Skip to main content

Facebook Inc.'s Mark Zuckerberg could have paid a 50 per cent takeout premium for BlackBerry Inc., got similar global reach in messaging through the company's BlackBerry Messenger (BBM) service, and saved more than $11-billion (U.S.). So why didn't he?

BlackBerry is not a perfect fit for Facebook. New management would be faced with the same difficult strategic dilemmas, severance costs, and poor brand perception that current CEO John Chen has to deal with now. It's also possible (although not probable, in my opinion) that the Canadian government would have concerns about foreign ownership of a former flagship Canadian company.

At the same time, a few executive hassles seems like a reasonable price to pay to save $11-billion.

Story continues below advertisement

BBM remains highly competitive with WhatsApp in many key markets. According to Forbes, the availability of BBM on the iPhone operating system was a huge success. In the first month it was available, "BBM was the most downloaded messaging app in U.K. and India – and only two percentage points behind WhatsApp in South Africa."

BBM is struggling for market share in the U.S., but so is WhatsApp. Competing messenging apps Kik and Viber have now pulled even with WhatsApp in the world's biggest market.

BlackBerry stock is higher Thursday, but I strongly suspect this won't last. The extravagant valuation Facebook intends to pay for WhatsApp – which at $19-billion amounts to more than $350-million per employee – only makes sense in combination with the 1.2 billion Facebook users across the globe.

Without a platform as powerful as Facebook, BBM is at a huge competitive disadvantage. This implies that BBM is worth less in the wake of the deal, not more. The only real hope for BBM growth is a takeout offer from Google or another major player looking to grab market share.

It's frustrating because it would have made more sense for Facebook to buy BlackBerry for $7.5- or $8-billion, rather than WhatsApp for more than double the price. Is the brand that broken?

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter