptic_curve.shtml http://www.technologyreview.com/view/518476/encryption-patents-could-be-blackberrys-biggest-asset/ At this point, it could be time to use that IP for higher and better uses than BB10 devices, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txlaw Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 Bert Nordberg interview: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324463604579044851825017922.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin4u2 Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 ZachMansell most people dont listen to that poster. He is just a mole here - used to be CEO lol don't waste any fingertip skin on him/it whomever. I havent read a post of his in a long time and Im sure I am not the only one here, basically for reasons you listed in your quote. There are alot of other good posters here but you wont have a tough time differentiating. Hint: the ones who have better things to do than write trash ALL DAY LONG on a company they care nothing about. What I find ironic is how certain posters run around ALL DAY LONG posting about a company they care nothing about, and claim those who post are the ones with an emotional attachment. Who's the one with the emotional attachment? Self-deception at it's finest. I wish there was an ignore feature on this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest valueInv Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Article from the Verge going through the RIM/BBRY timeline: http://www.theverge.com/2012/2/21/2789676/rim-blackberry-mike-lazaridis-jim-balsillie-lost-empire It's a pretty good summary of the situation, although I think the analysis of Heins is probably wrong. I think he's less of an "incrementalist" than they think he is, given all of the developments that have occurred since he took over. They also completely gloss over QNX and the reasons why Lazaridis set out to buy that company. Perhaps that is because Lazaridis has never come out and said why he thinks QNX is so great. " "Turn that off." Interview over. Arguably, Lazaridis had a point, at least about the phrasing of the question. The interviewer wanted to ask about the Indian government's threat to shut down BlackBerry operations in the country unless RIM provided surveillance access to BlackBerry Messenger and email." This goes to my point earlier about open vs. closed source code. Regardless of how secure a company says its code is, if the company can be strongarmed into installing backdoors for governments it isn't secure. I'm more of a hardware guy, but I was talking with someone who is an expert on encryption and security issues and he agrees with microkernals being preferable, but thinks the future of microkernels will be something like seL4 where each piece of the OS is formally verified from the kernel on up. In light of recent events trusting a company to keep its code backdoor free doesn't sound like a good idea. To the extent you are talking about protecting communications and data from governments and legal process, then I think you're right about that. However, the customers that BBRY really needs to keep -- enterprise customers -- tend to be okay with (certain) governments having the ability to get a hold of their data/communications pursuant to legal process. Protecting their proprietary data from other private parties (or internal miscreants) is their main concern. Thus, they're willing to outsource security to BBRY because they understand that BBRY's encryption technology is pretty robust, the devices/software are more secure than competing solutions, and because they trust the company (a necessity since, for communications, we're talking about a centralized architecture here with messages going through their servers across the globe). The same is true with entities who use iMessage or Skype. Ultimately, you're placing your trust in these third parties who will undoubtedly respond to government inquiries. With respect to BBRY's encryption IP, check out: http://www.certicom.com/ http://www.certicom.com/pdfs/FAQ-TheNSAECCLicenseAgreement.pdf http://www.nsa.gov/business/programs/elliptic_curve.shtml http://www.technologyreview.com/view/518476/encryption-patents-could-be-blackberrys-biggest-asset/ At this point, it could be time to use that IP for higher and better uses than BB10 devices, no? Looks like the ECC patents are FRAND: http://www.certicom.com/index.php/ecc-and-the-ietf-part-2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest valueInv Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Here's a feel for the IoT space: http://qz.com/120270/a-new-alternative-to-wi-fi-has-a-range-of-nearly-a-mile-and-wont-drain-your-battery/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest valueInv Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Nokia working its way into autos: http://feedly.com/k/1fwblwN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fareastwarriors Posted September 4, 2013 Share Posted September 4, 2013 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324577304579055321852435370.html?mod=WSJ_business_whatsNews BlackBerry Pushes for Speedy Sale Process The Board Aims to Wrap Up Auction by November. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ballinvarosig Investors Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 Looks almost certain that Blackberry will be broken up. I have no doubt that this is the correct course of action and will maximise shareholder value. The only question is who gets what. I said it before and I will say it again, but Microsoft getting involved makes a lot of sense. If they buy BBM and BES, those products are actually a fantastic fit with the newly acquired Nokia. If BES/BBM can run great on BB7 devices, there is no question that it will run on Microsoft's Asha feature phones as well. With Microsoft's large footprint in emerging market feature phones, acquiring BES/BBM will give them a competitive advantage over other feature phone manufacturers. We know the business will eventually die, but it's still profitable and has a few years of life left in it. Also by getting BBM, it will guarantee that it gets ported to Windows Phone (currently it looks set to feature of Ios and Android only). Finally, by integrating BES into their Lumia range, that will give them a foothold into the corporate market which is non-existent territory for them right now. The patent portfolio has of course been well documented with estimates going from $2B to $5B. I would suspect that the value is going to be at the lower range of those estimates, but you would still imagine that they would do quite well at auction. That leaves the handset division which is a mixed bag. I can't see any of the big players being interested in this (Google, Apple or Microsoft). With the remaining competitors far too small to compete, the division will need total restructuring. BB7 devices still seem to be doing quite well even though they're rapidly falling into obsolescence - someone may wish to try and extract the last few Dollars out of that. BB10 on the other hand has been a spectacular flop. The BB10 OS is worthless, but there is a chance that someone might try to refocus the HW around Android (perhaps with the possibility of licensing BES/BBM?). There are all manner of permutations on who could get what. Another alternative is that Blackberry stays in business but exits the HW business. I believe before Thorsten Heinz took charge, they were giving active consideration to getting out of HW and leveraging expertise in BBM/BES into other OS's. This strategy could still work. Regardless of what happens, I think Blackberry will end their efforts at trying to maintain their own eco-system of HW and OS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary17 Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 Be interesting to look at a sum of the part analysis my take BBM = 1B BES = 7.5B (there's about 20M BES subscribers paying about 10/month and these individual's are likely the top 1% earners. Basing on the $3000/sub for mobile subscribers from the recent VOD/VZ transaction, this is a very rough estimate 20M x 3000 x ($10/$80 monthly bill) .... I think many tend to underestimate the value of a secure global network. Patents = 2B Cash = 1B Hardware = 0 about 10 - 12B or $19 - $23/share Seems like a good arbitrage play now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wellmont Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 the market, and lots of sell side analysts break up value, seems to suggest a figure around $12 a share. that may be high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest valueInv Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 Be interesting to look at a sum of the part analysis my take BBM = 1B BES = 7.5B (there's about 20M BES subscribers paying about 10/month and these individual's are likely the top 1% earners. Basing on the $3000/sub for mobile subscribers from the recent VOD/VZ transaction, this is a very rough estimate 20M x 3000 x ($10/$80 monthly bill) .... I think many tend to underestimate the value of a secure global network. Patents = 2B Cash = 1B Hardware = 0 about 10 - 12B or $19 - $23/share Seems like a good arbitrage play now Any tend to overestimate the value of a secure global network. Clearly it has done little to stop the bleed of customers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary17 Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 dont have much faith in analysts... they were the ones who said RIM was dead last summer and then over estimated the Q1 results... BES would probably do better had BB gone with Android - they have a problem selling their phones, not getting people to use the secure network though. If there are still 20M subs today, these are fairly committed users and will likely stick to it if BB had came up with a better phone. i don't think the value is lost though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wellmont Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 i have faith in the wisdom of crowds. the arbs are valuing this now. I don't see them leaving $9 on the table with bids two months away. i don't have faith in using verizon wireless customers as comps for seats in a declining enterprise software business. Similarly, I don't see the bbm revenue model. therefore for me, $1b is a pipe dream. I can see them selling this business to someone like whatsapp for something way less than $1b. $2b for patents? we shall see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txlaw Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324577304579055321852435370.html?mod=WSJ_business_whatsNews BlackBerry Pushes for Speedy Sale Process The Board Aims to Wrap Up Auction by November. This makes sense. When they made their strategic alternatives announcement, it set the clock ticking. They have to act as quickly as possible now because no potential enterprise customers will be buying or upgrading to any BB10 devices anytime soon. BB10 devices will, of course, still continue to exist. Whoever buys the company -- if it is not broken up into separate pieces -- cannot just leave those who have upgraded to BB10 in the lurch. Moreover, it would be foolish to do so, as there is real revenue associated with those customers who have adopted BB10 and BES. If a DoD department or police department or law firm has BB10 and BES deployed, that's revenue sitting out there that will generate profit for any buyer. So it doesn't make sense to assign BB10 no value whatsoever. And QNX, on which BB10 is built, of course has a lot of value. I've had my run-off/break up value number for a while now -- it'll be interesting to see if I was right or not. It's definitely higher than the current trading price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ballinvarosig Investors Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 $1b is a pipe dream. Instagram cost Facebook $1Bn (30 million users at the time). Whatsapp was touted as being on the market for $1Bn (200 million users). BBM isn't worth $1Bn (60 million users) but still has a value in the low $100's of millions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCG Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 $1b is a pipe dream. Instagram cost Facebook $1Bn (30 million users at the time). FB bought Instagram because they were afraid of them as a competitor. Nobody is worried about Blackberry as a competitor. Not sure what patents BB has, but competitors seem to be doing just fine w/out those patents so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ballinvarosig Investors Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 BB10 devices will, of course, still continue to exist. Whoever buys the company -- if it is not broken up into separate pieces -- cannot just leave those who have upgraded to BB10 in the lurch. Moreover, it would be foolish to do so, as there is real revenue associated with those customers who have adopted BB10 and BES. If a DoD department or police department or law firm has BB10 and BES deployed, that's revenue sitting out there that will generate profit for any buyer. So it doesn't make sense to assign BB10 no value whatsoever. And QNX, on which BB10 is built, of course has a lot of value. BB10 devices will, of course, still continue to exist. Whoever buys the company -- if it is not broken up into separate pieces -- cannot just leave those who have upgraded to BB10 in the lurch. Moreover, it would be foolish to do so, as there is real revenue associated with those customers who have adopted BB10 and BES. If a DoD department or police department or law firm has BB10 and BES deployed, that's revenue sitting out there that will generate profit for any buyer. I think you will find that devices can and have been killed off pretty ruthlessly. Look at how HP dealt with WebOS - it was axed off within a year of them buying it. Nokia have done it before as well. When they released the N9, the CEO actually said it was going to be the first and last device running Meego. Anyone looking at BB10 will see an OS that has about 1% market share. They will see read the reports of poor sales and inventory piling up at BB warehouses and phone stores. The only way that BB10 can be turned around is with a LOT of money. Like I said months ago, the only way to break into mobile will be to spend a stonking amount of money. Perhaps with $10 billion, a competitor might be able to source the best hardware, spend massively on R&D dept filled with top notch talent, port all of the popular apps and then be able to buy enough marketing and advertising muscle to sell devices. That is what Microsoft have essentially done. They've spent the guts of $10 billion to get their pinky toe in the door and secure a 3% market share. All this money has been spent, and while they have a fairly decent product, they're stilling losing money 3 years later. That is why BB10 is worthless. Even if you were sold the devices division for $1 - for the next two years at very least, you're looking at hundreds of million in losses. To whip BB10 into shape, on top the of the hundreds of millions of losses, you're going to have to shovel several billion more into the thing to get it competitive. No sane person is going to want to try and compete Google or Apple (unless you're Microsoft and by not competiting you become irrelevant). QNX probably has some value, but at this point, most of this value just isn't tangible and Blackberry certainly haven't figured out a way on how they can bundle their products and services with the core OS technology. If Blackberry had found a way to get QNX seriously making money, they would have broken it out in their quarterly numbers. As it stands though, I suspect they would be lucky to get their money back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txlaw Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 BB10 devices will, of course, still continue to exist. Whoever buys the company -- if it is not broken up into separate pieces -- cannot just leave those who have upgraded to BB10 in the lurch. Moreover, it would be foolish to do so, as there is real revenue associated with those customers who have adopted BB10 and BES. If a DoD department or police department or law firm has BB10 and BES deployed, that's revenue sitting out there that will generate profit for any buyer. So it doesn't make sense to assign BB10 no value whatsoever. And QNX, on which BB10 is built, of course has a lot of value. I think you will find that devices can and have been killed off pretty ruthlessly. Look at how HP dealt with WebOS - it was axed off within a year of them buying it. Nokia have done it before as well. When they released the N9, the CEO actually said it was going to be the first and last device running Meego. Anyone looking at BB10 will see an OS that has about 1% market share. They will see read the reports of poor sales and inventory piling up at BB warehouses and phone stores. The only way that BB10 can be turned around is with a LOT of money. Like I said months ago, the only way to break into mobile will be to spend a stonking amount of money. Perhaps with $10 billion, a competitor might be able to source the best hardware, spend massively on R&D dept filled with top notch talent, port all of the popular apps and then be able to buy enough marketing and advertising muscle to sell devices. That is what Microsoft have essentially done. They've spent the guts of $10 billion to get their pinky toe in the door and secure a 3% market share. All this money has been spent, and while they have a fairly decent product, they're stilling losing money 3 years later. That is why BB10 is worthless. Even if you were sold the devices division for $1 - for the next two years at very least, you're looking at hundreds of million in losses. To whip BB10 into shape, on top the of the hundreds of millions of losses, you're going to have to shovel several billion more into the thing to get it competitive. No sane person is going to want to try and compete Google or Apple (unless you're Microsoft and by not competiting you become irrelevant). You're assuming that the goal would be to try to take handset market share back from Google and Apple, which is not the case. BB10 was pretty much always destined to be a niche product. Despite the optimistic words we heard from folks like Thorsten Heins over the last year (which, frankly, was part of his job), I don't think anyone there seriously thought they could take back a huge amount of handset market share in some miraculous comeback. (Even MSFT is only projecting 15% market share five years from now.) Instead, the goal has always been to utilize their market position -- and, particularly, their toehold in enterprise -- to transform to a software and services business model. As I've repeatedly said, BES and the other software and services BBRY is building are worth less if BB10 has 0% market share. It would be better to break even on BB10 handset sales and maintain as much market share as possible than to just kill off BB10. The reality is that a niche product like BB10 that is focused on security can be profitable over the short term, despite the cost disadvantages resulting from having low market share. But in the medium to long term, profits on handset sales generally (not just for niche providers) will approach $0. Tied software and services is where the money is to be made. I also think you're overestimating the amount of money that would need to be spent to maintain BB10. We're in patch mode at this point. Most of the money you're seeing spent at this time, which the Street is worried will cause cash burn, is for investment into the entire mobile computing platform (BES, BBM, Secure Workspace, etc.). If BBRY were to decide tomorrow that they're just going to run-off the BB10 business, only maintaining it for its existing customers, the BB10 business line would generate net cash over time because a LOT of expenditures (both in the P&L and CF statement) would go away. But, again, it wouldn't make sense to just kill off BB10. You're also forgetting that the BB10 handset business would be, at worst, breakeven and, at best, highly profitable (in the short term) if it were in the hands of a handset manufacturer. For example, if Lenovo were to buy Blackberry, pretty much all duplicative capex and intangible asset purchases, as well as a lot of SG&A, would go away. At that point, Lenovo could easily make profits on selling BB10 devices. But for Lenovo, the level of profits associated with BB10 handset sales would be very small in relation to the profits from their Android portfolio, and any acquisition would really be for the IP portfolio, BBRY's enterprise/government relationships, the software and services business lines, and QNX. QNX probably has some value, but at this point, most of this value just isn't tangible and Blackberry certainly haven't figured out a way on how they can bundle their products and services with the core OS technology. If Blackberry had found a way to get QNX seriously making money, they would have broken it out in their quarterly numbers. As it stands though, I suspect they would be lucky to get their money back. Well, this is just a symptom of what we were discussing over on the MSFT thread. Just because you don't see profit being broken out in quarterly numbers doesn't mean that value is not being created or that a business isn't being built. We're in the early stages of mobile computing, and QNX is a very valuable strategic asset to have. The market simply doesn't have the patience to wait for the new business to be built. This seems to be a problem for all tech companies engaged in transformation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blainehodder Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 I have some honest questions on breakup/sale valuation. I am not long or short, so these are just straight forward questions that the longs may be able to answer for me. I keep hearing the $2-5B in patents being thrown around...What specific patents are worth that kind of money? Is there any detailed analysis on the patent valuation, or did one or 2 analysts just randomly come up with a number looking at Nortel, and the blog echo chamber has cemented that as a correct estimate? Why can't the largest houses of software engineering talent in the world solve instant messaging and email security without buying it in the form of patents from Blackberry? What does QNX bring to the table for any company? Google and Apple already have much better operating systems(I'd argue MSFT does too). What would QNX add to them? Also, why is BBM worth 1B? Isn't it basically just text messenging? Is the security of BBM worth 1B? I dont get it. Presumably Apple and Google employ engineers who can develop a secure texting platform? Why is BBM worth anything at all? I understand people use it currently, but people used to use ICQ. I honestly dont see much of a difference. I can message on any computing device in many ways. Lastly, who would be a buyer of the rest of it? How would buying anything from blackberry be better for the big 3 than watching it die from the sidelines? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txlaw Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 I keep hearing the $2-5B in patents being thrown around...What specific patents are worth that kind of money? Is there any detailed analysis on the patent valuation, or did one or 2 analysts just randomly come up with a number looking at Nortel, and the blog echo chamber has cemented that as a correct estimate? Analysts have actually analyzed the patent portfolio (including the encryption-related patents) and come up with a wide range of valuations. Their estimates are not solely based on looking at the Nortel transaction or at comps like Motorola. Keep in mind that it is actually quite difficult to determine the value of a patent portfolio. In addition to taking the NPV of potential royalty streams, patents can also have strategic value to certain parties. It's best to very conservatively value the IP portfolio. Why can't the largest houses of software engineering talent in the world solve instant messaging and email security without buying it in the form of patents from Blackberry? What does QNX bring to the table for any company? Google and Apple already have much better operating systems(I'd argue MSFT does too). What would QNX add to them? I suppose you could ask this question about anything, really. Why did Apple buy Siri instead of building itself? Why did Google buy Android instead of building itself? As to QNX specifically, you can just do a search on QNX on this website, and you'll see a lot of discussion about it and why it is both more reliable and secure than Linux or iOS (remember, BB10 is NOT QNX -- BB10 is built on top of QNX). Note that this does not mean that QNX will ever be in as many places as Linux or iOS. Instead, it is more likely to be found in mission and life critical hardware. Also, why is BBM worth 1B? Isn't it basically just text messenging? Is the security of BBM worth 1B? I dont get it. Presumably Apple and Google employ engineers who can develop a secure texting platform? Why is BBM worth anything at all? I understand people use it currently, but people used to use ICQ. I honestly dont see much of a difference. I can message on any computing device in many ways. BBM is not just text messaging. BBM is the equivalent of Google Hangouts, Apple's FaceTime, and MSFT's Skype. What are those worth? After thinking about that, you can come to your own conclusions on what BBM could be worth, especially in the hands of certain third parties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now