theothergeoff

melgross said:

And yet, the stock is up 5%. Amazing!

sog35 said:

scartart said:

They have just announced to deal with an unprofitable part of their business, why wouldn't the stock go up?

because without that unprofitable part of the business they will have a hard time selling their profitable products.

why would someone with an Android/iOS device want to buy Blackberry software? LOL

as stated, their BES architecture is a reasonably secure corp message server (end to end encryption, with a corporate escrow key if needed to crack messages sent between people).    They are selling up their MDM and Messaging management to orgs that want to bid on contracts with Govt's that require both security and 'crackability.'

Also, their QNX division is a long term value asset as self-driving cars come to the fore.

TOG

sog35 said:

Why isnt the Verge, Wall Street Journal, Business Insider, Forbes, CNET, ect picking up this story?

So friken obvious these a-holes are trying their best to keep this quiet.

Crazy that Samsung just excused the past half dozen Note7 fires in China as having nothing to do with the Note7. Right......

maybe they are waiting for a confirmed pattern... some[most] news organizations won't source another news orgs article if it's a single source whose motivations to contact the newssite are in question...

"Hey Gizmodo... I got a picture of a replacment Samsung 7 that blew up in my pocket"
"who is this?"
"Well I'm Phil Schill...  errr... I'm Phyllis Shillsmeister...  It's a really bad blow up... I want people to know how bad this is...."

sog35 said:

These numbers are from Samsung.

I don't believe a single word of it.

They claim that 90% of Note7 owners decided to get another Note7 instead of a refund. No way that's true.

well... we have to determine the definition of 'owner.'

Samsung used to considers devices in the channel 'sold' (that device in the ATT store was 'sold' to ATT... like a new car on the lot has a 'dealer sales invoice').
Channel dealers will get replacements, since they have empty shelves AND likely incentives to put Samsung devices on those empty shelves [the more you sell, the more profit you make, and the more units you get the next device release].

bigger? (volume?)
or higher capacity? (more electrons?)

timborama said:

2x is virtually useless anyways.  Digital zoom can do a decent 2x anyways.  They should have had the courage to do least 3x-4x.  

so now you get 4X (2X optical plus decent 2X digital).  Your point?

Courage can't change the laws of optics