Executive Infighting Reportedly Led to BlackBerry's Downfall

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
I believe Lincoln said it first: A house divided against itself cannot stand, which pretty much sums up the crumbling Blackberry empire. Independent investigations conducted to find the main reason Blackberry failed so miserably put the blame squarely on the company executive’s inability to cooperate with each other.

Once the preferred handset maker among the corporate elite, BlackBerry was hurt by its inability to move past the legacy operating system that got it into the smartphone game and quickly fell behind Apple's iPhone and Google's Android operating system.
 
I believe Lincoln said it first: A house divided against itself cannot stand,

Nope, the bible said it first.

Mark 3:25 "And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand."
 
I don't think it is any one thing that brought them down but a lot of little things ... their miscalculation on the role that the consumer market would play in smartphones was certainly one ... poor roadmaps and execution helped compound their problems ;)
 
I love my Q10. But this past year has been incedibly frustrating for BB users like myself.

The Z10/Q10 release fiascos, the weak apps environment, and everything else related to the launch of BB10.

It's just all been a mess. I hope going private, and cleaning up the board will infuse some much needed direction.
 
Blackberry and their arrogance was their downfall. They were the biggest 'haters' of the iPhone when it came out in 2007, and now they've paid for their arrogance and failiure to adapt to the new marketplace. Every other major handset maker responded and began pushing smartphones similar to what the original iPhone brought to the table, and they've seen success because of that.
 
Blackberry and their arrogance was their downfall. They were the biggest 'haters' of the iPhone when it came out in 2007, and now they've paid for their arrogance and failiure to adapt to the new marketplace. Every other major handset maker responded and began pushing smartphones similar to what the original iPhone brought to the table, and they've seen success because of that.

They were arrogant before that. They had a platform that was hard to develop for, and told their developers to suck it. They had mandatory infrastructure, that even heavily discounted had a minimum buy in to get service of about $3800, and in large scale a minimum per user cost of about $34 to get email and calendar on your phone in addition to your per user cost to provide the underlying calendar and email service. If you had a group of 40 people, that cost was much higher per user.

The arrival of other platforms simply made people aware of the degree of arrogance. The still told the developers to suck it when they were saying that there were multiple better options available, rather than just saying that easier development was possible. When they admitted they priced themselves out of the market, they only came up with a solution for small groups running exchange.
 
Rumour has it that they were fighting on whether or not to get Tim Hortons or Starbucks.
 
The arrival of other platforms simply made people aware of the degree of arrogance. The still told the developers to suck it when they were saying that there were multiple better options available, rather than just saying that easier development was possible. When they admitted they priced themselves out of the market, they only came up with a solution for small groups running exchange.

Monopoly made them arrogant. They gouged their customer base. Then tried in vain to protect a poorly design business and wonder why all customers did not want to give them a second chance. They lacked solid leadership to plot a new course... as it was obvious to most they were done quite sometime ago.

They upset consumers/clients.
They upset developers
They were not willing to pay the price for their actions.
They were bought out and will likely fade.

Always interesting you have to wonder if who they let on the board helped with this as they ended up with the ip. You have to wonder if they let the wrong fox into the hen house:)
 
Nope, the bible said it first.

Mark 3:25 "And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand."

Yep, beat me to it...;) Lincoln, of course, was certainly aware of the source.
 
They haven't actually been bought yet. If the deal falls through my puts will work out great.
 
Blackberry was an arrogant company who refused to change and felt government backing would always keep them at #1. The iPhone didn't have to come out to tell me their days were numbered. Each iteration of their phone that i used showed it was so slow, clunky, and focused solely on email.
 
Blackberry earned the nickname 'Crackberry' back in the day. It was the first very successful smartphone. It was the iPhone that came in and took that from them. BB, Microsoft and a lot of others laughed at Apple when they brought the iPhone. Both BB & Microsoft underestimated it. They were slow to come back with a competing product, too. BB could have stayed relevant, but they failed. Microsoft finally came out with WP7/8 and it's a great device, but Android beat them to the punch.

BB is like a bunch of old geezers (railroad, IBM, MPAA/RIAA) that want to stick with the old ways and be successful like they used to be. It doesn't work. You have to keep moving forward, keep evolving. Nature of the business.
 
Blackberry was an arrogant company who refused to change and felt government backing would always keep them at #1. The iPhone didn't have to come out to tell me their days were numbered. Each iteration of their phone that i used showed it was so slow, clunky, and focused solely on email.

It didn't have to come out, but it expedited the process as everyone was caught with their pants down. Blackberry never pulled their pants back up.
 
Back
Top