Feed aggregator

Which companies could be interested in acquiring BlackBerry Ltd? A look at its most likely suitors

National Post Tech Desk - Thu, 05/14/2015 - 12:58

BlackBerry Ltd. has come a long way since CEO John Chen took over in late 2013. And for that reason, the company’s long-term survival now seems much more assured.

That said, BlackBerry still has plenty of challenges ahead. Its brand does not have a good image, which seems to be holding back sales. Reports have surfaced that its software offering isn’t catching on. And the company remains well behind in the app war. Personally, I expect sales to disappoint for a while.

In the long term, there’s a lot of value in BlackBerry: it has a leadership position in security; its QNX operating system is very strong; and it’s well positioned in the growing Internet of Things marketplace. Its war chest of 44,000 patents is a key asset, and who can forget BlackBerry Messenger (BBM)?

Given BlackBerry’s weak brand, those assets would probably be more valuable in the hands of an acquirer. I’m not predicting a takeover any time soon, but if BlackBerry continues with its revenue struggles, then this may become more realistic. But who are the most likely suitors?

Related

1. Samsung or Google

In January reports surfaced that Samsung made an offer to buy BlackBerry. Even though no acquisition ended up happening, it’s easy to see why Samsung would be interested.

For one, Samsung has struggled to gain a foothold in the enterprise market, mainly because it doesn’t have the same security capabilities as its competitors. A takeover of BlackBerry would certainly help with that problem.

Secondly, BlackBerry’s patent portfolio could be a key asset for Samsung as it battles Apple Inc. in U.S. courts.

Google Inc. could also make a push for BlackBerry, and its motivations would be similar to Samsung’s. The Android operating system is making little headway in the enterprise market, and Google is also battling Apple in the courts.

2. Apple

BlackBerry shares spiked on Monday when rumours surfaced that Apple was considering a takeover bid. How likely is such a buyout?

On the surface a takeover seems possible. Apple has had its own security issues (the main one being a celebrity nude photo scandal last year) and could potentially use BlackBerry’s help in this area. Furthermore, BlackBerry’s patent portfolio could once again be a valuable asset.

Apple could also buy BlackBerry as a favour to the U.S. government, which does not want to see the BlackBerry brand die.

I still don’t see this happening. It would be very out of character for Apple, and I doubt the technology giant really needs BlackBerry anyways.

3. Lenovo

I’ve only included Lenovo on this list because it has pursued BlackBerry in the past.

That being the case, this merger looks extremely unlikely. Lenovo is a Chinese company, so any takeover would surely be rejected by the Canadian government. It would also upset the U.S. government—BlackBerry’s biggest customer.

Remember, these are only three of the many potential suitors, and more could emerge down the road. We’ll just have to wait and see what happens.

The original version of this article can be viewed at www.fool.ca

Puzzle & Dragons Z + Puzzle & Dragons Super Mario Bros. Edition review: Way better than its goofy name suggests

National Post Tech Desk - Thu, 05/14/2015 - 12:32

I used to look forward to playing the occasional match-three puzzle game, but I’ve grown extremely leery of the genre in recent years.

For every strategic and balanced entry there are dozens poorly designed knockoffs created not to challenge players with fun, balanced play, but instead taunt them with luck-driven puzzles and unfair progression systems that encourage people to spend to win. This past winter’s Pokemon Shuffle, which began with some promise before quickly descending into a pay-based catastrophe, is the most recent example I had the misfortune of trying.

It was with some trepidation, then, that I plugged – the incredibly awkwardly named – Puzzle & Dragons Z + Puzzle & Dragons Super Mario Bros. Edition into my Nintendo 3DS last week and began slinging around tiles with my stylus.

I was surprised and delighted to discover, however, that it’s just about the best match three puzzle game I’ve played in years.

Nintendo

I haven’t played the original free-to-play Puzzle & Dragons for mobile devices or any of its spinoffs, so I don’t have a frame of reference for how this version compares to its predecessors. I understand, though, that they incorporated in-app purchases that cleverly lured players to spend, spend, spend on virtual currency. They’re smartly dissected in this great Gamasutra piece that examines popular free-to-play monetization techniques.

However, the Nintendo 3DS version is pay once, play forever. That means the designers had no reason to insert progression gates or arbitrarily ramp up difficulty to frustrate players into spending more. And the resulting game is one in which strategy is rewarded and progression is constant and satisfying.

Well, it’s two games, actually.

The first, Puzzle & Dragons Z, is a fresh take on the original mobile game while the second, Puzzle & Dragons Super Mario Bros. Edition, drapes a Nintendo-themed blanket over Puzzle & Dragons’ core machinery.

The puzzles in both are broken into dungeons consisting of multiple battles. Each battle sees one or more enemies appear on the top screen with a life bar. Your goal is to whittle their health down to nothing by sliding tiles around to create matching rows of three or more matching orbs. Each matched row causes any monsters of the corresponding colour on your team to attack your enemies.

Nintendo

There’s all sorts of strategy going on here that needs to be unpacked.

First off, you can pick the members of your team – including a special helper character with a unique power that might, say, increase the attack power of allies of a particular affinity or change orbs of one colour to another – prior to each dungeon. You pick these teammates based not only on their current level and abilities, but also the types of tiles and opposing monsters slated to appear in specific dungeons. There’s a rock-paper-scissors kind of math that governs everything. It’s pretty easy to understand.

Then, once you’re in the dungeon and fighting enemies, you’ll need to carefully plan each move before putting stylus to screen. Unlike most match-three games, you can move single tiles anywhere you like on the board. And instead of just swapping locations with one other tile, you’ll displace each tile you pass along the way.

It’s a little confusing at first, but it’s also enormously empowering. During a single five-second turn you can quickly adjust the position of every tile on the screen. If you take the time to figure out exactly how you want to move your tile prior to moving it you can make multiple matches resulting in huge – and hugely satisfying – combo attacks. It’s great stuff.

The strategy extends outside the dungeon, too. You can upgrade your allies in various ways, sacrificing one to level up another or evolving them into new and more powerful forms using rare resources earned through combat. These and other forms of ally manipulation are slowly unlocked over dozens of dungeons and several hours.

There’s still some luck involved. You can’t, for example, control which tiles will fall from the top as you clear those below. But the impression that the outcome of each battle depended almost entirely on my skill and planning never left. Rare is the match-three puzzler that leaves me feeling so in control. And here we get two packaged together!

Though you may not like both equally.

Nintendo

The differences in the two games’ puzzles and tactics are pretty minor.

For example, in Puzzle & Dragons Z you earn a stack of skill points from which any ally can draw from to execute its special skill (meaning one ally can perform the same skill multiple times in a row). In contrast, allies in the Mario-themed game power up their abilities on an individual basis. I preferred the Puzzle & Dragons Z method, but found I could cope easily enough with the less flexible system in the Mario edition.

It’s the differences outside the puzzle arena that will likely determine which game you like more.

Like presentation and storytelling. The Mario edition dubs its dungeons “courses” and breaks them into “worlds.” Its monsters are Shy Guys, Bloopers, and Buzzy Beetles, and its heroes are Mario and Luigi wearing familiar, power-bestowing costumes. The orbs we clear are Fire Flowers and Yellow Stars and Poison Mushrooms. And there is virtually no story. We’re whisked swiftly and efficiently between courses and worlds with virtually nothing in the way of exposition. It’s just match-three puzzle battles dressed up in Mario colours.

Nintendo

Puzzle & Dragons Z, on the other hand, has more of a traditional fantasy-meets-Pokemon vibe. There are monsters to capture and collect, a young, customizable hero in training, and an explorable world outside the dungeons with quests and within which a story about an impending catastrophe plays out. I think it took around half an hour of chatting and training before I got to the first real dungeon and began puzzling in earnest.

The Mario-themed edition’s presentation is far and away the more palatable of the two, at least for me. It kept me playing puzzles pretty much non-stop, which is all I really want from a puzzle game. The familiar and beloved Nintendo mugs dappling the screen are just a bonus.

That said, Puzzle & Dragon Z‘s ally upgrade and evolution system – accessed while exploring the RPG world – is quicker paced, a little easier to understand, and ultimately more satisfying.

I enjoyed both, but I can also imagine a single game that takes the best bits from both for a truly transcendent puzzle battle experience.

Nintendo

The question I keep wondering, however, is whether a world now accustomed to free-to-play match-three puzzlers will be eager to spend 30 bucks on a game like this. Even if you reason that you’re really only paying $15 per game, the cost still seems pretty steep compared to free.

Of course, I think it’s a great deal. Paying a reasonable price for dozens and dozens of hours of satisfying and balanced puzzle play – and no temptation to spend more on in-app purchases – seems like a no-brainer to me.

But humans as a species are notoriously short sighted when it comes to things like this. I fear that the Candy Crushes of the world – upon which many players have spent far more $30 over the long term – have ruined things for fair, well-designed, pay once upfront match-three games that don’t prey upon our psychological weaknesses.

That’s probably all the more reason to grab up a game like Puzzle & Dragons Z + Puzzle & Dragons Super Mario Bros. Edition while you have a chance.

Apple Watch review: A new smartwatch king has finally arrived — but even it has flaws

National Post Tech Desk - Thu, 05/14/2015 - 11:39

Apple Watch is the top wearable device I have ever used, but I’m still not sold on the concept of a smartwatch, especially one as pricey as Apple Inc.’s.

With this in mind though, Apple has still created the best-looking, best-performing and most feature-rich smartwatch released so far, making top competing devices such as the Android Wear-based Moto 360 and even Pebble, two of my favourite smartwatches, almost feel like limited toys in comparison. However, Apple Watch has a number of flaws — some of which nearly ruin the smartwatch experience — making it difficult to not recommend most consumers wait for the next, likely superior version of the product.

Also, with the Apple Watch’s significant price point in mind, it’s a hard sell for consumers on the fence about the concept of a smartwatch in general.

But make no mistake, Apple Watch continues with the premium-priced, high-end direction Apple is known for, and in some ways consumers get exactly what they’re paying for.

It’s undeniably pretty and functional

Every Apple Watch model is impressive looking, but the Apple Watch Edition version (starting at $650) is the most visually appealing iteration. However, it has a few significant drawbacks in terms of build-quality.

The chrome body of the Apple Watch Edition is prone to scuffs and scratches. After using an Apple Watch Edition for approximately a week and a half, I was frustrated that it already showed a number of hairline scrapes on various parts of its chrome body (I tend to be very careful with my electronics). Considering its $650 price tag, I expected the Apple Watch Edition to be able to take more abuse before showing signs of wear and tear.

Patrick O'Rourke/National PostThe Apple Watch's digital crown is intuitive, but not as easy to pick-up and use as a touch screen.

This leads me to believe the brushed-metal Apple Watch Sport might be the best option in terms of durability. It seems I’m not alone: Many other technology critics have similar sentiments. Some experts also say Apple Watch Sport has a superior screen, claiming the more durable sapphire display featured in the Apple Watch Edition unfortunately results in poor viewing angles and that it doesn’t look as sharp as the Sport’s glass display.

Next there is the underused favourite contacts button, located on the left side of he Apple Watch just under the Digital Crown, depending on how the device is oriented and which hand it’s being worn on. This button seems to be largely ignored by Apple and is currently only used to access favourite contacts as well as to turn the wearable on and off.

However, the button’s limited use makes it much easier to access the favourites section of the Apple Watch. Still, its placement makes it a little difficult to access and it’s hard not to wonder if Apple intended to use it for additional purposes, but ran out of time when designing the Apple Watch’s user-interface (UI).

Related Patrick O'Rourke/National PostThe Apple Watch's Sport Band is surprisingly comfortable.

On the other side of the spectrum, Apple Watch’s Digital Crown offers a simple and intuitive way of scrolling through messages as well as zooming the Apple Watch’s main UI screen in and out, but it’s hardly the navigation revolution Apple has touted it to be.

It shares a lot in common with the classic scroll wheel featured on older iPods. While the Digital Crown works adequately, the fluid scroll wheel isn’t as intuitive as a touch screen — one of the main factors that made the iPad and iPhone so popular and helped the devices reach such a broad audience.

This means there’s a learning curve when it comes to understanding the Apple Watch’s user-interface. Most people I showed the Apple Watch to were initially unsure how to navigate through apps. It often took a number of minutes before they were able to grasp the basics of Apple Watch navigation.

That’s not to say that the Apple Watch’s UI isn’t impressive, because it is. Similar to BlackBerry’s BB10 operating system, using an Apple Watch just takes a little getting used to. After a couple of hours with the smartwatch zooming in with the Digital Crown and scrolling through glances, it can become second nature.

Straps/bands are intuitive and comfortable

Patrick O'Rourke/National PostOne of the most surprising aspects of the Apple Watch is how much thought has gone into the device's bands.

The various impressive, but often very expensive, Apple Watch straps are perhaps the aspect of the device I have been the most surprised about.

The Apple Watch Sport’s fluoroelastomer synthetic rubber band is silky smooth and doesn’t stick to skin like other smartwatch bands. It also costs a reasonable $69 — not a bad price for a product that’s designed for when you’re working out.

The Leather Loop’s magnetic band conforms perfectly and snuggly to the wearer’s wrist. This is my favourite band because it is a good mix between style and comfort, and also doesn’t add additional weight to the Apple Watch. The Leather Loop’s $199 price will likely be too steep for most people, though.

With the Steel Link Bracelet you’re able to easily remove magnetic links from the band for sizing purposes. This strap costs an astronomical $599, a high price to pay for something that gets easily scratched.

After using the Steel Link Bracelet for only a few days, a number of small scuffs began cropping up on its buckle and various links. It may be a minor issue, considering many of these scratches will likely be able to be buffed out. But at a $599 price tag, most would expect the Steel Link Bracelet to be significantly more durable.

Other bands such as the Modern Buckle and intricate Milanese Loop, are also available.

Some apps are great. Others? Not so much

Patrick O'Rourke/Financial PostWhen you strip the Apple Watch down, it almost amusingly looks very similar to older iPod Nano models.

Apple Watch’s app selection initially seems robust and varied, but there are really only a handful actually worth downloading right now. Montreal-developed Transit App is one of the Apple Watch’s most useful applications, but even it has drawbacks.

While Transit App often pulls data from its iPhone app counterpart in just a few seconds, sometimes the transfer can take up to 10 seconds. When this occurred I often opted to pull out my phone and check upcoming public transit times on it instead, defeating the inherent easy-to-access intended purpose of Apple Watch.

This brings to light perhaps one of the Apple Watch’s most significant issues. Apple Watch apps are always tethered to the iPhone and every current application for the device pulls data from the smartphone. In some cases users are forced to manually open an app on their iPhone before being able to use its Apple Watch counterpart. Sometimes this only needs to be done once, but other apps need to be opened multiple times on the iPhone.

If the Apple Watch’s purpose is intended to revolve around gathering information at a glance, then this is an issue that needs to be fixed.

In terms of other Apple Watch applications there are a few standouts: Twitter (although the app is very limited), Instagram, Calcbot, Deliveries, Clear and perhaps surprisingly, a simplistic games called Spy_Watch, that tasks players with sending virtual spies on real-time missions, all work perfectly within the platform’s limitations.

News applications and simple built-in companion apps such as Music, Phone and Photos, felt useless on the Apple Watch because they’re simply a more limited version of their iPhone counterparts. It makes more sense to just open the app on your iPhone instead.

Glances are a great idea hindered by technical issues

Patrick O'Rourke/National PostNavigating through the Apple Watch's UI takes some getting used to, but it's still intuitive and well thought-out.

Glances are Apple’s version of Google’s automated Google Now system, a feature that aims to give Android Wear watch users access to information they want before they even know they need it. Google Now isn’t very customizable but still works great in most cases, giving users access to emails, movie times, weather and a variety of other information, with just a few swipes on an Android Wear smartwatch or Android smartphone.

But with Glances, Apple has taken the concept of a personal information gatherer to another level, allowing developers to create custom widgets, giving customizable and quick access to the information they need. For instance, I have Glances set up for Transit App, Calendar, Twitter, Spy_Watch, and weather – all apps I use frequently.

While all this might sound great, these always-on widgets are hindered by the same issues as standard Apple Watch apps. They’re often slow, crash on occasion and sometimes fail to pull data from their iPhone counterparts. With that said, there’s something special about the ability to personally cater your experience with Glances on the Apple Watch that makes me think the feature will likely become a significant part of the Apple Watch’s experience, and the direction smartwatches are headed in general.

If app developers and Apple are able to find a way to make Glances more stable and responsive, then they could be the key UI feature that will give Apple Watch a significant advantage over anything Android Wear is currently capable of.

It’s all about notifications

Patrick O'Rourke/National PostIt also tells time. After all, the Apple Watch is still a "watch."

Apple Watch’s most useful purpose, which is also arguably how any smartwatch can be used best, is to notify you of important information. This means sending emails, text messages, Instagram notifications, as well as a variety of other app messages, directly to your wrist. This means your smartphone can stay in your pocket for longer and you can concentrate on things that are more important, rather than constantly checking your phone for that important email you’ve been waiting for.

And this is where Apple Watch will either shine or fall apart for most people, depending on how much effort you put into configuring which notifications land on your wrist. The idea behind smartwatches, particularly Apple Watch, is to simplify your life and to not have every single message you receive on your iPhone also be sent to your wrist. This is why I opted to only receive emails, phone calls and text messages to the Apple Watch, rather than Google Hangout, Facebook, Twitter, and countless other notifications.

This keeps things simple and allows me to quickly raise my wrist to see the information I need right away. It’s also important to point out that while there is an option that allows users to only receive primary emails or emails from a specific sender via the Apple Watch with Apple’s stock mail app, this same filtering is not carried over to Gmail and other applications.

If you’re deeply tied to Google’s ecosystem you’re going to have issues with the Apple Watch since the company has launched very few Apple Watch apps, an issue that is expected given Google created the operating system most of Apple Watch’s competitors take advantage of. Currently only Google News and Weather are available on Apple Watch.

Cool, but not very practical features

Patrick O'Rourke/National PostThe Apple Watch shines an eerie green light through the user's skin to monitor their heartbeat.

The Apple Watch is also full of cool but not exactly practical features. For example, you can take calls from your wrist with the Apple Watch, an act that makes you look ridiculous in public and that I have not found a practical purpose for.

Additionally I found myself often sending simple doodles and handwritten messages to people in my top friends list who also have Apple Watches. You’re also able to send your heartbeat to other Apple Watch users, which on some level is mildly creepy. Unfortunately both of these capabilities can only be received by other Apple Watch users.

Other cool features include the ability to use the Apple Watch as a shutter remote for the Apple Watch’s camera, opening up new photography opportunities for iPhone users, and Siri voice controls and search capabilities, another feature that tends to make you look rather ridiculous if you opt to talk to your wrist in public.

Multiple watch faces are also available for the Apple Watch, although they aren’t very customizable and Apple hasn’t opened up the feature to third-party developers.

Price is still a barrier for the best smartwatch out there

Despite its flaws Apple Watch is an impressive device. Battery life is solid, clocking in at an impressive 8-12 hours with moderate use as long as I charged the smartwatch every day. This is in part due to the battery-saving technology behind its screen, which turns on approximately 98 per cent of the time I raise my wrist to look at the device (this was a huge issue with the Moto 360).

But the question of whether smartwatches are set to be the next device everybody needs, similar to an iPhone or any other smartphone, still remains. Apple is on to something with Apple Watch and similar to its past devices, the company has already blown away wearable competitors both in terms of functionality and aesthetics.

But with the impressive looking and much more affordable $250 Android-focused Pebble Time on the horizon, it’s unclear if Apple’s current smartwatch supremacy will last.

Cineplex looks to draw crowds from burgeoning gamer community by hosting competitions

National Post Tech Desk - Thu, 05/14/2015 - 09:33

TORONTO — Step aside Hollywood because this year Cineplex is placing its bets on Canada’s burgeoning video game community.

After years of dabbling in various small gaming events, the Toronto-based movie exhibitor wants to show gamers it’s ready to invest in their obsession.

This summer, Cineplex will hold a series of gaming-themed screenings it hopes will eventually lead to hosting local video game competitions at its own theatres.

The move comes as the company focuses on building a sustainable business that doesn’t solely rely on the volatile profits of the movie industry, which thrives on the latest blockbuster and stumbles on the flops.

Enthusiastic gamers could offer the company a reliable way of drawing crowds any time of year.

Multi-player video game tournaments, also known as Esports, have become a global sensation that attracts thousands of spectators to live events held at arenas and other venues around the world.

Fans cheer on players who compete head-to-head in popular games like “Counter-Strike: GO” and “Call of Duty” as their every move is projected on giant screens. The winners can go home with thousands of dollars in cash prizes.

Cineplex chief executive Ellis Jacob said Wednesday that he wants to tap into that energy within the Canadian gaming community this year.

“There’s a lot of vitality,” he said at the company’s annual meeting.

Related

In July, Cineplex will gauge the national interest of gamers with an event screening of the documentary, “All Work All Play: The Pursuit of Esports Glory” at 85 theatres across much of the country. The movie will be followed by a casual Esports competition between audience members inside the theatres.

Cineplex hopes the documentary will trigger interest from a hungry gaming community that has faced a lack of public spaces to hold competitions in many parts of the country.

In August, Cineplex also plans to host a live screening of the ESL One Cologne 2015 gaming tournament from Cologne, Germany.

Video games aren’t an entirely new area of business for Cineplex. The company first put gamers on its radar in 2008 when it began renting out downtime at theatres to Xbox 360 players who wanted to compete on the big screen.

In 2013, a Cineplex theatre in Toronto hosted a tournament to promote “EA Sports NHL14” on PlayStation 3 before the game was released in stores.

Theatrical exhibitors have struggled in recent years to convince younger people — in particular teenage boys and young men — to buy movie tickets, as a slate of blockbusters compete against video game consoles and entertainment alternatives like YouTube and Netflix.

Esport competitions have proven to be one of the few sure bets, as the gaming business grows in leaps and bounds.

Video game research firm Newzoo expects that gaming “enthusiasts” will surge from an estimated 89 million in 2013 to as many as 145 million by 2017, while revenues for the gaming industry are projected to climb as high as $465 million in 2017.

Advertisers salivate over the demographics of the gaming community, with Coca-Cola signing up to be a leading sponsor of Riot Games’ League of Legends tournaments in the United States.

Sports broadcaster TheScore Inc. also joined the gaming world earlier this year with an app that tracks scores and statistics for top gamers.

TheScore also delivers breaking news related to select games and says it plans to expand coverage as its app gains traction.

The Canadian Press

Salesforce.com partners with Communitech to bolster Canadian startup community

National Post Tech Desk - Thu, 05/14/2015 - 07:18

Thursday at Salesforce World Tour in Toronto, Salesforce.com Inc. announced a series of initiatives to assist the Canadian startup community, including a partnership with Communitech, an industry-led innovation centre that supports, fosters and celebrates a community of nearly 1,000 tech companies.

Salesforce is partnering with Communitech to support Communitech’s Rev program, which is a first of its kind sales accelerator that enables high-potential startups to scale revenue growth quickly. Salesforce will provide training, mentorship and resources to Rev companies, and will also work closely with Communitech to support the growth of the broader local startup ecosystem.

“Salesforce is an ideal partner for Communitech and the Rev program,” said Iain Klugman, CEO, Communitech. “With their industry leading technology and expertise, Salesforce can provide the mentorship, training and resources that will help our companies scale quickly.”

In addition, the company announced the Canadian launch of Salesforce for Startups. It will give technology entrepreneurs the resources needed to successfully build and grow their businesses, including technology, and connections with experts who can assist them.

The three core elements of the program are:

  • Build: As part of the program, startups will have access to the Salesforce1 Platform, enabling them to quickly build any kind of app at scale.
  • Grow: Salesforce for Startups provides access to curated content and tools to help startups delight customers and grow.
  • Give Back: Startups are encouraged to integrate philanthropy into the fabric of their company from the very beginning.

“We’re thrilled to join forces with the Canadian tech startup ecosystem to accelerate innovation,” Ludovic Ulrich, director of startup relations at Salesforce, said in a statement. “The tech startup sector is a critical part of the Canadian economy and we’re proud to provide the technology, tools and expertise entrepreneurs need to take their businesses into the future.”

To assist with the third element, Give Back, Salesforce for Startups is working with Pledge 1%, a movement it co-founded with Atlassian and EFCO. Pledge 1% encourages startups to pledge one per cent of equity, product and/or employee time to their communities. It is entirely funded by its co-founders, so all pledges go to causes designated by pledging companies. With the help of Canadian non-profit Upside Foundation, over 30 companies, including Candid, Organimi, Switch Video, Empty Cubicle, Funnelcake, Hubba, MeetVibe, and Mindstack, have already made the commitment.

Related

Through the Salesforce Foundation, Salesforce itself has donated over $80 million in grants, and almost one million volunteer hours through its 1-1-1 initiatives since it was founded in 1999, co-founder Parker Harris noted. In addition, it sponsors an initiative for customers at its annual Dreamforce user conference. Last year, its goal was to raise one million meals for those in need, either with cash or canned food donations from participants; when combined with matching contributions, the conference tripled that number, yielding three million meals.

Salesforce World Tour Toronto is Salesforce’s premier event in Canada, bringing together Salesforce experts, partners and customers to demonstrate how companies can leverage the Salesforce Platform to connect all of their apps, devices and customer data in today’s cloud, social, mobile and data science world.

Internet music streaming service, Rdio, announces new $3.99 monthly ‘Select’ plan

National Post Tech Desk - Thu, 05/14/2015 - 05:00

Rdio has announced a new mobile-focused $3.99 per month pricing plan, in an effort to compete in the crowded and quickly-growing music streaming industry. The price undercuts Spotify Ltd.’s $10 premium service price tag significantly, as well as paid versions of a variety of other platforms, and is the lowest priced music streaming subscription available right now.

Rdio says its new pricing tier gives subscribers unlimited mobile access to any station on its service, with no ads or skip limits – a limitation of the free version of the platform restricts the number of songs a listener can skip over. Music is also streamed at high-quality 320 kbps and users are only able to download 25 songs for offline listening, with a limit of replacing these downloads once per day.

Rdio is also offering a 60-day trial of the new “Select” plan.

“We’re excited to reach a new group of price sensitive music subscribers with Rdio Select and have designed the service to appeal to a wide audience,” said Rdio CEO Anthony Bay in a press release. “Rdio Select joins our premium Rdio Unlimited package and reflects our commitment to offering customized streaming options tuned to different listening audiences.”

The catch with this pricing plan is that users will only be able to use Rdio’s mobile app, which means it won’t work with the service’s web-based application. Arguably the two top music streaming platforms, Rdio and Spotify, both offer free music tiers that institute some sort of limit on use. For example, Spotify’s free subscription tier is largely restriction-free, unless you’re using the service’s mobile app which limits songs to shuffle playback.

Ads and lack of enhanced music quality are also restrictions on the free tier of Spotify’s service. Spotify soft-launched in Canada in early September 2014, joining competitors such as Deezer, Google Play Music, Slacker and Songza – which was purchased by Google in July 2014.

Rdio offers ad-free web streaming at $4.99, and unlimited mobile and web streaming is pegged at $9.99, a price point matching Spotify’s standard premium subscription fee of $9.99. In comparison, Google Play Music does not offer a a free subscription level and instead charges $9.99 for unlimited streaming access. The other major player in the Canadian music streaming space is Deezer, which also offers a $9.99 subscription price tag.

Jay Z’s supposedly artist-focused Tidal, which launched to significant fanfare just a few weeks ago, is currently considered a flop after the app fell out of the U.S. top 700 iTunes app charts.

While Rdio’s new “Select” price point might seem insignificant it could signal that competing platforms will begin offering less expensive, but still feature limiting, subscription levels

Mobilicity buys time to review ‘acquisition transaction,’ but sources say nothing is new

National Post Tech Desk - Wed, 05/13/2015 - 14:45

TORONTO – Financially strapped Mobilicity has secured another reprieve from its creditors from an Ontario court, affording its stakeholders four more months to review “credible interest” from “various parties” for “an acquisition transaction,” according to a monitor’s report filed during the company’s last stay extension.

However, sources familiar with the struggling wireless startup confirmed the potential suitors brought before the court to secure the latest extension until Aug. 31 are the same two prospective buyers that have been circling what’s left of the carrier for years: Telus Corp. and Wind Mobile Corp.

Given that the same hurdles that either blocked or delayed a sale in the past continue to prevail today, it appears Mobilicity may be stalling for more time.

Related

“Nothing new has happened in two months,” said a source familiar with the company, which has been attempting to restructure since September 2013. “Wind and Telus are still the only ones that have shown interest, but they haven’t been to the table in a very long time.”

Telus clashed with Industry Canada when it tried to buy Mobilicity three times in 2013 and 2014, first offering $380 million and then $350 million. But Ottawa insisted that a marriage of the two carriers would hurt wireless competition and blocked the deal each time.

Joe Natale, chief executive officer of Telus, confirmed the Vancouver-based wireless giant was not in renewed talks with Mobilicity. “We are not, and we have nothing active going with Mobilicity,” he said in a recent phone interview, “nor would we comment on anything we might be doing in the marketplace with respect to business development or otherwise.”

Wind and Mobilicity restarted merger talks earlier this year, which the pair have been doing on and off since 2009, but Wind’s owners have so far balked at the terms Mobilicity is seeking. Sources say Wind will not bid higher than $200 million for its cash-strapped rival.

“Mobilicity has stale numbers in their head that are so unrealistic,” another source said.

A spokesman for Mobilicity declined to comment.

Facing the prospect of insolvency, Mobilicity says it is striving for a “value-maximizing transaction” for both management and creditors, a task that has proven to be a challenge for a group that can’t seem to agree on how to reach the most-optimal exit.

As of April 30, Mobilicity estimates it has 157,000 active wireless subscribers, down from 158,600 at the end of 2014. According to a projected cash-flow statement filed with the court, it expects to record a cash outflow of $2.9 million from operations between April 25 and Sept. 4, forecasting $23.1 million in sales.

The prior stay was extended until May 8 from Jan. 30 so Mobilicity could consider tabling a bid for spectrum licences in March’s AWS-3 auction that were set aside specifically for new entrants, a decision that was deemed to be in “the best interest” of Mobilicity by its board, lawyers and financial advisers.

But the company didn’t table a bid after Catalyst Capital Group Inc. pulled up to $200 million in funding because the Toronto-based lender “determined that all the conditions precedent to funding under the term sheet had not been met,” per the recent court filings.

The benefactor of Mobilicity’s inability to secure financing for a bid was rival Wind, which won set-aside licenses to AWS-3 spectrum in British Columbia, Alberta and southern Ontario for a bargain reserve price of $56.4 million. The biggest loser might be the federal government, which could have fetched a much steeper amount for the coveted resource if someone other than Wind had bid for it. Plus, it’s stuck watching stumbling Mobilicity, a company it had once hoped would vie to be Canada’s fourth national carrier.

Mobilicity’s decision to submit its $62-million deposit to Industry Canada to participate in the AWS-3 auction has cost the carrier $1.9 million in unpaid fees and interest, which is still owed.

Financial Post
cpellegrini@nationalpost.com

Pages