Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

RIM’s Response to 'Open Letter'

blogs.blackberry.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 113 posts

Re: RIM’s Response to 'Open Letter'

#61

Post by shaggyfrog »

dirtyaura wrote: post #50
TomOfTTB wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really isn't that much. Look at it this way... The way a corporate balance sheet works you don't spend money manufacturing your product. What you do is convert the asset from money to a physical product you can sell. But that asset is still on your books as being worth whatever you paid to manufacture it. RIM claims to have "shipped" 13.2 Million smartphones in the last quarter (as opposed to "sold"). Assume their…

Interesting. Are you saying that this inventory can still be listed under Cash & Equivalents (1,986M on 28/5/2011) on balance sheet? Or is it under Accounts Receivable (3,772M)? Does Total inventory (943M) then has phones that are not yet shipped? (Values are from latest Balance Sheet data http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ:RIMM&fstype=ii ) I've recently started to learn to read financials more carefully, but all…

If you check your link's "Balance Sheet" tab, you'll see inventory listed under Assets as "Total Inventory". It would most certainly not be listed as Cash & Equivalents.

Re: RIM’s Response to 'Open Letter'

#62

Post by [deleted] »

technoslut wrote: post #49
tolmasky wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did the original letter even get that much traction? I got the impression it would have blown over tomorrow. Instead now they may get a Streisand effect.

It's not going to die anytime soon. I just saw Gellar on CNBC and he said that he has two more letters from people inside RIM. I got the impression that he will publish those as well.

[deleted]

Re: RIM’s Response to 'Open Letter'

#63

Post by skroth »

jessedhillon wrote: post #16
skroth wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It didn't sound like that to me. Could you elaborate on how it is rash?

It's a two paragraph response to a well-reasoned critique, which outlined several important, thoughtful points. By contrast, the response looks as though it was co-authored by an accountant and an HR rep. > ...it is particularly difficult to believe that a “high level employee” in good standing with the company would choose to anonymously publish a letter on the web rather than engage their fellow executives in a con…

I'm obviously in the minority here, but I don't feel their response was so bad. There are plenty of "well-reasoned critiques that outline several important, thoughtful points" of many companies on the internet. I think the fact that they responded at all is good. Remember Apple's response to the iPhone 4 issues? We (finally) got Jobs pointing the finger at other companies and trying to shift the attention.

Here RIM is admitting they're in some shit, and yes, they are only offering the typical response, but what else do you expect? That's not a rhetorical question. I'm genuinely curious how they could have responded that would make critics happy.

My thought is that the only thing they can do right now is promise action, which they did. Whether they follow through or not, I have no idea.

In response to your quoted text: I have no idea if the person really was an employee. I think people should take a neutral look at this instead of assuming one way or the other. On one hand, it could be an employee who has already talked to his colleagues about these issues and has been ignored. On the other hand, it's possible that it is just a bad media stunt by someone trying to bring negative attention to RIM or even trying to make some money with shorting them. If it's the former, I agree with you and would find this backpedalling immature. In the latter case I would agree with RIM and feel their response is appropriate.

Re: RIM’s Response to 'Open Letter'

#66

Post by dirtyaura »

shaggyfrog wrote: post #61
dirtyaura wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. Are you saying that this inventory can still be listed under Cash & Equivalents (1,986M on 28/5/2011) on balance sheet? Or is it under Accounts Receivable (3,772M)? Does Total inventory (943M) then has phones that are not yet shipped? (Values are from latest Balance Sheet data http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ:RIMM&fstype=ii ) I've recently started to learn to read financials more carefully, but all…

If you check your link's "Balance Sheet" tab, you'll see inventory listed under Assets as "Total Inventory". It would most certainly not be listed as Cash & Equivalents.

Yeah, I was curious because it doesn't sound likely that shipped-but-not-sold phones would be listed under Cash & Equivalents (which is ~ $2B). But if his math about value of shipped phones ($3B) is approximately correct, then it doesn't fit under Total Inventory (<$1B) either, so it must be under Receivables (~3-4B), right?

Re: RIM’s Response to 'Open Letter'

#67

Post by sixtofour »

Given that the purpose of the first paragraph (and almost half the post) was to passive-aggressively attack the letter writer, it's no surprise that the writer did not engage management directly.

The second paragraph basically said "all is well!"

Ah. Well.

Re: RIM’s Response to 'Open Letter'

#68

Post by 9999 »

Shenglong wrote: post #34

What this teaches us, is that Bush's "we don't negotiate with terrorists" is a valuable idea. Every company should have a bi-law which states it will not respond to public letters. This letter, even though it got the point across, is heavily damaging to the brand.

How do you think this response damages their brand exactly?

Re: RIM’s Response to 'Open Letter'

#69

Post by esrauch »

swombat wrote: post #33
kin wrote: post #9

This response is meaningless. Any public company will say the same jargon to reassure their shareholders but I will put money down that internally RIM executives are dwelling on the letter and taking action.

I will put money down that internally RIM executives are dwelling on the letter and taking action Really? Are you buying some RIM shares then?

Even if he thinks the company is going to end up doing better in the long term, that doesn't necessarily mean he should purchase the stock. He could think they are going to be making moves with only minor announcements and the stock will fall despite the company actually doing something that will fix their downward trajectory. Stock purchases are more closely tied to what the public perception of their trajectory is, or even higher order (eg what will individuals on average predict what the public will think the company worth is).

Re: RIM’s Response to 'Open Letter'

#70

Post by ScottBurson »

TomOfTTB wrote: post #30
hvs wrote: post #2

RIM has $3 Billion in cash? I guess I'm not that surprised, but that's quite a bit of "help us get back on our feet money." With some clear direction (which they may or may not get from their current executives) they could definitely regain some of their previous market. The more competition the better, and having another player in the mobile space can only improve things for the consumer (and the enterprise).

It really isn't that much. Look at it this way... The way a corporate balance sheet works you don't spend money manufacturing your product. What you do is convert the asset from money to a physical product you can sell. But that asset is still on your books as being worth whatever you paid to manufacture it. RIM claims to have "shipped" 13.2 Million smartphones in the last quarter (as opposed to "sold"). Assume their…

You're assuming that the channel holds a full 90 days worth of inventory. I don't know much about these things, but in these days of just-in-time manufacturing, that seems implausible to me. How do you know it's not 30 days, or 15?
Post reply on HN