Page 16 of 19 « First 61415 16 1718 Last »
Reply
Thread Tools
Crashdamage is offline Crashdamage
2011-08-17 , 15:51
Posts: 670 | Thanked: 747 times | Joined on Aug 2009 @ Kansas City, Missouri, USA
#151
Originally Posted by Texrat View Post
Good points Crashdamage. It would be interesting to see what unfolds if ANY company even shows a tiny bit of interest in Nokia now...
It'll be interesting to see if Intel makes a play not to actually buy it so much as to force M$ to, to put the wood to M$ financially. M$ has much to lose if Nokia is bought but far less to gain for 30 billion or so since they already basically control Nokia.

IOW a play for Nokia is a nightmare for M$. They don't want to buy it but they might have to. I'd put the screws to M$ if I were Intel.
__________________
Registered Linux user #266531.
 

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Crashdamage For This Useful Post:
Texrat's Avatar
Texrat is offline Texrat
2011-08-17 , 16:23
Posts: 11,700 | Thanked: 10,045 times | Joined on Jun 2006 @ North Texas, USA
#152
Just to play devil's advocate for the outright naysayers...

Consider that when the Microsoft-Nokia partnership was announced it looked like Nokia was being reduced to an OEM. No one can be blamed for arriving at that conclusion.

But then to find out that Nokia will be using Compal as the actual producer for their WP devices has to result in a lot of head scratching. Those unfamiliar with the cell phone business could be forgiven for asking why Microsoft did not just go directly to Compal.

The short answer is mobile expertise. Nokia has it, Microsoft not so much. Despite a bizarre claim here negating the very existence of patents (), they also play a large part in Microsoft's original decision.

BUT--

Does Microsoft need Nokia as a company, or mainly that expertise?

Employees are assets, too, as much as I hate to reduce humans to that term. So, really, all Microsoft needs from Nokia is patents plus people. No infrastructure. Not even a brand when it comes down to it. Nokia's channels could still prove useful, but even those are eroding.

Regardless, as one confused poster put it (and in this case rightfully), it's impossible to completely predict the mobile space these days-- with the exception that change, often drastic, is inevitable.
__________________
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
 

The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Texrat For This Useful Post:
egoshin is offline egoshin
2011-08-17 , 16:49
Posts: 992 | Thanked: 995 times | Joined on Dec 2009 @ California
#153
Originally Posted by Laughing Man View Post
What happens to your stock in a company if they split like that? E.g. If I bought Motorola stock and then they split.
Two variants. Usual case - you get one stock and after sale of one division you have dividends from sale or share price increases because new cache in hands of company.

Another case - your get an equal number of shares for both divisions, and after sale - one kind of share is reimbursed or replaced by buyer share in accordance with sale price ratio.
 

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to egoshin For This Useful Post:
ericsson is offline ericsson
2011-08-17 , 18:16
Banned | Posts: 974 | Thanked: 622 times | Joined on Oct 2010
#154
Originally Posted by Texrat View Post
Just to play devil's advocate for the outright naysayers...

Consider that when the Microsoft-Nokia partnership was announced it looked like Nokia was being reduced to an OEM. No one can be blamed for arriving at that conclusion.

But then to find out that Nokia will be using Compal as the actual producer for their WP devices has to result in a lot of head scratching. Those unfamiliar with the cell phone business could be forgiven for asking why Microsoft did not just go directly to Compal.

The short answer is mobile expertise. Nokia has it, Microsoft not so much. Despite a bizarre claim here negating the very existence of patents (), they also play a large part in Microsoft's original decision.

BUT--

Does Microsoft need Nokia as a company, or mainly that expertise?

Employees are assets, too, as much as I hate to reduce humans to that term. So, really, all Microsoft needs from Nokia is patents plus people. No infrastructure. Not even a brand when it comes down to it. Nokia's channels could still prove useful, but even those are eroding.

Regardless, as one confused poster put it (and in this case rightfully), it's impossible to completely predict the mobile space these days-- with the exception that change, often drastic, is inevitable.
Careful now, you may actually make some sense. Nokias patents are not eroding, they are being produced at a rapid rate as we speak. That ability to produce patents is really what it's all about. Lots of people want to buy Nokia, but the main investors must go completely mad to be willing to sell a chicken that lay golden eggs time after time after time. Nokia is very much like VW, solid to the core and with investors that are equally solid in mind and body.

Consider that when the Microsoft-Nokia partnership was announced it looked like Nokia was being reduced to an OEM. No one can be blamed for arriving at that conclusion.
Except for the fact that it is a braindead and wrong conclusion based on way too high regard for Microsoft and zero understanding of Nokia and the hardware business.

Google may be a nice uncle right now, in words at least. They are a software company and may actually be naive enough to see the acquisition of Motorola as a way of strengthening Android for all I know. But as soon as they get a taste of the raw power and possibilities that the acquisition gives them, they will stop being a nice uncle, it's a law of nature.

Nokia had no idea how to run their software business, and it nearly killed them. Microsoft knows how to do this, better than anyone. By teaming up they become stronger than by merging because it is the combined effort, the ecosystem, that is the goal. To reach that goal they need Samsung, LG, HTC and others to play along with them. They will also take part in the fruits of that ecosystem, because it is an open ecosystem, not closed as the Apple ecosystem, or one sided as Android where you have Google on one side and OEM on the other.

Anyway, if you think I'm full of nonsense, just remember it is a relative thing. I don't really care, and the view is way too cluttered and foggy for me to convince anyone to "see the light" if they refuse to accept the simple facts of reality. Nokia-MS may fail, but IMO that possibility is close to zero. They have both already done their share of mistakes, tons of them, and are not likely to do them again, at least not within a 5-10 years time frame. And Microsoft will not purchase Nokia.
 
Texrat's Avatar
Texrat is offline Texrat
2011-08-17 , 18:21
Posts: 11,700 | Thanked: 10,045 times | Joined on Jun 2006 @ North Texas, USA
#155
Originally Posted by ericsson View Post
Careful now, you may actually make some sense. Nokias patents are not eroding, they are being produced at a rapid rate as we speak..
Ah, I think I see the root of your reasoning problem now.

Re-read what I wrote. I did not say Nokia's patents are eroding.

You're welcome.
__________________
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Texrat For This Useful Post:
BigBadGuber! is offline BigBadGuber!
2011-08-17 , 18:39
Banned | Posts: 706 | Thanked: 296 times | Joined on May 2010
#156
Why would an American company wanna buy nokia, when they have absolutely no presence in USA
 
Texrat's Avatar
Texrat is offline Texrat
2011-08-17 , 18:47
Posts: 11,700 | Thanked: 10,045 times | Joined on Jun 2006 @ North Texas, USA
#157
Originally Posted by BigBadGuber! View Post
Why would an American company wanna buy nokia, when they have absolutely no presence in USA
Is that a rhetorical question, or are you really struggling for answers to that?

You might as well ask "Why is Nokia investing so heavily in the US, when they have absolutely no presence there?"
__________________
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
 

The Following User Says Thank You to Texrat For This Useful Post:
BigBadGuber! is offline BigBadGuber!
2011-08-17 , 18:54
Banned | Posts: 706 | Thanked: 296 times | Joined on May 2010
#158
Originally Posted by Texrat View Post
Is that a rhetorical question, or are you really struggling for answers to that?

You might as well ask "Why is Nokia investing so heavily in the US, when they have absolutely no presence there?"
Why would Intel or anyone else in US buy NOKIA? Makes absolute no sense. I can bet you that no one is buying Nokia and speculators already lost money as Nokia stock is back to its under 6 value. Stop wasting your arguments. Nokia will not be acquired
 
gerbick
2011-08-17 , 19:07
Guest | Posts: n/a | Thanked: 0 times | Joined on
#159
Originally Posted by BigBadGuber! View Post
Nokia will not be acquired
Even Atari and Commodore, as well as Amiga are worth a damn just for the name brand.
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to For This Useful Post:
BigBadGuber! is offline BigBadGuber!
2011-08-17 , 19:09
Banned | Posts: 706 | Thanked: 296 times | Joined on May 2010
#160
Originally Posted by gerbick View Post
Even Atari and Commodore, as well as Amiga are worth a damn just for the name brand.
Not in the US. Nokia is synonymous with penny phones in US
 
Reply
Page 16 of 19 « First 61415 16 1718 Last »

Tags
gogle-mogle, google motorola, motogoogle, motogrogle, never say never

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 22:53.

Contact Us - Home - Archive - Top