BlackBerry’s revenue continues to slide as company reports $117 million Q3 2017 net loss

Comments

  • Cowpoke

    Waaaah? B-B-B-Buh…there’s a ‘turnaround plan’!
    Turnaround, I tells ya!

    • Chug that haterade

      “We remain on track to deliver 30 percent growth in company total software and services revenues for the full fiscal year. We are raising our outlook on profitability for FY17. We now expect to achieve non-GAAP EPS profitability for the full year, up from a prior range of breakeven to a five cent loss. This is the third consecutive quarter we have increased our EPS outlook, reflecting the traction we are achieving in our shift to a software business model. We also anticipate breakeven non-GAAP EPS and approximately breakeven free cash flow in Q4.”

    • dannyR

      “…$1.6 billion in cash and cash equivalents, down from the $2.5 billion the company had just last quarter.”

      My simple brain finds this easier to grasp.

    • Chug that haterade

      You do realize that 2.5 billion included the 1.25 billion in the face value of their debt. Net cash balance of Q2 was 1.22 billion. Net cash balance for Q3 was 1 billion.

      Maybe your simple brain should do some research before posting…

    • dannyR

      “Also worrisome is the company’s dwindling war chest, which is down t0 $1.6 billion in cash and cash equivalents, down from the $2.5 billion the company had just last quarter.”

      Would you care to tell the author he hasn’t done his research?

      I also understand non-GAAP well enough. It isn’t well… GAAP. It’s fiddly, feel-good, accounting.

    • Chug that haterade

      The author didn’t do his research and neither did you…

    • dannyR

      Honestly, are we asking for another mod intervention, or have they simply given up?

    • Chug that haterade

      Why is a mod intervention needed? Because you made a comment and I corrected it and now you’re upset?

    • dannyR

      “…and now you’re upset?”
      That is escalation, now, isn’t it?

    • Chug that haterade

      What is escalating? I haven’t called you names or made any rude comments to you in any way… my comment about you possibly being upset is my observation.

    • dannyR

      It used to be called ‘flaming’. One didn’t have to define it; it was very well recognized for what it is.

    • Chug that haterade

      I wasn’t “flaming” anything… just posting some factual information and my opinion.

    • dannyR

      What did I just write? “One didn’t have to define it; it was very well recognized for what it is.”

    • Chug that haterade

      You can assign whatever label you like to whatever you think it is… that is definitely your right and your opinion.

    • dannyR

      I’m trying to correct your behaviour. Try to cooperate.

    • dannyR

      You gave an opinion, not a ‘correction’.

    • Chug that haterade

      I stated facts from their quarterly financial documents… it certainly wasn’t an opinion.

    • dannyR

      “The author didn’t do his research and neither did you”

      That is most assuredly an opinion. My ‘research’ of the ‘facts’ aren’t in quarterly documents that I know of.

    • Chug that haterade

      My point was that you just reposted the misinformation the author posted. I agree that one should expect the information contained in the article to be accurate. But the fact is that the 2.5 billion from the previous quarter had their debt included… when you compare apples to apples… they only dropped about 200+ million in cash.

    • kirfer

      They have turned around: unfortunately they’re wearing a hospital gown.

      Not a pretty sight…

    • BBRYSUXBALLS_2.1

      Yikes, what happened? $2.5b to $1.6b in the coffers? How much more can Waterloo take?

    • Chug that haterade

      “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt”

    • dannyR

      I thought a previous mod issued a plea for, well, moderation, shall we say.

    • Chug that haterade

      I posted a quote from Lincoln. What is your point?

    • dannyR

      Why did you post that particular quote from Lincoln?

      Has the term ‘flaming’ lost its meaning? It did mean something quite specific.

    • Chug that haterade

      Flaming? Like how that same poster responded to me 45 minutes ago telling me to “spin it, spin it”?

    • dannyR

      The buck stops with each commenter.

    • Chug that haterade

      So when will you be calling him out for “flaming”?

    • Chug that haterade

      See my comment to dannyR below. It wasn’t 2.5 to 1.6….

    • Jockohomo

      Everything is just fiiiiinnnee…..

    • Chug that haterade

      Why are you quoting Tim Cook? This isn’t an article about the iSwatch..

    • Jockohomo

      Oh, I don’t know….let’s just say it felt right.

  • Chug that haterade

    The title is only a snippet of the full picture… BlackBerry actually made money in the quarter (12 million) but had accounting treatments that reduced their overall net income.

    “Non-GAAP operating income was $12 million, and non-GAAP earnings per share was $0.02. GAAP net loss for the quarter was $117 million, or ($0.22) per basic share. Adjustments to GAAP net income and earnings per share are summarized in a table below.”

    • BBRYSUXBALLS_2.1

      Spin it, spin it!

    • Chug that haterade

      Spin what? The facts?

    • TheCuddlyKoala

      Shill

    • Chug that haterade

      Posting fact is being a shill? Riiiiiight

    • Aaron Hoyland

      Sure, but you could also easily translate that to say “By our special accounting rules, we made $12 million this quarter, but by industry-accepted accounting principles, we lost $117 million.” GAAP isn’t a set of accounting rules to make things look worse. They’re a standard designed to ensure equitable comparisons across the financial sector. To put it bluntly, those are the only numbers that matter.

    • Chug that haterade

      I know what GAAP is… my point was that they are actually making money from operations but when they applied GAAP treatments to writedown assets, etc, it shows them having a net loss. Just because the accounting value of a piece of equipment or supplies that they own decreased does mean the company is somehow in dire straights. I’m not saying they are hitting it out of the park when it comes to their financial position… but it isn’t all doom and gloom either.

    • Sweet

      e.g. including write-offs for phone-making equipment doesn’t tell you how well they’re doing at selling enterprise software. 🙂

    • Chug that haterade

      Exactly…

  • Surveillance

    If this company had any marketing sense, it could probably sell a few of these Android handsets. Instead, they flood the internet with obviously pro blackberry YouTube videos and comments on forums and Best Buy websites. It’s so obvious they’re blackberry fanboys trying to sell product and not real reviews. You can’t tell me this company isn’t serious about selling handsets, why would they keep bringing out these dtek phones otherwise? Invest some real money and effort into a REAL marketing campaign and I promise you WILL see results!

    • Not for you

      I’ve never owned one, but find it amusing that anyone says anything positive about BB is automatically a shill for them. Yet when anyone prominent says nice things about a Samsung, LG, Google or Apple product, it’s treated as validation for whatever purchase decision you made.

    • Techguru86

      He’s a troll who makes bbry comments on Apple or Samsung articles lol at-least bbry is making moves unlike Sony , HTC and LG who just can’t sell in canada any-more and don’t market

    • Surveillance

      Thanks but I’m not a troll

    • Surveillance

      With all due respect, I’m not suggesting anyone is a shill here. I think that Dtek60 is a thing of beauty and I’m sure would satisfy most Android tastes. But the truth is NOBODY buys these phones! NOOOOBODY! So when I watch videos and read comments, to me, it’s all fake. This is how they’re marketing their products. It’s a $0 budget marketing plan.

    • Not for you

      OnePlus gets lots of positive press, as well as commenters claiming they bought one. Yet I’ve seen exactly one owner of a OP1 in real life.

      Are you implying they’re all shills too? 😉

    • TheCuddlyKoala

      It’s pathetic isn’t it?

    • Gewurttraminer

      Of course they’re aren’t serious, and not just about handsets but everything else they shill.
      When you aren’t even willing to spend proper funds to promote your products but have little difficulty in paying out Watsa $50 million in interest for his debentures or pointless share buybacks you know they don’t have their priorities straight.

    • Chug that haterade

      I thought you weren’t a shareholder?

    • Chug that haterade

      The interest payments to Watsa should be of little concern to anyone other than a BlackBerry investor.

  • kirfer

    Ouch, that revenue number is horrific! They’ve “surpassed” the standard drop of 40% YoY that we’ve come to expect, and are heading towards 50% now.

    289 million: Utter peanuts… No wonder the call’s gone out today to get the Canadian government to throw a few shekels into the horse-drawn cart effort!

    • dannyR

      Bombardier has Quebec, BB has Prem. no deal.

    • Chug that haterade

      And right on cue…

    • dannyR

      What’s on cue?

    • Chug that haterade

      The usual…

    • dannyR

      What? Ellipses?
      Trending now, ellipses…

    • Chug that haterade

      Sure

  • Victor Creed

    Q3 2017?

    • dannyR

      Mmm? What?

    • Chug that haterade

      Their fiscal year doesn’t align with the calendar year…

    • Victor Creed

      Thanks

    • Sweet

      Their fiscal year ends at the end of February.

  • Pingback: BlackBerry’s revenue continues to slide as company reports $114 million Q3 2017 net loss – MobileSyrup.com()

  • TheCuddlyKoala

    That’s really bad. We all expected it but still….

    • Chug that haterade

      Like a moth to a flame…

    • Cowpoke

      It’s a bit like, ‘where were you when Elvis died…?’, only in this case no one cares…except ol’ You-Know-Who…and in 3…2…1…

    • TheCuddlyKoala

      Like a moth…

    • Chug that haterade

      You two are here?

    • Cowpoke

      Yes. Like you, we are concerned about the ongoing mismanagement of this once-proud icon of the telecommunications industry.

    • Chug that haterade

      Umm… okaaaay.

    • kirfer

      **Zap**

    • Chug that haterade

      And here is the third…

    • kirfer

      Sure we’re not the same person, Dingle? Your grip on reality seems a little shaky at the moment…

    • Chug that haterade

      Riiiiiight. Spread em wide..

    • kirfer

      Sorry, Dingle: not interested.

      Maybe try eric_sob?

      YECH!

    • Cowpoke

      I believe this comment contravenes the site’s guidelines; not looking good for you, Uncle Dingle.
      At least you have desisted in calling people ‘dum f*qs’…

    • Chug that haterade

      Riiiiiiight…….

  • Gewurttraminer

    This company is finished and this quarter just proves there is no ‘turnaround’ here. You got Chen basically cooking the books charging off inventory in the last quarter then miraculously posting healthy margins in mobility services the next. All using non-GAAP methods which is the ONLY reason the stock is showing an increase in EPS.
    Add to that the dwindling cash and the continuing revenue decline and what you see here is a total full-on joke.

    • Chug that haterade

      Dwindling cash? How so?

    • dannyR

      non-GAAP is fine and dandy. It’s just that it isn’t GAAP.

    • Chug that haterade

      You do realize that stuff like write downs to assets held for sale, impairment of goodwill, etc are part of the GAAP accounting treatments….which do little in demonstrating the health of a company’s operations.

    • Gewurttraminer

      The use of non-GAAP reporting methods is a favourite tactic of troubled companies eager to cook their books to tell a story that doesn’t square with the facts. Put simply, its a way to cover up failure and disappointment so while its perfectly legitimate to do so, it doesn’t lend them credibility in the eyes of anyone who has a basic understanding of accounting.

    • Rev0lver

      Hasn’t Tesla, who you’ve praised in other articles, historically used non-GAAP reporting methods?

    • Chug that haterade

      They reported both GAAP and non-GAAP. Please explain how this is a tactic to “cover up failure” and “cook the books”

  • TechRanger

    I am no Johnny Chen… but here is my simplistic 5 cents view of the situation! Blackberry is like it or not perceived as the dinosaur of mobile phones! They either need to completely re-brand, which is very expensive and potentially risky or they have to get public opinion to change and have them respect Blackberry as a true contender!

    Step 1 – build a quality, top tier product at most cost effective price
    Step 2 – market penetration – sorry but you have a big black cloud over your head – you need to re-introduce the average Joe/Josephine to your product – market a limited time introductory price for a year – like slightly over cost – get the phone in everybody’s hands with the understanding of course that it is temporary and pricing will normalize in following years.
    Step 3 Hopefully product can speak for itself – and thousands or even millions of users can provide positive feedback and possibly fall in love with Blackberry (again).

    Essentially many of us know that Blackberry is/was capable of making some top tier product… they have just been tainted with a stale reputation and they need the public to see that their product has caught up to current user needs and demands. Best way to do that is first hand – get your product out there so people can truly see what you can do, even if that means a cut on profits for a year or so!! It’s certainly better than a loss!!

    • Cowpoke

      Good comment but I don’t think Chen is the man to do it.

    • Chug that haterade

      Ranger…. I think your comment is spot on but is easier said than done. Most consumers fall into 3 categories:

      1. Current BlackBerry user (although numbers are dwindling)
      2. People don’t know that BlackBerry still exists
      3. People with a negative perception of BlackBerry (either they think of BlackBerry as spinning wheels and battery pulls or they are a former user left with a bad taste in their mouth).

      Each of these categories (and there might be more) requires different messaging to help educate/change perception… and I’m not sure if BlackBerry has the money, time, or know how to go on an all out marketing blitz.

  • Magic18

    I am proven right…again…

  • Chug that haterade

    “Also worrisome is the company’s dwindling war chest, which is down to $1.6 billion in cash and cash equivalents, down from the $2.5 billion the company had just last quarter.”

    Igor, this is due to BlackBerry’s restructuring of their debt. 2.5 billion of cash in Q2 also included 1.25 billion of debt at face value. Taking that out, they had a net cash position of 1.22 billion. In Q3, the 1.6 billion in cash minus 605 million in fv of debt left the BlackBerry with approx 1 billion in cash… a 220 million dollar delta versus the almost 900 million dollar delta you are implying.

  • Sweet

    I listened to the call, but I haven’t had the chance to read the docs.
    It appears that the big difference between their GAAP and non-GAAP numbers is due to a bunch of one-time charges. That’s expected, given that BlackBerry is in transition from a hardware company to a software and services (S&S) company.

    They have to give out severance packages, write off equipment used to develop phone hardware, possibly sell buildings, possibly end contracts with suppliers and partners (which could result in an early cancellation fee), hire new employees for S&S (which could result in BlackBerry issuing stock options), etc. Most of those costs don’t effect the profitability of their S&S business, and thus including them makes their S&S business look worse than it actually is.

    People shouldn’t dismiss the non-GAAP numbers as a smoke screen. Both the GAAP and non-GAAP numbers are important. They each tell different parts of the story.

  • Cowpoke

    What are no doubt NOT sliding are the generous ‘payout’ terms of John Chen’s contract.
    Alas, fiscal responsibility and success would no longer seem to be a requirement of industry CEO’s tenure…

    • Chug that haterade

      John Chen’s executive compensation package is mainly comprised of stock options, which would become worthless if he isn’t fiscally responsible or have poor managerial ability.