BB - BlackBerry

[DCG]

BBM is not just text messaging.  BBM is the equivalent of Google Hangouts, Apple's FaceTime, and MSFT's Skype.  What are those worth? 

 

 

Doesn't that only have value to Blackberry users though? As less and less people use Blackberrys, the value of BBM decreases. It relies on a network effect, with people quickly leaving the network.

[txlaw]

I don't see bb10 surviving as a niche product. Niche technologies become expensive. It doesn't make any kind of sense for a lot of reasons. For one, enterprise workers don't want to carry a bb10 phone alongside the phones they already carry. Consumers have spoken; and these are the people that carry their phones at work. They want to carry an iphone, windows phone, or android phone. the IT manager no longer wields the power to tell producers what phone they will carry. The other platforms have good enough security, and have been approved for use in most every enterprise. And all three platforms have been or will be approved for national security establishment applications.

 

Actually, consumers have bought BB10 products.  It just happens to be a small amount of consumers.  That is, in fact, why we call it a "niche" product. 

 

Also, there are definitely enterprises and government agencies who have bought BB10 devices as well, specifically because of security.  Not sure what you mean when you say that "niche technologies become expensive."

 

the plan was never to be niche. that's a fallback plan when you run out of options. The original plan was to try to become the 3rd ecosystem. That's why there was so much bbry created hype prior to bb10 launch. They failed at making bb10 anywhere close to being the 3rd ecosystem. Microsoft has established itself as the 3rd ecosystem and is only getting stronger from here. That's why the bbry plan has suddenly changed to trying to salvage something from a failing business.

 

True -- the plan was never to be niche.  Their aspirational goal was to become the 3rd ecosystem.  However, it is clear that Heins understood that they really needed to focus on the niche of the market where they could differentiate themselves, and that they might be relegated to becoming a niche player.  Which is why they started working on making their other software and services available to other ecosystems (starting with the release of Mobile Fusion).

 

Now, you might be right when it comes to Lazaridis.

 

It turns out that bbry has been trying to sell or partner for the better part of 2 years. nothing has materialized. no other company, so far, sees the value of partnering with an ecosystem that is #4 and falling. In fact ZTE just came out today and said they have no plans to make a bid on bbry. Microsoft of course just made it's wireless play and backed it up with $7b.

 

This is pure speculation on your part.  How do you know that BBRY has been trying to sell or partner with anyone for the better part of 2 years?  Was it the same person who told you that they have been trying to license BB10 for the last year? 

 

If anything, it's more likely to be the opposite -- that they have held out and spurned any initial offers to see if they could make it BB10 succeed.

 

I remember you making almost the exact same argument with CLWR.  When it was trading at $1, you said that the spectrum wasn't worth much because Mr. Market said it was, and because nobody was stepping up to buy any of their spectrum. 

 

Then after the bidding war erupted, you completely flipped and said that Ergen had made Sprint pay fair value.  Go figure.

[txlaw]

BBM is not just text messaging.  BBM is the equivalent of Google Hangouts, Apple's FaceTime, and MSFT's Skype.  What are those worth? 

 

 

Doesn't that only have value to Blackberry users though? As less and less people use Blackberrys, the value of BBM decreases. It relies on a network effect, with people quickly leaving the network.

 

Well, this is exactly why they are making BBM cross platform.  And why they will likely be bundling it with their Secure Work Space solution, which is an extension of Balance onto iOS and Android.

 

The software and services businesses are being carved out to work apart from the Blackberry platform.

[Guest valueInv]

I don't see bb10 surviving as a niche product. Niche technologies become expensive. It doesn't make any kind of sense for a lot of reasons. For one, enterprise workers don't want to carry a bb10 phone alongside the phones they already carry. Consumers have spoken; and these are the people that carry their phones at work. They want to carry an iphone, windows phone, or android phone. the IT manager no longer wields the power to tell producers what phone they will carry. The other platforms have good enough security, and have been approved for use in most every enterprise. And all three platforms have been or will be approved for national security establishment applications.

 

Actually, consumers have bought BB10 products.  It just happens to be a small amount of consumers.  That is, in fact, why we call it a "niche" product. 

 

Also, there are definitely enterprises and government agencies who have bought BB10 devices as well, specifically because of security.  Not sure what you mean when you say that "niche technologies become expensive."

 

the plan was never to be niche. that's a fallback plan when you run out of options. The original plan was to try to become the 3rd ecosystem. That's why there was so much bbry created hype prior to bb10 launch. They failed at making bb10 anywhere close to being the 3rd ecosystem. Microsoft has established itself as the 3rd ecosystem and is only getting stronger from here. That's why the bbry plan has suddenly changed to trying to salvage something from a failing business.

 

True -- the plan was never to be niche.  Their aspirational goal was to become the 3rd ecosystem.  However, it is clear that Heins understood that they really needed to focus on the niche of the market where they could differentiate themselves, and that they might be relegated to becoming a niche player.  Which is why they started working on making their other software and services available to other ecosystems (starting with the release of Mobile Fusion).

 

Now, you might be right when it comes to Lazaridis.

 

It turns out that bbry has been trying to sell or partner for the better part of 2 years. nothing has materialized. no other company, so far, sees the value of partnering with an ecosystem that is #4 and falling. In fact ZTE just came out today and said they have no plans to make a bid on bbry. Microsoft of course just made it's wireless play and backed it up with $7b.

 

This is pure speculation on your part.  How do you know that BBRY has been trying to sell or partner with anyone for the better part of 2 years?  Was it the same person who told you that they have been trying to license BB10 for the last year? 

 

If anything, it's more likely to be the opposite -- that they have held out and spurned any initial offers to see if they could make it BB10 succeed.

 

I remember you making almost the exact same argument with CLWR.  When it was trading at $1, you said that the spectrum wasn't worth much because Mr. Market said it was, and because nobody was stepping up to buy any of their spectrum. 

 

Then after the bidding war erupted, you completely flipped and said that Ergen had made Sprint pay fair value.  Go figure.

 

Speculation on whose part? His or yours?

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-13/blackberry-said-to-have-sought-buyers-since-2012-without-success.html

[txlaw]

I don't see bb10 surviving as a niche product. Niche technologies become expensive. It doesn't make any kind of sense for a lot of reasons. For one, enterprise workers don't want to carry a bb10 phone alongside the phones they already carry. Consumers have spoken; and these are the people that carry their phones at work. They want to carry an iphone, windows phone, or android phone. the IT manager no longer wields the power to tell producers what phone they will carry. The other platforms have good enough security, and have been approved for use in most every enterprise. And all three platforms have been or will be approved for national security establishment applications.

 

Actually, consumers have bought BB10 products.  It just happens to be a small amount of consumers.  That is, in fact, why we call it a "niche" product. 

 

Also, there are definitely enterprises and government agencies who have bought BB10 devices as well, specifically because of security.  Not sure what you mean when you say that "niche technologies become expensive."

 

the plan was never to be niche. that's a fallback plan when you run out of options. The original plan was to try to become the 3rd ecosystem. That's why there was so much bbry created hype prior to bb10 launch. They failed at making bb10 anywhere close to being the 3rd ecosystem. Microsoft has established itself as the 3rd ecosystem and is only getting stronger from here. That's why the bbry plan has suddenly changed to trying to salvage something from a failing business.

 

True -- the plan was never to be niche.  Their aspirational goal was to become the 3rd ecosystem.  However, it is clear that Heins understood that they really needed to focus on the niche of the market where they could differentiate themselves, and that they might be relegated to becoming a niche player.  Which is why they started working on making their other software and services available to other ecosystems (starting with the release of Mobile Fusion).

 

Now, you might be right when it comes to Lazaridis.

 

It turns out that bbry has been trying to sell or partner for the better part of 2 years. nothing has materialized. no other company, so far, sees the value of partnering with an ecosystem that is #4 and falling. In fact ZTE just came out today and said they have no plans to make a bid on bbry. Microsoft of course just made it's wireless play and backed it up with $7b.

 

This is pure speculation on your part.  How do you know that BBRY has been trying to sell or partner with anyone for the better part of 2 years?  Was it the same person who told you that they have been trying to license BB10 for the last year? 

 

If anything, it's more likely to be the opposite -- that they have held out and spurned any initial offers to see if they could make it BB10 succeed.

 

I remember you making almost the exact same argument with CLWR.  When it was trading at $1, you said that the spectrum wasn't worth much because Mr. Market said it was, and because nobody was stepping up to buy any of their spectrum. 

 

Then after the bidding war erupted, you completely flipped and said that Ergen had made Sprint pay fair value.  Go figure.

 

Speculation on whose part? His or yours?

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-13/blackberry-said-to-have-sought-buyers-since-2012-without-success.html

 

Yeah, and in late 2012, RIM was said to have drawn interest from IBM:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-09/rim-said-to-draw-interest-from-ibm-over-enterprise-services-unit.html

 

In that article, they said the following:

No party has shown interest in buying all of RIM or the division that makes its phones, and the Canadian company is inclined to wait for the rollout of BlackBerry 10 phones in early 2013 before making any decisions on a sale, the person said. No talks are currently under way, according to the person.

 

So which Bloomberg article is right?  The one where they say that BBRY has been trying to sell itself for two years?  Or the one where they say that BBRY was inclined to wait for the BB10 rollout before making any decisions on a sale?

 

We're in a bidding phase right now, and you can be sure that there will be a lot of interesting stories  seeded into the media.  I've seen such seeding happen with my own eyes.

[Guest valueInv]

I don't see bb10 surviving as a niche product. Niche technologies become expensive. It doesn't make any kind of sense for a lot of reasons. For one, enterprise workers don't want to carry a bb10 phone alongside the phones they already carry. Consumers have spoken; and these are the people that carry their phones at work. They want to carry an iphone, windows phone, or android phone. the IT manager no longer wields the power to tell producers what phone they will carry. The other platforms have good enough security, and have been approved for use in most every enterprise. And all three platforms have been or will be approved for national security establishment applications.

 

Actually, consumers have bought BB10 products.  It just happens to be a small amount of consumers.  That is, in fact, why we call it a "niche" product. 

 

Also, there are definitely enterprises and government agencies who have bought BB10 devices as well, specifically because of security.  Not sure what you mean when you say that "niche technologies become expensive."

 

the plan was never to be niche. that's a fallback plan when you run out of options. The original plan was to try to become the 3rd ecosystem. That's why there was so much bbry created hype prior to bb10 launch. They failed at making bb10 anywhere close to being the 3rd ecosystem. Microsoft has established itself as the 3rd ecosystem and is only getting stronger from here. That's why the bbry plan has suddenly changed to trying to salvage something from a failing business.

 

True -- the plan was never to be niche.  Their aspirational goal was to become the 3rd ecosystem.  However, it is clear that Heins understood that they really needed to focus on the niche of the market where they could differentiate themselves, and that they might be relegated to becoming a niche player.  Which is why they started working on making their other software and services available to other ecosystems (starting with the release of Mobile Fusion).

 

Now, you might be right when it comes to Lazaridis.

 

It turns out that bbry has been trying to sell or partner for the better part of 2 years. nothing has materialized. no other company, so far, sees the value of partnering with an ecosystem that is #4 and falling. In fact ZTE just came out today and said they have no plans to make a bid on bbry. Microsoft of course just made it's wireless play and backed it up with $7b.

 

This is pure speculation on your part.  How do you know that BBRY has been trying to sell or partner with anyone for the better part of 2 years?  Was it the same person who told you that they have been trying to license BB10 for the last year? 

 

If anything, it's more likely to be the opposite -- that they have held out and spurned any initial offers to see if they could make it BB10 succeed.

 

I remember you making almost the exact same argument with CLWR.  When it was trading at $1, you said that the spectrum wasn't worth much because Mr. Market said it was, and because nobody was stepping up to buy any of their spectrum. 

 

Then after the bidding war erupted, you completely flipped and said that Ergen had made Sprint pay fair value.  Go figure.

 

Speculation on whose part? His or yours?

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-13/blackberry-said-to-have-sought-buyers-since-2012-without-success.html

 

Yeah, and in late 2012, RIM was said to have drawn interest from IBM:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-09/rim-said-to-draw-interest-from-ibm-over-enterprise-services-unit.html

 

In that article, they said the following:

No party has shown interest in buying all of RIM or the division that makes its phones, and the Canadian company is inclined to wait for the rollout of BlackBerry 10 phones in early 2013 before making any decisions on a sale, the person said. No talks are currently under way, according to the person.

 

So which Bloomberg article is right?  The one where they say that BBRY has been trying to sell itself for two years?  Or the one where they say that BBRY was inclined to wait for the BB10 rollout before making any decisions on a sale?

 

We're in a bidding phase right now, and you can be sure that there will be a lot of interesting stories  seeded into the media.  I've seen such seeding happen with my own eyes.

So you were speculating?

[txlaw]

I don't see bb10 surviving as a niche product. Niche technologies become expensive. It doesn't make any kind of sense for a lot of reasons. For one, enterprise workers don't want to carry a bb10 phone alongside the phones they already carry. Consumers have spoken; and these are the people that carry their phones at work. They want to carry an iphone, windows phone, or android phone. the IT manager no longer wields the power to tell producers what phone they will carry. The other platforms have good enough security, and have been approved for use in most every enterprise. And all three platforms have been or will be approved for national security establishment applications.

 

Actually, consumers have bought BB10 products.  It just happens to be a small amount of consumers.  That is, in fact, why we call it a "niche" product. 

 

Also, there are definitely enterprises and government agencies who have bought BB10 devices as well, specifically because of security.  Not sure what you mean when you say that "niche technologies become expensive."

 

the plan was never to be niche. that's a fallback plan when you run out of options. The original plan was to try to become the 3rd ecosystem. That's why there was so much bbry created hype prior to bb10 launch. They failed at making bb10 anywhere close to being the 3rd ecosystem. Microsoft has established itself as the 3rd ecosystem and is only getting stronger from here. That's why the bbry plan has suddenly changed to trying to salvage something from a failing business.

 

True -- the plan was never to be niche.  Their aspirational goal was to become the 3rd ecosystem.  However, it is clear that Heins understood that they really needed to focus on the niche of the market where they could differentiate themselves, and that they might be relegated to becoming a niche player.  Which is why they started working on making their other software and services available to other ecosystems (starting with the release of Mobile Fusion).

 

Now, you might be right when it comes to Lazaridis.

 

It turns out that bbry has been trying to sell or partner for the better part of 2 years. nothing has materialized. no other company, so far, sees the value of partnering with an ecosystem that is #4 and falling. In fact ZTE just came out today and said they have no plans to make a bid on bbry. Microsoft of course just made it's wireless play and backed it up with $7b.

 

This is pure speculation on your part.  How do you know that BBRY has been trying to sell or partner with anyone for the better part of 2 years?  Was it the same person who told you that they have been trying to license BB10 for the last year? 

 

If anything, it's more likely to be the opposite -- that they have held out and spurned any initial offers to see if they could make it BB10 succeed.

 

I remember you making almost the exact same argument with CLWR.  When it was trading at $1, you said that the spectrum wasn't worth much because Mr. Market said it was, and because nobody was stepping up to buy any of their spectrum. 

 

Then after the bidding war erupted, you completely flipped and said that Ergen had made Sprint pay fair value.  Go figure.

 

Speculation on whose part? His or yours?

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-13/blackberry-said-to-have-sought-buyers-since-2012-without-success.html

 

Yeah, and in late 2012, RIM was said to have drawn interest from IBM:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-09/rim-said-to-draw-interest-from-ibm-over-enterprise-services-unit.html

 

In that article, they said the following:

No party has shown interest in buying all of RIM or the division that makes its phones, and the Canadian company is inclined to wait for the rollout of BlackBerry 10 phones in early 2013 before making any decisions on a sale, the person said. No talks are currently under way, according to the person.

 

So which Bloomberg article is right?  The one where they say that BBRY has been trying to sell itself for two years?  Or the one where they say that BBRY was inclined to wait for the BB10 rollout before making any decisions on a sale?

 

We're in a bidding phase right now, and you can be sure that there will be a lot of interesting stories  seeded into the media.  I've seen such seeding happen with my own eyes.

So you were speculating?

 

Uhh, no.  Wellmont stated that "it turns out" that BBRY has been trying to sell itself for two years.

 

I said that that was speculation, and that it would be more likely to be the opposite.  But I never claimed to know either way what has been going on with respect to bids in the last two years.

[Guest valueInv]

I don't see bb10 surviving as a niche product. Niche technologies become expensive. It doesn't make any kind of sense for a lot of reasons. For one, enterprise workers don't want to carry a bb10 phone alongside the phones they already carry. Consumers have spoken; and these are the people that carry their phones at work. They want to carry an iphone, windows phone, or android phone. the IT manager no longer wields the power to tell producers what phone they will carry. The other platforms have good enough security, and have been approved for use in most every enterprise. And all three platforms have been or will be approved for national security establishment applications.

 

Actually, consumers have bought BB10 products.  It just happens to be a small amount of consumers.  That is, in fact, why we call it a "niche" product. 

 

Also, there are definitely enterprises and government agencies who have bought BB10 devices as well, specifically because of security.  Not sure what you mean when you say that "niche technologies become expensive."

 

the plan was never to be niche. that's a fallback plan when you run out of options. The original plan was to try to become the 3rd ecosystem. That's why there was so much bbry created hype prior to bb10 launch. They failed at making bb10 anywhere close to being the 3rd ecosystem. Microsoft has established itself as the 3rd ecosystem and is only getting stronger from here. That's why the bbry plan has suddenly changed to trying to salvage something from a failing business.

 

True -- the plan was never to be niche.  Their aspirational goal was to become the 3rd ecosystem.  However, it is clear that Heins understood that they really needed to focus on the niche of the market where they could differentiate themselves, and that they might be relegated to becoming a niche player.  Which is why they started working on making their other software and services available to other ecosystems (starting with the release of Mobile Fusion).

 

Now, you might be right when it comes to Lazaridis.

 

It turns out that bbry has been trying to sell or partner for the better part of 2 years. nothing has materialized. no other company, so far, sees the value of partnering with an ecosystem that is #4 and falling. In fact ZTE just came out today and said they have no plans to make a bid on bbry. Microsoft of course just made it's wireless play and backed it up with $7b.

 

This is pure speculation on your part.  How do you know that BBRY has been trying to sell or partner with anyone for the better part of 2 years?  Was it the same person who told you that they have been trying to license BB10 for the last year? 

 

If anything, it's more likely to be the opposite -- that they have held out and spurned any initial offers to see if they could make it BB10 succeed.

 

I remember you making almost the exact same argument with CLWR.  When it was trading at $1, you said that the spectrum wasn't worth much because Mr. Market said it was, and because nobody was stepping up to buy any of their spectrum. 

 

Then after the bidding war erupted, you completely flipped and said that Ergen had made Sprint pay fair value.  Go figure.

 

Speculation on whose part? His or yours?

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-13/blackberry-said-to-have-sought-buyers-since-2012-without-success.html

 

Yeah, and in late 2012, RIM was said to have drawn interest from IBM:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-09/rim-said-to-draw-interest-from-ibm-over-enterprise-services-unit.html

 

In that article, they said the following:

No party has shown interest in buying all of RIM or the division that makes its phones, and the Canadian company is inclined to wait for the rollout of BlackBerry 10 phones in early 2013 before making any decisions on a sale, the person said. No talks are currently under way, according to the person.

 

So which Bloomberg article is right?  The one where they say that BBRY has been trying to sell itself for two years?  Or the one where they say that BBRY was inclined to wait for the BB10 rollout before making any decisions on a sale?

 

We're in a bidding phase right now, and you can be sure that there will be a lot of interesting stories  seeded into the media.  I've seen such seeding happen with my own eyes.

So you were speculating?

 

Uhh, no.  Wellmont stated that "it turns out" that BBRY has been trying to sell itself for two years.

 

I said that that was speculation, and that it would be more likely to be the opposite.  But I never claimed to know either way what has been going on with respect to bids in the last two years.

https://www.google.com/search?source=ig&rlz=1G1TSHB_ENUS543&q=speculation+definition&oq=speculation&gs_l=igoogle.3.1.0l10.121.1612.0.4608.9.8.0.0.0.0.772.4218.1j2j6-5.8.0...0.0...1ac.1.12.igoogle.HsOtPHZwlzY

[txlaw]

I don't see bb10 surviving as a niche product. Niche technologies become expensive. It doesn't make any kind of sense for a lot of reasons. For one, enterprise workers don't want to carry a bb10 phone alongside the phones they already carry. Consumers have spoken; and these are the people that carry their phones at work. They want to carry an iphone, windows phone, or android phone. the IT manager no longer wields the power to tell producers what phone they will carry. The other platforms have good enough security, and have been approved for use in most every enterprise. And all three platforms have been or will be approved for national security establishment applications.

 

Actually, consumers have bought BB10 products.  It just happens to be a small amount of consumers.  That is, in fact, why we call it a "niche" product. 

 

Also, there are definitely enterprises and government agencies who have bought BB10 devices as well, specifically because of security.  Not sure what you mean when you say that "niche technologies become expensive."

 

the plan was never to be niche. that's a fallback plan when you run out of options. The original plan was to try to become the 3rd ecosystem. That's why there was so much bbry created hype prior to bb10 launch. They failed at making bb10 anywhere close to being the 3rd ecosystem. Microsoft has established itself as the 3rd ecosystem and is only getting stronger from here. That's why the bbry plan has suddenly changed to trying to salvage something from a failing business.

 

True -- the plan was never to be niche.  Their aspirational goal was to become the 3rd ecosystem.  However, it is clear that Heins understood that they really needed to focus on the niche of the market where they could differentiate themselves, and that they might be relegated to becoming a niche player.  Which is why they started working on making their other software and services available to other ecosystems (starting with the release of Mobile Fusion).

 

Now, you might be right when it comes to Lazaridis.

 

It turns out that bbry has been trying to sell or partner for the better part of 2 years. nothing has materialized. no other company, so far, sees the value of partnering with an ecosystem that is #4 and falling. In fact ZTE just came out today and said they have no plans to make a bid on bbry. Microsoft of course just made it's wireless play and backed it up with $7b.

 

This is pure speculation on your part.  How do you know that BBRY has been trying to sell or partner with anyone for the better part of 2 years?  Was it the same person who told you that they have been trying to license BB10 for the last year? 

 

If anything, it's more likely to be the opposite -- that they have held out and spurned any initial offers to see if they could make it BB10 succeed.

 

I remember you making almost the exact same argument with CLWR.  When it was trading at $1, you said that the spectrum wasn't worth much because Mr. Market said it was, and because nobody was stepping up to buy any of their spectrum. 

 

Then after the bidding war erupted, you completely flipped and said that Ergen had made Sprint pay fair value.  Go figure.

 

Speculation on whose part? His or yours?

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-13/blackberry-said-to-have-sought-buyers-since-2012-without-success.html

 

Yeah, and in late 2012, RIM was said to have drawn interest from IBM:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-09/rim-said-to-draw-interest-from-ibm-over-enterprise-services-unit.html

 

In that article, they said the following:

No party has shown interest in buying all of RIM or the division that makes its phones, and the Canadian company is inclined to wait for the rollout of BlackBerry 10 phones in early 2013 before making any decisions on a sale, the person said. No talks are currently under way, according to the person.

 

So which Bloomberg article is right?  The one where they say that BBRY has been trying to sell itself for two years?  Or the one where they say that BBRY was inclined to wait for the BB10 rollout before making any decisions on a sale?

 

We're in a bidding phase right now, and you can be sure that there will be a lot of interesting stories  seeded into the media.  I've seen such seeding happen with my own eyes.

So you were speculating?

 

Uhh, no.  Wellmont stated that "it turns out" that BBRY has been trying to sell itself for two years.

 

I said that that was speculation, and that it would be more likely to be the opposite.  But I never claimed to know either way what has been going on with respect to bids in the last two years.

https://www.google.com/search?source=ig&rlz=1G1TSHB_ENUS543&q=speculation+definition&oq=speculation&gs_l=igoogle.3.1.0l10.121.1612.0.4608.9.8.0.0.0.0.772.4218.1j2j6-5.8.0...0.0...1ac.1.12.igoogle.HsOtPHZwlzY

 

Brilliant.  ::)

[Guest valueInv]

Or at least grounded in reality. ;)

 

Speaking of which, how much do you value RIM's cloud business?

[texual]

Wow BBM carries no cachet, nobody I know would use it on another platform and since BB subscribers are dropping it becomes a much worse proposition. People join existing and growing networks and if BB as a whole goes down, BBM seems like the dumbest platform for anyone to develop for, let alone use.

 

Its all about iMessage, WhatsApp and FB Messenger, and Skype. There really isn't another platform, maybe Google Talk when they make it fully unified. People use SMS/text on any platform and BBM doesn't have a competitive advantage over oncoming forms of communication like Snapchat or instagram. 1BN is a lofty idea to float. But I don't believe that.

[txlaw]

Hmm, where did this post go?

 

I remember saying the CEOs here would be fired right before they were. You believed ML walked on water and could never miscalculate. I remember saying the company had fallen behind in the technology race, that bb10 would be doa, and that bbry would be put up for sale, well before it was publicly announced. I remember you being shocked at that news, proclaiming that the markets "lacked patience" for the master plan to play out. You question my pronouncements. Yet your posts are filled with nothing but your own wild speculations, passed off as facts, based on scant real evidence. go figure.

 

I guess you decided it wasn't a good idea to start making stuff up like valueInv!  ;D

[txlaw]

Oh, and wellmont, cross-platform BBM hasn't been released yet.  But we're starting to get previews of it:

 

http://www.engadget.com/2013/09/02/bbm-for-android-beta-walkthrough

[alertmeipp]

What do you guys see as potential suitors for this one? How would the buyer benefit from BBRY? What can the buyer+BRRY do to turn BBRY around that BBRY can't by itself.

 

 

would you guys even touch this if Prem is not involved?

[txlaw]

What do you guys see as potential suitors for this one? How would the buyer benefit from BBRY? What can the buyer+BRRY do to turn BBRY around that BBRY can't by itself.

 

 

would you guys even touch this if Prem is not involved?

 

Re: strategic partners or acquirors, see ( http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/investment-ideas/rim-research-in-motion/msg127079/#msg127079 ) for some possibilities.

 

Would I have touched this had Prem Watsa not been involved?  Definitely not.  Here are some excerpts from my previous posts that demonstrate this:

 

I have to say, I'd be worried about RIMM's ability to make its BBX OS a success.  The market innovators, Apple and Google (maybe MSFT will make inroads, but that remains to be seen), are slowly but surely becoming the OS's for our three screens (phone, PC, and TV).  RIMM needs to think about that and adjust its strategy accordingly.

 

Ultimately, there is value in RIMM.  But what you get out of the investment will depend on the price you paid for the company.  I'm not ready yet to go with RIMM at current prices until I see a transformation a la DELL.

 

http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/investment-ideas/rim-research-in-motion/msg59388/#msg59388

 

I bought a small amount of RIMM yesterday for the first time ever.

 

I think that with Mr. Watsa on the board, there is much less risk now that the assets that RIMM has and the cash it generates gets destroyed by management.

 

If these guys somehow turnaround the company, there will be very nice upside, but I'm not counting on that.  I'm counting on the downside risk being fairly low.  Probably trades somewhere close to (if not below) runoff/breakup value at this point.

 

http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/fairfax-financial/prem-watsa-brings-hope-to-rim%27s-restless-shareholders/msg67150/#msg67150

 

Personally, I believe that HWIC made a big mistake getting into RIM at the high prices they initially started buying at.  They appear to have made the same mistake with DELL.

 

However, at this point, it makes sense to me to get involved because at current prices, the gap between IV and market price is close to 0 in a runoff situation, a decent size where assets are optimized through a change in strategy (which RIM is now taking), and very large if there is an actual turnaround where BB10 gains transaction (optionality -- don't count on this).  For me, it was very important to make sure that assets wouldn't deteriorate in value based on RIM management being in denial.  When Mr. Watsa joined the board, the calculus changed for me, and I started a position.  And it looks like Mr. Watsa's influence is partly behind Heins' recent acknowledgement of the problems that RIM has.

 

http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/investment-ideas/rim-research-in-motion/msg73614/#msg73614

[Guest valueInv]

Hmm, where did this post go?

 

I remember saying the CEOs here would be fired right before they were. You believed ML walked on water and could never miscalculate. I remember saying the company had fallen behind in the technology race, that bb10 would be doa, and that bbry would be put up for sale, well before it was publicly announced. I remember you being shocked at that news, proclaiming that the markets "lacked patience" for the master plan to play out. You question my pronouncements. Yet your posts are filled with nothing but your own wild speculations, passed off as facts, based on scant real evidence. go figure.

 

I guess you decided it wasn't a good idea to start making stuff up like valueInv!  ;D

 

Nobody can hold a candle to you in that regard. ;D ;)

 

But in the meantime, why don't you tell us how valuable RIM's cloud business is?

[Myth465]

Personally I think alot of this is pie in the sky.

The world will go on just fine without BBM, or even Nokia for that matter.

 

It went on just fine with out Palms Web OS and countless other past OSes.

 

Business is brutal, there are winners and losers, and overtime winners become losers.

We are now in greater fool area of investing. There are alot of fools though who will pay top dollar, so all bets are off.

[txlaw]

We are now in greater fool area of investing. There are alot of fools though who will pay top dollar, so all bets are off.

 

Yup, I expected this excuse to come out sooner or later.  Although I figured it would be valueInv, wellmont, or someone who had been publicly short to say it.  Guess I'm not surprised, though, given your minimally helpful posts on other threads lately, as well as your views on Skype (which apparently was valued at somewhere between $0 and $8.5 billion by MSFT).

 

So, yeah, even if BBRY gets broken up or sold off, or if some JV occurs where BBRY gets a cash infusion, there will be people who say -- well, it was just a greater fool situation.  The asset value was a fantasy, and really you just got lucky.  There was no MOS whatsoever.

 

I get it.  I've heard this over and over in names like BBRY, SHLD, and CLWR.  If I'm wrong, I think I will be finding out soon enough with BBRY.  But I realize that people will always claim that I was "speculating."  I'm fine with that because that's something I have to deal with to get outsized returns, given my style of "value investing," which is focused a lot less on the primacy of the income account.   

 

Okay, so let's assume that BBM is worth $0.  Then what do people think about BBRY's break-up value?  I mean, criticizing BBM seems like a pretty lame excuse for throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

[rkbabang]

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

 

I have no position in Blackberry (other than being long Fairfax) and no axe to grind, but I really don't get the lofty values you guys are putting on this.  It seems like a lot of wishful thinking to me.  I still agree with what I posted here.  The total amount will end up being closer to $4B than $20B. Although for Fairfax's sake I do hope I'm wrong.

 

[rkbabang]

To expand a little. 

 

Cash:  cash is cash and worth what it is worth.

But the rest of it is very up in the air. 

Patents: I'm not sure how to value the Patents, I'm taking a wild guess that they are worth $1B+/-$500M.

BBM:  I don't put any value on BBM, I don't think anyone wants it.  $0

BES: Anyone who buys this is going to regret it unless they pay pennies on the dollar, so BES $2B+/-$1.5B or less.

Hardware: $0 no one will want it.

 

I'd be pissed if I was a shareholder of a company which bought any or all of the above and paid more than those prices.  That isn't to say companies don't over-pay for things sometimes (even drastically).  But even a drastic overpayment won't get you to $20B.

[txlaw]

To expand a little. 

 

Cash:  cash is cash and worth what it is worth.

But the rest of it is very up in the air. 

Patents: I'm not sure how to value the Patents, I'm taking a wild guess that they are worth $1B+/-$500M.

BBM:  I don't put any value on BBM, I don't think anyone wants it.  $0

BES: Anyone who buys this is going to regret it unless they pay pennies on the dollar, so BES $2B+/-$1.5B or less.

Hardware: $0 no one will want it.

 

I'd be pissed if I was a shareholder of a company which bought any or all of the above and paid more than those prices.  That isn't to say companies don't over-pay for things sometimes (even drastically).  But even a drastic overpayment won't get you to $20B.

 

Clearly, we disagree on the value of these assets.  That's fine.  I would actually agree with you that if we get to $20 billion, that would definitely be overpaying.

 

Btw, your posts about government back doors into encryption were very timely:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57601599-38/nsa-can-see-through-encryption-including-your-private-e-mails-says-report/

[Guest wellmont]

We are now in greater fool area of investing. There are alot of fools though who will pay top dollar, so all bets are off.

 

Yup, I expected this excuse to come out sooner or later.  Although I figured it would be valueInv, wellmont, or someone who had been publicly short to say it.  Guess I'm not surprised, though, given your minimally helpful posts on other threads lately, as well as your views on Skype (which apparently was valued at somewhere between $0 and $8.5 billion by MSFT).

 

So, yeah, even if BBRY gets broken up or sold off, or if some JV occurs where BBRY gets a cash infusion, there will be people who say -- well, it was just a greater fool situation.  The asset value was a fantasy, and really you just got lucky.  There was no MOS whatsoever.

 

I get it.  I've heard this over and over in names like BBRY, SHLD, and CLWR.  If I'm wrong, I think I will be finding out soon enough with BBRY.  But I realize that people will always claim that I was "speculating."  I'm fine with that because that's something I have to deal with to get outsized returns, given my style of "value investing," which is focused a lot less on the primacy of the income account.   

 

Okay, so let's assume that BBM is worth $0.  Then what do people think about BBRY's break-up value?  I mean, criticizing BBM seems like a pretty lame excuse for throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

 

to be fair you really  haven't told us how bbm plans to make money. what is the revenue model? at this stage people are going pencil stuff out and won't pay for stuff that can't make any money. how exactly does a free service make money and how is that worth anything? especially given that it's behind already entrenched free services that are already cross platform.

 

you're very coy about what you think bbry is worth. I said it looks like the top bid, if there is one, is going to be in the $12 range. you've been quite reluctant to go on record. why is that?

[gary17]

I think when it coms to BBRY we tend to think about this as a 'stock' rather than a 'business'.  I like to look at it from the perspective of other companies such as Cisco , Samsung, IBM and think about, if the world is moving towards a hyper connected world where in a decades time we might be using the internet to do our grocery shopping, go to places, drive our cars, and moving all of our files online, making more payments with mobile phones, etc, what kind of technologies do I need to make sure I am still competitive against other key players in the industry.

 

Yes, each one of BB's components seem quite worthless. But in a very competitive tech industry, I don't think we can value them like we do with non-tech companies... it's not based on income or future earnings, but more based on competitive advantages  that these assets could potentially attribute to...

 

 

[rkbabang]

To expand a little. 

 

Cash:  cash is cash and worth what it is worth.

But the rest of it is very up in the air. 

Patents: I'm not sure how to value the Patents, I'm taking a wild guess that they are worth $1B+/-$500M.

BBM:  I don't put any value on BBM, I don't think anyone wants it.  $0

BES: Anyone who buys this is going to regret it unless they pay pennies on the dollar, so BES $2B+/-$1.5B or less.

Hardware: $0 no one will want it.

 

I'd be pissed if I was a shareholder of a company which bought any or all of the above and paid more than those prices.  That isn't to say companies don't over-pay for things sometimes (even drastically).  But even a drastic overpayment won't get you to $20B.

 

Clearly, we disagree on the value of these assets.  That's fine.  I would actually agree with you that if we get to $20 billion, that would definitely be overpaying.

 

Btw, your posts about government back doors into encryption were very timely:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57601599-38/nsa-can-see-through-encryption-including-your-private-e-mails-says-report/

 

Yes, we'll see what happens when its sold.  I'm interested to see where I'm wrong and figure out why (If I end up being wrong).

 

Thanks for the article.  I think many people have known (or at least strongly suspected) that this type of thing has been going on for decades and has picked up since 9/11.  There was the Windows _NSAKEY controversy in the late 90's, which is when I first thought about this type of thing.

 

[txlaw]

We are now in greater fool area of investing. There are alot of fools though who will pay top dollar, so all bets are off.

 

Yup, I expected this excuse to come out sooner or later.  Although I figured it would be valueInv, wellmont, or someone who had been publicly short to say it.  Guess I'm not surprised, though, given your minimally helpful posts on other threads lately, as well as your views on Skype (which apparently was valued at somewhere between $0 and $8.5 billion by MSFT).

 

So, yeah, even if BBRY gets broken up or sold off, or if some JV occurs where BBRY gets a cash infusion, there will be people who say -- well, it was just a greater fool situation.  The asset value was a fantasy, and really you just got lucky.  There was no MOS whatsoever.

 

I get it.  I've heard this over and over in names like BBRY, SHLD, and CLWR.  If I'm wrong, I think I will be finding out soon enough with BBRY.  But I realize that people will always claim that I was "speculating."  I'm fine with that because that's something I have to deal with to get outsized returns, given my style of "value investing," which is focused a lot less on the primacy of the income account.   

 

Okay, so let's assume that BBM is worth $0.  Then what do people think about BBRY's break-up value?  I mean, criticizing BBM seems like a pretty lame excuse for throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

 

to be fair you really  haven't told us how bbm plans to make money. what is the revenue model? at this stage people are going pencil stuff out and won't pay for stuff that can't make any money. how exactly does a free service make money and how is that worth anything? especially given that it's behind already entrenched free services that are already cross platform.

 

There are any number of ways that BBM could be monetized. 

 

For enterprise:

-BBM could be bundled with Secure Workspace, which costs $100 a year.  It's another version of Lync/Skype

-BBM could be linked to containerized enterprise apps to make them "social", but to also allow for security monitoring, which would cost a separate subscription fee

-The BBM owner could charge for compliance features.  Any enterprise communications or data transfers (you would send files via BBM) are to go through RIM servers, where RIM would communicate directly with IT/security professional when certain compliance or non-compliance "events" occur

-The BBM owner could charge for communications archiving.  The archiving functionality would be similar to Symantec archiving for Exchange traffic, which is necessary for any large enterprise who expects to be involved in litigation

-BBM could be bundled with QNX platforms that allow for secure M2M communications and data exchange

 

For consumers:

-BBM could charge rates for audio and video calls a la Skype or charge for secure conferencing services

-BBM could focus on trading and payments services a la Tencent or Weibo and link in with services like Mpesa in Africa (note that RIM's SEM solution is certified by Visa and Mastercard), getting a cut of that traffice

-BBM could charge a yearly fee like WhatsApp

-The owner could expand BBM channels and create a platform for ad-based monetization like Twitter

 

Anybody with a modicum of business sense could make BBM worth more than $0.  Whether it is worth $1 billion is a different story.