Re: Let's talk Nokia stock. Really.
 

These last few exchanges are ignoring - purposefully or not - that you're talking about 2007-2010. Back when there was no WP7/WP8 and the move from Symbian and its internal politics and overfunding were already were on the way, but not yet concrete. You're both also overlooking that Nokia, while once huge, was not gaining as much per year in regards to the then faster growth of the market.

Simply stated, Nokia kept growing, but not at the accelerated rates that iOS and Android enjoyed thus their decline in marketshare. Jumping to the lesser known/utilized mobile OS Windows Phone 7 and later WP8 didn't really help in regards to growth or marketshare. It's arguable that it dug them deeper into the situation they're now situated in - handset division sold to Microsoft for instance.

But instead, using nonsensical graphs and management arguments about something but not including everything - business is a multi-faceted endeavor and picking and choosing the pieces that support your stance is easy to do; but doesn't make it right.

Nokia was slow to turn from older Symbian/non-touch phones that featured what folks wanted on the newer touch phones and expectations. Sure, you can point to many successful Nokia products, like the N95, but folks will also remember out of memory errors. I vowed to never own a Symbian phone and that was mostly because of the fact that I just didn't like the OS. I've owned iPhones, Android phones, the N9, N900, and even a Lumia 900 and now a BB10 Z10. But in the end of the day, never a Symbian phone.

Back to my point; you guys are overlooking the overarching trends of smartphone growth and Nokia's lack of grabbing that new market with their offerings. They did well in other areas, but not well enough to continue their prior 2007 growth.

Add that to your argument, I'd consider it a well-rounded discussion instead of this tit-for-tat round of exchanges.

Just my honest opinion... carry on.

Re: Let's talk Nokia stock. Really.
 

Hey Gerb, I agree with what you said. No disagreements. What I disagree is to blame ELOP as the sole cause of Nokia failure. The point of the graph is to show that Nokia lost shareholders confidence as it's price kept sliding downwards despite fanboys touting large numbers. Everyone knew that Symbian was dead man walking.

Same happened to BB, even they changed their management with little success. Tells you what happens when you lose a step in this highly competitive market.

Re: Let's talk Nokia stock. Really.
 

His strategy turned gradual decline into a high velocity nose dive, as anybody with any intelligence knew it would.


Elop's strategy turned NOKIA into a dead man walking. Both smartphones and feature phones killed, each with their own m0ronic strategy that was inevitably doomed to fail.

Re: Let's talk Nokia stock. Really.
 

I beg to disagree. The mobile division is well and alive, perhaps under a different flag. Doing much better than Blackberry.

Re: Let's talk Nokia stock. Really.
 

The next update to BB10 will enable it to run Android apps without the conversion process and they will be hardware accelerated too.

As the personal side and corporate side of BB10 are kept separate BlackBerrys will probably then be better for running Android apps than Androids are.

So that'll be one big roadblock out of the way.

Another issue was price but in the US you can now get one free on contract with Verizon

I hope BB can shrink and survive rather than die.

Re: Let's talk Nokia stock. Really.
 

Writing this day down... no, seriously. I am.

No, Symbian was still selling, it just wasn't growing as fast as the market had grown. There's a subtle difference and when Elop came out with that "burning platform" notice, it scuttled any sales of Symbian any further thus setting a downward trend and disabled any more growth and Nokia didn't have a full-blown strategy at that moment that was publicly known.

Simply stated, he committed an unprecedented Osborne Effect by killing one brand that was still selling (yet not growing in market share which in itself the market was growing) and then coming out with an unpopular mobile OS that meant Nokia had an uphill battle whereas it truly could have been avoided.

BB is a different story, but with similar ingredients. Bad management, bad decisions, bad delays and a misunderstanding of how the market was going to change. Those are the similar ingredients. BB thought their enterprise inroads would keep them ahead of most; it didn't. BB also thought that nobody wanted a touch screen; they were 100% wrong there. Nokia disregarded touch, but built it anyway. There's some other differences... but BB was just plain arrogant whereas Nokia was just plain disillusioned.

Re: Let's talk Nokia stock. Really.
 

I'd say the biggest problem was the lack of a migration path from Symbian to WP. And the immaturity of the WP platform, of course.

It shows up the arrogance and hubris in Nokia management at that time, I think they honestly belived that public was going to eat up everything delivered to them, unquestioningly.


One difference between BB/Nokia strategies is that Nokia still had other legs to support it, like the network business. Over the years it usually has been so that one or other has been the supporting leg while the other rested.

Re: Let's talk Nokia stock. Really.
 

Sad to see that now Nokia is vacating its old HQ building in Keilaniemi to pass it to Microsoft...
http://yle.fi/uutiset/microsoft_take...kia_hq/6946079
But perhaps it was a destiny, as the building was known since the Nokia golden years as the 'Powerpoint house'

Re: Let's talk Nokia stock. Really.
 

Yes, I heard that all the people who are Nokia will be moving to Karaportti campus which is the local NSN site, about 5km to northwest from Keilaniemi.

I guess mr. Elop gets to keep his current office in the Keilaniemi building. Also the Microsoft regional office employees in finland are moving to Keilaniemi. The view from the former Nokia Head Office is somewhat better than from the current MS office :)

Re: Let's talk Nokia stock. Really.
 

Let's say that going WP was the right choice. Now convince me that announcing it one year before baving anything to show was worth it. And that not selling the N9 everywhere while there were still no Lumias was the right choice. And that not waiting to launch on WP8 directly was correct. And not allowing first-gen lumias to upgrade was sane (which could clearly be done, Wp8 on HD2 is a testament to that), and not bringing loved features like lpm earlier was ok, and marketing Lumias to teenagers alienating the traditional Nokia userbase was the correct course of action.

And many more... (europe vs US targeting, old hardware specs, abusing PureView name etc.)