It may initially look that way, but if Nokia sells each of those devices in just 1/10th to1/20th the scale of the leading competitor's single model, the simple multiplication laws applied will show them to sell the same amount. While neither of Nokia's devices would be immensely popular, they would share the same level of market share.

Nokia can reduce models, but can also improve those fewer models' appeal by making them better, and also reallocate the marketing budgets normally used for the extra models to increase exposure of the remaining models.

Companies have historically cut back on product portfolios to increase focus and profitabilty, like GM, for instance. This has long been a suggestion of analysts to improve Nokia. Not sure why you feel it is baseless. Care to expound on that?

There have been slight sales decreases, but increased competition as well. They are still fairly dominant in the market, and the competitors are mostly also-rans. I don't agree that Nokia doesn't care about a particular market. For years, markets like the US refused to allow Nokia to use its USP, which was in depth features, as strategy. They conceded the market until forces demanded a presence for features, and carriers cooled to having an open accessibility to services other than those of the carrier. They've been extremely focused on the US for the pat couple years now.

You should be careful throwing around insults. No one denies anything. I merely stated that the share of Expansys' sales were miniscule in the market, and they didn't even represent a typical retail perspective. Most Brits get devices in greater numbers at brick and mortar and other locations, hence their figures were akin to AdMob web traffic data: Insignificant.