Re: NY Times Article on Nokia US Blunders
 

The most interesting point in the article to me:

"AT&T’s wireless unit, Verizon, T-Mobile USA and Sprint Nextel [t]ogether ... control 96 percent of United States sales of mobile devices ... "

"In Europe, a competitive marketplace with more than 230 operators, Nokia could always find one or more operators in every domestic market willing to sell its portfolio of phones.

"But in the United States, where a small number of operators rule most of the market, the network companies can command design changes to promote and sell their own wireless services. They place their own brand names on every model they sell and make sure their revenue-raising wireless services are prominently displayed and easy to use."

In other words, Nokia is used to playing in a competitive marketplace, not in the oligopoly of the supposed Land of Free Market Competition.

Re: NY Times Article on Nokia US Blunders
 

There is a difference between Mobile Network Operators and Mobile Virtual Network Operators.

For a list see Wikipedia's List of mobile network operators of Europe and take into account Ownership...

[EDIT]...and Wikipedia's List of mobile network operators of the Americas, United States[/EDIT]

Hm... :confused:

Re: NY Times Article on Nokia US Blunders
 

This is the same story we have been hearing about for years. Nokia is a powerhouse in mobile computing amd phones. They also happen to believe that all markets should act the same, and when they find one that does not, like the NA market, they make/made a conscious decision not to adapt.

Yes, the US market has major players who set the rules though collusion and other nefarious activities. Nokia decided not to play and what happened ? Nokia lost Overall market share in smartphones once US consumers decided they were interested in them. More importantly they lost touch on the wants and needs of one of the biggest consumer markets in the world.

So what does any of this mean? Nokia Screwed up and is now playing catch up. Nokia is a big ship but once it starts moving in the right decisions it goes like gangbusters.

I also agree the article is flawed at holistic level since the forgot that this is a global world... And I think the sales numbers on Nokia's released touchscreens are not trivial...

Re: NY Times Article on Nokia US Blunders
 

Right

And still the journalist doesn't get it. The point is not that there are enough operators that a few of them will accept to sell Nokia phones, the point is that you just go to any shop (or netshop or anywhere) and just buy the d**n thing. In the GSM market, particularly with the governmental restrictions on how much you can be locked in, it's a consumer choice if you want a particular contract or not. You don't need to buy a phone through a carrier. In fact it's not even that common to do so. Instead the various shops can provide you with options to get a rebate on a phone if you get a contract with this or that carrier. But you can get a contract like that with any phone, bought from anywhere (or inherited from your sister, as it were..)

Every December I send a little note to my carrier and tell them I'm good for another year of contract (which just means that I don't stop paying them the monthly for 12 months, and I don't get to buy a rebated phone anywhere during that time), and they will give me enough credit to keep me from getting any phone bill (nor the monthly fee) until August next year.

That's how it works in Europe. I'm getting to understand that US journalists (some of them, at least) are unable to wrap their heads around this. They've clearly been exposed to a carrier mafia system for too long.

Re: NY Times Article on Nokia US Blunders
 

Yeah, I just read something about that. And wandering slightly off-topic, (in this off-topic section), I read an article in New Scientist a year or two ago, or rather, an interview. There was this Nokia researcher who traveled around the world to learn what people would like the phone to do. And in Africa he got this great idea.. a phone could have two separate phone lists, because in an African household people would often have to share a single phone and it would be nice to be able to keep their phone list separate.

Sure, that's a great idea, but why didn't it occur to the researcher that this is a great idea everywhere, and it's a major irritant with phones in the workplace that the phone list doesn't have categories (which is all it takes). Get a phone, insert the vcard file with the company numbers, add a new number now and then (business associates, your mother, whatever). Here comes an updated company phone list, if you try to install it you actually get duplicates instead of updates. Only way forward is to scratch the original list, lose your manually inserted numbers. With categories, as on a Palm PDA, you can do such things on groups of numbers. You can also insert numbers to a specific category simply buy installing a vcard file with name category.vcard. So, get me that Africa-optimised phone please - it's optimised for me too.

Re: NY Times Article on Nokia US Blunders
 

Wait... let me play devil's advocate for a moment.

Anybody care to show me how an unlocked phone is actually cheaper to own? I've brought my own phone to the table before and I didn't receive any price cuts on my service. I was just able to use the phone I had wanted to use instead.

Subsidization isn't an evil where it costs you more down the line in the USA. So... where are these savings? You pay more for the phone unsubsidized and you end up paying the same for the same coverage as a person with a subsidized phone. If there's a difference - not the oft-rumored Project Black/Dark from T-Mobile, that's not announced fully yet - then show me please.

Proof, not opinion. I'm honestly curious, no scoffing needed.

Re: NY Times Article on Nokia US Blunders
 

Registration free link: http://mobile.nytimes.com/article?a=...&single=1&f=24 . You also get there by using GWT (Google wireless transcoder) to get the gray lady to give a the mobile and reg free version most every time: http://www.google.com/gwt/n?u=http:/...s/19nokia.html

If you get hit with the registration screen in the future just back up two previous clicks, blow out your cookies and reclick (good for a few articles). Also you can highlight the title, search Google and click on the link from Google's search results.

Re: NY Times Article on Nokia US Blunders
 

+1

I was also quite amazed to read this:

http://thenokiablog.com/2009/10/18/t...sim-nokia-n900

And see how complex it is to get an SIM card for a unsubsidized phone in USA.

Re: NY Times Article on Nokia US Blunders
 

The evil is in things like cancellation fees.

Re: NY Times Article on Nokia US Blunders
 

i think the trick is that when you cant compete on exclusive phones, you have to compete on plans/contracts.