Nokia's Present & Future

Discussion in 'Mobile Industry' started by Arun, Dec 22, 2010.

  1. Helmore

    Regular

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    Messages:
    466
    Likes Received:
    0
    No it's not. This is the most ridiculous argument I've heard. It just means that Microsoft thinks it's sensible for Elop to continue do what he was already doing before they bought Nokia's phone business. Namely, lead the phone business.

    I'm not arguing for or against Elop being a trojan horse though. That's a pointless thing to argue about as we'll never know. IMO he wasn't, but alas.

    Do you know what's crazy? I don't think I would have been able to do things any better than he did. If I had been in Elop's shoes, Nokia would probably still be at the same place we're now. Or maybe in an even worse spot.

    You're telling it like Elop had such a big influence in Nokia, but I fear that things wouldn't have been much different with a different CEO.
     
  2. ToTTenTranz

    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    9,844
    Likes Received:
    4,458
    Bah, heavy argument then :p

    Here's hoping for an investigation promted by a group of smaller Nokia stockholders to occurr and bring things to light.
     
  3. Xmas

    Xmas Porous
    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    3,298
    Likes Received:
    137
    Location:
    On the path to wisdom
    Yes, that's 1920x1080 with 140% scaling (thus also giving an indication that screen size is similar to Surface Pro)


    They had more money and negotiating power at the time Elop came in. What's wrong with not selling smartphones if that market simply doesn't offer great profit opportunities for them?
     
  4. Mintmaster

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Messages:
    3,897
    Likes Received:
    87
    You really are clueless about the stock market, aren't you. Every company that buys most or all of another needs to pay a premium.

    What are you talking about? You think MS is going to liquidate the device business? I suppose you think Orton killed ATI?
     
  5. Snyder

    Regular

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2002
    Messages:
    609
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    True, I should heed my own advice, but in this case its "check the source".
    Those aren't pure WM numbers, but combined WM/WP numbers (even if your source says otherwise - but Gartner/Canalys etc. numbers won't add up otherwise). That makes the chart even more useless and the sharp decline easily explainable: Q1 2011 are still a mix of WM/WP (~1.6m WP sold in Q1, rest WM), and WM devices stopped shipping afterwards (~1.5m sold in Q2, basically all WP).
    And remember: The last new WinMo device came out in 1Q2010 (IIRC, could also be 2Q), as well as the last update. WinMo has been officially abandoned and deprecated by both MS and handset makers long before 2011. Everything in late 2010/early 2011 WM sales was basically stock emptying.

    And that's because....? Regurgitating your claims doesn't make them more true.

    Whaaa...? Osborne effect, anyone?

    No, I'm not overestimating. There are enough documented cases it's practically Business 101.
    And you know who IS especially aware such announcements? a) Carriers b) Enterprise Customers. a) -> indirect impact on consumer market b) -> DIRECT impact on enterprise market.
    And I think you have a lot backwards in your recollection. It was basically a Double Osborne, with both BB7 (earlier announcement, belated launch, no upgradeability for older hardware) and BB10 (well, same points but much worse). And before the end of May you had: March earnings call announcement, April: Tablet OS (based on QNX), Start of May: BB7 devices (and it was known from the beginning that 6.1 dev. couldn't be upgraded)


    Astounding. You have a simple correlation between two (completely different, by your own admission) companies, no other supporting argument than "they both had a dead end OS" and think your point stands?

    Aaand another strawman. Market share only shows your performance relative to others. (Which no one was debating here.) But it doesn't show how well your company itself is.
    You want relevant graphs?
    Here we go:
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    Made by myself for the earnings reports. I would have loved to include earlier numbers and profits/losses, but sadly nokia didn't report separate smartphone numbers before 2009 and doesn't report separate losses (smartphone/feature phone) in the devices division at all. Look at my previous link for a quick loss overview. (which basically start in 2Q2011)

    C'mon, don't play stupid. You know which part of your quote I meant.
     
    #2265 Snyder, Sep 7, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2013
  6. Florin

    Florin Merrily dodgy
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,644
    Likes Received:
    214
    Location:
    The colonies
    I'm pretty sure Nokia would've done better with you as CEO :lol:

    Elop hit Nokia like a biblical plague. Or maybe that's unfair. Come to think of it any random swarm of locusts would've probably made for a better CEO.

    Seriously though. Nokia was not exactly in imminent danger of extinction when he joined. There are turnaround stories for companies that were in worse shape.
     
  7. Mintmaster

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Messages:
    3,897
    Likes Received:
    87
    So the third option you're talking about involves selling off the devices division in 2010/2011 to some chump for 2-3x the $7B that MS paid? Or spinning it off into an independent company?

    I suppose you have a point there. It's not something that anyone else brought up in this thread. But Nokia expected their margins to stay on their feature phones and entry level smartphones, so I don't think their board seriously considered that.
     
  8. Florin

    Florin Merrily dodgy
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,644
    Likes Received:
    214
    Location:
    The colonies
    For a healthy company with other possibilities, certainly. In this case, they got a total bargain (lest you forget, when Elop took over 3 years ago, the market cap was $40 billion, most of it due to Nokia's handset business). They ended up getting it for $5 billion.

    Did the market cheer this shrewd purchase? After seeing Lumia's tepid adoption and the value of the WP brand, it did anything but.

    Nah, think MS will play around with the remains of Nokia's handset business for a year or 3, kill the Asha component as soon as possible, lose more market share overall, and eventually announce it will become some completely new and improved mobile initiative. Which will fail once again, as usual.
     
  9. Snyder

    Regular

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2002
    Messages:
    609
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    Sorry, you're right. I was still in "argument mode". :)


    Naah, please. Have to agree with the others here. Calm down with the conspiracies.
     
  10. french toast

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,667
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    Leicestershire - England
    Well I agree with tott and others, whilst not proof it is bloody bizarre to say the least.
     
  11. Mintmaster

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Messages:
    3,897
    Likes Received:
    87
    Fine, but it is still proof of a market transition. MS would not deprecate it if they could keep selling it as WP grew. They never stopped selling win98 when XP came out, or XP when Vista came out, etc.
    I didn't regurgitate anything in that quote. If you and others are saying that Nokia spoiled a cash cow, then you are unequivocally saying they could have kept selling their not-so-smartphones through time of transition. It's complete denial.

    There was never the type of hard announcement that in any way can be called an Osborne effect and affect results for Q1 2011.

    Show me a historical case of the Osborne effect that came from such a weak definition of future product announcement. There is no way that you can blame RIM's 1Q2011 results on this. By your definition the iPad mini should flop from speculation of the next model having a Retina display.

    RIM's prevalence through enterprise also makes it even easier for them to coast because they have far higher costs in changing platforms than a typical consumer and are also much slower to do so. That they still stumbled shows how much consumer demand transitioned.

    Buddy, it's FIVE operating systems. WinMo (doesn't matter whether it's due to customer choice or MS's perception of customer choice), RIM dying, Apple growing rapidly, and Android rocketing up in 2010 (surpassing Symbian by year's end).

    So what? A company can't control demand for an existing class of product. It can only control how well it does relative to others in providing it. A few quarters ago Intel saw shipment declines despite kicking AMD's ass more than ever before.

    The total smartphone market will go up and down depending on consumer sentiment/hype, seasonal variation, the economy, etc. The only way Nokia can change that is through a revolutionary product, which maybe 0.1% of CEOs are capable of initiating, and none could do in a few quarters.

    1. Your claim is that Elop's memo notably changed consumer preference for Nokia. Agreed?
    2. Nokia's marketshare, by definition, shows the percent of buyers who prefer Nokia. Agreed?
    And yet you are completely unable to show any correlation between Elop's memo and quarterly marketshare loss. That is not a strawman. That is a gaping hole in your argument.

    Your graphs show Nokia's shipped numbers, but we all know that manufacturers play tricks with these through inventory stuffing in one quarter versus the next. Nokia having 22% growth in smartphone revenue from 3Q2010 to 4Q2010 is unlikely given that Gartner shows their sales going from 29.5M units to only 32.6M units over the same timeframe.

    That Q4 number in your graph is a mirage from an all-time peak of 100M smartphones sold that quarter and, IMO, Nokia trying to make FY2010 look as good as it could.

    Take 1000 random smartphone buyers in Q1 2010, and you'll find 443 choose Nokia.
    In Q2, 412.
    In Q3, 366.
    In Q4, 326.
    Q1 2011, 274.
    Q2 2011, 221.

    There is no anomalous change in trajectory from the Q1 2011 memo. It was an accelerating decline that started before Elop even arrived.

    You're just being an ass now, and Xmas's response proves it. He was talking about Nokia not making phones in 2011. I was not "disproving" anything he said, I incorrectly assumed what his mysterious third option was, and he clarified it.
     
  12. Mintmaster

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Messages:
    3,897
    Likes Received:
    87
    No, a premium is always needed in a buyout. If a company is not healthy, then its stock will be lower than it used to be, but you still need to offer a premium to buy it out.

    By your definition of bargain, Blackberry is one right now. Only $5.7B market cap, and it used to be $36B 3 years ago, and $65B+ at its peak. Run, Florin! Buy shares of this bargain!

    The reality is that Nokia was heavily overvalued before Elop took over. Nobody knew that its featurephone business would lose value so quickly, or that its not-so-smart-phones would become obsolete so fast.
    You're all over the place. In one sentence you're saying MS got a bargain, and in another you're saying MS bought dead weight.

    Yeah, just like XBox failed. And how Skype lost users after the acquisition.
     
  13. Kaotik

    Kaotik Drunk Member
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2003
    Messages:
    8,166
    Likes Received:
    1,836
    Location:
    Finland
    Seriously? Do you really think any CEO could do anything like that? The CEO can't do anything the board of directors doesn't approve.
     
  14. warmi

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Messages:
    100
    Likes Received:
    0
    ToTTenTranz seems to be emotionally invested in Nokia and for some reason cannot accept the basic fact that companies routinely fuck up - no need for any sort of conspiracies.
     
  15. wco81

    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Messages:
    6,193
    Likes Received:
    260
    Location:
    West Coast
    If Nokia didn't throw up their hands and say "hey our next gen platforms that we've been working on for years are hopeless and we're going to junk them" would it have plummeted as quickly?

    Would they have sold less of the Symbian and Meego phones than the WP phones that they've sold?

    Did NOK go up when they signed on with MS? It's certainly gone down since.
     
  16. Florin

    Florin Merrily dodgy
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,644
    Likes Received:
    214
    Location:
    The colonies
    Haha, you know what I'll just quote the first hit on that snarky link you thought I needed:
    Do you have any more wisdom to impart on M&A, Mintmaster? It is highly entertaining.

    You may have accidentally said something insightful for a change. There's a number of people doing exactly that at the moment. Me, I think it has some ways to go.

    But I actually did buy Nokia in May and some more in August. Made a sweet profit cashing out on the news.

    I also reinvested some in MSFT on the dip. I'm counting on the unshakable faith of people like yourself to bring it back to $33.50 - $35 eventually ;)

    Another $8.5 Billion well spent, I have to say :lol:
     
  17. silent_guy

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Messages:
    3,754
    Likes Received:
    1,379
    You're using MSFT falling 8% as if that's some kind of big deal. If you look at the MSFT stock price over time, you wouldn't be able to spot it.

    MSFT dropped 12% in one day on July 19th, 2013. A month later it was almost back where it was. The volume was 250M shares, similar to the Balmer retirement announcement, compared to your 150M.

    On January 24th, 2013, Apple dropped 13% from $513 to $450 because of lower than expected numbers. They didn't announce buying 30000 employees from a company that became complacent, just numbers that weren't as perfect. The stock is now back where it was.

    How about on september 12, 2001, when the market suddenly thought that not just one company but whole US economy suddenly was worth 15% less on one of its highest volumes ever. Only to reverse itself a week or so later.

    My gut reaction is that using the market's gut reaction in anything other than a discussion of market psychology is a sign of desperation. It devalues whatever other smart argument may come after.
     
  18. Snyder

    Regular

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2002
    Messages:
    609
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    What should I think of this paragraph when already your first claim has been completely wrong for the last few years - where the total smartphone market only knew one direction: UP.
    And your second claim is a) ridiculously oversimplified and b) completely ignores the fact that "immediately switching to WP and abandoning the rest" was NOT the only possibility of executing change. But slowly I don't think anyone could ever change your mind about that...

    It's a strawman in that no one was arguing that Nokia was losing (unit) market share, but that at least Nokia was healthy from a business POV before (profitable, at least slightly increasing revenue, enough cash reserves) and that this shows that such a radical and immediate break wasn't neccessary and did more harm than good. And I already showed you the correlation re: Sales and Profits.
    But if you insist...the graph you provided makes it look linear, but when you look at the numbers, it paints a different picture:
    http://www.statista.com/statistics/263438/market-share-held-by-nokia-smartphones-since-2007/
    1Q10-1Q11: 38,8%->23.8% = -38,6% market share loss
    1Q11-1Q12: 23,8%->7,8% = -67,2%
    1Q12-1Q13: 7,8% -> 2,8% = -64,2%
    Is nearly doubling the market share loss enough for you?


    Exactly. Everyone does that. Your point being...?

    *sigh* Yes, Gartner is completely correct. (Well, mostly, since these are Symbian numbers. Nokia numbers are lower, but the ratio is roughly the same.) UNIT shipments rose roughly 7%. And now the kicker: ASP per Unit
    rose ~15%. And that makes? Tadaa: 22%.

    See above.

    It's not your assumption, but the foregone conclusion you drew: Not going immediately to WP or Android -> definite obsolescence.
     
  19. Mize

    Mize 3dfx Fan
    Moderator Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    5,048
    Likes Received:
    1,097
    Location:
    Cincinnati, Ohio USA
    Lmao.
     
  20. Helmore

    Regular

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    Messages:
    466
    Likes Received:
    0
    Could we open a new thread specifically for all the Nokia conspiracy theories? They're not adding anything to this thread anymore IMHO.
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...