Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 26th Jul 2013 14:56 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless "In smartphones, it's not all about Apple and Samsung anymore. For several years, these two companies have dominated the mobile phone-making business, successively one-upping each other with ever sleeker, more technologically sophisticated iPhones and Galaxy handsets that left would-be rivals grasping. But now the competition is stirring, and consumers are giving another look to brands they once ignored." Not only is Samsung now more profitable in mobile than Apple (next goalpost please), smaller Android manufacturers, such as LG, ZTE, and Lenovo, are making huge inroads, and are raking in growing profits - in fact, these three now belong to the top 5 mobile device makers. The common parlance that only Samsung is making a profit off Android is simply no longer true.
Thread beginning with comment 568020
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by cdude
by cdude on Fri 26th Jul 2013 17:36 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by cdude"
cdude
Member since:
2008-09-21

LG is a prime example. They went WP, fall down to 2% marks share, shifted to Android just some time ago and have now near double as much smartphones sold this quarter then Nokia has (Asha's are not smartphones dear Nelson). Huawei and Lenovo are two more newcomers jumping from zero to profitable using Android.

Moto is exceptional, more difficult to compare with, cause of there stand as Google owned company. If Moto grows fast people, like our Nelson, will point out that's the reason. The other candidates, where no such inter-connection exists, are much closer to Nokia. Except Nokia, back then, would not start from zero but as market leader with the most loyal customer base. A highly profitable well-connected mobile gorilla multiple factors larger then Samsung and Apple back then.

Point is, those latest arguments given by Nokia's Elop why not also* Android are now even more wrong then before. That's what this article and the sudden success of LG, Huawei, Lenovo shows. Even Samsung shows it since back then it wasn't Samsung leading Android, it was HTC.

* The question is not and never was WP or Android. The question is why only WP? No competitor went all in**. Even ZTE, growing with Android, is also doing FirefoxOS now.

** Even Microsoft not went all in with Nokia. Samsung, HTC, Huawei do WP too.

Edited 2013-07-26 17:46 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Comment by cdude
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Fri 26th Jul 2013 18:10 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by cdude"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

The only reason I listed Motorola, is for the counter example. If Motorola can't be profitable despite its close ties to Google, well then its really difficult to make money with android and Nokia might have a valid point.

You can't forget that HTC despite its stellar phones and reviews is not very profitable with android. If others besides samsung are doing well, then it must be something HTC is doing wrong. When Nokia made the statement, they were kind of pointing at HTC as the poster child of a company destroyed by samsung.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by cdude
by judgen on Fri 26th Jul 2013 21:06 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by cdude"
judgen Member since:
2006-07-12

To be frank: The lack of HTC profits is due to paying the microsoft tax on trheir android devices. The others that are making money do not.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by cdude
by Fergy on Sat 27th Jul 2013 18:01 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by cdude"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

You can't forget that HTC despite its stellar phones and reviews is not very profitable with android. If others besides samsung are doing well, then it must be something HTC is doing wrong. When Nokia made the statement, they were kind of pointing at HTC as the poster child of a company destroyed by samsung.

And your point is that had they gone with only Windows Phone they would have flourished?
I liked my HTC Desire until HTC refused to update my phone. That meant I had to go Nexus to get the treatment I deserve. I wonder if that had something to do with HTC's nosedive? I also wonder if releasing 22 android phones in 2011 was smart.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Comment by cdude
by cdude on Sun 28th Jul 2013 14:12 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by cdude"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

The only reason I listed Motorola, is for the counter example. If Motorola can't be profitable despite its close ties to Google, well then its really difficult to make money with android


That counter-example is wrong. If Motorola can't be profitable with Android then it shows only one thing: the close ties to Google are not competative advantage enough.

The whole mobile segment is full competition. Making products that sell good is what counts.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment by cdude
by Nelson on Fri 26th Jul 2013 19:15 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by cdude"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

LG is a prime example. They went WP, fall down to 2% marks share, shifted to Android just some time ago and have now near double as much smartphones sold this quarter then Nokia has (Asha's are not smartphones dear Nelson). Huawei and Lenovo are two more newcomers jumping from zero to profitable using Android.


I'm not counting Asha shipments, I don't much care. Nokia is fast approaching double digit millions with Lumia shipments, and them cracking that list will prove WP is moving mainstream. Something some have said was impossible.

LG never really tried with WP, Nokia did.


Moto is exceptional, more difficult to compare with, cause of there stand as Google owned company. If Moto grows fast people, like our Nelson, will point out that's the reason.


Actually no. Drop the strawman. Ill go on record and say that Moto wont really grow quickly at all. If they do, come back and quote me on this.

The other candidates, where no such inter-connection exists, are much closer to Nokia. Except Nokia, back then, would not start from zero but as market leader with the most loyal customer base. A highly profitable well-connected mobile gorilla multiple factors larger then Samsung and Apple back then.


Moto will likely do no better than LG or Sony. I'd be extremely surprised. Everyone says wait for Moto X, so I'll wait, but well see.

These were probably the only coherent set of points in your comment so I'll stop here.

Reply Parent Score: 2