Investing

Who's buying RIM shares? And how much could it gain this year?

  • Last Updated:
  • Jan 15th, 2015 12:17 pm
Banned
User avatar
Feb 15, 2008
26318 posts
3157 upvotes
Calgary
huiohuio wrote:
Jan 11th, 2013 11:36 am
This thread talks about security as if it's some quantifiable metric. It's not...
Well its quantifiable on the Android/iOS phones all right -- "zero", with a little better than zero if a customer installs a bunch of 3rd party ($$$) packages. The real question is how many users with a 'security' requirement are actually out there in the enterprise space? Does a government user who merely drives a road grader, really require anything fancy and secured?

One interesting 'rumour' I've heard is that the battery life on these devices blows the Android and iPhones away -- again, likely caused by the platform being locked down and very limited in 3rd party code it can run, in addition to highly tuned/optimized hardware. This could sell devices as well, but I haven't a clue about the impact.
TodayHello wrote:
Oct 16th, 2012 9:06 pm
...The Banks are smarter than you - they have floors full of people whose job it is to read Mark77 posts...
Member
Nov 27, 2009
303 posts
23 upvotes
I think what you are talking about is something RIM might have to fall back on if BB10 fails to take off with their Blackberry Fusion. That platform is the market leader and will likely continue to be in the next few years. They even support BYOD so whether BB10 works on, its there. The consumer sector is where RIM can potentially make a boatload of money. Its where Apple made those billions. If RIM gets even a small high single digit share by the end of this year, it will be huge.
SCEES8 wrote:
Jan 11th, 2013 11:56 am
Not all companies need to be consumer focused to be successful. They can be successful by facilitating backend stuff or helping facilitate business needs of other companies or corps.

Schumberger is one example. They are completely backend operations in the oil and gas sector. Most consumers wont know who they are. They know of shell, imperial oil etc - or other oil/gas companies without retail franchises, but schumberger is a very solid performer doing backend stuff facilitating that sector in the exploration and services.

Blackberry can be a backend service company like it used to by providing business and corporate customers secure and robust communication devices and solutions - like they used to. Once in a while they will entice consumers who see the yuppies use those phones and want one for themselves - like the old days. But if they were to overly focus on trying to win college student's attention by designing 'cool phones', then they should consider either departing from this direction, or seriously consider hiring new people (better designers, better engineers, better programmers etc) because lets face it, their recent offerings are really quite terrible and their sales reflect this. The playbook for example was quite ugly - knew it back before it was released - it did poorly. The new BB Dev Alpha looks pretty ugly too, lets see how it performs.
Member
Nov 27, 2009
303 posts
23 upvotes
Blackberry devices were always known for their battery life. Previously it was because RIM controlled their device vertically in all sectors and their integration was really good and having a smaller screen helped. With the new full touch devices, if they can pull off something better than samsung/htc with similar sized screens and weight, that will be a nice advantage that critics will love.

On another note, Why is RIM climbing today like this? Any news released/leaked that I have missed?
Mark77 wrote:
Jan 11th, 2013 12:14 pm
Well its quantifiable on the Android/iOS phones all right -- "zero", with a little better than zero if a customer installs a bunch of 3rd party ($$$) packages. The real question is how many users with a 'security' requirement are actually out there in the enterprise space? Does a government user who merely drives a road grader, really require anything fancy and secured?

One interesting 'rumour' I've heard is that the battery life on these devices blows the Android and iPhones away -- again, likely caused by the platform being locked down and very limited in 3rd party code it can run, in addition to highly tuned/optimized hardware. This could sell devices as well, but I haven't a clue about the impact.
Jr. Member
Oct 16, 2012
175 posts
4 upvotes
Toronto
12% now....what is going ON?!?!

I'm pretty happy, I wish I was in for more though. Definitely some inside news. Look at the volume.
Deal Addict
Mar 10, 2010
1604 posts
390 upvotes
SCEES8 wrote:
Jan 11th, 2013 11:56 am
Not all companies need to be consumer focused to be successful. They can be successful by facilitating backend stuff or helping facilitate business needs of other companies or corps.

Schumberger is one example. They are completely backend operations in the oil and gas sector. Most consumers wont know who they are. They know of shell, imperial oil etc - or other oil/gas companies without retail franchises, but schumberger is a very solid performer doing backend stuff facilitating that sector in the exploration and services.

Blackberry can be a backend service company like it used to by providing business and corporate customers secure and robust communication devices and solutions - like they used to. Once in a while they will entice consumers who see the yuppies use those phones and want one for themselves - like the old days. But if they were to overly focus on trying to win college student's attention by designing 'cool phones', then they should consider either departing from this direction, or seriously consider hiring new people (better designers, better engineers, better programmers etc) because lets face it, their recent offerings are really quite terrible and their sales reflect this. The playbook for example was quite ugly - knew it back before it was released - it did poorly. The new BB Dev Alpha looks pretty ugly too, lets see how it performs.
A backend service company? Doing what exactly? Securing Smartphones? There are hundred of other companies currently looking into this suite as well, such as Cisco, VMWare, Microsoft and a number of other companies both larger and smaller than Blackberry.

And people know Blackberry as a Phone company...if they can't sell a massive amount of Phones anymore, what are they? Yes, they could completely change direction and start doing services for Government organizations, etc...but there are a ton of companies in that space as well and as HP has shown, it's not an easy space to get into and make lots of money.

It's not about getting the college kids attention, it's about making a phone that the world wants. People used Blackberry before because it was the first successful Smartphone and most had it assigned to them from work. Once everyone else came out with phones easier to use and with much more features, Blackberry never really innovated. As a former BES Admin, the different between the Curve 9300 series and the Curve from 5 years ago is pretty minimal. In the high tech industry, if you aren't innovating, you're toast.
Newbie
Nov 14, 2012
17 posts
2 upvotes
You are all out to lunch. Watch this demo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a--JFskPL3Q

I can't and wont say too much, but understand the power of QNX. Understand why the stock is priced where it is, realize what is driving the volatility, and do your own due diligence. Once you realize the tech market is an expectations market then you will be profitable.
Deal Addict
Mar 10, 2010
1604 posts
390 upvotes
Mark77 wrote:
Jan 11th, 2013 12:14 pm
Well its quantifiable on the Android/iOS phones all right -- "zero", with a little better than zero if a customer installs a bunch of 3rd party ($$$) packages. The real question is how many users with a 'security' requirement are actually out there in the enterprise space? Does a government user who merely drives a road grader, really require anything fancy and secured?

One interesting 'rumour' I've heard is that the battery life on these devices blows the Android and iPhones away -- again, likely caused by the platform being locked down and very limited in 3rd party code it can run, in addition to highly tuned/optimized hardware. This could sell devices as well, but I haven't a clue about the impact.
Zero security on the iPhone? So obviously there must be a ton of viruses and malware associated with them iPhone...could you please link to me reports of these mass viruses destroying iPhones and slowing them down? You can't?? Is that because they don't exist?

"For organizations considering the security of iOS devices, it is helpful to understand how the built-in security features work together to provide a secure mobile computing platform.

iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch are designed with layers of security. Low-level hardware and firmware features protect against malware and viruses, while high-level OS features allow secure access to personal information and corporate data, prevent unauthorized use, and help thwart attacks.

The iOS security model protects information while still enabling mobile use, third-party apps, and syncing. Much of the system is based on industry-standard secure design principles—and in many cases, Apple has done additional design work to enhance security without compromising usability."

Does RIM have increased security measures not available on the iPhone, of course. But it's not like there is zero security with the iPhone and it's just some wild west environment. You are incorrect.
Member
Nov 27, 2009
303 posts
23 upvotes
Security on phones is not just about malwares and viruses. Of course Iphones and Androids with zero security is not really true but with blackberries IT admins gets to control the device and its communication completely which is one of the reasons it is touted as secure. You cant do that with Iphones/Androids out of the box, you will need third party "apps" that can do it to some extent. Blackberries were designed for this purpose and any other features were slapped on later. Iphones/Androids were designed from the ground up to do the opposite and enterprise level security is now being added on top.
Deal Addict
Mar 10, 2010
1604 posts
390 upvotes
Musabbir wrote:
Jan 11th, 2013 2:30 pm
Security on phones is not just about malwares and viruses. Of course Iphones and Androids with zero security is not really true but with blackberries IT admins gets to control the device and its communication completely which is one of the reasons it is touted as secure. You cant do that with Iphones/Androids out of the box, you will need third party "apps" that can do it to some extent. Blackberries were designed for this purpose and any other features were slapped on later. Iphones/Androids were designed from the ground up to do the opposite and enterprise level security is now being added on top.
True, but it's not like the Blackberry Enterprise Server to manage Blackberry's on an Enterprise level is free. You pay a $99/user license fee as well as a yearly fee for the Blackberry Enterprise Server. You would also have to pay yearly maintenance and support fees if you want any help should you run into problems.

For that money, you could also buy any 3rd party software that allows you to do 99% of the same stuff to iPhones, Android devices or Blackberry's. You could even buy Blackberry Fusion if you want to control the iPhones and Android devices from your Blackberry Enterprise Server.

All I'm saying is that security (for 99% of organizations) is fine with iOS. Yes, there will be those government agencies like the FBI or CSIS that require top notch encryption, but do you think an HR Manager at an Oil Field really requires the same level of security.
Member
Nov 27, 2009
303 posts
23 upvotes
I would like to see where you get the info on whether 99% of companies are okay with ios/android + third party security.

The way big companies work....when they make a investment(phones for employees), they like the "idea" of security whether they need blackberry encryption or not. They like to buy stuff from a company with a long history of successful security devices. They do not care whether its cost them 99/per user or not as much. They have money to throw at it. If your argument was true, then only FBI, CSIS and other intelligence organisations would use them....clearly not the case.

Also once you have an enterprise server solution from BB, its $4-10 per phone per month.
The third party software does not provide 99% of the functionality because Androids/Iphones cant support them on a hardware level. I will admit they are coming close but no one is there yet. Hence RIM is getting their last chance at this market.

Vitalogy80 wrote:
Jan 11th, 2013 3:10 pm
True, but it's not like the Blackberry Enterprise Server to manage Blackberry's on an Enterprise level is free. You pay a $99/user license fee as well as a yearly fee for the Blackberry Enterprise Server. You would also have to pay yearly maintenance and support fees if you want any help should you run into problems.

For that money, you could also buy any 3rd party software that allows you to do 99% of the same stuff to iPhones, Android devices or Blackberry's. You could even buy Blackberry Fusion if you want to control the iPhones and Android devices from your Blackberry Enterprise Server.

All I'm saying is that security (for 99% of organizations) is fine with iOS. Yes, there will be those government agencies like the FBI or CSIS that require top notch encryption, but do you think an HR Manager at an Oil Field really requires the same level of security.
Deal Addict
Mar 10, 2010
1604 posts
390 upvotes
Musabbir wrote:
Jan 11th, 2013 3:31 pm
I would like to see where you get the info on whether 99% of companies are okay with ios/android + third party security.

The way big companies work....when they make a investment(phones for employees), they like the "idea" of security whether they need blackberry encryption or not. They like to buy stuff from a company with a long history of successful security devices. They do not care whether its cost them 99/per user or not as much. They have money to throw at it. If your argument was true, then only FBI, CSIS and other intelligence organisations would use them....clearly not the case.

Also once you have an enterprise server solution from BB, its $4-10 per phone per month.
The third party software does not provide 99% of the functionality because Androids/Iphones cant support them on a hardware level. I will admit they are coming close but no one is there yet. Hence RIM is getting their last chance at this market.
Yes, I agree with you for the most part...RIM is getting it's last chance at the market. I also agree that RIM/Blackberry have better security than Apple and especially Android, but what I'm saying is that for most organizations, ease of use and functionality play a bigger role in deciding what phone to use over security. It's no longer IT that is deciding what phone to use, it's Management, and they want to use what they use at home or what they're more comfortable with. As of 2011, 92% of Fortune 500 companies were trialing the iPhone/iPad, I can only imagine that's closer to 100 now.

In October, the iPhone was chosen as the default phone by US Customs and Immigration. I would think that security would rate pretty high on their list?

But yes, RIM might have one last chance...if BB10 doesn't blow the customer away, RIM will go quickly into bankruptcy or they'll sell off their patents to the highest bidder. Once a company in the Tech Industry becomes unprofitable, the chances of it reversing course and becoming highly successful again are extremely low. Yes, it did happen with Apple, but the chances are very slim.
Banned
User avatar
Feb 15, 2008
26318 posts
3157 upvotes
Calgary
Musabbir wrote:
Jan 11th, 2013 2:30 pm
Security on phones is not just about malwares and viruses. Of course Iphones and Androids with zero security is not really true but with blackberries IT admins gets to control the device and its communication completely which is one of the reasons it is touted as secure. You cant do that with Iphones/Androids out of the box, you will need third party "apps" that can do it to some extent. Blackberries were designed for this purpose and any other features were slapped on later. Iphones/Androids were designed from the ground up to do the opposite and enterprise level security is now being added on top.
Not only this, but an iPhone or Android device that is 'acquired' from an owner can have most of its data downloaded fairly easily.

If the hypothetical oilfield HR manager has a document/email with salary data or well data saved on it, and said Android/iPhone is misplaced -- all of the data on that phone is accessible to anyone who finds the phone.

If it were a RIM phone, the data would be encrypted and un-retrievable without the benefit of the BES spitting out a new security key (which would be, of course, revoked as soon as the HR manager realizes that he/she lost the phone).

Then there's the auditability aspect, which is why RIM has done so well in the financial sector. Chat logs, phone call records -- these are all things that, for legal compliance reasons, businesses in that sector are required to save. If you have a bank staffer suspected of insider trading, the first thing the lawyers start looking at is the BlackBerry chat logs. Courts have drawn negative inferences against businesses who fail to keep such records and the 'standard' is BlackBerry for a good reason (nobody else can even come close to providing the required functionality!). Businesses that operate in an environment where Sarbanes-Oxley is a big deal are practically required to use an auditable solution such as BlackBerry. Apps that circumvent the monitoring framework are highly problematic in this environment.

For instance, many people may recall the case of Genuity Capital Markets which was founded by disgruntled CIBC investment banking employees. CIBC had the chat logs for all BlackBerry devices they owned, and were able to use them in the legal process against their former employees for violating non-solicit agreements among other violations of their CIBC employment contracts.
TodayHello wrote:
Oct 16th, 2012 9:06 pm
...The Banks are smarter than you - they have floors full of people whose job it is to read Mark77 posts...
Deal Addict
Mar 10, 2010
1604 posts
390 upvotes
Mark77 wrote:
Jan 11th, 2013 3:51 pm
Not only this, but an iPhone or Android device that is 'acquired' from an owner can have most of its data downloaded fairly easily.

If the hypothetical oilfield HR manager has a document/email with salary data or well data saved on it, and said Android/iPhone is misplaced -- all of the data on that phone is accessible to anyone who finds the phone.

If it were a RIM phone, the data would be encrypted and un-retrievable without the benefit of the BES spitting out a new security key (which would be, of course, revoked as soon as the HR manager realizes that he/she lost the phone).

Then there's the auditability aspect, which is why RIM has done so well in the financial sector. Chat logs, phone call records -- these are all things that, for legal compliance reasons, businesses in that sector are required to save. If you have a bank staffer suspected of insider trading, the first thing the lawyers start looking at is the BlackBerry chat logs. Courts have drawn negative inferences against businesses who fail to keep such records and the 'standard' is BlackBerry for a good reason (nobody else can even come close to providing the required functionality!). Businesses that operate in an environment where Sarbanes-Oxley is a big deal are practically required to use an auditable solution such as BlackBerry. Apps that circumvent the monitoring framework are highly problematic in this environment.

For instance, many people may recall the case of Genuity Capital Markets which was founded by disgruntled CIBC investment banking employees. CIBC had the chat logs for all BlackBerry devices they owned, and were able to use them in the legal process against their former employees for violating non-solicit agreements among other violations of their CIBC employment contracts.
Fairly easy? So I assume you've tried hacking into a locked iPhone with 128 bit encryption? It's extremely easy to require passwords on iPhones connecting to company resources, you can even require passwords through Microsoft Exchange, without the need to buy a 3rd party solution. It also has 128 Bit Encryption built into any iPhone later than an iPhone 3GS and you can prevent iPhones older than that from syncing with your Exchange system if you'd like. Can you please tell me how easy it is to break 128 bit encryption.

The US Government did a study and found that 128 Bit AES Encryption was perfectly acceptable for Non-Classified US Government data. So as I was saying, the iPhone is perfectly acceptable for security unless you have information stored on terrorist whereabouts on your iPhone...than perhaps you shouldn't be using an iPhone or probably any mobile device for that matter.
× < >

Top