RIM reportedly turned down takeover proposal from Amazon

Amazon reportedly gave serious consideration to buying Research In Motion, although it isn't clear as to why.
Written by Rachel King, Contributor

In what could have been the saving grace for Research In Motion or the biggest mistake that Amazon has made to date, reports are swirling that Amazon considered buying the beleaguered mobile device maker.

Yet, the reports also cite that RIM refused Amazon's advances, which seems bizarre considering it isn't a secret that the Canadian company is in the middle of some rough times and could use some serious cash and morale infusions.

Reuters reports, based on information from anonymous sources "with knowledge of the situation," that RIM turned down the proposal because it would prefer "to fix its problems on its own."

Amazon hired an investment bank this summer to review a potential merger with RIM, but it did not make a formal offer, said one of the sources. It is not clear whether informal discussions between Amazon and RIM ever led to specific price talk, or who else had approached RIM about a takeover.

It almost sounds too ridiculous to be true. It's already evident that RIM cannot fix its problems on its own as everything has pretty much gone sour before and since the launch of the BlackBerry PlayBook this year. (That's at least within the U.S. market and on consumer levels. Look at the international and business scenes, and it's a different story.)

However, purchasing RIM would give Amazon an in-house mobile device manufacturer -- just like Google is doing with its proposed bid for Motorola Mobility. It's not clear whether or not Amazon would turn over its Kindle products to RIM (which might end up getting ruined), but it has been reported that Amazon is keen on building a Kindle phone.

Thus, this might be why Amazon wanted RIM in the first place, and it would be a bargain buy for the online retail giant considering RIM's current state.

Nevertheless, RIM seems set to fight its own battles completely alone.


Editorial standards