Nokia - Microsoft partnership (merged threads) - Page 7 - maemo.org

Active Topics

Error after installing Leste on sdcard (13)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Maemish - 16 hrs, 58 mins ago
TLS 1.2 for N9 is ready (29)
to MeeGo / Harmattan by smatkovi - 1 day, 1 hr ago
Camera phone competition March 2023 "Endless" (35)
to General by Maemish - 4 days, 10 hrs ago
Maemo repository (3)
to Community by torsen - 5 days, 3 hrs ago
more...

Page 7 of 197

Thread Tools

	ysss	2011-01-28 , 09:46
	Posts: 4,384 \| Thanked: 5,524 times \| Joined on Jul 2007 @ ˙ǝɹǝɥʍou	#61

Originally Posted by eachna

*STOCKHOLDERS* do not want short term profits.

Stockholders want long term and steady dividends.

Daytraders and short term investors want short-term price churning.

Who are these fabled 'stockholders' that you mentioned?
Are they forever bound to their stocks, until the end of time?

__________________
Class .. : Power User
Humor .. : [#####-----] | Alignment: Pragmatist
Patience : [###-------] | Weapon(s): Galaxy Note + BB Bold Touch 9900
Agro ... : [###-------] | Relic(s) : iPhone 4S, Atrix, Milestone, N900, N800, N95, HTC G1, Treos, Zauri, BB 9000, BB 9700, etc
Follow the MeeGo Coding Competition!

Quote & Reply |

eachna	2011-01-28 , 10:19
Posts: 109 \| Thanked: 45 times \| Joined on Aug 2010	#62

Originally Posted by ysss

Who are these fabled 'stockholders' that you mentioned?
Are they forever bound to their stocks, until the end of time?

Well, I'm one. I don't buy a stock I want to sell in less than 5 years. The trading fees eat up too much of the profits if you churn through stocks in the short term. I don't have Nokia shares, but I have a modest stock portfolio in similarly sized companies.

By their very definition, people who invest in a company for the short term are interested in short-term results. That's not to say that they're hostile to the company doing well in the long term, but it really doesn't matter to them one way or another. Would any short term investor care if Nokia blew up a year from now, as long as they sold their shares for a profit before that happened?

A CEO (or other board member) should not be making financial decisions in a company to cater to short term investors. Heck, not many short term investors even vote for board members (they often don't even hold the stock long enough to vote).

While a board does not directly work for the shareholders it's supposed to be responsible for managing the company to the general benefit of the shareholders. Fiddling with things to generate short term price fluctuations is not any healthier for a company's financial well-being than yo-yo diets are for a person's biologic health.

Quote & Reply |

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to eachna For This Useful Post:
benny1967, Helmuth, sbock, slender

droitwichgas	2011-01-28 , 11:40
Posts: 523 \| Thanked: 292 times \| Joined on Jan 2010	#63

Originally Posted by eachna

Well, I'm one. I don't buy a stock I want to sell in less than 5 years. The trading fees eat up too much of the profits if you churn through stocks in the short term. I don't have Nokia shares, but I have a modest stock portfolio in similarly sized companies.

By their very definition, people who invest in a company for the short term are interested in short-term results. That's not to say that they're hostile to the company doing well in the long term, but it really doesn't matter to them one way or another. Would any short term investor care if Nokia blew up a year from now, as long as they sold their shares for a profit before that happened?

A CEO (or other board member) should not be making financial decisions in a company to cater to short term investors. Heck, not many short term investors even vote for board members (they often don't even hold the stock long enough to vote).

While a board does not directly work for the shareholders it's supposed to be responsible for managing the company to the general benefit of the shareholders. Fiddling with things to generate short term price fluctuations is not any healthier for a company's financial well-being than yo-yo diets are for a person's biologic health.

The only callers asking Questions on the Q&A were stockbrokers such as Barclay's Goldman Sachs etc, etc, nobody from the mobile phone industry as such but perhaps this was expected as it was an end of year results presentation. Howeever it is clear from Elop's answers that his concerns where keeping these investors happy and I cannot see waiting for Meego to develop as an OS & also it's "ecosystems" will keep them happy in the short term?

Quote & Reply |

wmarone	2011-01-28 , 16:27
Posts: 1,746 \| Thanked: 2,100 times \| Joined on Sep 2009	#64

Originally Posted by ericsson

Stupid way of thinking. Seriously, plain stupidity.

Oh really? How do you get 512MB worth of RAM out of a device that only has 256MB?

The mobile phone is defined by hardware, software and services working in perfect harminy to give the user he experience he seeks.

No joke. And the upper limit is defined by the hardware.

The limits are only those set to assure everything work as planned within the economics of the market, and assuring the users are satisfyed. This is the same for high end and low end, but different markets sets different restrictions on overall price.

So you called my statement stupid, but failed to state exactly why, instead spouting a tautology.

Quote & Reply |

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to wmarone For This Useful Post:
Creamy Goodness, theonelaw, Yorky

wizbowes	2011-01-28 , 16:41
Posts: 127 \| Thanked: 54 times \| Joined on Nov 2009	#65

Originally Posted by Ken-Young

I think that might be an option if Nokia were an Asian company, but I doubt a corporation in a high wage, generous social safety net country like Finland could compete with asian manufacturers as a hardware-only company. I think the same reasoning means they can't just become a manufacturer of Android or (especially) WP7 phones, which will soon be commodity products.

Exactly my thoughts.

They need to differentiate their products from the market - not join the gang in a race to the bottom. It's how they used to operate, it's how Apple operate, and it's what they need to do again. [edit: Actually it's still how they operate - they just need to do it better!]

Then again I've never run a multinational so what do I really know?

Quote & Reply |

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to wizbowes For This Useful Post:
sbock, theonelaw

bugelrex	2011-01-28 , 16:56
Posts: 521 \| Thanked: 296 times \| Joined on Sep 2009	#66

Originally Posted by ysss

Who are these fabled 'stockholders' that you mentioned?
Are they forever bound to their stocks, until the end of time?

The stockholders OWN the company, they ultimately decide the fate of the company.. not the CEO or fanboys.

few examples of what stock holders can do:
If things don't improve by next year
- vote the board out, force another CEO
- drive the stock price so low, it becomes a take-over target

Of course Nokia could reverse this by buying back all the shares and become private.. leaving the fanboys in charge. (open O/S for everyone.. profits? who gives a crap as long as blind fanboys can run an xterminal)

Quote & Reply |

	ysss	2011-01-28 , 16:57
	Posts: 4,384 \| Thanked: 5,524 times \| Joined on Jul 2007 @ ˙ǝɹǝɥʍou	#67

Originally Posted by eachna

Well, I'm one. I don't buy a stock I want to sell in less than 5 years. The trading fees eat up too much of the profits if you churn through stocks in the short term. I don't have Nokia shares, but I have a modest stock portfolio in similarly sized companies.

Seriously, in this kind market?
If everything craps out again, you'll just buy more of NOK?

By their very definition, people who invest in a company for the short term are interested in short-term results. That's not to say that they're hostile to the company doing well in the long term, but it really doesn't matter to them one way or another. Would any short term investor care if Nokia blew up a year from now, as long as they sold their shares for a profit before that happened?

There are different kinds of investors with different horizons. But even the long term one should pay attention to a company's current well being.

They have to have short-medium and long term gameplans. You can't just bet the farm on a company's long term game plan when they're facing immediate risks.

They need to juggle between their current and long term needs all the time.

A CEO (or other board member) should not be making financial decisions in a company to cater to short term investors. Heck, not many short term investors even vote for board members (they often don't even hold the stock long enough to vote).

Again, that's the text book idealized case; but the fact is that CEOs, especially one who's in Elop's position need to make quick and immediate changes that show publishable performance. That's how the media works now; otherwise he may not get adequate support to complete his med-long term plans.

While a board does not directly work for the shareholders it's supposed to be responsible for managing the company to the general benefit of the shareholders. Fiddling with things to generate short term price fluctuations is not any healthier for a company's financial well-being than yo-yo diets are for a person's biologic health.

Yes, that's how things are supposed to work. Maemo was supposed to be a big hit too on step 5 of 5. And Jakssi was supposed to be the CEO.

Quote & Reply |

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ysss For This Useful Post:
Helmuth, Mentalist Traceur

mikecomputing	2011-01-28 , 18:21
Posts: 3,464 \| Thanked: 5,107 times \| Joined on Feb 2010 @ Gothenburg in Sweden	#68

Originally Posted by Rugoz

We'll see meego 1.2 for handsets, tablets, netbooks and in vehicle in april. I mean nokia and intel invest shitloads of money in it, I doubt they do it just for fun.

Can you give me a fact that Nokia is invest "shitloads of money" in Meego? My guess is they still invest shitloads of money on Symbian and QT but not that much in Meego.

Would be very intrresting to know how many engineers inside nokia working on Symbian 3 vs Meego? My guess is there is stilklk shitloads of people working on Symbian and far less on Meego.

Quote & Reply |

Milhouse	2011-01-28 , 18:44
Posts: 3,401 \| Thanked: 1,255 times \| Joined on Nov 2005 @ London, UK	#69

Adding a basic Android application compatibility layer to Symbian and MeeGo may be a solution that keeps everyone happy - Nokia can dip their toe into the Android eco-system without the risk of losing their identity or control of their own platforms.

Only provide enough compatibility to run the majority of the more popular apps but continue down the native Qt route as the primary application platform. Once Qt on Symbian and MeeGo has found it's feet, drop Android app support - classic bait and switch. Or maybe even keep it going if it makes sense, it will be an advantage Android-alone can't easily match.

Apart from Android, none of the other competing operating systems - WebOS, WP7 - have an eco-system worth snot.

Quote & Reply |

bugelrex	2011-01-28 , 18:46
Posts: 521 \| Thanked: 296 times \| Joined on Sep 2009	#70

Originally Posted by mikecomputing

Can you give me a fact that Nokia is invest "shitloads of money" in Meego? My guess is they still invest shitloads of money on Symbian and QT but not that much in Meego.

Would be very intrresting to know how many engineers inside nokia working on Symbian 3 vs Meego? My guess is there is stilklk shitloads of people working on Symbian and far less on Meego.

Anyone know how the engineering teams for Symbian are split? Do they have 10+ teams doing duplicate work but for different phones?

Eg
1 group for Symbian, but for N95
1 group for Symbian, but for N96 etc etc

With any code over 10 years old, its probably become convoluted and full of hacks for specific phones (screen size, keyboard, features etc).. alot of cost savings if they can streamline...