maemo.org - Talk

maemo.org - Talk (https://talk.maemo.org/index.php)
-   Off Topic (https://talk.maemo.org/forumdisplay.php?f=19)
-   -   Let's talk Nokia stock. Really. (https://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=85965)

pichlo 2013-11-22 13:23

Re: Let's talk Nokia stock. Really.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumiaman (Post 1388020)
They chose Windows for two reasons: differentiate, and make MS dependent on them

Starting tomorrow, I will buy my bread exclusively from Warburtons.
That will make Warburtons depend on me.

Gad, am I glad you are not my business adviser.

Lumiaman 2013-11-22 13:50

Re: Let's talk Nokia stock. Really.
 
Its interesting, that pro-Symbian forces still thrive at Maemo. Its like the militias in Utah, Idaho and few other states, still glorifying the US past, and unaccepting of diversity and inevitability of change.....wake up guys, NOKIA was simply run over by superior forces. NOTHING would have changed the outcome, NOTHING. Blackberry is in the same boat, NOTHING, I mean NOTHING, can help blackberry either. They fell behind, they were content, fat, rich and non competitive. The now Jolla members were just a bunch of lazy coders who couldnt deliver.

cheve 2013-11-22 14:20

Re: Let's talk Nokia stock. Really.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumiaman (Post 1388142)
Its interesting, that pro-Symbian forces still thrive at Maemo. Its like the militias in Utah, Idaho and few other states, still glorifying the US past, and unaccepting of diversity and inevitability of change.....wake up guys, NOKIA was simply run over by superior forces. NOTHING would have changed the outcome, NOTHING. Blackberry is in the same boat, NOTHING, I mean NOTHING, can help blackberry either. They fell behind, they were content, fat, rich and non competitive. The now Jolla members were just a bunch of lazy coders who couldnt deliver.

I feel sorry for you... it remains me of one of those sayings: if you do not have the facts, pound the table. Take some rest and stop pounding the table.

Lumiaman 2013-11-22 15:38

Re: Let's talk Nokia stock. Really.
 
Facts are simple. symbian died. The numbers are gone. Good riddance.

Lumiaman 2013-11-22 16:07

Re: Let's talk Nokia stock. Really.
 
Here are some numbers chump:


http://i1329.photobucket.com/albums/...ps5f205518.jpg

uTMY 2013-11-22 16:25

Re: Let's talk Nokia stock. Really.
 
and I read that as your epitaph and breathed a sigh of relief.

rgds

cheve 2013-11-22 17:23

Re: Let's talk Nokia stock. Really.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumiaman (Post 1388181)

Well, let us see.

Your graph appears to be historical stock price trend between Sept 2003 to Sept 2013. If your point is about the up and down of the stock price; then sure Nokia current price is much lower than when it was peaking at $40 in mid 2007. So let me extend that thinking and may be I could conclude this: in 2007, Nokia was selling all this dump phones and the stock price was $40; in 2013, Nokia is selling all these wonderful WP phones and yet the stock price is under $10 -- what the f#$k, Wait a minute, I can get a bigger meal with $40 than $10...Oh my GOD, let us go back to sell more dump phones instead. :)

But... I guess that is NOT want you want to show or want people to conclude, isn't it?

So, just throwing a graph out without context and detail would cause a lot of confusion -- especially for simple guy like me.

You point was that nobody wanted Symbian, and the Nokia mobile was worthless before Mr. Elop's leadership. Your graph does NOT show that. If it were the case, shouldn't the graph show sharp decline of stock price toward of $0.0 by mid-2010 and then an upward trend once Mr. Elop has taken over.

We all know that by late 2011, under Elop's direction, Nokia was selling nothing but WP phones; and the overall stock price still trending downward; so using the same logic as you would have used(i.e. low stock price reflects the fact that less people wanting the product), then would it also means that Nobody wants WP either for all these years? But I have a warm and fuzzy feeling that you don't want me or other to conclude that either, isn't it?

As I noted before, it is a free country/or internet(as everyone says); you are entitled to what you want to write and say. But if you want to prove your points, I welcome you to put up the numbers. Again, please do not pound the table, I begin to feel sorry for the table now.

Cheers,

Lumiaman 2013-11-22 17:26

Re: Let's talk Nokia stock. Really.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by cheve (Post 1388219)
Well, let us see.

Your graph appears to be historical stock price trend between Sept 2003 to Sept 2013. If your point is about the up and down of the stock price; then sure Nokia current price is much lower than when it was peaking at $40 in mid 2007. So let me extend that thinking and may be I could conclude this: in 2007, Nokia was selling all this dump phones and the stock price was $40; in 2013, Nokia is selling all these wonderful WP phones and yet the stock price is under $10 -- what the f#$k, Wait a minute, I can get a bigger meal with $40 than $10...Oh my GOD, let us go back to sell more dump phones instead. :)

But... I guess that is NOT want you want to show or want people to conclude, isn't it?

So, just throwing a graph out without context and detail would cause a lot of confusion -- especially for simple guy like me.

You point was that nobody wanted Symbian, and the Nokia mobile was worthless before Mr. Elop's leadership. Your graph does NOT show that. If it were the case, shouldn't the graph show sharp decline of stock price toward of $0.0 by mid-2010 and then an upward trend once Mr. Elop has taken over.

We all know that by late 2011, under Elop's direction, Nokia was selling nothing but WP phones; and the overall stock price still trending downward; so using the same logic as you would have used(i.e. low stock price reflects the fact that less people wanting the product), then would it also means that Nobody wants WP either for all these years? But I have a warm and fuzzy feeling that you don't want me or other to conclude that either, isn't it?

As I noted before, it is a free country/or internet(as everyone says); you are entitled to what you want to write and say. But if you want to prove your points, I welcome you to put up the numbers. Again, please do not pound the table, I begin to feel sorry for the table now.

Cheers,

Let me tell you what the graph shows. It shows that despite "great" Symbian sales, the most rapid decline in NOKIA stocks occurred under OPK, the king of Symbian. Not only that, but the decline continued to occur despite great symbian numbers that you posted, and that the slope of decline did not change much with Elop, which tells you that Elop did not worsen the decline of the stock, it was freefalling prior to him.

cheve 2013-11-22 17:58

Re: Let's talk Nokia stock. Really.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumiaman (Post 1388221)
Let me tell you what the graph shows. It shows that despite "great" Symbian sales, the most rapid decline in NOKIA stocks occurred under OPK, the king of Symbian. Not only that, but the decline continued to occur despite great symbian numbers that you posted, and that the slope of decline did not change much with Elop, which tells you that Elop did not worsen the decline of the stock, it was freefalling prior to him.

Wow, I love these management excuse - too bad I couldn't try that with my line of work. I wonder what DID Mr. Elop tell the borard before He was named the CEO?. May be he said: (1) well guys, I am only one guy in this sinking vessel, so I don't have hope to turn this things around. I can try but good luck. OR (2). I am going to turn this thing around like no tomorrow -- just watch me. We will be swimming in cash, and be the KINGS of the world.

I think he mostly like said something like (2) and mostly saying something about he will fix it. So if the stock WERE really in freefall and his job were to fix it; then Mr. Elop FAILED - full stop.

By the way, you tried to change the channel again:). The point was whether NOBODY wanted these "dump" Symbian phones in 2010 and whether the Nokia mobile was worthless in 2010 as you claimed. May be you have trouble keeping up the timeline...no?

By the way, if NOBODY wanted the Symbian dump phones, how come Nokia had NON-zero sale figures for phones between late 2009 to early 2011. What were they selling? I really want to know how they achieve a market stock in $10-15; since they were selling things that NOBODY wanted.

Cheers,

Lumiaman 2013-11-22 18:29

Re: Let's talk Nokia stock. Really.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by cheve (Post 1388240)
Wow, I love these management excuse - too bad I couldn't try that with my line of work. I wonder what DID Mr. Elop tell the borard before He was named the CEO?. May be he said: (1) well guys, I am only one guy in this sinking vessel, so I don't have hope to turn this things around. I can try but good luck. OR (2). I am going to turn this thing around like no tomorrow -- just watch me. We will be swimming in cash, and be the KINGS of the world.

I think he mostly like said something like (2) and mostly saying something about he will fix it. So if the stock WERE really in freefall and his job were to fix it; then Mr. Elop FAILED - full stop.

By the way, you tried to change the channel again:). The point was whether NOBODY wanted these "dump" Symbian phones in 2010 and whether the Nokia mobile was worthless in 2010 as you claimed. May be you have trouble keeping up the timeline...no?

By the way, if NOBODY wanted the Symbian dump phones, how come Nokia had NON-zero sale figures for phones between late 2009 to early 2011. What were they selling? I really want to know how they achieve a market stock in $10-15; since they were selling things that NOBODY wanted.

Cheers,

It is gone to ZERO. There are ZERO symbian phones now. And these dumb phones were sold to countries that couldnt afford or didnt see android and ios yet...just a matter of time when those markets saw the competition, and cheap android pretty much obliterated any vestige of touchscreen symbian......


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:30.

vBulletin® Version 3.8.8