Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 18th Apr 2013 11:21 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless Nokia has posted its quarterly results for the first quarter of 2013, and just like the quarters that came before, there's not a whole lot of good news in there. The rise in Lumia sales still can't even dream of making up for the sales drop in Symbian phones, and when broken down in versions, the sales figures for Windows Phone 8 Lumias in particular are very disappointing. In North America, Nokia is getting slaughtered.
Order by: Score:
Steal ideas
by bolomkxxviii on Thu 18th Apr 2013 11:29 UTC
bolomkxxviii
Member since:
2006-05-19

Rumor has it that Nokia will be bringing out a "phablet" in hopes that will jumpstart sales. Samsung has sold a ton of Galaxy Notes so Nokia thinks bigger might be better.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Steal ideas
by Beta on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:19 UTC in reply to "Steal ideas"
Beta Member since:
2005-07-06

Rumor has it that Nokia will be bringing out a "phablet" in hopes that will jumpstart sales. Samsung has sold a ton of Galaxy Notes so Nokia thinks bigger might be better.

That news leaked to the Internet just in time to spread before the earnings call, call me a bitter tech blog reader…
Nokia doesn’t have much direction atm, and well, next quarter they’ll again have 20 million fewer ‘smart devices’ to keep them afloat. They are done :\

Reply Score: 4

RE: Steal ideas
by majipoor on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:59 UTC in reply to "Steal ideas"
majipoor Member since:
2009-01-22

"Samsung has sold a ton of Galaxy Notes so Nokia thinks bigger might be better."

No, Samsung didn't sell a ton of Galaxy Notes if you consider the figures in their context and compare them to "normal" smartphones sales.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Steal ideas
by jnemesh on Thu 18th Apr 2013 16:06 UTC in reply to "RE: Steal ideas"
jnemesh Member since:
2008-04-08

10 million Notes and 20 million and counting for the Note II. So you have AT LEAST 5 million more Note devices than Lumia devices out there. That's significant no matter how you look at it.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Steal ideas
by Nelson on Thu 18th Apr 2013 16:12 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Steal ideas"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I agree, they sold a ton. I'm not sure how well Nokia would fare though, unless Windows Phone made significant strides in pen computing which I doubt.

The Note I think is popular not just for its size, but because of the way you interact with it. Samsung is clearly ahead of most with this on a mobile phone device.

Its a shame because Microsof't pen support in Windows 8 blows everyone out of the water.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Steal ideas
by telns on Thu 18th Apr 2013 16:33 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Steal ideas"
telns Member since:
2009-06-18

Can you elaborate a bit? I recently received a Win8 tablet with a pen. Never really used pen input before, so I'm still adjusting to the whole thing.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Steal ideas
by Nelson on Thu 18th Apr 2013 18:17 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Steal ideas"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

They have really advanced pressure sensitivity, palm rejection, and handwriting recognition. Microsoft has been working on this longer than most, since it was the primary interaction paradigm for their early tablet efforts.

It depends which tablet though, the Surface Pro comes with a pressure sensitive pen and the screen has an addition digitizer for pen input.

Reply Score: 2

Ehm
by vaette on Thu 18th Apr 2013 11:35 UTC
vaette
Member since:
2008-08-09

A bit weird to say that Nokia is getting slaughtered in North America since they have never had a foothold there before. If anything the historical perspective makes that aspect appear relatively healthy.

The slaughter of Symbian devices does indeed bring the statistics down rather badly, but saying that sort of ignores the fact that Symbian devices are now dead, so the slaughter is in past tense, the current numbers are all the current portfolio and current plan for going forward. Nokia is still losing cash, but the Lumias and Ashas are now bringing in a healthy amount of money.

The thing the markets are upset about is the big drop in Nokias feature phone lines. This is a more critical part, since it brings in a lot of money overall, but really is a play in a segment that may not exist anymore going forward.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Ehm
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 18th Apr 2013 11:38 UTC in reply to "Ehm"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

The point is not that Symbian sales are dropping; the point is that Nokia has nothing to offset that drop, and growth in Lumia sales is nowhere near close enough to fix that any time soon.

Remember that Nokia shouldn't look at the past, but the future. There's nothing in here that shines a positive light on Nokia's future.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Ehm
by vaette on Thu 18th Apr 2013 11:56 UTC in reply to "RE: Ehm"
vaette Member since:
2008-08-09

Year over year smart devices sales are down only 5%. Lumia/Asha are profitable and are bringing in an increasingly large part of the cash. The issue everyone else has is that feature phones (i.e. non-symbian) are down 36% year over year. Symbian was never the big money-maker for Nokia, Lumia/Asha are not a failure in displacing Symbian, the failure is that the low-end where Nokia made up a lot of volume is going away entirely.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Ehm
by jgfenix on Thu 18th Apr 2013 12:37 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Ehm"
jgfenix Member since:
2006-05-25

A 49% drop in total smartphone sales is not a failure for you?

Reply Score: 11

RE[4]: Ehm
by Deviate_X on Thu 18th Apr 2013 13:20 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Ehm"
Deviate_X Member since:
2005-07-11

A 49% drop in total smartphone sales is not a failure for you?


As a critique of the Nokia business, yes, Nokia made no meaningful reply to the iPhone.

But that is not the title of this post.

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Ehm
by Nelson on Thu 18th Apr 2013 13:37 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Ehm"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Also Nokia is not just a one division company. Losses in their smart devices division while posting strong gains to offset that from NSN or somewhere else is still a good thing.

Once you take out the one time charges that aren't structural, Nokia posted a profit for the third consecutive quarter and actually improved their balance sheet.

This is what a mixed earning report is, mixed. Its wrong to universally spin this as good for Nokia, but it is also wrong to universally spin this as bad.

Its obvious the issues Nokia faced prior to this quarter they still face now, but it is also worth noting that their Windows Phone strategy is seeing increased momentum QoQ and YoY

Edited 2013-04-18 13:38 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: Ehm
by Beta on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:20 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Ehm"
Beta Member since:
2005-07-06

strong gains to offset that from NSN

Did I miss something, where are the strong gains?

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Ehm
by Nelson on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:39 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Ehm"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

From their earnngs: "- Nokia Group strengthened its net cash position by approximately EUR 120 million sequentially. Nokia Siemens Networks contributed approximately EUR 210 million to the Nokia Group net cash position."

They've also cut costs dramatically and increased their margins YoY.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Ehm
by dsmogor on Thu 18th Apr 2013 11:46 UTC in reply to "Ehm"
dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

Given that USA is the essential focal point in new Nokias management strategy of bringing it back to prominence (that's why WP, a platform unfit for traditional Nokia markets in developing countries was chosen), it's justifiable to say the strategy and Nokia along with it is being slaughtered.

Reply Score: 12

RE[2]: Ehm
by vaette on Thu 18th Apr 2013 11:49 UTC in reply to "RE: Ehm"
vaette Member since:
2008-08-09

So sales being up 9% year over year is being "slaughtered"? It is certainly not the wording I would use.

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Ehm
by sparkyERTW on Thu 18th Apr 2013 13:07 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Ehm"
sparkyERTW Member since:
2010-06-09

So sales being up 9% year over year is being "slaughtered"? It is certainly not the wording I would use.


Offset by a 49% total reduction in smartphone sales and a 21% year-over-year drop in feature phone sales! Seriously, what's wrong with you?

Reply Score: 9

RE[4]: Ehm
by Nelson on Thu 18th Apr 2013 13:23 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Ehm"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Yes, it still isn't bad, given that they've grown Lumia sales sequentially for 12/13 of the last quarters and they've had three straight quarters of non-IFRS profitability.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Ehm
by cdude on Thu 18th Apr 2013 13:47 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Ehm"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Nelson! Now that we have the numbers and now that I got proven correct in my last quarters forecast that Nokia continues to burn there limited remaining cash (without option to get new cash caused of there junk-rating) isn't there something you like to admit now? Something like dropping your quarterly "but they grow all time!" and "they are profitable, its changing!" you post here since over 2 years now?

Come on, even you can't deny what's happening with Nokia any longer.

Edited 2013-04-18 13:50 UTC

Reply Score: 8

RE[6]: Ehm
by Nelson on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:35 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Ehm"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Nelson! Now that we have the numbers and now that I got proven correct in my last quarters forecast that Nokia continues to burn there limited remaining cash


Nokia improved their cash on hand.

From their earnngs: "- Nokia Group strengthened its net cash position by approximately EUR 120 million sequentially. Nokia Siemens Networks contributed approximately EUR 210 million to the Nokia Group net cash position."

But hey, you want to talk about instances where you've been correct?

Let's take a look at what the insightful cdude has stated would happen, and what actually happened.

- You've previously said Nokia was not focusing on China.
This is WRONG.
Nokia was focusing on China. This financial result confirms that strong Lumia sales come partly from strong sales in China.

- You've previously said: "Its more a zombie. Not dead but also not alive. 4 quarters left till the head is cut off. Till then there is plenty time left to eat more brains."
This is WRONG.
Nokia has improved its cash position and achieved underlying profitability.
You said this two quarters ago. So according to you Nokia has two quarters left before its fully dead.

- You've previously said: "Who is going to buy an expensive WP7 device if WP8 devices are available already?"
This is WRONG.
This financial report suggests that Nokia's strategy of selling WP7 phones into the low end market is working, with 30% of their Lumia handsets being derived from their WP7 push.

- You've previously said: "Silverlight is already legacy and will not be supported in the future. It would be silly to build up anything new on it.".
This is WRONG.
WP8 apps are built on a hybrid Silverlight and WinRT runtime.

- You previously said: "Do we have numbers from Samsung and HTC meanwhile? Not yet I think. If we believe in comCast and Nielsens then both, every of them, sold more WP7 devices then Nokia. That was when most already dropped out of WP7 and only those 3 left."
This is WRONG.
Nokia controls 80% of the Windows Phone market and has pretty much commanded a presence from the beginning.

- You've previously said: "Making profit and grow again (or at least shrink not any longer) would be."
This is WRONG.
They have posted a profit for three straight quarters. You have not acknowledged this.

- You've previously said: "The cut could mean the abort all markets that refused Lumia like China or where Lumia sold most worse like Russia"
This is WRONG.
Nokia Lumia is now very strong in both China and Russia.

Quite obviously you're not as insightful as you think you are.

Reply Score: 4

RE[7]: Ehm
by cdude on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:54 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Ehm"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

So, dude, you are trying to shift away. I take that as you admitting its not working and your way to agree with me a quarter later. Fine, be my guest.

Edited 2013-04-18 14:55 UTC

Reply Score: 0

RE[7]: Ehm
by Valhalla on Thu 18th Apr 2013 18:38 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Ehm"
Valhalla Member since:
2006-01-24


Nokia improved their cash on hand.

Didn't Nokia recently sell their 'headquarters' for ~$200 million in order to raise cash? That's a one-time deal which probably helped this quarterly report.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Ehm
by Nelson on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:06 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Ehm"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Err, I haven't had my coffee yet. I meant Nokia has posted a profit for 4/5 last quarters.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Ehm
by phoenix on Thu 18th Apr 2013 15:39 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Ehm"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Err, I haven't had my coffee yet. I meant Nokia has posted a profit for 4/5 last quarters.


A nicer way to write that would be "4 of the last 5 quarters".

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Ehm
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Thu 18th Apr 2013 13:13 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Ehm"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Edit: I completely misread a chart. Removed erroneous comment.

Edited 2013-04-18 13:15 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Ehm
by Beta on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:23 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Ehm"
Beta Member since:
2005-07-06

So sales being up 9% year over year is being "slaughtered"? It is certainly not the wording I would use.

Sales could be up 100% and they’d still be ×20 behind Android sales in North America alone.

If Nokia doesn’t manage to sell enough of their devices to get a foothold in the market to make those delicious network efforts work for them, small YoY gains wont mean much as it will start trending back into the negative again.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Ehm
by tony on Thu 18th Apr 2013 18:10 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Ehm"
tony Member since:
2005-07-06

9% increase of squat is still only slightly higher than squat ;) Compared to Apple and Samsung, and overall market share, there's no good news here for Nokia. They've hitched themselves onto a dud. This certainly wasn't what they were hoping, and they can't be happy with this.

I like WP8, but I think it's too late.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Ehm
by Deviate_X on Thu 18th Apr 2013 13:11 UTC in reply to "Ehm"
Deviate_X Member since:
2005-07-11

A bit weird to say that Nokia is getting slaughtered in North America since they have never had a foothold there before...


Ssshhh your interfering with his axe..grinding

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Ehm
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 18th Apr 2013 13:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Ehm"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Country A has no presence in country B. Country A invades B, but they lose 80% of their invading army to the defending army, and lose massively. They are slaughtered.

North America was a very huge focus for Nokia. They clearly failed. They are being slaughtered in the market they bet a whole lot on.

Reply Score: 13

RE[3]: Ehm
by Nelson on Thu 18th Apr 2013 13:24 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Ehm"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I actually agree with Thom in that we need to be sober in the analysis of Nokia's North American attempts. There's no doubt they have work to do sealing the deal there. The US numbers are pitiful.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Ehm
by cdude on Thu 18th Apr 2013 13:54 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Ehm"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Nokia had with Symbian 2% of the US market, then switched to US-Microsoft WP and focused on US (giving up e.g there 60% Symbian share in China by killing Symbian and not pushing Lumia to China) and have now, 2 years later with massive investment, lesser then before. Even only in US with leaving the results of there US focus-shift (eg Symbian in China, Africa, et ) out. In the homeland of Microsoft, with AT&T, with the highest marketing budget ever.

Edited 2013-04-18 13:58 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Good:(
by dybyt on Thu 18th Apr 2013 12:17 UTC
dybyt
Member since:
2013-04-18

Die Nokia. For betraying Symbian and leaving me with a stock of currently unsupported phones.

Reply Score: 8

RE: Good:(
by Kochise on Thu 18th Apr 2013 12:24 UTC in reply to "Good:("
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

The crowd (folks, consumers) have spoken ! Whatever Microsoft tries pouring down people's throat, it doesn't work anymore, their only fate is living from old/bought IPs and licensing scheme.

They should have left Nokia with their aging Symbian line trying to go Meamo, instead to force people to use Windows Phone. See, no more OS competition even amongst Nokia's very own products, it's like putting all the eggs in the same basket.

You fell, you loose...

Kochise

Reply Score: 8

RE[2]: Good:(
by ricegf on Fri 19th Apr 2013 11:12 UTC in reply to "RE: Good:("
ricegf Member since:
2007-04-25

They had a really amazing run, though. From the early MS BASIC on home computers, to DOS on early PCs, to Windows-on-DOS and Office, to Windows-on-NT, Microsoft defined computing for legions of people over the majority of my life.

They also survived some amazingly bad missteps, from DOS 4 and OS/2 (from their ill-fated partnership with IBM) to Microsoft Network (their ill-fated "Internet Killer") to Windows ME and Bob and Vista. But they always bounced back, largely by clubbing their competition out of the market with monopoly leverage. They left numerous openings, but too little competition to exploit them.

They tried to keep Apple on life-support while fighting the anti-trust case against the Clinton administration, so it is perhaps fitting that it was Apple's iPhone that finally exploded through yet one more opening - capacitative touchscreens - and revealed that non-Windows environments could be not just usable, but great. Apple's Mac sales have risen in response to its status as the best iOS development environment.

Once the "Windows-compatible" moniker became a curse rather than a compliment, it was only a matter of time before a multi-vendor environment like Android largely took the commodity computing market from the previous multi-vendor champion, Windows. (By that I mean that while Windows still holds the dominant share of the declining desktop market, most of the growth is in mobile where Android dominates.)

I'm rather suspicious that Macs will follow a similar trajectory to iPhones - taking market share from Microsoft initially, but eventually holding a strong and insanely profitable minority share to a new multi-vendor commmodity leader. I don't know if the new leader will be Google's Chrome (which complements Android), or Canonical's Ubuntu (which covers all markets with the same core product), a resurgent Microsoft with Windows 9 (they have more cash than most countries), or an even darker horse.

But I couldn't be happier. To me, as the Internet under IE 6, desktop computing had become rather boring under Windows.

Here's to living in interesting times, and thanks to OSNews for keeping me sane during the long winter. ;-)

Reply Score: 2

Comment
by pandronic on Thu 18th Apr 2013 12:34 UTC
pandronic
Member since:
2006-05-18

I don't agree with your opinion. While Nokia is certainly selling less smartphones, due to the abrupt disappearance of Symbian, on the Windows front there seems to be a healthy growth. If the trend continues and Nokia holds on, the WP devices will make up for the Symbian phones in 2-3 years.

As for the U.S. market, I believe that Nokia doesn't have enough notoriety there and I agree that, at least there, it's a dud.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Comment
by cdude on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:04 UTC in reply to "Comment"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

And in 50 years the have 100% market share ... if grow is linear. But even if, they did not grow. That's just noise in a number to small to measure.

Edited 2013-04-18 14:04 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment
by pandronic on Thu 18th Apr 2013 15:07 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment"
pandronic Member since:
2006-05-18

Obviously they can't grow forever, but I feel that for now it looks OK for Nokia. Even if their traditional products are going down hard (cheap phones are probably replaced by basic Android devices and Symbian is thankfully dead), the direction they are actually focusing their efforts on is steadily growing (and a few million phones is not just noise). I think Thom was too quick to judge.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment
by tylerdurden on Thu 18th Apr 2013 16:39 UTC in reply to "Comment"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

What trend? Their net sales are down 20% from last year, and it accelerated last quarter. So that means the Lumias represent, if anything, an increasing percentage of a shrinking sales volume. Not a good place to be.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment
by pandronic on Fri 19th Apr 2013 05:28 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment"
pandronic Member since:
2006-05-18

Well, they are focusing on Windows devices and that part of their business is growing, which is good, while the parts on which they're not focusing are going down as expected.

Sure, Symbian is going down faster than Windows is growing, but if MS will prop them for another year or so, I think Nokia will be ok.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment
by tylerdurden on Fri 19th Apr 2013 17:57 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

But the point is that the growth of the windows phone sales have been nowhere near what nokia required, in terms of overall market share, just to maintain itself at its current size/level as an organization.

It is patently clear that WP will no be able to provide nokia with the same sales volume that symbian did. So overall it is not a key of "growth" but significant "shrinkage."

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment
by hhas on Fri 19th Apr 2013 22:30 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment"
hhas Member since:
2006-11-28

But the point is that the growth of the windows phone sales have been nowhere near what nokia required .. It is patently clear that WP will no be able to provide nokia with the same sales volume that symbian did.


This is all rooted in Elop's unfortunate Osborning of the old Symbian platform. Had he done things in the right order - i.e. burning Symbian after its Win8 successor was hitting the shelves - those Symbian users would've jumped to their new Win8 platform, helping to bootstrap that, rather than jumping to their competitors. So having hurt their brand and failed to migrate its existing customer base successfully, Nokia now have the painful task of building a whole new customer base largely from scratch - a long, difficult process at the best of times.

That said, I don't share Thom's thoroughly negative assessment of Nokia's future. And, strategic scheduling blunders aside, I still think their Win8 choice was in itself a sound one (i.e. the least unpromising option they had). Nokia's graphs obviously don't (yet?) show the exponential growth their new Win8 platform needs, but it's obvious the Symbian collapse has finally bottomed out so there won't be any more shrinkage caused by that. i.e. The damage phase is over, and everything now hinges on the rebuilding phase.

Commentators are already boldly pronouncing Act III a dud, but in truth Nokia are only on Act I, and I think it'll be another year or two before we can see if the new lineup can achieve the upward curve it now needs or ultimately just flatlines. Their new lineup reviews excellently and the low-end 620 and new 520 in particular are really priced to move, so now it's a question of how effectively Nokia can build new mindshare.

IOW, it's now a marketing challenge, not a technical one. All the tech pundits (including Thom) agree the products themselves are solid and pretty mature now. If they really want to kvetch about something, they should be whipping Nokia Marketing for not busting a gut to ensure their quality products stand out from the sea of me-too Android devices (e.g. by aggressively pushing dedicated product stands into all the big high-street vendors as Apple already does).

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment
by cdude on Sat 20th Apr 2013 17:44 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Nokia now have the painful task of building a whole new customer base largely from scratch

They try so since over two years now. Its not working. There is no demand for there products any longer like there was two years ago. Must be bad luck the demand vanished with the new products since it can't be because of the products. What customer cares about the products? Its all marketing like we saw last years NOT.

The damage phase is over

Now that's an optimistic view. Shrinking from the market leader to the market bottom indeed is positive since you have nothing to lose anymore. Good job done! Now they just need a to kill themselves so nobody can kill them any longer. What a clever business strategy!

I think it'll be another year or two before we can see


In February 2011 Elop himself wrote that the transition period is two years. First the transition finished. Customers switched from Symbian to iPhone and Android. Second that two years are passed and NOW that transition to the bottom, to where they cannot lose much anymore, is done, completed, over. There is nothing left to transition.

But yes, for some it will always take one year longer, success comes tomorrow, next game I win all my lost money back, pp.

Their new lineup reviews excellently

Reviews by Nokia Communications. To bad its the not-existing customers that count at the end of the 8 quarters we passed now.

it's now a marketing challenge, not a technical one

Same like it was past years what is why Microsoft, Nokia, AT&T, etc burned billions with marketing and achieved nothing. Even decline in the US, there marketing focus. By far more marketing money then any of the pre-Lumia got which all sold far better.

If your product doesn't sell, if customers reject it over years, if you sell even lesser when adding more marketing then something may faulty with the product, not the marketing.

e.g. by aggressively pushing dedicated product stands


They could start paying rather then demanding money for there products. That could increase there sales figures a lot!

Edited 2013-04-20 17:51 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment
by hhas on Sun 21st Apr 2013 15:48 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment"
hhas Member since:
2006-11-28

"The damage phase is over


Now that's an optimistic view. Shrinking from the market leader to the market bottom indeed is positive since you have nothing to lose anymore. Good job done! Now they just need a to kill themselves so nobody can kill them any longer. What a clever business strategy!
"

Did you read anything I wrote? I already called out Elop for his well-intentioned but commercially disastrous Osborning of Nokia. If I was a shareholder I'd have been aghast at his "burning platform" announcement; yes, Elop was right, but you don't say such things publicly if you want to retain consumer and shareholder confidence while you're trying to fix it.

I already explained how Elop should've kept quiet about EOLing Symbian until their Win8 products were ready, and then burned it to bootstrap their new platform's user base, which in turn would've created more confidence amongst other shoppers that this was a strong platform worth consideration rather than an unknown quantity, an odd kid out in a sea of 'safe' Android products.

Nevertheless, the Symbian flight is done: they can't lose any more sales that way. So the Symbian->Win8 'transition' is complete; it just wasn't done in a way that would've retained their existing customers.


To reiterate: it wasn't the decision to adopt Win8 that did Nokia damage, it was a single premature public announcement by a newbie CEO. That sort of idiot slip can and does destroy industry-leading companies, no mendacity or Machiavellian machinations required: just ask Adam Osborne, for whom the "Osborne Effect" is named. And he had a lot more experience than Elop when he nuked his industry-leading Osborne Computer Corporation into the ground.

Win8 haters who willfully ignore all these non-technical factors and wider history just so they can use Nokia's fall as an excuse to trash Win8 and MS are being intellectually dishonest trolly trolly weasels. We get it, you don't like Win8 and feel personally betrayed by MS's decision to stop kissing your ass and try kissing somebody else's for a change. Tough titties, MS doesn't owe you a thing; and if you're still not happy FOSS/Linux is just over there: feel free to build your own.


"e.g. by aggressively pushing dedicated product stands


They could start paying rather then demanding money for there products. That could increase there sales figures a lot!
"

Now you're just being a dick. I identified a genuine problem with how Nokia products are being presented on the high street: scattered randomly across general product shelving where they're drowned in a sea of largely undistinguished uniform Android devices.

You think iPhones would be holding their own position as highly desirable premium products if Apple let stores treat their products that way? Hell, no, they buy dedicated shelf space from those stores and put up their own Apple product displays which they have designed and built themselves. And that investment pays them back, because when shoppers walk into the store they still see the same vast dull sea of Android devices, but standing out from it all is this ruddy great physical monument to the total and utter awesomeness of Apple products.

Apple and Nokia are both selling products that fly in the face of the Android orthodoxy. Apple seize their 'differentness' by the hairy ones and turn that seeming liability into a major selling point. Nokia marketing can run all the gorgeous high-profile TV campaigns it likes, but the moment potential buyers walk into a store, they see a glossy premium Apple iPhone stand along with shelves of 'safe choice' Android devices. Rummage those shelves long enough and they might find the Nokia handset they were thinking of looking at, stuck in there like the proverbial red-headed stepchild. Not the way to create a great first impression or reassure potential buyers that this is a platform on the rise, one they can really trust in.

Seriously, I may not be a marketing bod by trade, but I trained in art and have been around brand designers and sales types enough to appreciate that what they do (or don't do) is a critical factor in determining the popular success or failure of a mass-market product. Heck, in one job I even left the computer to go humph branded floor display stands into high-street shops and fill them with our company's products. Believe me, presentation makes a difference. Maybe if you put some effort into expanding your understanding of the larger world beyond your own nerd-centered comfort zone and personal preconceptions and prejudices, you might find something substantive to contribute next time.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment
by cdude on Mon 22nd Apr 2013 16:49 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

until their Win8 products were ready, and then burned it to bootstrap their new platform's user base

Even after there Lumia got available in the market near all of the Symbian users switched away to something else, not Lumia. Nokia customers rejected Lumia while Nokia gave them no choice so customers switched to competition. That pattern continued even with WP8 Lumia. Close to all the loyal smartphone customers Nokia had, and that number WAS amazing, switched to competition. The same pattern still applies with there feature phones. Near all of there ex feature phone customers switched or are switching to competition when going smartphone.

Just get it, the numbers speak for themself: customers reject WP (not only Lumia, see HTC and even Samsung) and since Nokia has nothing else to offer (unlike all other mobile players) they are where they are: at the bottom, a struggling niche offer.

unknown quantity


It had one, no two, of the world-wide strongest brands assigned. Nokia had by far the most loyal customers. There customers looked at that forced "upgrade-path", at the product and active rejected to switch to something else. It can't become more clear then that that the Lumia productline was and still is active rejected by 98% of the market, probably 99% of ex Nokia customers.

So the Symbian->Win8 'transition' is complete; it just wasn't done in a way that would've retained their existing customers.

Exactly. The market leader, the number 1, goes by and changes its productlines while EOLing the previous product and all customers switch to competition. All that in 2 years. An amazing management mistake. Unique in history by size, speed and lost values.

Win8 haters

That, the position Nokia is in, was a management decision. Win8 wasn't even out then and haters gonna hate anyways. They didn't played a role during all that.

Apple

Come on. Comparing iPhone with Lumia and breaking the difference down to marketing? That's either blind or cheap. There is so much more.

Apple and Nokia are both selling products that fly in the face of the Android orthodox

For 20% Apple iPhone users and 2% Nokia Lumia users. The other 78% not agree with you :-)

marketing ... critical factor

One factor, there are many more. Marketing alone can't turn around everything what was just demonstrated again. This time by Nokia, Microsoft, AT&T, etc. I gonna say marketing will not save them. They need to improve the product.

Edited 2013-04-22 16:57 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment
by zima on Tue 23rd Apr 2013 21:37 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Did you read anything I wrote?
[...]
Win8 haters who willfully ignore all these non-technical factors and wider history just so they can use Nokia's fall as an excuse to trash Win8 and MS are being intellectually dishonest trolly trolly weasels.
[...]
Now you're just being a dick.
[...]
Maybe if you put some effort into expanding your understanding of the larger world beyond your own nerd-centered comfort zone and personal preconceptions and prejudices, you might find something substantive to contribute next time.

He probably hardly read it (besides, look at his EN...); yes he just hates the new Nokia allied with MS; yes he is; and he won't venture out of his prejudices. Don't bother with him... certainly don't waste time writing such lengthy posts as you do.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by twitterfire
by twitterfire on Thu 18th Apr 2013 13:09 UTC
twitterfire
Member since:
2008-09-11

They don't care about drop in sales. Patent litigation is their new bussiness model.

Reply Score: 4

What would save Nokia
by twitterfire on Thu 18th Apr 2013 13:13 UTC
twitterfire
Member since:
2008-09-11

They hoped and hoped that Windows Phone would take off and they bet their future on this.

Now, the only thing that can save Nokia is launching Android phones.

I think that considering their expertise, they can compete with success against the likes of Samsung.

Reply Score: 0

RE: What would save Nokia
by Nelson on Thu 18th Apr 2013 13:25 UTC in reply to "What would save Nokia"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Uh, their Windows Phone sales are up, and have been climbing sequentially.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: What would save Nokia
by twitterfire on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:01 UTC in reply to "RE: What would save Nokia"
twitterfire Member since:
2008-09-11

Uh, their Windows Phone sales are up, and have been climbing sequentially.


Sure, if going from 0.1 smartphone market share to 0.12 counts as climbing.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: What would save Nokia
by Nelson on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:09 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: What would save Nokia"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

They sold 17 million Lumias in 2012. But I guess that's a failure, somehow.

There is a clear trend and a clear acceleration. The worst part of Nokia's transition is behind them. Now they need to double down on their strategy and keep steadily increasing their volume.

This isn't going to happen in one quarter, but you can see the trend for Windows Phone sales.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: What would save Nokia
by twitterfire on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:37 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: What would save Nokia"
twitterfire Member since:
2008-09-11

They sold 17 million Lumias in 2012.


Rank . . Manufacturer . Units . . . Market Share . Was in Q3 of 2012 . . OS supported (coming),[ending]
1 (1) . . . Samsung . . . 63.9 M . . 29.4 % . . . . . .( 32.8 %) . . . . . . . . . Android, bada, Windows, (Tizen)
2 (2) . . . Apple . . . . . . 47.8 M . . 22.0 % . . . . . . ( 15.7 %) . . . . . . . . . iOS
3 (3) . . . Huawei . . . . . 20.2 M . . . 9.3 % . . . . . . ( 9.3 %) . . . . . . . . . Android, (Tizen)
4 (5) . . . ZTE . . . . . . . 12.4 M . . . 5.7 % . . . . . . ( 4.7 %) . . . . . . . . . Android, Windows, (Firefox)
5 (9) . . . Lenovo . . . . . . 9.4 M . . . 4.3 % . . . . . . ( 4.1 %) . . . . . . . . . Android
6 (4) . . . Sony . . . . . . . 8.7 M . . . 4.0 % . . . . . . ( 5.1 %) . . . . . . . . . Android
7 (8) . . . LG . . . . . . . . . 8.6 M . . . 4.0 % . . . . . . ( 4.2 %) . . . . . . . . . Android
8 (6) . . . HTC . . . . . . . . 7.0 M . . . 3.2 % . . . . . . ( 4.6 %) . . . . . . . . . Android, Windows
9 (7) . . . RIM . . . . . . . . 6.9 M . . . 3.2 % . . . . . . ( 4.3 %) . . . . . . . . . Blackberry
10 (10) . Nokia . . . . . . . 6.6 M . . . 3.0 % . . . . . . ( 3.7 %) . . . . . . . . . Windows, [Symbian], [MeeGo]
Others . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.7 M . . 11.8 % . . . . . . ( 11.6 %) . . . . . . . . . Android, Windows, others, (Tizen), (Sailfish)
TOTAL . . . . . . . . . 217.2 M

As you can see, even Lenovo sold more smartphones than Nokia. Huawei and Zte sold much, much more. And 4 years ago Nokia was #1 mobile phone seller while Huawei and Lenovo were maybe in top 100 while Lenovo didn't even sell phones at that time.

Now, tell me more about Nokia's massive growth.

Edited 2013-04-18 14:38 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: What would save Nokia
by Nelson on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:40 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: What would save Nokia"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Its nice that you can copy and paste a chart from somewhere, but that has nothing to do with my statement.

I also never claimed that Nokia had explosive growth, only steady and encouraging sequential growth.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: What would save Nokia
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:44 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: What would save Nokia"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Except... Their growth in the market that counts - smartphones - isn't steady at all. In fact, ever since the announcement of the switch to WP, it's been dropping like a brick. Right up until the WP announcement, even Symbian sales were up EVERY. SINGLE. QUARTER. After the announcement, everything collapsed.

Even if you look at just Lumia sales, there hasn't been "steady" growth at all - it's been a rollercoaster of ups and downs.

It baffles me how you can still call Nokia healthy. Had Nokia been posting these very same figures with Android, you would have sung a completely different tune, proclaiming Nokia another example of nobody being able to make money off Android.

Reply Score: 8

RE[7]: What would save Nokia
by Nelson on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:54 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: What would save Nokia"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

No I wouldn't. Its important to separate my enjoyment and evangelism of Windows Phone from my curiosity in how a company facing some pretty steep challenges can navigate them.

The fact that they use Windows Phone is coincidental, but I'd be just as interested if they were doing something genuinely cool with Android. Just like I'm interested in BlackBerry and Jolla and Firefox. I doubt them all to varying degree, just like I have expressed my reservations about Windows Phone -- but I am absolutely fascinated by watching these companies try to chip away at the more established players.

I also enjoy trying to predict what happens, being right, and being wrong.

You make a point that they're not moving the needle much in marketshare, but that to me is an afterthought beyond managing a transition and stabilizing their financial position.

There are two challenges for Nokia: Stay alive, and grow your shipments. Windows Phone 8 growing overall is a Microsoft problem, and I understand that Nokia can only do so much.

I still think despite this, they made the right long term bet with Windows Phone, especially given the information they had at the time. Would they be selling more with Android? Maybe if they found a creative way to buy themselves enough time to see the strategy through. I just don't think they wouldve had the financial means to get there.

Do you think Nokia in the US would've gone down better with an Android phone? I'm not entirely sure. They have a lot of work to do making their brand attractive in the US.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: What would save Nokia
by pandronic on Thu 18th Apr 2013 15:21 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: What would save Nokia"
pandronic Member since:
2006-05-18

Dude, you've got something to prove, or what? From your graph, the green part is growing steadily: http://imgur.com/1XFmbUK

Yes, there was an anomaly at one point, probably some holiday season or something, but the trend is clear. How is that bad news, again?

They've just lost their cash cows and that's bad news for them, but their Windows Phone effort seems to be on the right track.

Reply Score: 4

RE[6]: What would save Nokia
by twitterfire on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:45 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: What would save Nokia"
twitterfire Member since:
2008-09-11

Its nice that you can copy and paste a chart from somewhere, but that has nothing to do with my statement.

I also never claimed that Nokia had explosive growth, only steady and encouraging sequential growth.


Yeah, well, to see the big picture, let's express that growth you claim they are experimenting in percents of global smartphone sales figure.

What's that growth, then?

Edited 2013-04-18 14:45 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: What would save Nokia
by Nelson on Thu 18th Apr 2013 15:07 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: What would save Nokia"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

That isn't what sequential growth means. It means growth Quarter over Quarter compared to themselves, not growth compared to anyone else.

Its useful for measuring momentum without having your figures diluted by a transitional year. Everyone already knows that Nokia isn't selling tens of millions of phones a quarter. We know this.

What is additionally useful though is how Nokia is operating on a more short term basis because it can give hints towards future trends. If the trend is that Nokia is steadily increasing its volumes, then it can be seen as an indicator of slow but steady growth.

It is also why I repeatedly bring out regional breakdowns of sales because it helps to serve as an early indicator of growth of the platform.

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: What would save Nokia
by cdude on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:49 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: What would save Nokia"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

So from 3.7% marketshare in Q3 to 3.0% now is unrelated to your statement they sequential grow?

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: What would save Nokia
by Nelson on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:55 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: What would save Nokia"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Considering I specifically said volume, yes.

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: What would save Nokia
by tylerdurden on Thu 18th Apr 2013 16:41 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: What would save Nokia"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

That chart puts your statement in context, which I assume it's why you did not appreciate it.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: What would save Nokia
by Nelson on Thu 18th Apr 2013 18:20 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: What would save Nokia"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

No, the chart just says what is obvious, that Nokia's volumes still need to improve. Something I've said before.

That's completely separate from what I also said, which is that their volumes are increasing sequentially to the tune of over a million units a quarter.

Just because Nokia's job isn't done yet doesn't mean they're working and making progress towards getting there.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: What would save Nokia
by lindkvis on Fri 19th Apr 2013 11:54 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: What would save Nokia"
lindkvis Member since:
2006-11-21

They sold 17 million Lumias in 2012. But I guess that's a failure, somehow.

There is a clear trend and a clear acceleration. The worst part of Nokia's transition is behind them. Now they need to double down on their strategy and keep steadily increasing their volume.

This isn't going to happen in one quarter, but you can see the trend for Windows Phone sales.


Apple sold 47.8 million iPhones in Quarter 1 of 2013 alone. This was a 29% growth from the year before.

Samsungs increases are even more impressive. They sold 70 million smart phones in Q1 of 2013, and currently sell more than 25 million smart phones per month. They basically sell more smart phones per month than Nokia does per year.

For the last 5 years, we have been in a massive and ongoing upwards trend for smart phone sales. The typical YoY growth for the big players in this market is 20%+, and this is players who are already selling massively.

Nokia is doing neither. They have sales figures which have halved in a year. If you don't massively increase your smart phone sales during this massive market expansion, you are doing extremely poorly.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: What would save Nokia
by xgff on Sun 21st Apr 2013 22:59 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: What would save Nokia"
xgff Member since:
2013-04-21

They sold 17 million Lumias in 2012. But I guess that's a failure, somehow.

From Nokia Q4 2012 report: "Smart Devices shipped a total of 13.4 million Lumia devices in 2012."

Reply Score: 1

RE: What would save Nokia
by Kochise on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:03 UTC in reply to "What would save Nokia"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

A Lumia 920 with Jelly Bean 4.2.2, let me think about that one...

Agree !

Kochise

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: What would save Nokia
by jonoden on Thu 18th Apr 2013 19:41 UTC in reply to "RE: What would save Nokia"
jonoden Member since:
2012-02-13

Definitely. I was sad when they cast their lot in with Microsoft. I wanted a Nokia android phone.

I can see why they didn't go that route, I think they were thinking they couldn't compete well enough with Samsung, HTC and Motorola (and the long tail of other Android handset manufacturers).. So they went with Microsoft to differentiate, and also, how can you say no to $1 Billion.

If they can hang on for a few years they may be able to climb up to some level. It's going to be very difficult to dethrone Apple and Google's Army of manufacturers in that timeframe though.

Reply Score: 3

RE: What would save Nokia
by cdude on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:12 UTC in reply to "What would save Nokia"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

> considering their expertise

That expertise is long gone. R&D and production suffered most from Elop's removing of in-house expertise when it all was done at Microsoft.

Android is Linux. To stupid they have NOW such a bad stand among Linux talent and no money to compensate with higher sallery. Nokia went from one of the top companies to work for to one of the worst in just 2 years. Not going to happen they can rebuild in-house expertise fast enough.

> they can compete with success against the likes of Samsung.

They can't even bring Android to market without the talent that isn't with them any longer. Compete against Samsung? lol

Edited 2013-04-18 14:13 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Size matters
by wigry on Thu 18th Apr 2013 13:28 UTC
wigry
Member since:
2008-10-09

When Symbian was king, Nokia was a big behemoth so they needed those millinos devices to be sold to keep themselves running. Now Nokia is just a small show somwhere in the countryside of Finland and they are therefore more healthy than ever with much smaller WP sales.

So total amount of phones sold dropped massively but the size of Nokia has dropped more. So from the income/expenses point of view the situation is OK.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Size matters
by Nelson on Thu 18th Apr 2013 13:34 UTC in reply to "Size matters"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Exactly this, also the Average Selling Price of their smart devices has risen on Lumia sales, which partially offsets the drop in volume from Symbian.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Size matters
by tylerdurden on Thu 18th Apr 2013 16:48 UTC in reply to "RE: Size matters"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

... however Nokia profit margins have plummeted, which means that even though they may be selling more expensive products, they still ain't making that much money off them.

And that is ignoring the fact that their net sales figures are down across the board, with some exceptions, so they are selling less stuff at the end of the day.

They do have some products that may sell well in developing markets, so that may bring some relief to Nokia soon though. But there is also the issue that their competition ain't sitting still either...

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Size matters
by Nelson on Thu 18th Apr 2013 17:12 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Size matters"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Well since you didn't provide a specific number, I'm not sure if you mean specifically to the Devices&Services, Smart Devices, or the company as a whole.

D&S is obviously influenced as a whole by Symbian pains, I tried to get operating figures for SD specifically but couldn't find any. I did find gross margin which looks at it from a simple cost to produce POV.

Nokia gross margins for Smart Devices have increased precisely because of higher ASPs, and the way it relates to operating margin is influenced by a few different factors including marketing/subsidy/other selling costs and price erosion.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Size matters
by tylerdurden on Thu 18th Apr 2013 17:59 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Size matters"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

Check out the Operating Margin and Operating Profit from their financial report, they're pitiful. They barely have any margin across the board at the end of the day.

In any case, the nokia guys have their work cut out for them, good luck spinning this report out. Ouch.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Size matters
by Nelson on Thu 18th Apr 2013 18:08 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Size matters"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I'm not really spinning much of anything, because even when spun, it doesnt really make much of a difference besides in a larger sense. It only serves to provide a sense of direction and an overall trend.

I'm not making excuses or apologizing for Nokia's very serious problems.

Yes. Nokia sales will always look terrible if you compare them to what they used to sell, because its been a huge fall. That doesn't mean that Nokia's Lumia sales when viewed in isolation are terrible, only modest and need improvement.

What happens when Nokia moves on to 7 million, then 10, then 12 million phones a quarter? Pretty soon it starts to make a difference, and being able to see these trends early is whats important.

I don't quite understan the outrage some people seem to have with me trying to provide an assessment from a different angle. Its no longer objective, people on OSNews and other places irrationally want Nokia to fail. In fact, they enjoy the fact that Nokia is failing and that people are losing their jobs and livelihoods.

I never understood the blood sport, but I digress.

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: Size matters
by adkilla on Thu 18th Apr 2013 20:10 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Size matters"
adkilla Member since:
2005-07-07

I'm not really spinning much of anything, because even when spun, it doesn't really make much of a difference besides in a larger sense. It only serves to provide a sense of direction and an overall trend.


Come again?

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Size matters
by tylerdurden on Fri 19th Apr 2013 18:01 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Size matters"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

glorious, isn't it? ;-)

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Size matters
by Nelson on Sun 21st Apr 2013 15:49 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Size matters"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

"I'm not really spinning much of anything, because even when spun, it doesn't really make much of a difference besides in a larger sense. It only serves to provide a sense of direction and an overall trend.


Come again?
"

My point being that I'm accused of spinning numbers that make no material difference in a long run market share sense.

I know Nokia has much to do with regards to volume and marketshare -- but I'm not making excuses for that, or claiming that their numbers today or over this past year do much to ameliorate that difficulty.

All I'm saying is that these numbers show an encouraging momentum, which if persisted, could turn into good news down the line.

I think I've stressed this point enough, and I've been right on Nokia a hell of a lot more than anyone else on this website.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Size matters
by cdude on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:19 UTC in reply to "Size matters"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

If your company falls and shrinks that fast while explicit shrinking talent away then you are left with those who may not able to find a new, better place to work at.

During past 2 years whenever we read Nokia fires another bunch of people who did they fire? Where did they decrease? Not at management level, not marketing, not at lawyers. Production and R&D! That gives you a water-head company with 20 levels of management and nobody left below for execution. Good luck with that when being forced to produce something again rather then only repackage, market and resell what comes out of Redmond.

Even hardware-expertise is lost. That's why Lumia is still Lanku, why Pureview was lost, why qwerty was lost.

What stays is the name and a believe Nokia is still the same Nokia like before.

Edited 2013-04-18 14:32 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Size matters
by GDXN on Thu 18th Apr 2013 16:44 UTC in reply to "RE: Size matters"
GDXN Member since:
2012-07-02

The worst is that the Nokia problem was a management problem.

If Nokia had decided to go with Android, the had the possibility to negotiate a very strong position with Google, basically they had the possibility to negotiate to only incorporate the Play market without any other Google sanctioned apps having a true possibility for differentiation with other manufacturers.

Other possibility and the best for Nokia in my view was to split in two phone companies. A high quality business and government oriented company maintaining the Nokia name, with a strategy to unify S40 and Symbian in scalable smart featured phone platform and continuing pushing Meego to the high end market, all in a quasi unified QT development platform with some exclusive Meego extensions, only manufactured in Europe. And a second company more consumer oriented, that make phones in 3 platform, a common smart featured phone platform with the Nokia brand, Android and Windows but with the possibility to incorporate Meego depending on the market situation. This second company manufactured in any part of the world, pushing its phone strategy from low end to consumer high end.

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Size matters
by cdude on Sun 21st Apr 2013 12:26 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Size matters"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

they had the possibility to negotiate to only incorporate the Play market

Or use Ovi which was back then ahead of Google Play world-wide.

having a true possibility for differentiation with other manufacturers.

QT does on Android and Android apps on MeeGo just like Tizen is able to run Android and Bada apps. Even Blackberry went with an Android bridge. A pattern all those more successful then Nokia apply. Its only Elop who went on an ecosystem-war (and lost that). A fool to fight on such a front if it gives you nothing but lose.

Edited 2013-04-21 12:28 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Size matters
by zima on Tue 23rd Apr 2013 21:20 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Size matters"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

a strategy to unify S40 and Symbian in scalable smart featured phone platform and continuing pushing Meego to the high end market, all in a quasi unified QT development platform

They tried something like that for some time - and it didn't work.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Size matters
by bnolsen on Thu 18th Apr 2013 16:28 UTC in reply to "Size matters"
bnolsen Member since:
2006-01-06

profitability keeps the doors open.

It's just a shame that during the fastest growth market in history nokia went from having the largest share to having almost none of it.

That's absolutely historic and I'm sure business textbooks will use nokia's collapse as a case study on business failure for many years to come.

Nokia's stupidest mistake was to bet it all exclusively on one single dinosaur vendor instead of nimbly keeping their options open. If they would have even kept their fingers in android they could still have a healthy marketshare and definitely better leverage against microsoft.

HTC, Samsung, LG, Sony all were able to adjust to the market because they kept their options open.

Edited 2013-04-18 16:30 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Size matters
by zima on Tue 23rd Apr 2013 21:18 UTC in reply to "RE: Size matters"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

HTC, Samsung, LG, Sony all were able to adjust to the market because they kept their options open.

They all do rather poorly except for Samsung...

Reply Score: 2

US performance
by RCandelori on Thu 18th Apr 2013 13:59 UTC
RCandelori
Member since:
2013-04-18

Thom I think you're correct in highlighting the poor performance in the US - there is simply no avoiding the fact that their strategy has failed there so far. The alliance with AT&T where hero devices are given exclusivity with negligible marketing support from the carrier is never going to help, especially when it isn't even the biggest carrier. Troubling still is that they can't even crack 1 million devices per quarter in North America. Even the staunchest Nokia supporter has to concede that isn't good.

For me, the most important quarters will be Q2 and Q3 to see if the Lumia sales keep increasing. If they hover around current levels or decrease then Nokia will be in a bit of crap. However, going on current trends, it appears Lumias are being well received outside of the US. Who knows, China and India might be the more relevant indicators of success going forward considering market size there.

Reply Score: 2

RE: US performance
by twitterfire on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:06 UTC in reply to "US performance"
twitterfire Member since:
2008-09-11

Who knows, China and India might be the more relevant indicators of success going forward considering market size there.


You know that in China and India they are using either feature phones either low priced Android phones made in China, right?

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: US performance
by Nelson on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:09 UTC in reply to "RE: US performance"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Question: Did you even read Nokia's earnings report?

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: US performance
by segedunum on Fri 19th Apr 2013 12:07 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: US performance"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

And?

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: US performance
by Nelson on Sun 21st Apr 2013 15:52 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: US performance"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

And what? It might be early, and I may need glasses, but I dont think I was replying to you.

Reply Score: 2

RE: US performance
by cdude on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:42 UTC in reply to "US performance"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21
Self-Delusion
by jared_wilkes on Thu 18th Apr 2013 14:21 UTC
jared_wilkes
Member since:
2011-04-25

The self-delusion in the comments is strong.

Anyone saying that Nokia is doing okay, good, or anything remotely positive is only signaling that they are Nokia fanboys who hope and pray that they maintain some type of presence or relevance even if it is greatly diminished as to be near irrelevant.

But they are undercutting that message by not having the balls to actually just say that. And what they are saying instead is completely divorced from any understanding of business, proportionality, or reality.

Reply Score: 7

RE: Self-Delusion
by _txf_ on Thu 18th Apr 2013 22:41 UTC in reply to "Self-Delusion"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

Anyone saying that Nokia is doing okay, good, or anything remotely positive is only signaling that they are Nokia fanboys who hope and pray that they maintain some type of presence or relevance even if it is greatly diminished as to be near irrelevant.


Are there still Nokia fanboys? I used to be favorable to them...but since their U turns, I really don't give a crap about their fate.

Reply Score: 2

The future is bright
by twitterfire on Thu 18th Apr 2013 15:04 UTC
twitterfire
Member since:
2008-09-11

Question is who will continue to sell Windows Phones after Nokia dies? And they will die if they continue to pursue the same strategy.

Maybe Microsoft will buy Nokia and continue to sell Windows Phones at a loss?

Reply Score: 0

RE: The future is bright
by chithanh on Thu 18th Apr 2013 15:33 UTC in reply to "The future is bright"
chithanh Member since:
2006-06-18

Question is who will continue to sell Windows Phones after Nokia dies?

Microsoft has long been rumoured to work on a Surface Phone. So if Nokia folds, Samsung&Huawei fully concentrate on Android/Tizen, and HTC fails to return to previous strengths, they have a plan B.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: The future is bright
by ze_jerkface on Thu 18th Apr 2013 19:13 UTC in reply to "RE: The future is bright"
ze_jerkface Member since:
2012-06-22

Plan B is to copy the massive success that is Surface?

How many carriers will be excited about trying Surface if Microsoft lets Nokia drop out of the market?

Nokia is the only thing keeping WP above water. It might as well be called Nokia OS.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: The future is bright
by cdude on Sun 21st Apr 2013 12:39 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: The future is bright"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Its just that above water isn't enough. Even without Nokia Microsoft would still sell some devices and even only one keeps them above water. But that's not enough. They need significant market share. Nokia doesn't help here. In fact before Nokia joined WP market share was more or less the same its now.

Microsoft knows that. Bill Gates himself wrote there strategy failed. That applies to Surface and to the Nokia partnership. They already are changing. Huawei is there strategic partner for Africa. Once Nokia land but now its Huawei for Microsoft. Same for the WP8 hero-device, the showcase. That wasn't from Nokia, it was from HTC.

If Microsoft has more success with an own Surface Phone is as questionable as Nokia coming back anytime. What stays? Partnerships with other candidates. HTC isn't going to help them either. Huawei is mostly Android, Samsung rejected. Dell? Who else would be stupid enough to try where even Nokia, the market-leader back then, failed and got destroyed on the way trying?

Edited 2013-04-21 12:46 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Thu 18th Apr 2013 15:40 UTC
shmerl
Member since:
2010-06-08

Now Nokia is a threat, like a leaking nuclear submarine which can explode with patents at any point.

Reply Score: 8

So they sold 25 million Lumias, TOTAL
by jnemesh on Thu 18th Apr 2013 16:04 UTC
jnemesh
Member since:
2008-04-08

and Google just announced that they are activating 1.5 million Android devices in a DAY! So, in one month's time, Google will have sold more devices than Nokia has in 3 YEARS! Does anyone think that they have a ghost of a chance of competing with that? ANYONE?

Reply Score: 3

jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

I agree with your point, generally, but Google is NOT SELLING 1.5 million devices per day.

Reply Score: 2

chithanh Member since:
2006-06-18

Actually, Google does not sell that many themselves.

If you count not Google but Android device sales, the number will likely be even higher because a large part of Chinese domestic sales is not counted (neither by analysts nor through device activations).

Reply Score: 3

jnemesh Member since:
2008-04-08

These are activated Android phones (from multiple manufacturers) that access the Play store. That's how they track them now. So your assertion is either false, or splitting hairs. Either way, they are being buried.

Reply Score: 1

jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

Even with me being utterly demeaning, you are still too dense to understand the difference between "Google is selling..." and "Google is activating Android devices sold by other companies"?! Sad state of education these days.

Reply Score: 2

chithanh Member since:
2006-06-18

Google has a play store through which they sell Nexus devices. Some devices are also sold through the channel.

The popularity of Nexus devices is an important measure, so it is good to distinguish between Google and Android sales.

Reply Score: 2

jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

This is my point, or more generally, that discussion & debate benefit from simple accuracy of language. Maybe you meant to reply to our confused friend, jnemesh?

Reply Score: 2

cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Only if you like to make a point. Google is not and never planed to make money with Android through hardware sales. Its there services which bring money in. And those devices that access Google Play have there services installed (the full package). Chinese manufacture not using Google services and so not Google Play are not counted. Same with western offers cause its irrelevant for Google's services, there income source, there business strategy.

Under this light counting activations of devices using there services is the most accurate thing for them since a sold device says nothing about there services being used.

What you may additional do is to count sold Motorolla device units extra since that's where Google does indeed hardware. But then Moto was a long-term strategy decision and we not saw yet there first new device wave.

Counting Nexus units is stupid. Google doesn't make the hardware or gets a dime from it. Nexus devices are just like any other devices where there services are pre-installed and used. Difference is that Google can push updates to them. How that benefits there service-income through network-effects isn't known, hard to guess or even measure. I think it's more a strategy decision to drive there ecosystem forward then a direct service-benefit.

Edited 2013-04-21 13:14 UTC

Reply Score: 1

jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

No, they aren't.

I know reading can be a challenge to some and, for some reason, a lot of OSNews readers think they can make up their own definitions to words, but re-read your comment, my comment, and your link about 40 times -- maybe you'll eventually figure it out.

Edited 2013-04-18 18:57 UTC

Reply Score: 3

JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Google is activating 1.5m phones per day.

Reply Score: 2

jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

No shit. Am I supposed to be the slow one here?

What does that have to do with how many sales Samsung, Apple, HTC, Huawei, ZTE, Lenovo, Sony, LG, HTC, RIM, Nokia, and the misc. other Others which includes (somehow performing even worse than RIM, Nokia, and HTC) Google/Motorola and Google/contracted through Samsung, Asus, HTC, LG, or any other manufacturer?

Because it doesn't look like Google is particularly successful as a manufacturer and seller of mobile hardware either. Maybe liked and well-reviewed, but not obviously a sales success.

Reply Score: 3

cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

it doesn't look like Google is particularly successful as a manufacturer and seller of mobile hardware

Because that's not there business. There business, where they make the money, are there services. Android is the door to there services. That door is closed on e.g. Windows Phone. By far most Android devices, those counted with activations, are using there services. That's lot of money for Google. Have a look at there annual numbers.

Edited 2013-04-21 13:24 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Re:
by kurkosdr on Thu 18th Apr 2013 18:03 UTC
kurkosdr
Member since:
2011-04-11

[quote]to burn there limited remaining cash (without option to get new cash caused of there junk-rating)[/quote]

So, they burnt here some limited remaining cash, and then burnt there some limited remaining cash. Am I reading this right? Oh, you meant "their". Then stop making mistakes a third-grader wouldn't make!

Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.4; el-gr; LG-P990 Build/GRJ23) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1 MMS/LG-Android-MMS-V1.0/1.2

Reply Score: 2

If I were Nokia....
by bryanv on Thu 18th Apr 2013 18:40 UTC
bryanv
Member since:
2005-08-26

I'd fire Elop, jettison windows phone, and purchase Jolla.

They've solved their "we have x competing platforms" problem -- they now have zero viable platforms, and have jettisoned all the competing smart-phone divisions.

One more focus shift (back to your roots) may get people clamoring for the jolla (errr, nokia of yore) product.

It's a crazy idea, I know, but let's face it, lumia hardware with sailfish would be a good combo, and put nokia back into a position where they control their own destiny.

Heck, I'd buy one of those phone. Windows Phone? Heck no. I don't care if it's a good product. It's got the name "windows" in it.

I don't think Microsoft realizes what a tainted brand they have in "windows".

Reply Score: 5

RE: If I were Nokia....
by shmerl on Thu 18th Apr 2013 19:26 UTC in reply to "If I were Nokia...."
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

I don't think Jolla wants to deal with that again ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: If I were Nokia....
by lucas_maximus on Thu 18th Apr 2013 20:11 UTC in reply to "RE: If I were Nokia...."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Except has Jolla actually got anywhere? It are done by the same team that failed to deliver a Nokia mobile OS based on Linux.

Edited 2013-04-18 20:12 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: If I were Nokia....
by shmerl on Thu 18th Apr 2013 21:11 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: If I were Nokia...."
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

They got to where they planned up until now, and didn't slip behind any schedules so far, and are working on what's left before the release. So they are good. I'm sure they are fed up with Nokia and have no interest to deal with it again.

Their team didn't fail - they were a great success. Nokia failed use that success, and they have no use for Nokia now.

Edited 2013-04-18 21:13 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: If I were Nokia....
by lucas_maximus on Thu 18th Apr 2013 21:13 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: If I were Nokia...."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

What targets are these exactly?

Why do you think they are fed up with Nokia?

Their Team did fail otherwise the product would be out now instead of Nokia using Windows Phone.

You can't put everything on management ... there must of been a lack of buy-in from management and that is a failure of employees.

TBH unless you had a bird's eye view of Nokia and how it was working whatever you say is probably total bullshit in regards to what was going on and what failed and to why.

Edited 2013-04-18 21:17 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: If I were Nokia....
by shmerl on Thu 18th Apr 2013 21:24 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: If I were Nokia...."
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

They are announcing the first device in May:
http://www.taloussanomat.fi/porssi/2013/04/16/vain-pari-viikkoa-ja-...

Their Team did fail otherwise the product would be out now instead of Nokia using Windows Phone.


Totally unconvincing. Nokia is using Windows Phone because MS gave a few billions to key people there, who cared about filling the pockets in short term, and didn't care about company success long term. They didn't abandon Meego because of any lack of technical merits. Of course they'll never explicitly tell you their motives.

Edited 2013-04-18 21:27 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: If I were Nokia....
by lucas_maximus on Thu 18th Apr 2013 21:28 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: If I were Nokia...."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18



So a failed team haven't released anything yet

Totally unconvincing. Nokia is using Windows Phone because MS gave a few billions to key people there, who cared about to fill the pockets in short term, and didn't care about company success long term. That's how They didn't abandon Meego because of any lack of technical merits.


Except they are making profit and growing sales slowly which is better than what Jolla have accomplished so far .. which is not releasing anything.

Jolla team had years to actually make something and didn't do anything until they left Nokia and then try to make Android Compatibility a big thing ... might as well buy Android then!

Try again.

Edited 2013-04-18 21:32 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: If I were Nokia....
by shmerl on Thu 18th Apr 2013 21:34 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: If I were Nokia...."
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

So a failed team haven't released anything yet

Did you release anything yet? Or did you plan it? You didn't release and didn't plan. Did you fail? By your logic yes - you didn't release anything. Right? Wrong, since you didn't even plan. Jolla planned, and are implementing the plan accordingly. So you can't say whether they failed at all. Whether they'll succeed after the release - time will tell.

Jolla team had years to actually make something

They aren't making "something", they are making quality products. And how could they have years, if it's a recent startup? Straighten up your facts first.

Edited 2013-04-18 21:36 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: If I were Nokia....
by ze_jerkface on Thu 18th Apr 2013 19:26 UTC in reply to "If I were Nokia...."
ze_jerkface Member since:
2012-06-22

Well it's more than a product decision that they made, Microsoft bailed them out in exchange for using WP.

But I agree that it was a poorly chosen name. Most people probably assume that a "windows phone" requires anti-malware software and additional maintenance. You can't assume the public will learn about how Win32 malware doesn't work on WP anymore than Android. Heck I've even seen comments from Slashdotters that didn't understand the difference.

Microsoft has made too many mistakes with Windows 8 and WP but they were warned in the development blogs so they really have it coming. When deleting technical questions from Microsoft partners became a daily routine they probably should have re-thought their strategy.

Reply Score: 3

Bailed them out?!?
by sgtrock on Thu 18th Apr 2013 19:45 UTC in reply to "RE: If I were Nokia...."
sgtrock Member since:
2011-05-13

Take another gander at the chart that Thom provided. Symbian was the #1 selling smartphone platform _and_ Symbian growth was still continuing right up until Elop released the "Burning Platform" memo.

"Bailed them out?" More like tied a 2 ton anchor to the mast and threw it overboard, then shot the hull so full of holes it looked like a colander.

Reply Score: 1

RE: If I were Nokia....
by zima on Tue 23rd Apr 2013 21:25 UTC in reply to "If I were Nokia...."
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

I'd fire Elop, jettison windows phone, and purchase Jolla.
[...]
One more focus shift (back to your roots) may get people clamoring for the jolla (errr, nokia of yore) product.
It's a crazy idea, I know

Yes it is ...you'd hire back the team that was under-performing for so many years, delay after delay.

Reply Score: 2

Still not listening to business users
by ze_jerkface on Thu 18th Apr 2013 19:34 UTC
ze_jerkface
Member since:
2012-06-22

Android still has more enterprise features than WP and I still can't believe that WP will not sync contacts via USB with Outlook.

Microsoft has failed trying to chase the Apple crowd with Win8 and WP.

Perhaps there is hope that Ballmer will pull his head out of his ass and start listening to the customers. But as with NuMicrosoft the safe assumption is that they will do the opposite of common sense and incite even more anger. Ballmer is obsessed with getting even with Apple when the real threat to Microsoft's profits has long been him.

Reply Score: 2

Le roi est mort....
by ebasconp on Thu 18th Apr 2013 20:37 UTC
ebasconp
Member since:
2006-05-09

... vive le Sailfish!!!

Reply Score: 3

Comment by Tractor
by Tractor on Fri 19th Apr 2013 14:20 UTC
Tractor
Member since:
2006-08-18

The real issue, for me, is :
"Is Stephen Elop just a Bad CEO, which, in good faith, destroyed the company he was in charge of ?"

OR

"Is Stephen Elop still a Microsoft minion, having the mission to destroy the Nokia Ecosystem to make room for Windows, and then use the remaining strength of the controlled company for the sole benefit of its real employer, while sacrificing the best interest of his pretended company?"

And an associated question :
Is there a penalty for any CEO proved to be in the second category ?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by Tractor
by hhas on Sat 20th Apr 2013 11:27 UTC in reply to "Comment by Tractor"
hhas Member since:
2006-11-28

The real issue, for me, is :
"Is Stephen Elop just a Bad CEO, which, in good faith, destroyed the company he was in charge of ?"


I don't know about 'Bad', per-se, but he was certainly a green one. He was correct in identifying the sub-surface problems within Nokia - outwardly still successful but inwardly riding on its past laurels with no strong strategy for the future - and wanting to turn that million-ton tanker well before the still distant rocks were upon it.

I suspect Elop fancied himself as the next Steve Jobs stepping into the wildly dysfunctional not-dead-but-give-it-time mid-90s Apple. The crucial difference was, Jobs already had 20 years to make his mistakes and learn from them so knew how to hit the ground running. Whereas Elop, being inexperienced, immediately forgot all his Business 101 Theory and pulled an Adam Osborne instead, the twit.

The damage done, the only question now is: was it a one-time aberration which he'll ultimately make right for both his own and Nokia's sakes? Or was his promotion to CEO just another demonstration of big business's common Peter Principle in action? Time will tell.


"Is Stephen Elop still a Microsoft minion, having the mission to destroy the Nokia Ecosystem to make room for Windows, and then use the remaining strength of the controlled company for the sole benefit of its real employer, while sacrificing the best interest of his pretended company?"


I do wish the anti-MS types would stop with this ridiculous paranoid gibber, or at least take it to an appropriate loonyhole like InfoWars or PrisonPlanet where it belongs, i.e. as far away as possible from the reality-based rest of us. Or at least try to engage your Logic 101 brain circuits before you flap your mouth.

First, a crippled Nokia does Microsoft nothing but harm too, making Win8 appear a toxic destroyer of any vendor that touches it.

[Yes, I realize the anti-MS contingent loves to claim that's precisely what Win8 is, but I don't think anyone's fooled for a moment that theirs is an intellectually honest assessment. There's plenty solid objective criticisms to make of MS culture, behavior and products, so objectively tearing into those instead of making shit up would do wonders for the signal-to-noise here.]

Second, as Nokia CEO, Elop works for Nokia and is answerable to its board and shareholders:

1. They are the ones paying his salary. (See: the Golden Rule.)

2. His professional reputation and future employability rests entirely on his current performance. If his stewardship destroys Nokia, he'll be lucky to run so much as a fast-food joint afterward.

3. He is legally answerable to shareholders should he deliberately acting against the company's best interest. If they find out he's working for anyone else, they'll not only kick him out of the job but sue him as an individual into a hole so deep he'll never get out. And that's before any regulatory or criminal justice folks start taking an interest too.

..

Basically, Elop was handed the keys to the priceless family Rolls Royce, and you're saying his first action is to drive it down to the local chop shop for a $50 backhander? Only a complete crackhead would behave so, and no competent parent would ever hand the family fortune to such a loser crackhead son. I suspect only basement dwelling losers who've never run their own business nor taken on any other IRL responsibility could honestly propose anything so patently stupid. Really, look in a mirror before you say such things about other people; you might stop yourself looking a complete fool in future.

Reply Score: 2

which company dies 1st?
by supergear on Sat 20th Apr 2013 13:13 UTC
supergear
Member since:
2007-07-06

the race is on to see which company dies, in its current form, first. nokia or blackberry

Reply Score: 0

Wondering
by Cmax on Sat 20th Apr 2013 20:13 UTC
Cmax
Member since:
2013-04-20

I was a Nokia fan once. They had me... they lost me. I liked my 5800 and defended it against the (quite succesfull) attacks by htc hero in my surroundings. I wanted my next phone(s) to be a Nokia. I liked there feel of thoughness, handling and sound quality, heck i still miss it. But I also want an android phone (for all the obvious and none obvious reasons).

Maybe Nokia wouldn't be the number one but they still would be in much less problems if they had had a android phone offering. I don't believe the identity theorie that motived windows above android/symbian/x choice. Nokia could have won the phone battles easily. I even think they still can: Imagine an handsome watertight phone with pureview in radiant colours..with android. I want one.

I am curious how others would picture there ideal Nokia phone.......

Reply Score: 2

RE: Wondering
by cdude on Sun 21st Apr 2013 13:49 UTC in reply to "Wondering"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

N950 (qwerty N9 with slider) with pureview, an abnormal long battery-life and robust like there $25 S40.

Edited 2013-04-21 13:50 UTC

Reply Score: 1