Nokia's Present & Future

[dZeus]

Interesting how these two posts get a partial answer, one and a half year later...

<cut>

And they still have that answer, with smooth Symbian->MeeGo transitions through Qt..
But I guess the deals that Elop made with Microsoft probably involve turning Nokia into Microsoft's puppet. Nokia will only release what MS tells them to.


Funny question: can't Elop and Nokia's Board of Directors be charged with corporate corruption or something?
Can they actually keep destroying the company's brand and assets on purpose, while firing thousands of employees every quarter in order to make it cheap enough for Microsoft to buy Nokia at dirt-low prices? Isn't that some sort of crime?

Aren't they threatening the Finnish/European economy and patrimony?

all speculation on my behalf here:
You'd need to find out if Mr. Elop's actions in killing off Symbian and Meego the way he did it were due to incompetence (disregarding risk management, betting the house on an unannounced third-party OS), or due to corruption; in other words, if he has a personal interest in having Windows Phone succeed even if it comes at the expense of Nokia as a company and its shareholders.

A good case can be made for the latter half (Nokia nosediving as it has). Now if someone could find out if Mr. Elop (and/or the Board of Directors) has private dealings with MS regarding Nokia and/or the success of Windows Phone...

in retrospect it's crazy to have allowed Nokia to go down the road they went, with their importance to the European technology and manufacturing sector.

so, the board of directors agreed with the contract with the 'special clause' with Mr. Elop. Were the Nokia shareholders informed about this? Were they obliged to be?

 

[Mariner]

When it comes to the decisions of the board, shareholders are rarely considered. Just look at the outrageous pay packets and extra incentives awarded to executives at the financial institutions before (and after) the financial crash to see this.

In the aftermath, especially, vast bonuses were still being paid despite the fact that share prices were hugely below pre-crash levels.

I remember reading an article about this which pointed out that the board members tended to be of a similar 'class' - and by that I mean they all went to the same Schools/Universities/Business Schools as each other so were always more likely to scratch each other's backs when it came to payment awards.

That said, I don't necessarily subscribe to the 'Elop as a trojan' theory which is so popular. As the saying goes, "Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence".

I think almost certain that Elop wasn't crooked with a secret machiavellian scheme to enable Microsoft to buy the phone arm of Nokia at a knock-down price. It is much more probable that he was just not very good at the job he was brought in to carry out. As for the theory that the Nokia board members were 'in on the scam', again, it is just more likely incompetence was the issue.

This all assumes, of course, that the Nokia phone business was actually saveable when Elop took over, something there is still lots of debate about.

 

[french toast]

'Elopement' lol....thats gonna stick.

 

[french toast]

That said, I don't necessarily subscribe to the 'Elop as a trojan' theory which is so popular.

I think almost certain that Elop wasn't crooked with a secret machiavellian scheme to enable Microsoft to buy the phone arm of Nokia at a knock-down price. It is much more probable that he was just not very good at the job he was brought in to carry out.

(Edited quote)
Ok fair enough ill go along with that scenario for one second....why then was he richly rewarded with his incompetence with a windfall that dwarfs his predecessor's? Why has he been awarded a good position at Microsoft?
Why has steve balmer publicly endorsed elop for his job of ceo of microsoft?
Why did nokia lie and try to cover up the details of elops contract?
Speeking of which, why was there such a clause in his contract in the first place?

If he was so incompetent and terrible at his job he wouldnt be getting the rewards and credibility from one of the worlds biggest and most savvy companies fo that incompetence, especially when were are talking about billions of $$ worth of responsibility.

To be able to believe this naive mary poppins script, you have to believe in very unlikely coincidences, that microsoft is a bunch of idiots, nokias board were a bunch of naive idiots, elop was a naive idiot and while your at it completely throw out all of microsofts anti competitive business practices and hosile take overs/attempts.

The whole thing looked at logically stinks, still there will always be the peeps who will refuse to open thier eyes.

 

[Lazy8s]

For all the inefficiencies of the old Nokia organization, they had multiple refined, profit making businesses that could have been wound down or retargeted with far better results than what happened. The way it all happened might not have been the worst case scenario, but it was pretty close to it under any reasonable analysis.

 

[zed]

It is much more probable that he was just not very good at the job he was brought in to carry out.

as French toast saiz if like youre saying
the guy was an incompetent idiot, now why on earth would MS want him in a high position of power at MS.

Youve gotta wonder Could this be the next CEO at MS

 

[Mariner]

Before he was awarded the job at Nokia, Elop had worked for a number of companies in a number of roles. However, just one year of employment for a company which produced hardware and he wasn't in charge of that company, either.

Looking at Elop's employment record, I'd have to ask what made the Nokia board think he would be capable of running the company effectively in the face of such vigorous competition, especially when he had apparently never worked in the mobile market?

It looks to me that incompetence by the board of directors is the most likely explanation, as noted in my previous post. Is it any surprise that they might make such a poor decision in their CEO appointment? Well, no. Nokia was on the rocks before they appointed Elop due to a failure of the previous executive decision making process so it seems pretty obvious that a continuation of this failure could have led to Elop's employment.

For Microsoft, bringing Elop back in to run the newly-purchased Nokia divisions seems a sensible enough plan. He's been working there a couple of years, has overseen the move across to Windows Phone so should know as much about the business as pretty much anyone else at Nokia. Now, whether or not this will be a good appointment is a different matter, as Microsoft hardly has the best record in the mobile area, to say the least!

 

[liolio]

THere are a lot of half assed conspiracy theories, wow.
Real conspiracy theorists would say: Nokia did not comply with Symbian to the NSA best practices wrt privacy, they got punished

 

[Deleted member 13524]

For Microsoft, bringing Elop back in to run the newly-purchased Nokia divisions seems a sensible enough plan. He's been working there a couple of years, has overseen the move across to Windows Phone so should know as much about the business as pretty much anyone else at Nokia. Now, whether or not this will be a good appointment is a different matter, as Microsoft hardly has the best record in the mobile area, to say the least!

So you think that even though he did a terrible job throughout the whole process, Microsoft seeks to reward him because he was there?

 

[Mariner]

So you think that even though he did a terrible job throughout the whole process, Microsoft seeks to reward him because he was there?

It's what I'd do if I was in charge.

They know Elop from his previous time at Microsoft so they know they can obviously work with him.

Regardless of what occurred at Nokia on a larger scale, there is no denying that the Lumia phones are pretty good devices and Windows Phone is a decent OS.

Now, whether or not Elop will still be there in a year's time is a different matter, but it is perfectly understandable to take on the CEO of a company you've just bought to run the division. Even if they just keep him in place for a year to help integration of the two companies, it's not such a bad idea - Elop has been working with all the various department heads at Nokia for two years so knows them all well.

As I said, whether or not Elop's judgement about his Nokia staff is correct or Microsoft's judgement of Elop himself is correct is a different matter.

I think your viewpoint probably differs on this to mine because you think him guilty. I think it unlikely that Elop was a trojan horse, so Microsoft bringing him back is perfectly explicable to me, despite the relative failure of Nokia under his tenure there. Microsoft don't give a toss about the feature phone market lost by Nokia. All that is important is Lumia for them.

A lot depends on how Microsoft intends to proceed in the future. Have they just bought Nokia to fiddle around with as they have with their other various mobile initiatives, or are they really going to try and take on Apple and Android with Windows Phone? Microsfot might not be the megalithic computer company they once were, but they aren't exactly lacking in resources if they plan to make a real push into the mobile market.

 

[silent_guy]

Mariner, stop make sense please!

 

[wco81]

MS may eventually have to ramp up their own brand of phones, if the Lumia brand doesn't expand further.

In the mean time, what are the prospects for the parts of Nokia that remain?

Do the other businesses have the chance to make the revenues and make profits that the handheld division generated? Or at least the revenues?

 

[Deleted member 13524]

Regardless of what occurred at Nokia on a larger scale, there is no denying that the Lumia phones are pretty good devices and Windows Phone is a decent OS.

Yes, there is denying. There's a ton of denying about Lumia phones being pretty good and WP being a decent OS.

Actually, despite your (and others') personal opinion it's pretty factual that the worldwide market did not find the Lumias pretty good devices and did not consider WP a decent OS.
In fact, looking at how much money was spent on marketing and how long they were in the market, both WP and the Lumias are (still being) a complete disaster.

 

[eastmen]

Lumias account for 90% of windows phone market share and windows phone market share is increasing quarter over quarter it seems like .

Dunno if a growing market share is a complete disaster. OF course I'm sure it would have been better if it was a complete disaster like android was for the first 2-3 years of its life before the biggest carrier in the united states decided to push it as an iphone competitor since they didn't have the iphone on their network and were loosing subs.

 

[BadTB25]

Anecdotal evidence on my part suggests that it has good mindshare at least in this part of Florida. Both AT&T and Verizon have the phones prominently displayed and I saw a few pick them up when I was shopping for a new smartphone. I ended up picking up 2 Lumia 928s for the wife and me---was debating between them and the Galaxy S4.

Ultimately the better camera and ease of use won us out (mainly for the wife). Quite happy with the purchase so far.

 

[Mariner]

Yes, there is denying. There's a ton of denying about Lumia phones being pretty good and WP being a decent OS.

Actually, despite your (and others') personal opinion it's pretty factual that the worldwide market did not find the Lumias pretty good devices and did not consider WP a decent OS.
In fact, looking at how much money was spent on marketing and how long they were in the market, both WP and the Lumias are (still being) a complete disaster.

Good products aren't always successful, especially when they are competing against entrenched market forces.

The Lumia phones get good reviews, WP continues to improve with new iterations and I know one or two people who are very happy using their Lumias. There is also some innovation as well with the 1020 having the best mobile camera around, bar none. Personally, I'm pretty much invested in Android and enjoy playing around with different ROMs and the like so I'm not interested in moving across to WP, but there's no doubt that it is a very capable modern mobile OS and, if I had to, I could quite happily use a Lumia for all of my mobile usage.

Now, the question is, can Microsoft pump enough money into the marketing and sales of Lumia/WP to give it a foothold in the market? Personally, I think they would need to run their Lumia division as a loss leader for a couple of years if they are going to have a chance of taking a good proportion of the market.

 

[Sxotty]

There is also some innovation as well with the 1020 having the best mobile camera around, bar none. Personally, I'm pretty much invested in Android and enjoy playing around with different ROMs and the like so I'm not interested in moving across to WP, but there's no doubt that it is a very capable modern mobile OS and, if I had to, I could quite happily use a Lumia for all of my mobile usage.

Now, the question is, can Microsoft pump enough money into the marketing and sales of Lumia/WP to give it a foothold in the market? Personally, I think they would need to run their Lumia division as a loss leader for a couple of years if they are going to have a chance of taking a good proportion of the market.

Yes I actually would gt to windows phone in a heartbeat if I wasn't enamored with the more open Android phone where I can do what I want with the hardware I purchased. The 1020 is enticing to me as well since I quite enjoy photography.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

Plot twist from Jorma Ollila!:

This is true. We were not successful in using Microsoft's operating system to create competitive products

Just kidding, this isn't news.
More to the soap opera in the link.
He says that back in 2011, going Windows Phone had the "broad support" of "outside advisers, company's management and R&D".
We all know who the company's management was and that's explainable (Elop). What I don't know is what was missing in the heads of their outside advisors and R&D teams by then.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Sad for Nokia. The Lumia line continues to show increasingly strong growth (19% growth YoY) which is managing to keep pace with Samsung (20% growth YoY) and Apple (26% growth YoY). So now that the brand is starting to hit strong and steady growth, they are divesting themselves of the division.

Not surprising as most analysts expected their growth to accelerate once they got low cost devices on the market.

Regards,
SB

 

[Mize]

Sad for Nokia. The Lumia line continues to show increasingly strong growth (19% growth YoY) which is managing to keep pace with Samsung (20% growth YoY) and Apple (26% growth YoY). So now that the brand is starting to hit strong and steady growth, they are divesting themselves of the division.

Not surprising as most analysts expected their growth to accelerate once they got low cost devices on the market.

Regards,
SB

Uh...keeping apace of the % growth of Samsung and Apple (well, 1-7 points off) means basically being flat and riding along with market growth, no? What's far more important is the % of total market volume they capture and that grown, not top-line sales growth.