Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 3rd Sep 2013 05:39 UTC
Microsoft Ever since Stephen Elop became CEO of Nokia we knew this outcome was inevitable. It was his job to make it as easy as possible for Microsoft to acquire the vital parts of Nokia, and here we are: Microsoft is acquiring Nokia's devices unit for 3.79 billion euro, and another 1.65 billion euro for its patents. It's a bit of a complicated deal in that Microsoft buys the Asha feature phone brand and Lumia smartphone brand outright, but will only license the Nokia name for current Nokia products; the Nokia brand will remain under the control of Nokia the company. This means Nokia as a phone brand is effectively dead.

In addition, Stephen Elop will return to Microsoft. I'm sure entirely coincidentally, Ballmer announced recently that he's stepping down.

All this was as inevitable as the tides rolling in. Nokia has been going downhill and has stagnated ever since the announcement it would bank its future on Windows Phone. It went from being the largest smartphone manufacturer to an also-ran, which is made painfully clear by the fact that Microsoft paid more for Skype than it does for Nokia's devices unit.

A painful end for a once-great phone brand. This was the plan all along, and in essence, Nokia's board has executed it masterfully; the Finnish company has switched core markets several times in its long, long history (it started out as a paper company), and the unprofitable phone business was a huge liability for the company, despite claims by some that Nokia was doing just fine. Nokia's board has masterfully gotten rid of this money pit so it can focus on the parts that are profitable.

And, as always, the next Lumia will turn it all around.

Thread beginning with comment 571199
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by Nelson
by Vanders on Tue 3rd Sep 2013 09:57 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Nelson"
Vanders
Member since:
2005-07-06

While true, $8.66 was a sharp drop already from the 12 or so they were at, and that occurred under the previous CEO.


That's true, but when you look at the graph over the past three years the best you can say is that Elop managed to maintain the price and stop Nokia falling over the edge entirely.

Whether that makes him a "turnaround" CEO depends on just how dire the situation was at Nokia when he got there, I guess.

I think its unrealistic that the Nokia board colluded with Mr. Elop to destroy the value of their own company in order to be sold for less


No I have to admit, it seems unlikely. Still, it's a nice conspiracy theory...

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Tue 3rd Sep 2013 10:51 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29


That's true, but when you look at the graph over the past three years the best you can say is that Elop managed to maintain the price and stop Nokia falling over the edge entirely.


Yeah. He put a floor under it, what is disappointing for me is that I'll never get to see if the partnership would've been fruitful on its own. Of course now that MSFT has Nokia it won't go bankrupt, but half of the fascination I had was with seeing how Nokia could thread a fine needle.


Whether that makes him a "turnaround" CEO depends on just how dire the situation was at Nokia when he got there, I guess.


Eh, to me it depends on if we use shareprice as the sole barometer.

I think slowing the losses, divesting non-essential businesses (Selling Vertu for example) and moving Nokia to release devices every 2-3 months was an impressive managerial feat.

If (big if) Nokia ever came back (let's say #3 or #4 worldwide) it would've been a historic turnaround. I guess we'll never get to find out.

Reply Parent Score: 3