Nokia's Present & Future

[BRiT]

It sure is amazing how quick some users are to jump to conclusions and miss the truth just because their hatred towards a company blinds them.

 

[I.S.T.]

I was misinformed, I apologize. No need to make assumptions on who I hate and how much I hate them, as well as talk about me like I would not check to see any replies to the topic.

For the record, I do dislike MS intensely, but I dislike just about every big company intensely because they a;lways fuck shit up and hurt people in the process. They're no different to me than any other super large corp.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

So Nokia is going to be making Android smartphones and tablets?

B-but.. no one except Samsung makes money with Android! Why would they do that?

They should go with Windows Mobile instead. With some nice exclusivity contracts, they could get the lionshare of those 8 or 9 weekly sold Win Mobile phones.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

So Nokia is going to be making Android smartphones and tablets?

Nokia licensed the rights to use the name to another company. They are not funding this, but collecting royalty payments. Nokia does have some presence at board of the new company though, but it's a big stretch to say Nokia is making them.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Yeah, Nokia knows that it is extremely unlikely that Nokia branded phones of any description will be a profit generator. Hence, taking a no-risk approach to licensing the name to another company for that company to take the risk and most likely go down in flames.

Regards,
SB

 

[Deleted member 13524]

Another 1850 former Nokia employees losing their jobs and a further $1B write-off at Microsoft.

 

[Florin]

Good job Elop.

 

[Kaotik]

Good job Elop.

The decisions that led to Nokias fall were done during Kallavuo's time, not Elops

 

[Deleted member 13524]

The decisions that led to Nokias fall were done during Kallavuo's time, not Elops

You're right. Kallasvuo's decisions led to Nokia falling.
Elop's decisions led to Nokia putting a grenade in their mouth and pulling the pin.

 

[Kaotik]

You're right. Kallasvuo's decisions led to Nokia falling.
Elop's decisions led to Nokia putting a grenade in their mouth and pulling the pin.

Which decisions exactly would those be? The big lines deciding OS future for example were done before Elop, by the board of directors.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Which decisions exactly would those be? The big lines deciding OS future for example were done before Elop, by the board of directors.

It's easier to blame the CEO when people don't understand that the CEO operates under the direction of the Board of Directors. A CEO, generally, only gets to execute on the directives of the Board of Directors as best they can. Rare are the companies that have a CEO that is powerful enough to defy the Board or persuasive enough to get the Board to follow their direction.

Steve Jobs and Bill Gates stand as a couple of those rare exceptions. Their successors, Tim Cook and Steve Ballmer, weren't and were (I guess in Cook's case still is) at the mercy of doing what the Board dictates. Although at least in Ballmer's case he had more leeway than Nadella as he had the backing of Gates (who was on the Board) for quite a while. However, eventually the Board cracked down and exerted their will on him despite Gate's influence. It didn't help that even Gate's confidence in Ballmer was faltering somewhat towards the end.

Anyway, I'd say Elop wasn't an exception either. He was just your typical CEO that the Board of Directors hired because they felt he could execute on their plans. He tried, but ultimately failed. That's not to say Elop was a good or bad CEO, only that he couldn't make the Board of Director's plan succeed.

Regards,
SB

 

[Deleted member 13524]

Which decisions exactly would those be?

1 - Going with windows phone, which at the time had already proven to be a failure (BTW nothing changed in that department after all these years)
2 - Going exclusively with windows phone, which at the time had already proven to be a failure.

Doesn't matter if it was Elop or BoD's decisions. These were the decisions that ultimately got tens of thousands of Finnish without jobs and a huge flow of intellectual property value away from Finland.

 

[Kaotik]

1 - Going with windows phone, which at the time had already proven to be a failure (BTW nothing changed in that department after all these years)
2 - Going exclusively with windows phone, which at the time had already proven to be a failure.

Doesn't matter if it was Elop or BoD's decisions. These were the decisions that ultimately got tens of thousands of Finnish without jobs and a huge flow of intellectual property value away from Finland.

Yes, those decisions led to disasters, but they weren't initiated by Elop. Nokia actually held tons if not all of their IP, IIRC, and just licenced them to MS

 

[Deleted member 13524]

Yes, those decisions led to disasters, but they weren't initiated by Elop.

The burning memo, which instantly osbourned their entire product line for at least 8 months, was probably his decision.

 

[Kaotik]

The burning memo, which instantly osbourned their entire product line for at least 8 months, was probably his decision.

Even if the memo itself was, the decision to dump the old platform had been done before

 

[wco81]

Let's not revisit this.

Nokia may have been doomed once iPhone and Android started gathering momentum.

Companies tried to develop a third mobile platform and none of it panned out.

Would Nokia have been better off steering clean of Elop and MS? Maybe though unlikely that the platform they were working on would have gained any traction.

Or maybe they could have gone Android back then. They would have had a good chance to ship volumes but perhaps not much profits, since most Android device makers are not reaping huge profits, other than Samsung did for awhile before they were undercut in China.

Maybe a Nokia-branded Android phone in 2010 or 2011 would have sold well in Europe.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

That would have happened only if they had abandoned Symbian much much sooner and jumped onto Android around the time Samsung did or shortly after. Once Samsung got to critical mass with public adoption of their phones it was difficult for any non-Chinese manufacturer to compete with them. HTC was actually doing competitively at first before Samsung just steamrolled all over them.

By the time they decided to switch platforms it was already going to be an uphill battle. Either go Android and drown in a sea of Android devices trying to compete with Samsung or hope that a new platform driven by a large corporation could gain traction. Either one was going to be a struggle with a low chance of success.

Going Android likely meant they'd eventually have to move manufacturing to China unless they could somehow wrest control of the high end Android handset market away from Samsung. Windows Phone gave them a prospect of being the de facto high end phone supplier for the platform with generous licensing agreements and backing from Microsoft. That would allow them to potentially keep their manufacturing. I'd imagine that prospect looked the most attractive to the Board of Directors at the time the decision was made. Obviously hindsight being 20/20, that didn't happen.

Anyway, once the Board of Directors made that decision it was time to go looking for a CEO to execute on it. That CEO search lead to Elops hiring.

IE - everything was decided prior to Elop being hired. As with most CEO's he just ended up being the fall guy. The Board of Directors for companies rarely take the flack for their decisions, it's always dumped onto whatever CEO they hired. On the flip side if things go well, the CEO gets to take the credit.

Regards,
SB

 

[wco81]

So elop had nothing to do with choosing WP? Why did MS reward him after it acquired Nokia?

Nokia had brand equity in Europe so for a time, the Nokia Lumias were doing okay in some countries like Italy, actually outselling iPhone. Was that because of WP or the Nokia name?

Given all the reboots of WP, maybe Nokia Android phones may have had a chance to build up some momentum against Samsung Galaxy in some markets.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

So elop had nothing to do with choosing WP? Why did MS reward him after it acquired Nokia?

Nokia had brand equity in Europe so for a time, the Nokia Lumias were doing okay in some countries like Italy, actually outselling iPhone. Was that because of WP or the Nokia name?

Given all the reboots of WP, maybe Nokia Android phones may have had a chance to build up some momentum against Samsung Galaxy in some markets.

Nope on Elop being the driving force behind Nokia going with WP. Likely kept Elop on because he was intimately familiar with the workings of the Nokia phone business as well as having previously been with Microsoft.

If anything, it's entirely likely there was communication between Microsoft and Nokia about the possibility of them moving to the Windows Phone platform prior to Elop being hired as the CEO.

What is extremely curious is why Finland rewarded Elop for everything that happened. Perhaps he facilitated the sale of Nokia's phone division to Microsoft on very favorable terms for Nokia. Something Nokia wanted (out of the handset business) and that also benefitted them extraordinarily well when it comes to public perception (Microsoft took the fall for layoffs instead of Nokia which is what would have happened otherwise). And the Finnish government at the time perhaps thought that was the best way to keep all those Finnish workers employed. Except even Microsoft couldn't save it.

Until someone on their Board of Directors decides to shed light on everything, we'll never really know.

As for the Nokia brand pushing sales. Yes, that was definitely the case. Hence why Microsoft were willing to go into a business partnership with Nokia on very favorable terms for Nokia. The question is, would an Andoid version of Nokia phones in a country like say, Italy, have done significantly better than the Windows Phone version? And if it had would it have had the momentum required to challenge even a lower tier non-Chinese handset maker like say, HTC? Even assuming it matched HTC, it's unlikely Nokia would have wanted to keep the handset division around for much longer. Manufacturing costs for them is higher than it was for the Korean, Taiwanese and especially Chinese handset makers, especially when you consider they would likely want to keep their reputation for quality built handsets.

The possibility was certainly there for them to succeed somewhat. But the possibility was also there for them to succeed with Windows Phone. They perhaps took the riskier gamble on Windows Phone. But if it had worked the payoff would have been far larger than if they had gone with Android. They would have been the de facto premium handset maker for Windows Phone similar to Samsung for Android. Everyone else would have been competing against them, similar to Samsung with Android.

The gamble didn't pay off, but it was unlikely to have paid off even if they'd gone with Android instead.

Regards,
SB

 

[orangpelupa]

Do online only store like xiaomi and their cheap but high quality devices?

Although in xiaomi case, it's almost impossible to buy officially from them online. They sold out really fast and now the market is filled with Grey imports on physical stores.