Winnipeg Free Press - PRINT EDITION
On the RIM
BlackBerry maker teeters between has-been and hot value
TYLER ANDERSON / POSTMEDIA NEWS ARCHIVES Enlarge Image
A lukewarm reaction to RIM’s PlayBook has many analysts wary about RIM’s competitiveness.
When you make a product so useful and spellbinding it is nicknamed after crack cocaine, you know you're on to something.
That was certainly once the case with the BlackBerry, or the CrackBerry, as it was called by many. That somewhat odd euphemism symbolized how dominant Canada's most successful tech firm, Research in Motion (RIM), had become.
What BlackBerry still does well
BlackBerry's leading edge is its security encryption. In fact, it's so good it's affected RIM's ability to enter growing markets like China, Saudi Arabia and Iran. Their governments are concerned they can't monitor their citizens who use BlackBerry. "There's no question that if you're into security and you believe that you need your message to be remaining as secure as possible, it's the gold standard in mobile security," says Tony Demarin at BCV Financial. But a recent MIT Tech Review article says some security experts argue that while it's still the most secure of the devices, BlackBerry's advantage is largely due to its relative obscurity -- hackers have yet to turn their full attention to exploiting its potential failings. The bottom line is that BlackBerry devices are secure, but not hack-proof -- and its competitors are improving their security. Still, tech-sector expert and senior online editor for Investing Daily Jim Fink writes BlackBerry Enterprise Solution provides "industrial strength" security that Android and Apple can't match. Furthermore, BlackBerry's ability to synch to a computer and its email and instant messaging systems remain superior to competitors.
Ripe for the corporate picking
With all of its technological advantages, still-strong market share and now attractive share price, RIM is a juicy takeover prize for other players in the tech sector. "Microsoft is a name that always pops up because it needs reasons to grow," Demarin says. "This company (RIM) shouldn't fall too much lower on a stock price basis given what we know in terms of earnings and revenues and what they've created from a technology perspective."
Losing its grip
BlackBerry's market share in the United States has eroded quickly in the first three months of 2011.
-- RIM went from 30.4 per cent in January to 25.7 per cent among U.S. mobile subscribers, one of the key figures for sales strength. Only two months earlier, RIM had the largest market share, at 33.5 per cent.
-- Apple increased marginally to 26 per cent from 24.7.
-- Android made the largest gain, to 36.4 per cent from 31.2 per cent.
-- Microsoft's new addition to the market is already losing ground, dropping to 6.7 per cent by April from eight per cent in January.
-- Palm, once an industry leader, dropped to 2.6 per cent from 3.2 per cent.
-- In Canada, BlackBerry remains dominant for the time being. It makes up 42 per cent of the market (as of last March), while the iPhone accounts for 31 per cent and the Google Android, 12 per cent.
-- Comscore
Related Items
Only a few years ago, the BlackBerry was a corporate must-have. Even the most popular and powerful man on Earth -- Barack Obama -- loved to "crack."
Things were looking bright for its maker, Research in Motion, based in Waterloo, Ont. After all, it had effectively changed the way we work and communicate.
But today, RIM's future is suddenly in doubt. BlackBerry has gone from the IT world's "it" device to a perceived one-trick pony, fighting off tech-sector giants Google and Apple.
It's no longer in a battle to remain the leader. Now the question is whether RIM can hold on to what market share it has left.
Still, it's hard to deny millions of BlackBerry users find their devices indispensable. Furthermore, RIM has impeccable financials. It earns billions of dollars in profits annually, carries no debt and, perhaps for the first time in a long time, seems to be a reasonably priced stock buy for value investors.
RIM's share price has fallen so far -- to about $27 a share today from $148 a share in 2008 -- it's no longer in the purview of just mutual funds and other institutional investors.
This is not an uncommon story in the tech sector: A once-industry leader loses its dominance and finds its place among the rest of the tech sector, reasonably priced, hanging around and hoping to mount a comeback.
Microsoft, Dell, Cisco and Intel have all tumbled from nosebleed stock prices to more reasonable valuations, says Tony Demarin, president of BCV Financial in Winnipeg.
"These are companies that are now kind of stodgy, slow-growing and struggling to reinvent themselves," says Demarin, also an analyst whose company specializes in value investing in firms that provide dividends.
As a value investor, Demarin wouldn't touch RIM stock when it was flying high. Even today, at its seemingly undervalued price, he remains skeptical because of RIM's growth prospects.
Here's the rub:
"Once the stock price comes down into the value category, many times they become 'value traps,' where it appears they are great investments," he says.
"But the problem is the fundamentals remain flat to negative and, over time, there is deterioration in the fundamentals of the business."
Nokia, the Finnish mobile phone maker, is maybe the most apt comparison to RIM, he says. It was a leader in the cellphone market. That is, until the smartphone came along, with BlackBerry leading the charge.
Yet Nokia is still around today and profitable. Its profits fell from $7 billion annually to $891 million in 2009, but they doubled the following year to $1.85 billion.
"It doesn't mean you can't make money with these stocks, but it is not as clear and there's a risk to investing, and Research in Motion falls into that category," Demarin says.
It's too early to eulogize RIM, speculating it will be taken over by Microsoft or have its bones picked clean for its technologies -- a fate similar to that of Canadian tech giant Nortel.
It still has a security advantage over other smartphones, remains the dominant player in the institutional and business world, grew its revenues overseas by 67 per cent from last year and has grown its profits to more than $3.4 billion last year from $1.2 billion in 2008.
But if you live by rapid growth -- as all tech-sector firms do -- even the expectation of a slowing in that pace can lead to a grave scenario.
"It's a great company, but it doesn't live up to the expectation of growth by the market, and the market is a bit of a hard taskmaster," says Knud Jensen, a professor of strategy and entrepreneurship at Ted Rogers School of Management at Ryerson University.
RIM's main problem has been matching the growth of its competitors in the consumer market, where concerns about secure communication do not weigh as heavily as ease of web browsing.
It's the consumer market where RIM has been losing battles with Apple's iPhone and Google's Android.
Jensen says while RIM has made some missteps and much has been made about the awkward corporate leadership structure of its co-CEOs, founder Mike Lazaridis and Jim Balsillie, it's perhaps in marketing that it has "dropped the phone in the crapper."
But Jensen says that's hardly surprising.
"If you think about the institutional and business markets, they don't require a lot of marketing," he says.
We consumers of technology for pleasure purposes are a different breed. The slick Apple marketing campaigns, along with the eye-pleasing design of the iPhone, have many techies willing to wait outside a store overnight for the latest release of an Apple gadget.
Apple co-founder and CEO Steve Jobs understands hype, whereas marketing is not really part of the RIM leadership's circle of expertise, says Jensen. Still, RIM has a new operating system, one based on the recent acquisition of software firm QNX. It's already used on the PlayBook tablet -- and some experts speculate the QNX could again put BlackBerry ahead of the pack.
But recent delays for the new BlackBerry Bold 9900 and lukewarm reaction to the PlayBook have many analysts wary about RIM's competitiveness with Apple, which is expected to provide its own highly secure mobile system soon.
Apple, however, may be the least of RIM's worries. Google's Android operating system has become the platform of choice for many smartphones sold to the consumer market. And its market share in the United States has increased to 36 per cent in April from 26 per cent last November, while BlackBerry's share shrank by about the same amount.
The worry is Google has done little marketing. It has quietly grown market share, providing an easy-to-use system to any smartphone maker willing to use its technology.
RIM's future certainly isn't over yet. It still has a robust research and development (R&D) budget. But with its stock price halved, it will be hard-pressed to keep up R&D to match its competitors, which have budgets 10 times the size of RIM's.
If RIM is to carry on successfully, maybe not as a leader but as a vigorous competitor in the sector, the next six to 12 months will be crucial, Demarin says.
"Watch the sale of PlayBooks and the sale of the BlackBerry 9900." If sales exceed expectations, buying RIM stock today will turn out to be a bold but brilliant move.
"If those things fail to excite investors and analysts, and followers, then I'm very concerned about this company because they have nothing to hang their hat onto."
And then, the thrill of the buy today could morph into buyer's remorse tomorrow.
giganticsmile@gmail.com
Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition July 2, 2011 0
- Back to Top
- Return to Personal Finance
Poll
Most Popular Personal Finance
- Impact of divorce on RRSPs
- Home truths hit hard
- No pension, no problem
- Deadline decisions
- Senior citizens vulnerable to fraud, financial abuse from within family
- Winpak is very good at packaging success
- Expense deductions are CRA's business
- Earliest days most vital time for will's executor
- Avoid 'agent hazard' when trying to sell your home
- Making sense of the new (and complicated) changes to CPP
- Home truths hit hard
- No pension, no problem
- Winpak is very good at packaging success
- Expense deductions are CRA's business
- Senior citizens vulnerable to fraud, financial abuse from within family
- Consider both RRSPs and TFSAs
- Impact of divorce on RRSPs
- Deadline decisions
- Earliest days most vital time for will's executor
- Making sense of the new (and complicated) changes to CPP
- Love, marriage and Valentine's Day
- No pension, no problem
- Canadians paring down debt but not racking up savings, Royal Bank study suggests
- Home truths hit hard
- Olivia's future looks promising
- Consider both RRSPs and TFSAs
- Avoid 'agent hazard' when trying to sell your home
- Making sense of the new (and complicated) changes to CPP
- Limit on CMHC mortgages could tighten lending and slow housing market
- Winpak is very good at packaging success
- Senior citizens vulnerable to fraud, financial abuse from within family
- Canadians paring down debt but not racking up savings, Royal Bank study suggests
- Budget battle
- Deciding when to take CPP
- Making sense of the new (and complicated) changes to CPP
- Earliest days most vital time for will's executor
- Deadline decisions
- Winpak is very good at packaging success
- Canadians paring down debt but not racking up savings, Royal Bank study suggests
- Making sense of the new (and complicated) changes to CPP
- Love, marriage and Valentine's Day
- Senior citizens vulnerable to fraud, financial abuse from within family
- Defined benefit pensions scarce
- Location, location, allocation
- Earliest days most vital time for will's executor
- Insured annuity offers choice
- Investment evolution
- Budget battle
Ads by Google








You can comment on most stories on winnipegfreepress.com. You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is register and/or login and you can join the conversation and give your feedback.
The Winnipeg Free Press does not necessarily endorse any of the views posted. By submitting your comment, you agree to our Terms and Conditions. These terms were revised effective April 16, 2010; View the changes. New to commenting? Check out our Frequently Asked Questions.